/
Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or Without Ribavirin in Patients With HCV Genotype 3 Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or Without Ribavirin in Patients With HCV Genotype 3

Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or Without Ribavirin in Patients With HCV Genotype 3 - PowerPoint Presentation

kittie-lecroy
kittie-lecroy . @kittie-lecroy
Follow
348 views
Uploaded On 2018-12-09

Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or Without Ribavirin in Patients With HCV Genotype 3 - PPT Presentation

Interim Analysis of a French Multicenter Compassionate Use Program Christophe Hézode 1 Victor De Ledinghen 2 Helene Fontaine 3 Fabien Zoulim 4 Pascal Lebray 5 Nathalie Boyer 6 ID: 739392

dcv sof patients treatment sof dcv treatment patients hcv rbv weeks svr12 liver data pugh rna missing cirrhosis child

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or With..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Daclatasvir Plus Sofosbuvir With or Without Ribavirin in Patients With HCV Genotype 3 Infection: Interim Analysis of a French Multicenter Compassionate Use Program

Christophe Hézode,1 Victor De Ledinghen,2 Helene Fontaine,3 Fabien Zoulim,4 Pascal Lebray,5 Nathalie Boyer,6 Dominique Larrey,7 Christine Silvain,8 Danielle Botta-Fridlund,9 Vincent Leroy,10 Marc Bourliere,11 Louis d’Alteroche,12 Isabelle Hubert-Fouchard,13 Dominique Guyader,14 Isabelle Rosa,15 Eric Nguyen-Khac,16 Vincent Di Martino,17 Larysa Fedchuk,18 Raoudha Akremi,18 Yacia Bennai,18 Jean-Pierre Bronowicki,19 on behalf of Bristol-Myers Squibb1Hépato-gastro-entérologie, CHU Henri-Mondor, Créteil; 2Centre d’Investigation de la Fibrose hépatique, Hôpital Haut-Lévêque, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Bordeaux, Pessac; 3Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP, Université Paris-René Descartes, Paris; 4Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon; 5Service d’Hépatogastroentérologie, Hôpital Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris; 6AP-HP, Hôpital Beaujon, Service d’Hépatologie, Clichy; 7Hépato-gastroentérologie, CHU de Montpellier, Hôpital Saint-Éloi, Montpellier; 8Service d’hépato-gastroentérologie et d’assistance nutritive, laboratoire inflammation tissus epithéliaux et cytokines EA 4331, CHU Poitiers, Poitiers; 9Hôpital de la Conception, Marseille; 10CHU de Grenoble, Clinique universitaire d’hépato-gastroentérologie, Grenoble; 11Hôpital Saint-Joseph, Marseille; 12CHU Trousseau, Tours; 13Service d’Hépato-Gastroentérologie, CHU Angers, Angers; 14Service des Maladies du Foie, CHU Rennes, Rennes; 15Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Créteil; 16Service d’Hépato-gastroentérologie, CHU Amiens Nord, Amiens; 17Service d’Hépatologie et de soins intensifs digestifs, CHRU Jean Minjoz, Besançon; 18Bristol-Myers Squibb Research and Development, Rueil-Malmaison; 19Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nancy and Université de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France

The Liver Meeting® 2015: The 66th Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases San Francisco, CA, November 13–17, 2015Oral 206

Corresponding author:

Christophe Hézode (christophe.hezode@aphp.fr) Slide2

Patients infected with HCV genotype (GT) 3 are in urgent need of effective treatments due to the increased risk of accelerated disease progression and hepatocellular carcinoma

Daclatasvir (DCV) plus sofosbuvir (SOF) with or without ribavirin (RBV) is the only all-oral regimen currently recommended for alla patients with GT 3 infection by EASL1 and AASLD2 treatment guidelinesThe pangenotypic, 12-week RBV-free regimen of DCV + SOF achieved 96% SVR12 in non-cirrhotic GT 3 patients (ALLY-3)312- and 16-week GT 3 data for DCV + SOF + RBV in compensated cirrhosis or advanced fibrosis (SVR12 88% and 92%, respectively) have been presented here (ALLY-3+; Abs. LB-3)Background a Non-cirrhotic and compensated or decompensated cirrhotic, treatment-naive and-experienced, HIV/HCV coinfected, post-liver transplant.1. European Association for Study of Liver. J Hepatol 2015;63:199–236. 2. AASLD/IDSA/IAS-USA guidelines. Available at www.hcvguidelines.org. 3. Nelson DR, et al. Hepatology 2015;61:1127–1135.2Slide3

