Six-monthly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening in cirrhotic patients has been recommended since 2011. HCC prognosis is associated with diagnosis at an early stage. We examined the prevalence and correlates of 6-monthly HCC surveillance in a cohort of HCV-infected cirrhotic patients. Data were obtained from the medical records of patients receiving care from four hospitals between January 2011 and December 2016. Frequencies and logistic regression were conducted. Of 2,933 HCV-infected cirrhotic patients, most were ≥ 60 years old (68.5%), male (62.2%), White (65.8%), and had compensated cirrhosis (74.2%). The median follow-up period was 3.5 years. Among these patients, 10.9% were consistently screened 6 monthly and 21.4% were never screened. Patients with a longer history of cirrhosis (AOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.80–0.93) were less likely to be screened 6 monthly while decompensated cirrhotic patients (AOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.06–1.81) and cirrhotic patients between 18 and 44 years (AOR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.07–3.74) were more likely to be screened 6 monthly compared to compensated cirrhotic patients and patients 60 years and older respectively. There were no significant differences by race, gender, or insurance type. The prevalence of consistent HCC surveillance remains low despite formalized recommendations. One in five patients was never surveilled. Patients with a longer history of cirrhosis were less likely to be surveilled consistently despite their greater HCC risk. Improving providers’ knowledge about current HCC surveillance guidelines, educating patients about the benefits of consistent HCC surveillance, and systemic interventions like clinical reminders and standing HCC surveillance protocols can improve guideline-concordant surveillance in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND:The introduction of oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has dramatically changed the landscape of HCV treatment. However, a small percentage of patients fail to achieve sustained virologic response (SVR). Understanding the number of people who fail on DAAs and require re-treatment is important for budget impact and disease burden projections.AIM:To quantify the number of HCV patients who fail to achieve SVR on oral DAAs (NS5A vs. non-NS5A) and require re-treatment.METHODS:We used a mathematical model to simulate clinical management of HCV in the USA, which included the implementation of HCV screening, treatment, and disease progression. We simulated different waves of DAA treatment and used real-world data to extract SVR rates and market shares of available therapies.RESULTS:Our model projected that the number of people living without viraemia (i.e. cured) would increase from 0.70 million in 2014 to 1.78 million by 2020. Between 2014 and 2020, 1.50 million people would receive treatment with DAAs, of whom 124 000 (8.3%) are projected to fail to achieve SVR. Among those treatment failures, 66 600 (53.7%) patients would fail treatment with NS5A inhibitors and 69 600 (56.1%) would have cirrhosis. During the same period, 34 200 people would progress to decompensated cirrhosis and 27 300 would develop hepatocellular carcinoma after failing to achieve SVR.CONCLUSIONS:Even in the era of highly effective DAAs, a significant number of patients will fail to achieve SVR and will require re-treatment options. Timely and effective re-treatment is essential to prevent the long-term sequelae of HCV.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is strongly associated with several human leukocyte antigen (HLA) haplotypes. Due to extensive linkage disequilibrium and multiple polymorphic candidate genes in the HLA complex, identifying the alleles responsible for these associations has proven difficult. We aimed to evaluate whether studying populations of admixed or non‐European descent could help in defining the causative HLA alleles. When assessing haplotypes carrying HLA‐DRB1*13:01 (hypothesized to specifically increase the susceptibility to chronic cholangitis), we observed that every haplotype in the Scandinavian PSC population carried HLA‐DQB1*06:03. In contrast, only 65% of HLA‐DRB1*13:01 haplotypes in an admixed/non‐European PSC population carried this allele, suggesting that further assessments of the PSC‐associated haplotype HLA‐DRB1*13:01‐DQA1*01:03‐DQB1*06:03 in admixed or multi‐ethnic populations could aid in identifying the causative allele.

BACKGROUNDPatients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and who do not have a sustained virologic response after treatment with regimens containing direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have limited retreatment options.METHODSWe conducted two phase 3 trials involving patients who had been previously treated with a DAA-containing regimen. In POLARIS-1, patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had previously received a regimen containing an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (150 patients) or matching placebo (150 patients) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who were infected with HCV of other genotypes (114 patients) were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group. In POLARIS-4, patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, or 3 infection who had previously received a DAA regimen but not an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir- velpatasvir-voxilaprevir (163 patients) or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (151 patients) for 12 weeks. An additional 19 patients with HCV genotype 4 infection were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group.RESULTSIn the three active-treatment groups, 46% of the patients had compensated cirrhosis. In POLARIS-1, the rate of sustained virologic response was 96% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir, as compared with 0% with placebo. In POLARIS-4, the rate of response was 98% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir and 90% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir. The most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. In the active-treatment groups in both trials, the percentage of patients who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events was 1% or lower.CONCLUSIONSSofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir taken for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response among patients across HCV genotypes in whom treatment with a DAA regimen had previously failed. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; POLARIS-1 and POLARIS-4 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02607735 and NCT02639247.)

