-
Journal of Medical Economics 2015To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the relative efficacy and safety of simeprevir, a second generation oral protease inhibitor (PI), compared to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
A network meta-analysis to compare simeprevir with boceprevir and telaprevir in combination with peginterferon-α and ribavirin in patients infected with genotype 1 Hepatitis C virus.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the relative efficacy and safety of simeprevir, a second generation oral protease inhibitor (PI), compared to telaprevir and boceprevir in combination with pegylated interferon-α and ribavirin (PR) in patients with chronic hepatitis C.
METHODS
A systematic literature review and NMA of randomized controlled trials involving anti-virals added to PR were conducted. Electronic database searches and hand searches were conducted to identify relevant publications. Outcomes of interest included sustained virologic response (SVR), incidence of adverse events (AEs), and discontinuation due to AEs. Networks were based on treatment-, dose-, and duration-specific nodes. Sub-group analyses were conducted to investigate heterogeneity, based on Metavir scores, sub-genotypes 1a/1b, and prior response.
RESULTS
A total of 15 publications were considered for the base case of the meta-analysis. Simeprevir was associated with higher SVR rates than PR alone. Compared to telaprevir and boceprevir, SVR rates tended to be higher for simeprevir, with odds ratios ranging from 1.27 [0.81-2.00] to 2.61 [1.44-4.74] in treatment-naïve and from 1.04 [0.78-1.38] to 1.74 [0.84-3.61] in treatment-experienced patients, respectively. In terms of safety, the risks of anemia and discontinuations due to AEs were lower for simeprevir compared to PR alone, telaprevir, and boceprevir. The risk of rash was lower for simeprevir compared to telaprevir, and similar compared to PR alone and boceprevir.
CONCLUSION
This NMA in genotype 1 HCV patients suggests a similar or better efficacy and tolerability profile for simeprevir compared to telaprevir and boceprevir.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Databases, Bibliographic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Interferon-alpha; Oligopeptides; Proline; Protease Inhibitors; Ribavirin; Simeprevir; Viral Load
PubMed: 25934147
DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2015.1046880 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jun 2016The burden of HCV cirrhosis is high and projected to increase significantly over the next decade. While interferon therapy is problematic in HCV cirrhosis, the era of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The burden of HCV cirrhosis is high and projected to increase significantly over the next decade. While interferon therapy is problematic in HCV cirrhosis, the era of direct-acting anti-viral (DAA) therapy provides effective treatment for patients with cirrhosis.
AIM
To systematically review the results of DAA therapy to date in patients with HCV cirrhosis, and highlight the ongoing challenges for DAA therapy in this population.
METHODS
A structured Medline search was conducted to obtain phase II and III HCV trials in patients with cirrhosis. Citations from review articles were cross-referenced and conference abstracts from EASL and AASLD liver meetings for the preceding 3 years were reviewed manually. Keywords used included hepatitis C, cirrhosis and the DAA's: sofosbuvir, ledipasvir, velpatasvir, grazoprevir, elbasvir, daclatasvir, beclabuvir, asunaprevir, simeprevir, paritaprevir, ombitasvir and dasabuvir.
RESULTS
Successful direct-acting anti-viral treatment is now possible in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis including those with liver decompensation with several regimens now offering sustained virological response (SVR) of 90-95%. Overall success rates in GT1 cirrhosis are excellent while GT3-infected patients with cirrhosis remain hard to cure. The pangenotypic combination of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir holds promise for GT3 cirrhosis achieving SVR of ~90%.
CONCLUSIONS
Potent DAA therapies provide much needed, safe and highly effective treatment options for persons with HCV cirrhosis including those previously deemed unsuitable for treatment. Combination therapy with two or more classes of drug is essential to achieve high efficacy and minimise viral resistance, with the role of ribavirin still under evaluation. However, several challenges remain including the hard-to-cure groups of GT3 cirrhosis and direct-acting anti-viral failures, and managing drug-drug interactions.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Hepatitis C; Humans; Interferons; Liver Cirrhosis
PubMed: 27087015
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13633 -
Medicine Mar 2016All possible direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA) regimens for treatment-naive hepatitis C genotype 1 were evaluated by many randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents for Treatment-Naive Hepatitis C Genotype 1.
