UNASSIGNED: Pharmacotherapy against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has tremendously improved since the advent of interferon (IFN)-free direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). Additionally, fixed-dose pangenotypic DAAs, which are safe, potent, easy for use, and can cover a wide spectrum of patients, have been recommended by professional guidelines for DAA-naïve and DAA-experienced patients with HCV.
UNASSIGNED: We review the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of fixed-dose pangenotypic DAA regimens, including glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX). Additionally, we summarize the efficacy and safety of these regimens in clinical trials as well as real-world studies for treating different populations. Lastly, we discuss unmet medical needs in managing HCV in the era of fixed-dose pangenotypic DAAs.
UNASSIGNED: Protease inhibitors (PIs), including GLE and VOX, are prone to have more frequent DDIs, compared to the non-structural (NS) 5A and 5B inhibitors. These regimens are generally well tolerated and can be applied to different populations, except for the contraindicated use of PI-containing DAA regimens in decompensated cirrhosis. Using the first-line GLE/PIB and SOF/VEL can eradicate HCV in more than 95% of DAA-naïve patients across different populations. The viral cure usually exceeds 95% when using the rescue SOF/VEL/VOX regimen for prior DAA failures.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of pan-genotypic regimens, glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL), and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) and other direct-acting antivirals (DAA) regimens for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected adolescents (12-18 years), older children (6-11 years), and young children (3-5 years). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to inform the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.
METHODS: We included clinical trials and observational studies published up to August 11, 2021, that evaluated DAA regimens in HCV-infected adolescents, older children, and young children. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases and key conference abstracts. Sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12), adverse events (AEs), and treatment discontinuation were the outcomes evaluated. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the ROBINS-I tool. Data were pooled using random-effects models, and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: A total of 49 studies including 1882 adolescents, 436 older children, and 166 young children were considered. The SVR12 was 100% (95% Confidence Interval: 96-100), 96% (90-100), and 96% (83-100) for GLE/PIB in adolescents, older, and young children, respectively; 95% (90-99), 93% (86-98), and 83% (70-93), for SOF/VEL, respectively; and 100% (97-100) and 100% (94-100) for SOF/DCV in adolescent and older children, respectively. There was a clear trend towards a higher rate of any reported AE from adolescents (50%), older children (53%), to young children (72%). Serious AEs and treatment discontinuations were uncommon in adolescents and older children (<1%) but slightly higher in young children (3%).
CONCLUSIONS: All three pan-genotypic DAA regimens were highly effective and well-tolerated and are now recommended by the WHO for use in adults, adolescents, and children down to 3 years, which will simplify procurement and supply chain management. The evidence was based largely on single-arm non-randomized controlled studies. Moreover, there were also missing data regarding key variables such as route of HCV acquisition, presence or absence of cirrhosis, or HIV co-infection that precluded evaluation of the impact of these factors on outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42020146752.

Following the discovery of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in 1989, 3 decades of basic, translational, and clinical research culminated in the development of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy-curative oral treatment for HCV infection. The availability of DAA therapy revolutionized HCV clinical management, including acute (duration of infection <6 mo) and recent (duration of infection <12 mo) infection. Several DAA regimens, including the contemporary pan-genotypic combinations of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir and glecaprevir-pibrentasvir, have been shown to be safe and effective among people with acute and recent HCV infection, highlighting their potential in an HCV controlled human infection model. This article describes the natural history and management of acute and recent HCV infection in the era of DAA therapy and outlines a strategy for use of DAA therapies in the setting of an HCV controlled human infection model.