The French ATU (Temporary Authorisation for Use) program for DCV provided early, pre-market-authorization access to DCV for HCV patients with advanced liver disease and no other HCV treatment options

We report interim ATU findings on DCV + SOF ± RBV in GT 3-infected patients with advanced liver diseaseObjective3Slide4

Adult patients with:

METAVIR fibrosis F3 or abovea orIrrespective of fibrosis score: severe extrahepatic manifestations; post-liver transplant HCV recurrence, or indication for liver or kidney transplantRecommended regimen and treatment durationDCV 60 mg QD + SOF 400 mg QD for 24 weeksRBV use and/or shorter treatment duration (12 weeks) at physician’s discretionEndpointsEfficacy: SVR12b at post-treatment Week 12 (PT12)Safety: based on serious adverse events (SAEs), AEs, and treatment discontinuationPatients and Endpoints a Biopsy, FibroScan ( 9.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.59);b HCV RNA < lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), target detected (TD), or target not detected (TND).4Slide5

The

safety population comprised patients with detectable HCV RNA at baseline who had  1 subsequent visit form completedThe primary efficacy population comprised patients within the safety population who had available HCV RNA data at PT12aTreatment failure was defined as HCV RNA  LLOQ at PT12 (including imputation)aDeath before PT12AE-related discontinuation without achieving SVR12Populationsa Missing PT12 data were back-imputed from PT24 if available. Where PT24 was missing, missing SVR12 visit data was imputed as a failure ( LLOQ at PT12) if HCV RNA was  LLOQ at PT4. Where both PT4 and PT24 were missing, SVR12 failure was imputed if HCV RNA was  LLOQ at end-of-treatment; b Total ATU population: 3886.All GT 3 Patients in ATUbN = 561Safety PopulationN = 468

Primary Efficacy PopulationN = 284

Excluded, 93

BL HCV RNA undetectable, 32

BL HCV RNA missing, 1

No visit form, 60

Excluded, 184

Follow-up < 12 weeks, 184

5Slide6

Treatment Regimens and Proportions

6a Excludes 2 patients with unknown treatment duration. Total efficacy population: 284. 58.9%(n = 166)18.8%(n = 53)DCV + SOF + RBV24 WeeksTotal: N = 282aSlide7

Baseline Characteristics7

a DCV + SOF + RBV, n = 5; b Overall totals include data for 2 patients with missing regimen details (not shown);c Advanced fibrosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 9.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.59);d Cirrhosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 14.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.75).All percentages are of patients with available data in indicated category. Missing data due to unknown: sex (n = 5); HCV RNA (n = 1); previous HCV treatment status (n = 2); cirrhosis status (n = 2); Child–Pugh category (n = 26); fibrosis stage (n = 2); platelet count (n = 20); albumin count (n = 26). 7Parameter

DCV + SOF ± RBVa12 weeksn = 63

DCV + SOF

24 weeks

n = 166

DCV + SOF

+ RBV

24 weeks

n = 53

Overall

(N = 284)

b

Age

, median (range) years

53.4 (39–78)

55.0 (27–79)

53.2 (40–72)

54.1 (27–79)

Male

, n (%)

43 (68.3)

123 (75.0)

40 (80.0)

208 (74.6)

HCV RNA

, median (range) log

10

IU/mL

5.99 (2.40–7.83)

6.00 (3.03–7.40)

5.60 (1.60–7.25)

5.94 (1.60–7.83)

Advanced

fibrosis (F3)

,

c

n (%)

19 (30.2)

21 (12.7)

2 (3.8)

42 (14.8)

