Información de la revista
Vol. 75. Núm. S2.
Páginas 149-160 (Noviembre 2010)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 75. Núm. S2.
Páginas 149-160 (Noviembre 2010)
Acceso a texto completo
Current and Evolving Guidelines for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C
Visitas
...
Emmet B. Keeffea
a Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California, USA
Información del artículo
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Figuras (4)
Mostrar másMostrar menos
Texto completo

¿ Introduction

Up to 3% of the world's population, or 170 million people, are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV).1 The prevalence of chronic HCV infection ranges from 0.1% to more than 10% in different countries, with the highest prevalence rates (10% to 15%) found in the African and Eastern Mediterranean regions. It is estimated that there are 2.7 to 3.9 million HCV chronic carriers in the United States and 5 million HCV carriers in Western Europe, with a higher prevalence of HCV in Eastern Europe.2-4 Recent reports indicate that HCV infection currently accounts for up to two-thirds of newly diagnosed cases of chronic liver disease in the United States.5

In Mexico, liver disease ranks fifth among most common causes of death, with alcoholic liver disease being the dominant etiology, followed by nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and chronic hepatitis C.6 A systematic review of reactivity to antibody against HCV (anti-HCV) in Mexico showed a weighted mean prevalence rate of 0.37%, lower than prior estimates of 1%.7 HCV can be classified into six major genotypes based on sequence divergence of 30%, which differ by geographic distribution, with HCV genotype 1 being the most prevalent one in North America, South America, and Western Europe. Genotype 1 affects two-thirds (63-70%) of individuals with chronic hepatitis C in Mexico, similar to the prevalence of this genotype in the United States.7

HCV is efficiently transmitted by percutaneous exposure to infectious blood. Following acute HCV infection, up to 85% of adults will develop chronic infection and approximately 20% (range 5-25) of chronically infected individuals may develop cirrhosis after 25 to 30 years of infection.8 Children infected at a young age and women have lower rates of cirrhosis on long-term follow-up (2-6%). Persons most likely to have chronic HCV infection are those who received a blood transfusion prior to 1992 or have past or current injection drug use. However, other groups are at risk, such as those with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or history of multiple sexual contacts, persons with hemophilia who received clotting factor concentrates before 1987, patients who have been on hemodialysis, persons who received an organ transplant before 1992, those with unexplained elevation of serum aminotransferase levels, and children born to HCV-infected mothers. Chronic HCV infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, and may progress to cirrhosis, liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the need for liver transplantation, albeit at variable rates.9 Chronic hepatitis C is the leading indication for liver transplantation in many countries, accounting for more than one third (37-41%) of all liver transplants in the United States.10

Several factors appear to accelerate the progression of chronic hepatitis C, including advanced age, male gender, excessive alcohol intake, HIV coinfection, and hepatic steatosis with obesity, diabetes mellitus and insulin resistance.11,12 In addition, higher serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels are associated with a higher rate of fibrosis progression, while worsening of fibrosis is less common in patients with persistently normal ALT levels.13 Chronic hepatitis C with advanced hepatitis fibrosis, and particularly with cirrhosis, is significantly associated with the development of HCC.14,15 Although chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is the most common predisposing factor for HCC worldwide, HCV infection is the most frequent cause of HCC in the United States and the incidence of HCV-associated HCC is increasing.14,15 Antiviral therapy may have a significant impact on the natural history of chronic HCV infection, as a sustained virologic response (SVR) to therapy may halt fibrosis progression, decrease the risk of HCC, and prolong survival.16-19

¿ Treatment

Guidelines for Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C

The dominant current guideline for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C was developed by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and published in 2009.20 Other guidelines on treatment of HCV infection are either outdated or focused on regional considerations of specific countries, such as different genotype prevalence rates, reimbursement policies, or other local issues. Although a bit dated, the position statement from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) published in 2006 is also frequently cited along with the AASLD guideline.21 The earlier hepatitis C consensus development conferences conducted by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1997 and 2002 were historically instrumental in providing guidance and standardization to the management of patients with chronic hepatitis C.22,23 In the recent past, a joint effort of the AGA and the American Medical Association led to the development of hepatitis C Physician Performance Measures, which have been adopted by the United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services as part of the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative, to assist physicians in enhancing quality of care in patients with chronic hepatitis C.24 These comprehensive measures focus on diagnostic testing, counseling and education, treatment of hepatitis C, and both hepatitis A and B vaccination. Finally, the Institute of Medicine just recently assembled an expert committee and published a report calling for improved surveillance for HCV and HBV, advances in knowledge and awareness of viral hepatitis, improved HBV vaccine coverage, and better integration of viral hepatitis services in the United States.25,26

Selection of Patients for Treatment

The diagnosis of chronic hepatitis C is made by the detection of anti-HCV and serum HCV RNA, which are usually obtained based on the presence of risk factors for HCV infection. 20,21 The role of liver biopsy as part of the baseline evaluation remains controversial, but biopsy is generally recommended for staging hepatic fibrosis in patients with genotype 1 infection to assist the patient and physician in making a decision regarding initiation of antiviral therapy.20 A liver biopsy may be unnecessary in patients with genotype 2 or 3 infection, since approximately 80% achieve an SVR. Although currently available noninvasive tests may be useful in defining the presence or absence of minimal or advanced fibrosis, the AASLD does not recommend these tests to replace liver biopsy in routine clinical practice.20

Current recommendations for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C are primarily derived from the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (efficacy) involving patients selected based on restrictive inclusion criteria.20,21 However, it must be kept in mind that the results of therapy in clinical practice (effectiveness) may not be equivalent, as was shown in a New York study of 255 patients that included many ethnic minorities (58% Hispanic and 20% African Americans) who were naïve to prior therapy and had quite low SVR rates with standard peginterferon plus ribavirin therapy (14% in genotype 1 patients, and 37% in genotypes 2 and 3 patients).27 Standard indications, relative indications, and contraindications for treatment of chronic hepatitis C recommended in the AASLD guideline are summarized in Table 1. Treatment indications for patients in real-life settings are more challenging, and the risk and benefits of therapy need to be weighed in these circumstances, such as in patients with psychiatric disorders, advanced or young age, various medical comorbidities, history of poor adherence, and other psychosocial or medical issues. Chronic hepatitis C disproportionately affects minorities and lower socioeconomic groups, who often are not candidates for therapy and have lower SVR rates when treated.27 Despite the substantial improvements in therapy for chronic hepatitis C, the rates of diagnosis and treatment are low, and treatment rates appear to be declining in the United States.28 One analysis of ambulatory care visits showed that less than 10% of visits were associated with a prescription for antiviral therapy, regardless of demographic and insurance status.29 Another study of patients receiving care through the Veterans Administration, which covers a population with a known high rate of HCV infection, showed that only 12% of veterans diagnosed with chronic hepatitis C received a prescription for antiviral therapy.30 Efforts to improve rates of diagnosis (less than half of all HCV-infected individuals) and treatment uptake are required to ameliorate the future health care burden of hepatitis C from the development of cirrhosis and HCC.