About 5% of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients experienced treatment failure with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment. The global data on the practice and treatment outcomes of Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir/Voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) in DAA-experienced CHC patients remains sparse. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SOF/VEL/VOX as a salvage treatment in DAA-experienced CHC patients. We searched five electronic databases from inception to 31 January 2023. The study outcomes were SVR12 and treatment-related adverse effects, with subgroup analysis performed based on genotype, cirrhosis, HCC, prior SOF/VEL exposure, and region. We identified and analyzed data from 24 studies (2877 DAA-experienced CHC patients); 17.2% had prior SOF/VEL exposure, 25% received ribavirin with SOF/VEL/VOX, and 42% had pre-treatment resistance-associated substitution (RAS) testing performed. Eastern Mediterranean had a higher pooled SVR12 than the America and Europe regions (p < 0.05). Predictors of SOF/VEL/VOX failure were genotype 3, active HCC, baseline cirrhosis, and prior SOF/VEL. Baseline RAS mutation and ribavirin supplementation were not associated with higher SVR12. Treatment discontinuation because of drug-related adverse events was uncommon (10 studies, 0.2%). In summary, SOF/VEL/VOX is efficacious and safe for retreatment in DAA-experienced CHC patients, even with RAS mutation. Our findings support SOF/VEL/VOX as a first-line rescue treatment for DAA-experienced CHC patients.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) on mortality, the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and clinical recovery in patients with COVID-19.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search through the PubMed, Scopus and Embase from the inception of databases until 6 April 2021. The intervention group was SOF/DCV, and the control group was standard of care. The primary outcome was mortality, defined as clinically validated death. The secondary outcomes were (1) the need for ICU admission or IMV and (2) clinical recovery. The pooled effect estimates were reported as risk ratios (RRs).
RESULTS: There were four studies with a total of 231 patients in this meta-analysis. Three studies were randomised controlled trial, and one study was non-randomised. SOF/DCV was associated with lower mortality (RR: 0.31 (0.12, 0.78); p=0.013; I2: 0%) and reduced need for ICU admission or IMV (RR: 0.35 (0.18, 0.69); p=0.002; I2: 0%). Clinical recovery was achieved more frequently in the SOF/DCV (RR: 1.20 (1.04, 1.37); p=0.011; I2: 21.1%). There was a moderate certainty of evidence for mortality and need for ICU/IMV outcome, and a low certainty of evidence for clinical recovery. The absolute risk reductions were 140 fewer per 1000 for mortality and 186 fewer per 1000 for the need for ICU/IMV. The increase in clinical recovery was 146 more per 1000.
CONCLUSIONS: SOF/DCV may reduce mortality rate and need for ICU/IMV in patients with COVID-19 while increasing the chance for clinical recovery.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO: CRD42021247510.

The combination of Sofosbuvir (SOF), velpatasvir (VEL), and voxilaprevir (VOX) is an effective, safe rescue therapy for patients with previous treatment failure. Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in diabetics with a history of hypoglycemia could improve insulin resistance due to HCV clearance. However, some studies have shown that SOF/VEL/VOX causes grade 3 hyperglycemia and other adverse events, which contradicts the findings of other DAA studies.
To analyze the incidence of grade 3 hyperglycemia of SOF/VEL/VOX for chronic HCV infection.
We searched electronic databases from the inception of each database until October 2021. A random-effects model was employed to pool data. The study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, and quality assessment was performed by using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The study protocol was registered on the INPLASY database (Registration No. 2021120109).
Five RCTs were included in this review. Overall, 49 of 2315 patients had grade 3 hyperglycemia with a risk ratio of 0.015 (95% confidence interval, 0.010-0.020; p < .001), and the incidence risk ratio (IRR) for cirrhosis compared to without cirrhosis was 12.000 (95% confidence interval: 0.727-198.160), the HCV genotype 3-genotype 1 IRR was 4.13 (95% confidence interval: 1.52-11.22) in subgroup analysis. No significant differences were found within the other subgroups, in prior DAA treatment experience, and in treatment duration.
Although the incidence of hyperglycemia was rare in diabetic patients with HCV, it is recommended that glucose levels be closely monitored during the first 3 months of therapy and that diabetes medication be modified if necessary.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C is an important agent of liver damage in patients with chronic kidney disease and the advent of DAAs has dramatically changed the management of HCV positive patients, including those with advanced CKD. Sofosbuvir is the backbone of many anti-HCV regimens based on DAAs but it remains unclear whether it is appropriate for HCV-infected patients with stage 4-5 CKD.
UNASSIGNED: We performed a systematic review of the literature with a meta-analysis of clinical studies in order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SOF-based DAA regimens in patients with stage 4-5 CKD. The primary outcome was sustained viral response (as a measure of efficacy); the secondary outcomes were the frequency of SAEs and drop-outs due to AEs (as measures of tolerability). The random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird was adopted, with heterogeneity and stratified analyses.
RESULTS: Thirty clinical studies (n=1537 unique patients) were retrieved. The pooled SVR12 and SAEs rate was 0.99 (95% confidence intervals, 0.97; 1.0, I2=99.8%) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05; 0.13, I2=84.3%), respectively. The pooled SVR12 rate in studies with high HCV RNA levels at baseline was lower, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.75; 1.0, I2=73.3%) (P<0.001). The pooled drop-out rate due to AEs was 0.02 (95% CI, -0.01; 0.04, I2=16.1%). Common serious adverse events were anemia (n=26, 38%) and reduced eGFR (n=14, 19%). SAEs were more common in studies adopting full-dose sofosbuvir (pooled rate of SAEs 0.15, 95% CI, 0.06; 0.25; I2=80.1%) and in those based on ribavirin (0.15, 95% CI, 0.07; 0.23, I2=95.8%). Six studies (n=69 patients) reported eGFR levels at baseline/post- antiviral therapy; no consistent changes were found.
CONCLUSIONS: SOF-based regimens appear safe and effective in patients with stage 4-5 CKD. Serum creatinine should be carefully monitored during therapy with SOF in patients with CKD. Randomized controlled studies in order to expand our knowledge on this point are under way.