Cirrhosis

,

d

n (%)

37 (58.7)

135 (82.3)

48 (90.6)

222 (78.7)

Child–Pugh A

/ B / C

, n (%)

30 (83.3) /

3 (8.3) / 3 (8.3)

98 (85.2) /

15 (13.0) / 2

(1.7)

33 (76.7) /

9 (20.9) / 1 (2.3)

162 (82.7) /

28 (14.3) / 6 (3.1)

Platelets

< 100 ×10

9

cells/L

, n (%)

18 (32.1)

55 (35.0)

27 (55.1)

102 (38.6)

Albumin ˂ 35 g/L

, n(%)

19 (31.7)

39 (26.5)

14 (28.6)

74 (28.7)

Liver transplant recipient

, n (%)

3 (4.8)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

24 (8.5)

Pre-liver or

renal transplant stage

, n (%)

4 (6.3)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

25 (8.8)

Treatment-experienced

, n (%)

38 (60.3)

125 (76.2)

40 (75.5)

205 (72.7)

Coinfection

with HIV / HBV

,

n (%)

7 (11.3) / 0

31 (18.7) / 5 (3.0)

3 (5.7) / 2 (3.7)

41 (14.4) / 7 (2.5)Slide8

Baseline Characteristics8

a DCV + SOF + RBV, n = 5; b Overall totals include data for 2 patients with missing regimen details (not shown);c Advanced fibrosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 9.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.59);d Cirrhosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 14.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.75).All percentages are of patients with available data in indicated category. Missing data due to unknown: sex (n = 5); HCV RNA (n = 1); previous HCV treatment status (n = 2); cirrhosis status (n = 2); Child–Pugh category (n = 26); fibrosis stage (n = 2); platelet count (n = 20); albumin count (n = 26). 8Parameter

DCV + SOF ± RBVa12 weeksn = 63

DCV + SOF

24 weeks

n = 166

DCV + SOF

+ RBV

24 weeks

n = 53

Overall

(N = 284)

b

Age

, median (range) years

53.4 (39–78)

55.0 (27–79)

53.2 (40–72)

54.1 (27–79)

Male

, n (%)

43 (68.3)

123 (75.0)

40 (80.0)

208 (74.6)

HCV RNA

, median (range) log

10

IU/mL

5.99 (2.40–7.83)

6.00 (3.03–7.40)

5.60 (1.60–7.25)

5.94 (1.60–7.83)

Advanced

fibrosis (F3)

,

c

n (%)

19 (30.2)

21 (12.7)

2 (3.8)

42 (14.8)

Cirrhosis

,

d

n (%)

37 (58.7)

135 (82.3)

48 (90.6)

222 (78.7)

Child–Pugh A

/ B / C

, n (%)

30 (83.3) /

3 (8.3) / 3 (8.3)

98 (85.2) /

15 (13.0) / 2

(1.7)

33 (76.7) /

9 (20.9) / 1 (2.3)

162 (82.7) /

28 (14.3) / 6 (3.1)

Platelets

< 100 ×10

9

cells/L

, n (%)

18 (32.1)

55 (35.0)

27 (55.1)

102 (38.6)

Albumin ˂ 35 g/L

, n(%)

19 (31.7)

39 (26.5)

14 (28.6)

74 (28.7)

Liver transplant recipient

, n (%)

3 (4.8)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

24 (8.5)

Pre-liver or

renal transplant stage

, n (%)

4 (6.3)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

25 (8.8)

Treatment-experienced

, n (%)

38 (60.3)

125 (76.2)

40 (75.5)

205 (72.7)

Coinfection

with HIV / HBV

,

n (%)

7 (11.3) / 0

31 (18.7) / 5 (3.0)

3 (5.7) / 2 (3.7)