Current Standard Treatment

There has been impressive progress in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C since the first use of standard interferon monotherapy in the early 1990s, which overall achieved SVR rates of approximately 10%.31 With the addition of ribavirin in the late 1990s followed later by pegylation of interferon to enhance its half-life, the SVR rate increased to approximately 50%-60% overall using peginterferon and ribavirin based on the results of three pivotal trials.32-34 These studies showed that SVR rates ranged from 42% to 52% in patients with genotype 1 infection treated with peginterferon alfa-2a (Pegasys®, Roche Pharmaceuticals Inc., Nutley, NJ, USA) or peginterferon alfa-2b (Peg-Intron®, Schering-Plough Corporation, Kenilworth, NJ, USA) plus ribavirin for 48 weeks, and 76% to 84% in those with genotype 2 or 3 infection treated for 24 or 48 weeks (Table 2). The study by Hadziyannis et al.34 demonstrated that 24 weeks of combination therapy using ribavirin at a dose of 800 mg daily was adequate for patients with genotype 2 or 3 infection. The initial dose of ribavirin used in the interferon alfa-2b registration trial was 800 mg daily,32 but a subsequent large community-based trial demonstrated that weight-based ribavirin (800-1400 mg daily) was superior to flat-dose ribavirin (800 mg/d) when used in combination with peginterferon alfa-2b for the treatment of patients with genotype 1 infection.35 Thus, combination therapy with either peginterferon alfa-2a or peginterferon alfa-2b and weight-based ribavirin (1000-1200 mg with peginterferon alfa-2a, and 800-1400 mg with peginterferon alfa-2b) for 48 weeks is the current standard of care for the treatment of genotype 1 HCV infection, and either of the peginterferon products plus ribavirin 800 mg daily for 24 weeks is used for patients with genotype 2 or 3 HCV infection.20,21

There are fewer studies and less data regarding the outcomes of therapy for patients with genotype 4, 5 or 6 infection. Patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 4 infection appear to achieve maximal benefit with 48 weeks of peginterferon and weight-based ribavirin therapy, with SVR rates ranging from 48% to 79%,36,37 although limited data from one study suggests that 36 weeks of therapy is sufficient provided an early virologic response (EVR; a 32 log10 decrease in HCV RNA levels from baseline) is achieved (Table 2).38 There are no prospective studies on the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 5 infection, but five non-randomized retrospective studies using different interferon-based treatment regimens and durations of therapy demonstrated SVR rates varying between 55% and 87%.39 In HCV genotype 6 infection, which is common in Vietnamese patients, a small retrospective analysis of different treatment regimens found that higher SVR rates were seen in patients receiving 48 weeks of peginterferon plus ribavirin versus those treated for 24 weeks (75% vs. 39%).40 However, a subsequent prospective study did not show a significant difference in the SVR rates of patients treated for 24 or 48 weeks, i.e., 70% vs. 79% (p = 0.45).41

Peginterferon alfa-2a and peginterferon alfa-2b differ in their pharmacokinetics and dosing regimens.42 Peginterferon alfa-2b has a linear 12-kd polyethylene glycol (PEG) chain covalently linked to standard interferon alfa-2b via an unstable urethane bond that is hydrolyzed when injected. Peginterferon alfa-2a has a 40-kd branched PEG chain covalently linked via a stable amide bond to standard interferon alfa-2a and circulates as an intact molecule. Thus, peginterferon alfa-2a has a restricted volume of distribution, longer half-life and reduced clearance, and can be administered once weekly irrespective of body weight. Peginterferon alfa-2b has a shorter half-life, wide volume of distribution, and requires body weight-based dosing. Trials comparing the two peginterferons have had variable results although some randomized and retrospective studies appear to show superiority of peginterferon alfa-2a.42 The largest head-to-head randomized controlled trial conducted in the United States involving 3 070 patients with genotype 1 infection showed that peginterferon alfa-2a and peginterferon alfa-2b in combination with ribavirin had comparable efficacy in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, with SVR rates of 40% in patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin 800-1400 mg daily and 41% in those treated with peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin 1000-1200 mg daily.43 However, a 2010 meta-analysis including only head-to-head randomized controlled trials showed a significant advantage for peginterferon alfa-2a over peginterferon alfa-2b, with SVR rates of 47% vs. 41%.44 When patients with genotypes 1 and 4 or genotypes 2 and 3 were analyzed separately, the results continued to favor peginterferon alfa-2a. There were no differences with regard to adverse effects between the two drugs in this meta-analysis.

The goal of treatment of chronic hepatitis C is to prevent complications and death from HCV infection. Emerging data demonstrates that interferon-based therapy, particularly among those achieving an SVR,18,19,45 is associated with long-term persistence of SVR, improved fibrosis and inflammation scores, reduced incidence of HCC, improved quality of life, and prolonged life expectancy.16-19,46-49 This reduction in the rate of progression has also been demonstrated in patients with chronic hepatitis C and cirrhosis in some but not all studies. The impact on slowing progression is greatest in patients with an SVR, less in relapsers, and equivocal in nonresponders. Thus the natural history of chronic hepatitis C after completion of antiviral therapy is favorable with achievement of an SVR.

Viral Kinetics and Predictors of Virological Response

The timing of viral clearance of HCV from serum during therapy has been shown to be helpful as an early predictor of the likelihood of responding to therapy, for determining the optimal duration of therapy, and as a practical stopping rule in nonres-ponders. The common virologic responses during therapy and their definitions are shown in Table 3. The most important response is the SVR, which is generally regarded as a "virologic cure," although patients with cirrhosis remain at risk for HCC and require continued surveillance.20,21 The ability to achieve complete HCV RNA suppression to undetectable levels at four weeks of therapy, known as a rapid virologic response (RVR), is highly predictive of an SVR independent of genotype and has a positive predictive value for SVR in genotype 1 patients of up to 90%.50 However, only 15% to 20% of genotype 1 patients treated with standard therapy achieve an RVR. The achievement of an EVR, defined by at least a 2 log10 decrease in HCV RNA from baseline levels at week 12 of therapy, is also an important predictor of response to antiviral therapy. Patients who fail to achieve an EVR have a negative predictive value of SVR approaching 100% and are considered nonresponders in whom therapy should be stopped.33,51 A retrospective study of genotype 1 patients enrolled in six different trials of peginterferon plus ribavirin combination therapy provided evidence that complete suppression of HCV to undetectable levels at different time points is the most important on-treatment predictor of SVR.52 In this study, patients with an RVR had the highest rate of SVR at 87%. Patients who achieved a complete EVR (cEVR) had a significantly greater SVR rate (68%) compared with those who had a partial EVR (pEVR) with a 2 log10 reduction but still detectable serum HCV RNA at week 12 (SVR rate of 27%). Patients who did not achieve an EVR had the lowest SVR rate at 5%. Thus, more rapid complete clearance of HCV RNA is associated with a higher likelihood of achieving an SVR.