All possible direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA) regimens for treatment-naive hepatitis C genotype 1 were evaluated by many randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, the optimum regimen remains inconclusive. We aim to compare interventions in terms of sustained virological response at 12 (SVR12) and 24 (SVR24) weeks after the end of treatment and adverse effects (AEs) (fatigue, headache, nausea, insomnia). PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs until July 31, 2015. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) between treatments on clinical outcomes. Twenty-two eligible RCTs were included. Compared with peginterferon-ribavirin (PR), daclatasvir plus PR (OR 8.90, P < 0.001), faldaprevir plus PR (OR 3.72, P < 0.001), simeprevir plus PR (OR 3.59, P < 0.001), sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 4.69, P < 0.001) yield a significant effect in improving SVR12. Consistently, simeprevir plus PR (OR 3.49, P < 0.001), sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 4.51, P < 0.001), daclatasvir plus PR (OR 4.77, P < 0.001) also improved the rates of SVR24 significantly compared with PR. With respect to AEs, compared with PR, ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 2.13, P < 0.001) confer a significant AE in nausea, whereas daclatasvir plus PR (OR 0.20, P < 0.001 and OR 0.18, P < 0.001, respectively) lowered the incidence of fatigue and nausea significantly when compared with ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir plus PR. Daclatasvir plus PR was the most effective in SVR12 and SVR24, but caused an increased AEs profile (headache and insomnia). Combined ledipasvir with sofosbuvir or combination of PR was associated with higher incidence of fatigue and nausea.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Drug Therapy, Combination; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Odds Ratio; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26945424
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003004 -
Bioorganic Chemistry Jan 2021Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease outbreak, there has been an increasing interest in finding a potential therapeutic agent for the...
BACKGROUND
Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease outbreak, there has been an increasing interest in finding a potential therapeutic agent for the disease. Considering the matter of time, the computational methods of drug repurposing offer the best chance of selecting one drug from a list of approved drugs for the life-threatening condition of COVID-19. The present systematic review aims to provide an overview of studies that have used computational methods for drug repurposing in COVID-19.
METHODS
We undertook a systematic search in five databases and included original articles in English that applied computational methods for drug repurposing in COVID-19.
RESULTS
Twenty-one original articles utilizing computational drug methods for COVID-19 drug repurposing were included in the systematic review. Regarding the quality of eligible studies, high-quality items including the use of two or more approved drug databases, analysis of molecular dynamic simulation, multi-target assessment, the use of crystal structure for the generation of the target sequence, and the use of AutoDock Vina combined with other docking tools occurred in about 52%, 38%, 24%, 48%, and 19% of included studies. Studies included repurposed drugs mainly against non-structural proteins of SARS-CoV2: the main 3C-like protease (Lopinavir, Ritonavir, Indinavir, Atazanavir, Nelfinavir, and Clocortolone), RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (Remdesivir and Ribavirin), and the papain-like protease (Mycophenolic acid, Telaprevir, Boceprevir, Grazoprevir, Darunavir, Chloroquine, and Formoterol). The review revealed the best-documented multi-target drugs repurposed by computational methods for COVID-19 therapy as follows: antiviral drugs commonly used to treat AIDS/HIV (Atazanavir, Efavirenz, and Dolutegravir Ritonavir, Raltegravir, and Darunavir, Lopinavir, Saquinavir, Nelfinavir, and Indinavir), HCV (Grazoprevir, Lomibuvir, Asunaprevir, Ribavirin, and Simeprevir), HBV (Entecavir), HSV (Penciclovir), CMV (Ganciclovir), and Ebola (Remdesivir), anticoagulant drug (Dabigatran), and an antifungal drug (Itraconazole).
CONCLUSIONS
The present systematic review provides a list of existing drugs that have the potential to influence SARS-CoV2 through different mechanisms of action. For the majority of these drugs, direct clinical evidence on their efficacy for the treatment of COVID-19 is lacking. Future clinical studies examining these drugs might come to conclude, which can be more useful to inhibit COVID-19 progression.