UNASSIGNED: This study investigated the clinical efficacy sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF-DCV) in patients with COVID-19.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before January 6, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy of SOF-DCV (study group) with alternative treatments (control group) in patients with COVID-19 were included.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 9 RCTs were included. The all-cause mortality rate in the study group was 10.7% (96/898), which was lower than that in the control group (12.3%, 108/871). However, this difference was not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.62-1.12; I2 = 49%). The overall clinical recovery rate was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group (OR = 2.34; 95% CI, 1.47-3.72; I2 = 20%). Furthermore, the average length of hospital stay was shorter in the study group than in the control group (mean deviation = -1.84; 95% CI, -3.42 to -0.26, I2 = 68%).
UNASSIGNED: Although SOF-DCV did not confer a survival benefit in patients with COVID-19, it may increase a patient\'s odds of clinical recovery, and shorten the length of their hospital stay.

Chronic hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection, which occurs almost exclusively in immunocompromised patients, if untreated may progress to cirrhosis and possibly hepatocellular carcinoma. The reduction of immunosuppression and/or administration of ribavirin is frequently curative but there remain many immunocompromised individuals whose HEV infection is refractory to these therapeutic strategies. Moreover, the haematological toxicity of ribavirin limits its use. Pegylated interferon has demonstrated success in a small number of patients with chronic HEV infection; however, the potentially increased risk of graft rejection associated with its use renders it unsuitable for many transplant recipients. Alternative therapeutic strategies are therefore required. This article reviews the in vitro and in vivo literature to date of the antiviral agent sofosbuvir (well established in the treatment of hepatitis C) in the treatment of HEV infection.

OBJECTIVE: Sofosbuvir (SOF) is a new and highly effective medication that dramatically improved hepatitis C virus (HCV) management. However, ribavirin (RBV) is still added to SOF-based medication regimens in several clinical scenarios, despite its well-known toxicities. The aim of our study is to systematically review and analyse the impact of adding RBV to SOF-based medication regimens on clinical outcomes among HCV patients.
METHODS: Included studies were randomized trials comparing the same SOF-based medication regimens with and without RBV in HCV patients and measuring serious adverse events (SAEs) and/or sustained virologic response at 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR-12). Two investigators independently searched PubMed and Cochrane Library through September 2021. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess trials quality. Clinical outcomes were analysed as risk ratios (RR) using a random effects model using R version 4.1.2.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study included a total of 26 trials with 5058 HCV patients. Quality assessment showed moderate risk of bias for most trials. Upon adding RBV, there was no significant difference in SAEs (RR 1.07, 95% CI: 0.77-1.48, I2  = 10%), nor an impact on SVR-12 (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01, I2  = 41%). There was no evidence of publication bias for either outcome. Subgroup analysis consistently showed lack of benefit among HCV subgroups. Additionally, NCT01826981 was identified as the main source of heterogeneity in the SVR-12 outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest nonsignificant differences in safety and efficacy between SOF-based medication regimens with and without RBV which should be considered in clinical practice.