Several clinical and virological factors predict the likelihood of achieving an SVR to combination peginterferon and ribavirin therapy and may be used to guide management decisions both before and during a course of therapy.20,21 HCV genotype is an important predictor of response to therapy, with the highest SVR rates in patients with geno-type 2 infection, intermediate rates in genotypes 3, 4 and 6, and the lowest rate in genotype 1 infection (Table 2). A number of factors have been established as predictors of a reduced SVR rate, including high baseline serum HCV RNA levels (typically > 800,000 IU/mL), African-American or Latino ethnicity, increased age (particularly > 60 years of age), obesity, and the presence of advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis.20,21,53,54

A new predictor of response to therapy, which was uncovered by three independent genome-wide association studies, is a recently identified genetic variation in the IL28B gene that encodes interferon lambda-3 on chromosome 19.55-57 The CC genotype at the rs12979860 single nucleotide polymorphism in the IL28B locus demonstrates an extraordinarily strong relationship with the outcome of antiviral therapy of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection. In the study by Ge et al.,55 the favorable CC genotype (compared with the CT or TT genotypes) was associated with a twofold increase in SVR rate in all ethnic groups and was a stronger independent predictor of SVR than viral load, fibrosis stage, or ethnicity. The CC genotype was more common in Caucasians than African Americans and was estimated to account for about half of the known discrepancy in response rates in these two populations.55 In addition, the CC genotype is most common in Asian patients, and thus this genetic variant may explain the higher response rates found in this ethnic group.58 It is expected that a licensed IL28B assay will be available soon and used in routine practice to determine the best course of treatment, such as a standard or a shortened course of therapy for those with the favorable CC genotype versus a more aggressive course of therapy with the addition of newer direct acting antiviral (DAA) agents in those with the unfavorable CT or TT genotypes.59

Evolving Strategy of Individualized Therapy

Patients who demonstrate rapid clearance of serum HCV RNA during treatment may be considered for discontinuation at an earlier time point, especially those with poor tolerance to treatment. In patients with genotypes 2 or 3 who achieve an RVR, a shortened course of therapy of 12 to 16 weeks has been proposed, particularly for patients with low baseline serum HCV RNA levels, normal platelet count, absence of advanced hepatic fibrosis, and a low body mass index (BMI); however, prospective studies have had critical differences in study design that may account for the mixed results that have been reported.60-66 The largest study by Shiffman et al.66 involving 1 469 patients who received peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin 800 mg daily showed that the SVR rate was significantly lower in patients treated for 16 weeks compared to 24 weeks (62% vs. 70%). In addition, the relapse rate was significantly higher in the 16-week group (31% vs. 18%). Even among patients with an RVR, the SVR rates were significantly lower in the 16-week group (79% vs. 85%). However, SVR rates were similar in a subset analysis of patients with baseline serum HCV RNA levels £ 400,000 IU/mL (82% vs. 81%).66 A subsequent analysis of this trial restricted to patients who achieved an RVR and received treatment for 80% or more of the planned treatment duration once again showed a significantly higher SVR rate in patients randomized to 24 weeks of therapy (91% vs. 82%; p = 0.0006).67 SVR rates in patients with a baseline serum HCV RNA levels £ 400,000 IU/mL randomized to 24 and 16 weeks of therapy were similar (95% and 91%). Significant pretreatment predictors of SVR were assignment to 24 weeks of treatment, absence of advanced fibrosis on liver biopsy, lower HCV RNA levels, and a lower body weight.67 The seven trials studying a shortened course of therapy for patients with genotype 2 or 3 infection provide evidence for the following general conclusions: (1) patients with genotype 2 or 3 who achieve an RVR, particularly those with a low baseline viral load and without bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis, can be treated for less than 24 weeks, although the exact duration (12, 14 or 16 weeks) remains debatable; (2) patients with genotype 3 and a high viral load (> 800 000 IU/mL) are the most difficult to treat and need therapy for 24 and possibly even 48 weeks; and (3) patients with genotypes 2 or 3 without an RVR are not candidates for a shorter treatment duration, as even 24 weeks yields unsatisfactory SVR rates of 50-70%.67,68 Although the evolving literature makes a case for shortening therapy in selected patients with genotype 2 or 3 infection, the AASLD guideline recommends a standard 24-week course of therapy for patients with these genotypes, unless patients are intolerant of a planned 24-week course of therapy and understand that the relapse rate is higher with the shortened course of therapy.20

In patients with genotype 1 infection, dose modifications and variations in treatment duration are two strategies that have been investigated to optimize the outcomes of therapy.69 Studies have suggested that a shortened 24-week course of therapy in genotype 1 patients who achieve an RVR may be as effective as 48 weeks, particularly in those with low baseline HCV RNA levels, although the viral load cutoff has varied in different studies (400 000 IU/mL, 600 000 IU/mL, and 800 000 IU/mL). 70-72 A recent meta-analysis of seven studies found that patients with genotype 1 infection treated for 24 versus 48 weeks had a significantly lower SVR rate (-14%), which was related to a 10% higher relapse rate.73 However, treatment for 24 weeks in patients with a baseline serum HCV RNA level of £400 000 IU/mL was as effective as a 48-week course of therapy. The selection of patients with genotype 1 infection for a shorter course of therapy remains problematic, as the presence of factors other than viral load such as obesity, insulin resistance, and advanced fibrosis, among others, need to be considered. Thus, the AASLD and another expert panel do not generally recommended a shortened course of therapy for patients with genotype 1 infection, although the AASLD accepts that selected patients with an RVR and baseline HCV RNA £400 000 IU/ mL can be treated with a 24-week course of therapy with SVR rates approaching 90%.20,74

On the other hand, persistently detectable HCV RNA during therapy of genotype 1 infection predicts a low likelihood of achieving an SVR.