Topics: Animals; Antiviral Agents; Cell Line, Tumor; Computational Chemistry; Drug Discovery; Drug Repositioning; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33261845
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2020.104490 -
Hepatitis Monthly Sep 2016Direct acting antivirals (DAAs) have recently emerged as a promising therapeutic regimen for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, which is a major public... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Direct acting antivirals (DAAs) have recently emerged as a promising therapeutic regimen for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, which is a major public health problem. Among the known DAAs, daclatasvir (DCV), an inhibitor of the non-structural 5A protein, has been used in combination with several drugs for treatment of infection with HCV of different genotypes under different conditions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of combination therapy with DCV.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct and Web of Science with appropriate keywords for DCV. Studies that evaluated any regimen containing DCV and reported the sustained virological response (SVR) 12 weeks after therapy based on the HCV genotype, treatment duration and use of ribavirin (RBV) were included. The selected studies were considered for meta-analysis using STATA 11.0.
RESULTS
We found six different regimens containing DCV: DCV/asunaprevir (ASV), DCV/ASV/beclubavir, DCV/pegylated interferon lambda or alpha/RBV with or without ASV, DCV/simeprevir, DCV/VX-135 and DCV/sofosbuvir (SOF). Most of these regimens were used for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infections, and in most cases, treatment failure was noted in subtype 1a infections. Among all these regimens, DCV/SOF with or without RBV for 12 or 24 weeks was found to be an efficacious approach for treatment of different types of patients with infections with different HCV genotypes.
CONCLUSIONS
Among the treatment regimens containing DCV, DCV/SOF has the highest SVR rate for the treatment of infection with different HCV genotypes in different patient contexts; thus, this regimen shows promise for the treatment of HCV infections.
PubMed: 27826322
DOI: 10.5812/hepatmon.41077 -
Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and... Jan 2016Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are known to present with additional dermatological events over pegylated-interferon/ribavirin (Peg-IFN/RBV). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are known to present with additional dermatological events over pegylated-interferon/ribavirin (Peg-IFN/RBV).
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the incidence/risk of cutaneous adverse events (AEs) for simeprevir, sofosbuvir, ABT450/r-ombitasvir, dasabuvir, ledipasvir, daclatasvir, and asunaprevir.
METHODS
The databases searched included PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Clinicaloptions.com. Data on telaprevir and boceprevir were obtained from a previous study.
RESULTS
The incidences of cutaneous AEs were 34.3% (95% CI 18.4%-54.8%) for the old DAAs + Peg-IFN/RBV, 22.0% (95% CI 17.9%-26.8%) for the new DAAs + Peg-IFN/RBV, 9.8% (95% CI 8.6%-11.2%) for the DAAs + RBV, and 3.8% (95% CI 2.4%-6.1%) for DAAs only. Simeprevir + Peg-IFN/RBV was associated with an increased relative risk over Peg-IFN/RBV; RR = 1.319 (95% CI 1.026-1.697).
CONCLUSION
Dermatological events are still an important issue for many of the new DAAs. Appropriate monitoring, management, and patient education are needed to minimize AEs and achieve HCV cure.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Skin Diseases
PubMed: 26162860
DOI: 10.1177/1203475415595775 -
Clinical Drug Investigation May 2018Hepatitis C treatment has changed considerably in recent years, and many interferon (IFN)-free therapies are now available. Considering the high rates of sustained... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Sustained Virological Response in Special Populations with Chronic Hepatitis C Using Interferon-Free Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Cohort Studies.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Hepatitis C treatment has changed considerably in recent years, and many interferon (IFN)-free therapies are now available. Considering the high rates of sustained virological response (SVR) presented by clinical trials for these treatments, high rates of effectiveness are also expected in real-world clinical practice. Hence, this study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational cohort studies to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of IFN-free therapies for hepatitis C.
METHODS
The search was performed in four electronic databases and included cohort studies that evaluated IFN-free schemes and provided data on SVR at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12) as the primary outcome. Overall and subgroup meta-analyses of patients' clinical conditions (e.g. co-infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), cirrhosis, liver transplant, specific genotypes, and other conditions) were performed.