BACKGROUND:Limited information exists regarding the distribution of disease phases, treatment prescription and severe liver disease among patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in US general healthcare settings.AIM:To determine the distribution of disease phases, treatment prescription and severe liver disease among patients with CHB in general US healthcare settings.METHODS:We analysed demographic and clinical data collected during 2006-2013 from patients with confirmed CHB in the Chronic Hepatitis Cohort Study, an observational cohort study involving patients from healthcare organisations in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Hawaii. CHB phases were classified according to American Association for the Study of Liver Disease guidelines.RESULTS:Of 1598 CHB patients with ≥12 months of follow-up (median 6.3 years), 457 (29%) were immune active during follow-up [11% hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive, 16% HBeAg-negative, and 2% HBeAg status unknown], 10 (0.6%) were immune tolerant, 112 (7%) were inactive through the duration of follow-up and 886 (55%) were phase indeterminate. Patients with cirrhosis were identified within each group (among 21% of immune active, 3% of inactive and 9% of indeterminate phase patients) except among those with immune-tolerant CHB. Prescription of treatment was 59% among immune active patients and 84% among patients with cirrhosis and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA >2000 IU/mL.CONCLUSIONS:Approximately, one-third of the cohort had active disease during follow-up; 60% of eligible patients were prescribed treatment. Our findings underscore the importance of ascertainment of fibrosis status in addition to regular assessment of ALT and HBV DNA levels.

In the United States, hospitalization among patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is high. The healthcare burden associated with hospitalization is not clearly known. We analysed data from the Chronic Hepatitis Cohort Study, an observational cohort of patients receiving care at four integrated healthcare systems, collected from 2006 to 2013 to determine all-cause hospitalization rates of patients with chronic HCV infection and the other health system patients. To compare the hospitalization rates, we selected two health system patients for each chronic HCV patient using their propensity score (PS). Propensity score matching was conducted by site, gender, race, age and household income to minimize differences attributable to these characteristics. We also compared primary reason for hospitalization between chronic HCV patients and the other health system patients. Overall, 10 131 patients with chronic HCV infection and 20 262 health system patients were selected from the 1 867 802 health system patients and were matched by PS. All-cause hospitalization rates were 27.4 (27.0-27.8) and 7.4 (7.2-7.5) per 100 persons-year (PY) for chronic HCV patients and for the other health system patients, respectively. Compared to health system patients, hospitalization rates were significantly higher by site, gender, age group, race and household income among chronic HCV patients (P < 0.001). Compared to health system patients, chronic HCV patients were more likely to be hospitalized from liver-related conditions (RR = 24.8, P < 0.001). Hence, patients with chronic HCV infection had approximately 3.7-fold higher all-cause hospitalization rate than other health system patients. These findings highlight the incremental costs and healthcare burden of patients with chronic HCV infection associated with hospitalization.

BACKGROUND:An all-oral, pegylated interferon (pegIFN)-free and ribavirin (RBV)-free single-tablet of ledipasvir (LDV) and sofosbuvir (SOF) is now approved for the treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1.AIM:To estimate the health economic outcomes for LDV/SOF compared with current treatments in US patients infected with HCV genotype 1.METHODS:A hybrid decision-tree and Markov state-transition model was developed. For a cohort of 10,000 patients, the model captured outcomes for several pairings of LDV/SOF with comparators, including long-term health outcomes, number need to treat, life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS) gained, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and costs per sustained virologic response (SVR). Patients with different levels of treatment experience and different cirrhosis stages were included.RESULTS:LDV/SOF decreased the number of advanced liver disease cases by 0-93% compared with current regimens or no treatment in treatment-naïve patients. In treatment-experienced [pegIFN plus ribavirin (PR) or protease inhibitor (PI) + PR] patients, treatment with LDV/SOF decreased the incidence of advanced liver disease complications in most of the cases analysed, except SOF + SMV. For all patient sub-cohorts, LDV/SOF was associated with the lowest 1-year costs per SVR and, with regard to lifetime incremental costs per QALY gained, was either dominant or the most cost-effective treatment. Overall, treatment initiation at earlier stages of liver fibrosis resulted in improved health economic outcomes.CONCLUSION:LDV/SOF is associated with more favourable short- and long-term health economic outcomes compared with current therapies for patients across all levels of treatment experience and cirrhosis stages.