Patients who continue to have detectable HCV RNA at 24 weeks of therapy are nonresponders, have a very low likelihood of SVR, and should have therapy discontinued.50 In patients with detectable HCV RNA at week 12 who subsequently clear HCV RNA by week 24, often characterized as "slow responders," extending therapy to 72 weeks may have a favorable impact on the SVR rate.75-77 Although these three studies included patients that were not homogeneous, had different baseline characteristics, and used different treatment regimens, results showed trends toward higher SVR rates by extending therapy from 48 to 72 weeks that was primarily related to lower relapse rates. With 48 versus 72 weeks of therapy, the SVR rates were 32% vs. 45% in the study of Sanchez-Tapias et al.,75 17% vs. 29% in the study of Berg et al.,76 and 18% vs. 38% in the study of Pearlman et al.77 In contrast to these three studies, a recent prospective study did not demonstrate a significant advantage of extended treatment.78 The AASLD guideline recommends that consideration should be given to extending therapy to 72 weeks in patients with delayed viral clearance.20

Optimizing Adherence to Therapy

Peginterferon and ribavirin both have side effects that can lead to adverse events, dose reduction, and treatment discontinuation, and thus efforts to optimize adherence to therapy is essential to achieving an SVR. Peginterferon therapy can be associated with fatigue, flu-like symptoms, depression, anxiety, exacerbation of both psychiatric and autoimmune diseases, as well as hematologic side effects such as neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. One of the most important side effects associated with ribavirin therapy is hemolytic anemia, which must be monitored closely as it can be severe, particularly in difficult patient groups such as cirrhotics. If hematologic side effects occur, dose reductions may be required;20,21 however, growth factors may be used in selected cases.74 Efforts should be made to optimize ribavirin dosing, as it is a key factor in the prevention of relapse, and recent data suggest that reductions in ribavirin dosage that decrease the cumulative dose to below 60% may contribute to a poor outcome.79 In addition, adherence to peginterferon dosing has a significant impact on ability to achieve SVR based on a retrospective analysis that shows reduction of either interferon or peginterferon and/or ribavirin below 80% of the originally prescribed dose or stopping the medications before the patient received 80% of the planned duration were associated with a significant decrease in SVR.80 The largest reduction in SVR occurred in patients in whom dose was reduced or treatment was discontinued before 12 weeks of therapy; their SVR rate was only 34%.

Retreatment of Relapsers and Nonresponders

Approximately half of treated patients with chronic hepatitis C will fail standard therapy and may be considered as potential candidates for retreatment. Nonresponders are defined as patients with detectable serum HCV RNA after 24 weeks of therapy, relapsers as patients with undetectable serum HCV RNA at the end of treatment but detectable at 24 weeks of follow-up, and breakthrough patients as those who transiently have undetectable serum HCV RNA levels during therapy that subsequently become detectable during continued therapy (Table 3). Patients who have failed prior standard interferon therapy may be considered for retreatment with peginterferon plus ribavirin combination therapy. Three prospective studies have reported SVR rates ranging from 20% to 40% with peginterferon alfa-2a or alfa-2b treatment of nonresponders to interferon monotherapy and 8-10% in nonresponders to prior interferon and ribavirin therapy.81-83 Up to 58% of relapsers following treatment with standard interferon may achieve SVR with peginterferon plus ribavirin.82,84-89 Patients most likely to achieve SVR with retreatment include those with non-1 genotype, low baseline HCV RNA levels, a low fibrosis stage, and Caucasian race.

Patients most commonly seen today are those who have failed treatment with peginterferon plus ribavirin. In the Evaluation of Peg-Intron in Control of Hepatitis C Cirrhosis (EPIC3) study, patients who relapsed or were nonresponders to prior inter-feron (n=1203) or peginterferon (n=820) with or without ribavirin were treated with peginterferon alfa-2b and weight-based ribavirin.90 The SVR rate was 22% overall and 15% in patients with geno-type 1 infection, 59% with genotype 2 infection, and 45% with genotype 3 infection. However, SVR rates were less than 10% (6-7%) in nonresponders to prior peginterferon plus ribavirin therapy.90 This low response rate was confirmed in the REtreatment with PEgasys in pATients not responding to prior peginterferon alfa-2b (12kDa)/ribavirin combination therapy (REPEAT) trial (n=950), which showed an SVR rate of only 9% (all geno-types) with retreatment with peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin.91 A higher induction dose of peginterferon alfa-2a (360 mg weekly for 12 weeks) did not increase the SVR rate when compared to the standard dose of 180 mg weekly, but extension of retreatment to 72 weeks was associated with a higher SVR rate (16% with 72 weeks vs. 8% for 48 weeks). However, based on these modest efficacy rates, the AASLD guideline does not recommend retreatment of patients who did not achieve an SVR with peginterferon plus ribavirin with another course of peginterferon plus ribavirin.20

Other formulations of interferon-based therapy have been introduced as alternatives for prior treatment failures, such as interferon alfacon-1 (consensus interferon). Interferon alfacon-1 is a synthetic interferon protein derived from a consensus sequence of the most common amino acids found in naturally occurring alpha interferon sub-types. Interferon alfacon-1 is administered daily when used for retreatment, which is a potential disadvantage of the use of this agent. Rates of SVR following therapy with interferon alfacon-1 in prior interferon monotherapy nonresponders and interferon plus ribavirin relapsers appear to be comparable to retreatment with peginterferon and ribavirin; however, several prospective studies have reported SVR rates ranging from 22% to 36% in prior interferon plus ribavirin nonres-ponders, which are higher than those reported following retreatment with peginterferon plus ribavirin.92 However, a large multicenter prospective, randomized, phase 3 trial has recently reported a modest SVR rate of 10% using interferon alfacon-1 15 mg daily plus weight-based ribavirin in nonresponders to peginterferon plus ribavirin.93 A subanalysis showed that prior null responders had a significantly lower SVR rate, and noncirrhotic patients with an EVR during prior therapy had a higher SVR rate of 29%.

In chronic patients who failed prior interferon-based therapy, the concept of maintenance therapy with low-dose peginterferon was introduced with the goal of delaying disease progression. Three large prospective studies evaluating this treatment strategy have been performed and have thus far not demonstrated any survival benefit.94-96 The Hepatitis C Antiviral Long-term Treatment against Cirrhosis (HALT-C) trial showed no difference in survival, incidence of HCC, clinical decompensation, or development of cirrhosis between treated and untreated patients over a 3.5 year follow-up in patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2a 90 mg weekly.94 Likewise, the Colchicine versus Peg-Intron Long-term (COPILOT) trial demonstrated no survival benefit to low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b 0.5 mg/kg/week monotherapy versus colchicine over a 4 year period; however, data from this study suggested that patients with portal hypertension treated with peginterferon had a lower incidence of variceal bleeding during the follow-up.95 Finally, in the EPIC3 trial, patients who did not respond to retreatment received peginterferon alfa-2b 0.5 mg/ kg/week monotherapy or no treatment for 3 (those with stage 2 or 3 fibrosis) or 5 (those with stage 4 fibrosis) years.96 Preliminary data indicate that maintenance therapy was not superior to control in the prevention of clinical events. The results of these three maintenance trials do not support long-term low-dose peginterferon in the management of patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis.20

Treatment of Special Groups

This concise review does not allow a detailed discussion of antiviral therapy of a number of special groups with chronic HCV infection. A summary of the recommendations of the AASLD for several of these patient groups may be found in Table 4.