RESULTS
Sixty-eight studies encompassing a total of 24,151 patients were included for quantitative and qualitative analyses, evaluating six treatments: sofosbuvir with ledipasvir, daclatasvir, or simeprevir; daclatasvir with asunaprevir; paritaprevir/ritonavir in combination with ombitasvir and dasabuvir; and sofosbuvir with ribavirin. The overall analysis showed SVR rates of 88-96% for all treatments except sofosbuvir combined with ribavirin, which had SVR rates of approximately 80%. The results of subgroup analyses showed that the genotype 3 virus appears to be the most difficult to treat.
CONCLUSION
In order to choose the best treatment option, it is necessary to consider the patients' conditions and characteristics. In conclusion, the use of IFN-free therapies meets the high expectations created by clinical trials, including patients in special clinical conditions.
Topics: 2-Naphthylamine; Anilides; Antiviral Agents; Benzimidazoles; Carbamates; Cohort Studies; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fluorenes; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Interferons; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Macrocyclic Compounds; Male; Middle Aged; Proline; Ribavirin; Ritonavir; Simeprevir; Sofosbuvir; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response; Treatment Outcome; Uracil; Valine
PubMed: 29435907
DOI: 10.1007/s40261-018-0624-6 -
BMJ Open Gastroenterology 2016Outcome data on simeprevir and sofosbuvir (SMV+SOF) in patients with liver transplantation (LT) with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCV-1) are limited with individual...
BACKGROUND
Outcome data on simeprevir and sofosbuvir (SMV+SOF) in patients with liver transplantation (LT) with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCV-1) are limited with individual studies having a small sample size and limited SVR12 (sustained virological response) data. Our goal was to perform a meta-analysis to study the outcome of SMV+SOF±ribavirin (RBV) in recipients with LT.
METHODS
In April 2015, we conducted a literature search for 'simeprevir' in MEDLINE/EMBASE and five major liver meetings. We included studies with SVR12 data in ≥5 post-LT mono-infected HCV-1 patients treated with SMV+SOF±RBV. We used random-effects models to estimate effect sizes, and the Cochrane Q-test (p value <0.10) with I(2) (>50%) to assess study heterogeneity.
RESULTS
We included nine studies with a total of 325 patients with post-LT. Studies included mostly men (59-81%). Pooled SVR12 was 88.0% (95% CI 83.4% to 91.5%). In two studies, HCV-1a patients with mild fibrosis (n=108) had an SVR12 rate of 95.0% (95% CI 82.4% to 98.7%), which was significantly higher than that of HCV-1a patients with advanced fibrosis (n=49) with an SVR12 rate of 81.7% (95% CI 69.8% to 89.5%), OR 4.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 16.1, p=0.03). The most common pooled side effects were: fatigue 21% (n=48/237), headache 9% (n=23/254), dermatological symptoms 15% (n=38/254), and gastrointestinal symptoms 6% (12/193).
CONCLUSIONS
SMV+SOF±RBV is safe and effective in recipients with LT with HCV-1 infection.
PubMed: 26966549
DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2015-000066 -
Journal of Gastroenterology and... Sep 2020Various all-oral direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens are being widely used in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infected... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Various all-oral direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens are being widely used in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infected patients; however, the comparative efficacy and safety of different types and combinations of DAAs are not completely clear. There is still a lack of integration of evidence for optimized therapies for HIV/HCV co-infection.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search in several databases up to January 1, 2020. All the studies that reported the sustained virologic response (SVR) and adverse events of DAAs in HIV/HCV co-infected patients were included. The Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo method was used for the pooled estimates of network meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We identified 33 eligible articles with 7 combinations of all-oral DAAs for the analyses of efficacy and safety. Grazoprevir-elbasvir ± ribavirin (GZR/EBR ± RBV: 95.6%; 95% CrI, 91.7-98.1%), ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir ± ribavirin (3D ± RBV: 95.3%; 95% CrI, 93.4-96.9%), sofosbuvir-ledipasvir ± ribavirin (SOF/LDV ± RBV: 95.2%; 95% CrI, 93.7-96.6%), and sofosbuvir-daclatasvir ± ribavirin (SOF/DCV ± RBV: 94.8%; 95% CrI, 92.5-96.6%) were the most effective combinations for HIV/HCV co-infected patients, with SVR rates of approximately 94% and above while severe adverse events were rare. However, the SVR rates of sofosbuvir-ribavirin (SOF/RBV) and sofosbuvir-simeprevir ± ribavirin (SOF/SMV ± RBV) both failed to reach 90%, and the incidences of adverse events were higher than 5%.