BACKGROUNDIn phase 2 trials, treatment with the combination of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response in patients chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 or 3.METHODSWe conducted two randomized, phase 3, open-label studies involving patients who had received previous treatment for HCV genotype 2 or 3 and those who had not received such treatment, including patients with compensated cirrhosis. In one trial, patients with HCV genotype 2 were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, in a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet (134 patients), or sofosbuvir plus weight-based ribavirin (132 patients) for 12 weeks. In a second trial, patients with HCV genotype 3 were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks (277 patients) or sofosbuvir-ribavirin for 24 weeks (275 patients). The primary end point for the two trials was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy.RESULTSAmong patients with HCV genotype 2, the rate of sustained virologic response in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group was 99% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96 to 100), which was superior to the rate of 94% (95% CI, 88 to 97) in the sofosbuvir-ribavirin group (P=0.02). Among patients with HCV genotype 3, the rate of sustained virologic response in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group was 95% (95% CI, 92 to 98), which was superior to the rate of 80% (95% CI, 75 to 85) in the sofosbuvir-ribavirin group (P<0.001). The most common adverse events in the two studies were fatigue, headache, nausea, and insomnia.CONCLUSIONSAmong patients with HCV genotype 2 or 3 with or without previous treatment, including those with compensated cirrhosis, 12 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir resulted in rates of sustained virologic response that were superior to those with standard treatment with sofosbuvir-ribavirin. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ASTRAL-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02220998; and ASTRAL-3, NCT02201953.).

BACKGROUND:Infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been considered a major cause of mortality, morbidity and resource utilisation in the US. In addition, HCV is the main cause of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) in the US. Recent developments in the diagnosis and treatment of HCV, including new recommendations pertaining to screening for HCV by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and newer treatment regimens with high efficacy, short duration and the potential for interferon-free therapies, have energised the health care practitioners regarding HCV management.AIM:To assess the full impact of HCV burden on clinical, economic and patient-reported outcomes.METHODS:An expert panel was convened to assess the full impact of HCV burden on a number of important outcomes using an evidence-based approach predicated on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. The literature was summarised, graded using an evidence-based approach and presented during the workshop. Workshop presentations were intended to review recent, relevant evidence-based literature and provide graded summary statements pertaining to HCV burden on topics including the relationships between HCV and the development of important outcomes.RESULTS:The associations of HCV with cirrhosis, HCC, liver-related mortality, type 2 diabetes mellitus, rheumatological diseases and quality of life impairments are supported by strong evidence. Also, there is strong evidence that sustained viral eradication of HCV can improve important outcomes such as mortality and quality of life.CONCLUSIONS:The current evidence suggests that HCV has been associated with tremendous clinical, economic and quality of life burden.

SummaryBackgroundSofosbuvir, an oralNS5B nucleotide polymerase inhibitor, is indicated for the treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV).AimTo evaluate the long‐term health economic outcomes of sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon alfa/ribavirin (pegIFN/RBV) compared with current treatments in patients infected withHCVgenotype 1 in theUS.MethodsA decision‐analytic Markov model was developed to estimate health outcomes, number needed to treat and short‐term and long‐term economic outcomes, including incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios and cost per sustained virological response (SVR), for several sofosbuvir–comparator regimen pairings for a cohort of 10 000 patients. It considered three patient cohorts: treatment‐naïve, treatment‐experienced and treatment‐naïve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co‐infected. Subgroup analyses were conducted for treatment‐naïve patients with and without cirrhosis.ResultsReductions in the incidence of new cases of liver‐disease complications with sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBVcompared with pegIFN/RBV, boceprevir + pegIFN/RBV, telaprevir + pegIFN/RBVand simeprevir + pegIFN/RBVwere 64–82%, 50–68%, 43–58% and 33–56%, respectively. Sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBVwas typically associated with the lowest 1‐year cost per SVR. When considering the lifetime incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life‐year gained, sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBVwas the most cost‐effective treatment option assessed. Sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBVgenerally dominated (less costly and more effective than) boceprevir + pegIFN/RBV, telaprevir + pegIFN/RBVand simeprevir + pegIFN/RBV.ConclusionSofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBVyields more favourable future health and economic outcomes than current treatment regimens for patients across all levels of treatment experience and cirrhosis stage, as well as for individuals with or withoutHIVco‐infection.