¿ Future Treatments for Hepatitis C

Several new investigational antiviral therapies that selectively target various components of the HCV life cycle have now completed early-phase clinical trials and additional agents are currently in development. These agents include protease inhibitors, polymerase inhibitors, immune modulators, and other molecules. The DAA drugs that target the NS3/4A serine protease and are now in late phase 3 development include telaprevir and boceprevir. Results from the phase II investigations of telaprevir in naïve HCV genotype 1 patients revealed SVR rates up to 69% after a 12-week course of telaprevir in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin followed by 12 weeks of standard peginterferon plus ribavirin therapy, thus shortening the total course of therapy to 24 weeks.97,98 Telaprevir has also demonstrated efficacy in the retreatment of genotype 1 patients who previously failed combination peginterferon and ribavirin, with reported SVR rates up to 39% in prior nonresponders and 76% in prior relapsers.99 Likewise, early reports on the efficacy of boceprevir in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin from a phase II clinical trial of treatment-naïve genotype 1 patients revealed a significant improvement over the standard of care with peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin (SVR = 38%), with an SVR rate up to 75% when boceprevir was added to the standard of care.100 Several nucleoside and nonnucleoside polymerase inhibitors that target the HCV RNA-dependent RNA polymerase have also been studied, including a combination of nucleoside polymerase inhibitor (R7128) and protease inhibitor (R7227/ITMN-191) without peginterferon, which demonstrated significant antiviral potency in a recent phase I clinical trial.101

Additional agents with antiviral activity against HCV currently under study include toll-like receptor agonists, cyclophilin inhibitors, ribavirin analogues, and new antiviral agents such as nitazoxanide. In vitro studies suggest nitazoxanide may modulate host antiviral responses through activation of interferon-induced mediators such as the protein kinase activated by double-stranded RNA, resulting in antiviral activity against HCV.102 Nitazoxanide has demonstrated efficacy against HCV, particularly in genotype 4 patients, in whom SVR rates as high as 80%have been reported in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin.103,104

¿ Conclusion

Although the treatment of chronic hepatitis C remains a challenge to clinicians, several recent developments in the approach to treatment have resulted in an improved ability to achieve an SVR. Despite combination therapy with peginterferon and ribavirin remains the gold standard in the treatment of chronic HCV infection, the use of optimal dosing regimens and the assessment of viro-logic responses during a course of therapy allows for individualization of therapy and further improvements in outcomes using current therapy. Several new DAA agents against HCV are currently under investigation. These newer agents used in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin will allow a shorter 24-week course of therapy in the majority of patients with genotype 1 infection, saving costs and reducing the morbidity of therapy. In addition, the use of a DDA agent in conjunction with interferon-based therapy has been shown to result in a major improvement in SVR rates in patients who have failed prior therapy. It is estimated that licensure of telaprevir and boceprevir will occur in late 2011, which in combination with routine use of IL28B testing will lead to the development of much more complex guidelines for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. All of these advances in therapy resulting in higher SVR rates will have a major impact on the liver-related morbidity and mortality associated with chronic hepatitis C, including reduction in the rates of progression to cirrhosis and the development of HCC, with prolongation of life.

Abbreviations used:

AASLD = American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases

AGA = American Gastroenterological Association

ALT = alanine aminotransferase

Anti-HCV = antibody to hepatitis C virus

BMI = body mass index

cEVR = complete early virologic response

DAA = direct acting antiviral

ETR = end of treatment response

EVR = early virologic response

HBV = hepatitis B virus

HCV = hepatitis C virus

HCV RNA = hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid

NIH = National Institutes of Health

PEG = polyethylene glycol

pEVR = partial early virologic response

RVR = rapid virologic response

SVR = sustained virologic response


Correspondence: Emmet B. Keeffe, MD.