CONCLUSIONS
Efficacy and safety of all-oral DAAs were in prospect for HIV/HCV co-infection patients. GZR/EBR ± RBV was the optimal combination recommended for HIV/HCV co-infected patients based on the excellent treatment effects and insignificant adverse events.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Coinfection; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; HIV Infections; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Male; Middle Aged; Quinoxalines; Ribavirin; Safety; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32246857
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15051 -
PloS One 2015The treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) infections has significantly changed in the past few years due to the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). DAAs... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) infections has significantly changed in the past few years due to the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). DAAs could improve the sustained virological response compared to pegylated interferon with ribavirin (PR). However, there has been no evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compare the efficacy among the different regimens of DAAs.
AIM
Therefore, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis aiming to compare the treatment efficacy between different DAA regimens for treatment naïve HCV genotype 1.
METHODS
Medline and Scopus were searched up to 25th May 2015. RCTs investigating the efficacy of second generation DAA regimens for treatment naïve HCV genotype 1 were eligible for the review. Due to the lower efficacy and more side effects of first generation DAAs, this review included only second generation DAAs approved by the US or EU Food and Drug Administration, that comprised of simeprevir (SMV), sofosbuvir (SOF), daclatasvir (DCV), ledipasvir (LDV), and paritaprevir/ritonavir/ombitasvir plus dasabuvir (PrOD). Primary outcomes were sustained virological response at weeks 12 (SVR12) and 24 (SVR24) after the end of treatment and adverse drug events (i.e. serious adverse events, anemia, and fatigue). Efficacy of all treatment regimens were compared by applying a multivariate random effect meta-analysis. Incidence rates of SVR12 and SVR24, and adverse drug events of each treatment regimen were pooled using 'pmeta' command in STATA program.
RESULTS
Overall, 869 studies were reviewed and 16 studies were eligible for this study. Compared with the PR regimen, SOF plus PR, SMV plus PR, and DVC plus PR regimens yielded significantly higher probability of having SVR24 with pooled risk ratios (RR) of 1.98 (95% CI 1.24, 3.14), 1.46 (95% CI: 1.22, 1.75), and 1.68 (95% CI: 1.14, 2.46), respectively. Pooled incidence rates of SVR12 and SVR24 in all treatment regimens without PR, i.e. SOF plus LDV with/without ribavirin, SOF plus SMV with/without ribavirin, SOF plus DCV with/without ribavirin, and PrOD with/without ribavirin, (pooled incidence of SVR12 ranging from 93% to 100%, and pooled incidence of SVR24 ranging from 89% to 96%) were much higher than the pooled incidence rates of SVR12 (51%) and SVR24 (48%) in PR alone. In comparing SOF plus LDV with ribavirin and SOF plus LDV without ribavirin, the chance of having SVR12 was not significantly different between these two regimens, with the pooled RR of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.01). Regarding adverse drug events, risk of serious adverse drug events, anemia and fatigue were relatively higher in treatment regimens with PR than the treatment regimens without PR. The main limitation of our study is that a subgroup analysis according to dosages and duration of treatment could not be performed. Therefore, the dose and duration of recommended treatment have been suggested in range and not in definite value.
CONCLUSIONS
Both DAA plus PR and dual DAA regimens should be included in the first line drug for treatment naïve HCV genotype 1 because of the significant clinical benefits over PR alone. However, due to high drug costs, an economic evaluation should be conducted in order to assess the value of the investment when making coverage decisions.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fatigue; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Humans; Odds Ratio; Publication Bias; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load
PubMed: 26720298
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145953