750 Welch Road, Suite 210. Palo Alto, CA 94304-1509.

Phone: 650-498-5691. Fax: 650-498-5692

E mail:ekeeffe@stanford.edu

Bibliography
[1]
Lavanchy D..
The global burden of hepatitis C..
, 29 (Liver Int 2009), pp. 74-81
[2]
Armstrong GL, Wasley A, Simard EP, et al..
The prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection in the United States, 1999 through 2002..
, 144 (Ann Intern Med 2006), pp. 705-14
[3]
Trépo C, Pradat P..
Hepatitis C virus infection in Western Europe..
, 31 (J Hepatol 1999), pp. S80-3
[4]
Naoumov N..
Hepatitis C virus infection in Eastern Europe..
, 31 (J Hepatol 1999), pp. S84-7
[5]
Bell BP, Manos MM, Zaman A, et al..
The epidemiology of newly diagnosed chronic liver disease in gastroenterology practices in the United States: Results from population-based surveillance..
, 103 (Am J Gastroenterol 2008), pp. 2727-36
[6]
Méndez-Sánchez N, Villa AR, Chávez-Tapia NC, et al..
Trends in liver disease prevalence in Mexico from 2005 to 2050 through mortality data..
, 4 (Ann Hepatol 2005), pp. 52-5
[7]
Chiquete E, Panduro A..
Low prevalence of anti-hepatitis C virus antibodies in Mexico: A systematic review..
, 50 (Intervirology 2007), pp. 1-8
[8]
Seeff LB..
Natural history of chronic hepatitis C..
, 36 (Hepatology 2002), pp. S35-46
[9]
Perz JF, Armstrong GL, Farrington LA, Hutin YJ, Bell BP..
The contributions of hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infections to cirrhosis and primary liver cancer worldwide..
, 45 (J Hepatol 2006), pp. 529-38
[10]
Thuluvath PJ, Guidinger MK, Fung JJ, et al..
Liver transplantation in the United States, 1999-2008..
, 10 (Am J Transplant 2010), pp. 1003-19
[11]
Massard J, Ratziu V, Thabut D, et al..
Natural history and predictors of disease severity in chronic hepatitis C..
, 44 (J Hepatol 2006), pp. S19-24
[12]
Moucari R, Asselah T, Cazals-Hatem D, et al..
Insulin resistance in chronic hepatitis C: Association with specific genotypes, viral replication and liver fibrosis..
, 134 (Gastroenterology 2008), pp. 416-23
[13]
Martinot-Peignoux M, Boyer N, Cazals-Hatem D, et al..
Prospective study on antihepatitis C virus-positive patients with persistently normal serum ala-nine transaminase with or without detectable serum hepatitis C virus RNA..
, 34 (Hepatology 2001), pp. 1000-5
[14]
El-Serag HB, Rudolph KL..
Hepatocellular carcinoma: epidemiology and molecular carcinogenesis..
, 132 (Gastroenterology 2007), pp. 2557-76
[15]
Di Bisceglie AM, Lyra AC, Schwartz M, et al..
Hepatitis C-related hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States: Influence of ethnic status..
, 98 (Am J Gastroenterol 2003), pp. 2060-3
[16]
Poynard T, McHutchison J, Manns M, et al..
Impact of pegylated interferon alfa-2b and ribavirin on liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C..
, 122 (Gastroenterology 2002), pp. 1303-13
[17]
Craxi A, Camma C..
Prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma..
, 9 (Clin Liver Dis 2005), pp. 329-46
[18]
Maylin S, Martinot-Peignoux M, Moucari R, et al..
Eradication of hepatitis C virus in patients successfully treated for chronic hepatitis C..
, 135 (Gastroenterology 2008), pp. 821-9
[19]
Aronsohn A, Reau N..
Long-term outcomes after treatment with interferon and ribavirin in HCV patients..
, 43 (J Clin Gastroenterol 2009), pp. 661-71
[20]
Ghany MG, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB..
Diagnosis, management, and treatment of hepatitis C: An update..
, 49 (Hepatology 2009), pp. 1335-74
[21]
Dienstag JL, McHutchison JG..
American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on the management of hepatitis C..
, 130 (Gastroenterology 2006), pp. 225-30
[22]
National Institute of Health Consensus Development Conference Panel statement: Management of hepatitis C..
Hepatology 1997..
, 26 pp. 2S-10S
[23]
National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: management of hepatitis C..
Hepatology 2002..
, 36 pp. S3-20
[24]
Keeffe EB, Williams J..
Hepatitis C physician performance measurement set..
[25]
IOM..
Hepatitis and Liver Cancer: A National Strategy for Prevention and Control of Hepatitis B and C..
, National Academic Press, 2010 (Washington, DC),
[26]
Mitchell AE, Colvin HM, Beasley RP..
Institute of Medicine recommendations for the prevention and control of hepatitis B and C..
, 51 (Hepatology 2010), pp. 729-33
[27]
Feuerstadt P, Bunim AL, Garcia H, et al..
Effectiveness of hepatitis C treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin in urban minority patients..
, 51 (Hepatology 2010), pp. 1137-43
[28]
Volk ML, Tocco R, Saini S, Lok AS..
Public health impact of antiviral therapy for hepatitis C in the United States..
, 50 (Hepatology 2009), pp. 1750-5
[29]
Cheung R, Mannalithara A, Singh G..
Utilization and antiviral therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C: Analysis of ambulatory care visits in the US..
, 55 (Dig Dis Sci 2010), pp. 1744-51
[30]
Butt AA, Justice AC, Skanderson M, et al..
Rate and predictors of treatment prescription for hepatitis C..
, 56 (Gut 2007), pp. 385-9
[31]
Zaman A, Fennerty MB, Keeffe EB..
Systematic review: peginterferon vs..
standard interferon in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, 18 (Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003), pp. 661-70
[32]
Manns MP, McHutchison JG, Gordon SC, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin compared with interferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin for initial treatment of chronic hepatitis C: A randomized trial..
, 358 (Lancet 2001), pp. 958-65
[33]
Fried MW, Shiffman ML, Reddy KR, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin for chronic hepatitis C virus infection..
, 347 (N Engl J Med 2002), pp. 975-82
[34]
Hadziyannis SJ, Sette H Jr, Morgan TR, et al..
Peginterferon-alpha2a and ribavirin combination therapy in chronic hepatitis C: A randomized study of treatment duration and ribavirin dose..
, 140 (Ann Intern Med 2004), pp. 346-55
[35]
Jacobson IM, Brown RS Jr, Freilich B, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2b and weight-based or flat-dose ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C patients: a randomized trial..
, 46 (Hepatology 2007), pp. 971-81
[36]
Khuroo MS, Khuroo MS, Dahab ST..
Meta-analysis: A randomized trial of peginterferon plus ribavirin for the initial treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 4..
, 20 (Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004), pp. 931-8
[37]
Kamal SM..
Hepatitis C genotype 4 therapy: increasing options and improving outcomes..
, 29 (Liver Int 2009), pp. 39-48
[38]
Kamal SM, El Kamary SS, Shardell MD, et al..
Pegylated interferon alpha-2b plus ribavirin in patients with genotype 4 chronic hepatitis C: The role of rapid and early virologic response..
, 46 (Hepatology 2007), pp. 1732-40
[39]
Antaki N, Craxi A, Kamal S, et al..
The neglected hepatitis C virus genotypes 4, 5 and 6: An international consensus report..
, 30 (Liver Int 2010), pp. 342-55
[40]
Nguyen MH, Trinh HN, Garcia R, et..
Higher rate of sustained virologic response in chronic hepatitis C genotype 6 treated with 48 weeks versus 24 weeks of peginterferon plus ribavirin..
, 103 (Am J Gastroenterol 2008), pp. 1131-5
[41]
Lam KD, Trinh HN, Do ST, et al..
Randomized controlled trial of pegylated interferon-alpha 2a and ribavirin in patients with treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C genotype 6 [abstract]..
, 138 (Gastroenterology 2010), pp. S-783
[42]
Foster GR..
Pegylated interferons for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C: Pharmacological and clinical differences between peginterferon-a-2a and peginterferon-a-2b..
, 70 (Drugs 2010), pp. 147-65
[43]
McHutchison JG, Lawitz EJ, Shiffman ML, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2b or alfa-2a with ribavirin for treatment of hepatitis C infection..
, 361 (N Engl J Med 2009), pp. 580-93
[44]
Awad T, Thorlund K, Hauser G, et al..
Peginterferon alpha-2a is associated with higher sustained virologic response than peginterferon alfa-2b in chronic hepatitis C: Systematic review of randomized trials..
, 51 (Hepatology 2010), pp. 1176-84
[45]
Marcellin P, Boyer N, Gervais A, et al..
Long-term histologic improvement and loss of detectable intrahepatic HCV RNA in patients with chronic hepatitis C and sustained response to interferon-alpha therapy..
, 127 (Ann Intern Med 1997), pp. 875-81
[46]
Pradat P, Tillmann HL, Sauleda S, et al..
Long-term follow-up of the hepatitis C HENCORE cohort: Response to therapy and occurrence of liver-related complications..
, 14 (J Viral Hepat 2007), pp. 556-63
[47]
Veldt BJ, Heathcote EJ, Wedemeyer H, et al..
Sustained virologic response and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis..
, 147 (Ann Intern Med 2007), pp. 677-84
[48]
Bruno S, Stroffolini T, Colombo M, et al..
Sustained virological response to interferon-alpha is associated with improved outcome in HCV-related cirrhosis: a retrospective study..
, 45 (Hepatology 2007), pp. 579-87
[49]
George SL, Bacon BR, Brunt EM, et al..
Clinical, virologic, histologic, and biochemical outcomes after successful HCV therapy: A 5-year follow-up of 150 patients..
, 49 (Hepatology 2009), pp. 729-38
[50]
Ferenci P, Fried MW, Shiffman ML, et al..
Predicting sustained virological responses in chronic hepatitis C patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2a (40 KD)/ribavirin..
, 43 (J Hepatol 2005), pp. 425-33
[51]
Davis GL, Wong JB, McHutchison JG, et al..
Early virologic response to treatment with peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C..
, 38 (Hepatology 2003), pp. 645-52
[52]
Marcellin P, Hadziyannis SJ, Berg T, et al..
Virological response at 4 and 12 weeks predict high rates of sustained virological response in genotype 1 patients treated with peginterferon a-2a (40kD) plus ribavirin [abstract]..
, 46 (J Hepatol 2007), pp. S231-32
[53]
Muir AJ, Bornstein JD, Killenberg PG..
Peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in blacks and non-Hispanic whites..
, 350 (N Engl J Med 2004), pp. 2265-71
[54]
Rodriquez-Torres M, Jeffers LJ, Sheikh MY, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin in Latino and non-Latino whites with hepatitis C..
, 360 (N Engl J Med 2009), pp. 257-67
[55]
Ge D, Fellay J, Thompson AJ, et al..
Genetic variation in IL28B predicts hepatitis C treatment-induced viral clearance..
, 461 (Nature 2009), pp. 399-401
[56]
Tanaka Y, Nishida N, Sugiyama M, et al..
Genome-wide association of IL28B with response to pegylated interferon-alpha and ribavirin therapy..
, 41 (Nat Genet 2009), pp. 1105-9
[57]
Suppiah V, Moldovan M, Ahlenstiel G, et al..
IL28B is associated with response to chronic hepatitis C interferon-alpha and ribavirin therapy..
, 41 (Nat Genet 2009), pp. 1100-4
[58]
Liu CH, Liu CJ, Lin CL, et al..
Pegylated interferon-alpha-2a plus ribavirin for treatment-naïve Asian patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial..
, 47 (Clin Infect Dis 2008), pp. 1260-9
[59]
Thompson AJ, Fellay J, McHutchison JG..
How the human genome can predict response to hepatitis C therapy..
, 9 (Curr Hepatitis Rep 2010), pp. 1-8
[60]
Mangia A, Santoro R, Minerva N, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin for 12 vs..
24 weeks in HCV genotype 2 or 3, 352 (N Engl J Med 2005), pp. 2609-17
[61]
von Wagner M, Huber M, Berg T, et al..
Peginterferon-alpha-2a (40KD) and ribavirin for 16 or 24 weeks in patients with genotype 2 or 3 chronic hepatitis C..
, 129 (Gastroenterology 2005), pp. 522-7
[62]
Dalgard O, Bjoro K, Hellum KB, et al..
Treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavarin in HCV infection with genotype 2 or 3 for 14 weeks: A pilot study..
, 40 (Hepatology 2004), pp. 1260-5
[63]
Yu ML, Dai CY, Huang JF, et al..
A randomised study of peginterferon and ribavirin for 16 versus 24 weeks in patients with genotype 2 chronic hepatitis C..
, 56 (Gut 2007), pp. 553-9
[64]
Lagging M, Langeland N, Pedersen C, et al..
Randomized comparison of 12 or 24 weeks of peginterferon alpha-2a and ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 2/3 infection..
, 47 (Hepatology 2008), pp. 1837-45
[65]
Mangia A, Minerva N, Bacca D, Cozzolongo R, et al..
Determinants of relapse after a short (12 weeks) course of antiviral therapy and re-treatment efficacy of a prolonged course in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 2 or 3 infection..
, 49 (Hepatology 2009), pp. 358-63
[66]
Shiffman ML, Suter F, Bacon BR, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin for 16 or 24 weeks in HCV genotype 2 or 3..
, 357 (N Engl J Med 2007), pp. 124-34
[67]
Diago M, Shiffman ML, Bronowicki JP, et al..
Identifying hepatitis C virus genotype 2/3 patients who can receive a 16-week abbreviated course of peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD) plus ribavirin..
, 51 (Hepatology 2010), pp. 1897-1903
[68]
Tarantino G, Craxi A..
Optimizing the treatment of chronic hepatitis due to hepatitis C genotypes 2 and 3: a review..
, 29 (Liver Int 2009), pp. 31-8
[69]
Farnik H, Mihm U, Zeuzem S..
Optimal therapy in genotype 1 patients..
, 29 (Liver Int 2009), pp. 23-30
[70]
Zeuzem S, Buti M, Ferenci P, et al..
Efficacy of 24 weeks treatment with peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C infected with genotype 1 and low pretreatment viremia..
, 44 (J Hepatol 2006), pp. 97-103
[71]
Jensen DM, Morgan TR, Marcellin P, et al..
Early identification of HCV geno-type 1 patients responding to 24 weeks peginterferon alpha-2a (40 kd)/ribavirin therapy..
, 43 (Hepatology 2006), pp. 954-60
[72]
Yu ML, Dai CY, Huang JF, et al..
Rapid virological response and treatment duration for chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 patients: A randomized trial..
, 47 (Hepatology 2008), pp. 1884-93
[73]
Moreno C, Deltenre P, Pawlotsky JM, et al..
Shortened treatment duration in treatment-naïve genotype 1 HCV patients with rapid virological response: A meta-analysis..
, 52 (J Hepatol 2010), pp. 25-31
[74]
Nelson DR, Davis GL, Jacobson I, et al..
Hepatitis C virus: A critical appraisal of approaches to therapy..
, 7 (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009), pp. 397-414
[75]
Sanchez-Tapias JM, Diago M, Escartin P, et al..
Peginterferon-alfa2a plus ribavirin for 48 versus 72 weeks in patients with detectable hepatitis C virus RNA at week 4 of treatment..
, 131 (Gastroenterology 2006), pp. 451-60
[76]
Berg T, von Wagner M, Nasser S, et al..
Extended treatment duration for hepatitis C virus type 1: Comparing 48 versus 72 weeks of peginterferon-alfa-2a plus ribavirin..
, 130 (Gastroenterology 2006), pp. 1086-97
[77]
Pearlman BL, Ehleben C, Saifee S..
Treatment extension to 72 weeks of peginterferon and ribavirin in hepatitis c genotype 1-infected slow responders..
, 46 (Hepatology 2007), pp. 1688-94
[78]
Buti M, Lurie Y, Zakharova NG, et al..
Extended treatment duration in chronic hepatitis C genotype 1-infected slow responders: Final results of the SUCCESS study [abstract]..
, 50 (J Hepatol 2009), pp. S58
[79]
Reddy KR, Shiffman ML, Morgan TR, et al..
Impact of ribavirin dose reductions in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 patients completing peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin treatment..
, 5 (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007), pp. 124-9
[80]
McHutchison JG, Manns M, Patel K, et al..
Adherence to combination therapy enhances sustained response in genotype-1-infected patients with chronic hepatitis C..
, 123 (Gastroenterology 2002), pp. 1061-9
[81]
Shiffman ML, Di Bisceglie AM, Lindsay KL, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C who have failed prior treatment..
, 126 (Gastroenterology 2004), pp. 1015-23
[82]
Jacobson IM, Gonzalez SA, Ahmed F, et al..
A randomized trial of pegylated interferon alpha-2b plus ribavirin in the retreatment of chronic hepatitis C..
, 100 (Am J Gastroenterol 2005), pp. 2453-62
[83]
Mathew A, Peiffer LP, Rhoades K, McGarrity T..
Sustained viral response to pegylated interferon alpha-2b and ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C refractory to prior treatment..
, 51 (Dig Dis Sci 2006), pp. 1956-61
[84]
Sherman M, Yoshida EM, Deschenes M, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD) plus ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C patients who failed previous interferon therapy..
, 55 (Gut 2006), pp. 1631-8
[85]
Krawitt EL, Ashikaga T, Gordon SR, Ferrentino N, Ray MA, Lidofsky SD..
Peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin for treatment-refractory chronic hepatitis C..
, 43 (J Hepatol 2005), pp. 243-9
[86]
Basso M, Torre F, Grasso A, et al..
Pegylated interferon and ribavirin in retreatment of responder-relapser HCV patients..
, 39 (Dig Liver Dis 2007), pp. 47-51
[87]
Moucari R, Ripault MP, Oulès V, et al..
High predictive value of early viral kinetics in retreatment with peginterferon and ribavirin of chronic hepatitis C patients non-responders to standard combination therapy..
, 46 (J Hepatol 2007), pp. 596-604
[88]
Poynard T, Colombo M, Bruix J, et al..
Peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin: Effective in patients with hepatitis C who failed interferon alfa/ribavirin therapy..
, 136 (Gastroenterology 2009), pp. 1618-28
[89]
Taliani G, Gemignani G, Ferrari C, et al..
Pegylated interferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin in the retreatment of interferon-ribavirin nonresponder patients..
, 130 (Gastroenterology 2006), pp. 1098-106
[90]
Poynard T, Schiff E, Terg R, et al..
Sustained viral response (SVR) is dependent on baselines characteristics in the retreatment of previous alfa interferon/ribavirin (I/R) nonresponders (NR): final results from the EPIC3 program [abstract]..
, (J Hepatol 2008), pp. S369
[91]
Jensen DM, Marcellin P, Freilich B, et al..
Re-treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C who do not respond to peginterferon alpha2b: a randomized trial..
, 150 (Ann Intern Med 2009), pp. 528-40
[92]
Gonzalez SA, Keeffe EB..
Management of chronic hepatitis C treatment failures: Role of consensus interferon..
, 3 (Biologics 2009), pp. 141-50
[93]
Bacon BR, Shiffman ML, Mendes F, et al..
Retreating chronic hepatitis C with daily interferon alfacon-1/ribavirin after nonresponse to pegylated interferon/ribavirin: DIRECT results..
, 49 (Hepatology 2009), pp. 1838-46
[94]
Di Bisceglie AM, Shiffman ML, Everson GT, et al..
Prolonged therapy of advanced chronic hepatitis C with low-dose peginterferon..
, 359 (N Engl J Med 2008), pp. 2429-41
[95]
Afdhal NH, Levine R, Brown R Jr, et al..
Colchicine versus peg-interferon alfa 2b long term therapy: Results of the 4 year COPILOT trial [abstract]..
, 48 (J Hepatol 2008), pp. S4
[96]
Bruix J, Poynard T, Colombo M, et al..
Pegintron maintenance therapy in cirrhotic (Metavir F4) HCV patients who failed to respond to interferon/ribavirin (IR) therapy: final results of the EPIC3 cirrhosis maintenance trial [abstract]..
, 50 (J Hepatol 2009), pp. S22
[97]
McHutchison JG, Everson GT, Gordon SC, et al..
Telaprevir with peginterferon and ribavirin for chronic HCV genotype 1 infection..
, 360 (N Engl J Med 2009), pp. 1827-38
[98]
Hézode C, Forestier N, Dusheiko G, Feet al..
Telaprevir and peginterferon with or without ribavirin for chronic HCV infection..
, 360 (N Engl J Med 2009), pp. 1839-50
[99]
McHutchison JG, Manns MP, Muir AJ, et al..
Telaprevir for previously treated chronic HCV infection..
, 362 (N Engl J Med 2010), pp. 1292-1303
[100]
Kwo P, Lawitz E, McCone J, et al..
HCV SPRINT-1 final results: SVR 24 from a phase 2 study of boceprevir plus pegintron (peginterferon alfa-2b)/ribavirin in treatment-naive subjects with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C [abstract]..
, 50 (J Hepatol 2009), pp. S4
[101]
Gane EJ, Roberts SK, Stedman C, et al..
First-in-man demonstration of potent antiviral activity with a nucleoside polymerase (R7128) and protease (R7227/ITMN-191) inhibitor combination in HCV: Safety, pharmacokinetics, and virologic results from INFORM-1 [abstract]..
, 50 (J Hepatol 2009), pp. S380
[102]
Elazar M, Liu M, McKenna SA, et al..
The anti-hepatitis C agent nitazoxanide induces phosphorylation of eukaryotic initiation factor 2a via protein kinase activated by double-stranded RNA activation..
, 137 (Gastroenterology 2009), pp. 1827-1835
[103]
Rossignol JF, Elfert A, Keeffe EB..
Treatment of chronic hepatitis C using a 4-week lead-in with nitazoxanide before peginterferon plus nitazoxanide..
, 44 (J Clin Gastroenterol 2010), pp. 504-9
[104]
Rossignol JF, Elfert A, El-Gohary Y, Keeffe EB..
Improved virologic response in chronic hepatitis C genotype 4 treated with nitazoxanide, peginterferon, and ribavirin..
, 136 (Gastroenterology 2009), pp. 856-62
Idiomas
Revista de Gastroenterología de México

Suscríbase a la newsletter

Opciones de artículo
Herramientas