41 (14.4) / 7 (2.5)Slide9

Baseline Characteristics9

a DCV + SOF + RBV, n = 5; b Overall totals include data for 2 patients with missing regimen details (not shown);c Advanced fibrosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 9.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.59);d Cirrhosis defined by biopsy, FibroScan ( 14.6 kPa), or FibroTest ( 0.75).All percentages are of patients with available data in indicated category. Missing data due to unknown: sex (n = 5); HCV RNA (n = 1); previous HCV treatment status (n = 2); cirrhosis status (n = 2); Child–Pugh category (n = 26); fibrosis stage (n = 2); platelet count (n = 20); albumin count (n = 26). 9Parameter

DCV + SOF ± RBVa12 weeksn = 63

DCV + SOF

24 weeks

n = 166

DCV + SOF

+ RBV

24 weeks

n = 53

Overall

(N = 284)

b

Age

, median (range) years

53.4 (39–78)

55.0 (27–79)

53.2 (40–72)

54.1 (27–79)

Male

, n (%)

43 (68.3)

123 (75.0)

40 (80.0)

208 (74.6)

HCV RNA

, median (range) log

10

IU/mL

5.99 (2.40–7.83)

6.00 (3.03–7.40)

5.60 (1.60–7.25)

5.94 (1.60–7.83)

Advanced

fibrosis (F3)

,

c

n (%)

19 (30.2)

21 (12.7)

2 (3.8)

42 (14.8)

Cirrhosis

,

d

n (%)

37 (58.7)

135 (82.3)

48 (90.6)

222 (78.7)

Child–Pugh A

/ B / C

, n (%)

30 (83.3) /

3 (8.3) / 3 (8.3)

98 (85.2) /

15 (13.0) / 2

(1.7)

33 (76.7) /

9 (20.9) / 1 (2.3)

162 (82.7) /

28 (14.3) / 6 (3.1)

Platelets

< 100 ×10

9

cells/L

, n (%)

18 (32.1)

55 (35.0)

27 (55.1)

102 (38.6)

Albumin ˂ 35 g/L

, n(%)

19 (31.7)

39 (26.5)

14 (28.6)

74 (28.7)

Liver transplant recipient

, n (%)

3 (4.8)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

24 (8.5)

Pre-liver or

renal transplant stage

, n (%)

4 (6.3)

16 (9.6)

5 (9.4)

25 (8.8)

Treatment-experienced

, n (%)

38 (60.3)

125 (76.2)

40 (75.5)

205 (72.7)

Coinfection

with HIV / HBV

,

n (%)

7 (11.3) / 0

31 (18.7) / 5 (3.0)

3 (5.7) / 2 (3.7)

41 (14.4) / 7 (2.5)Slide10

Overall SVR12 in GT 3 by Regimen and Duration

10475814716655435381.010088.681.1Relapse: 6 Other VF: 2

Death: 2DC due to AEs: 1

Relapse: 9

Other VF: 7

Death: 3

Relapse: 7

Other VF: 3

HCV RNA < LLOQ

TD/TND

DCV + SOF

DCV + SOF + RBV

Overall SVR12 by

regimen:

87% (194/224) for DCV + SOF; 83% (48/58) for DCV + SOF + RBV

Overall SVR12 by

treatment duration

: 83% (52/63) for 12 weeks; 87% (190/219) for 24 weeks

DC, discontinuation; Other VF, undefined virologic failure.

Data missing for 2 patients due to unknown treatment duration.Slide11

SVR12 in Patients Without Cirrhosis(70% With Advanced Fibrosis [F3])

11DCV + SOFDCV + SOF + RBV242545292911

Overall SVR12 97% (58/60)By regimen: 98% (53/54) for DCV + SOF; 83% (5/6) for DCV + SOF + RBVBy treatment duration: 96% (25/26) for 12 weeks; 97% (33/34) for 24 weeks

Data missing for 2 patients due to unknown treatment duration or cirrhosis status. Slide12

SVR12 in Patients With Cirrhosis

121161352333394844DCV + SOFDCV + SOF + RBV

Overall SVR12 82% (182/222)By regimen: 83% (139/168) for DCV + SOF; 83% (43/52) for DCV + SOF + RBVBy treatment duration: 73% (27/37) for 12 weeks; 85% (155/183) for 24 weeks

Data missing for 2 patients due to unknown treatment duration or cirrhosis status. Slide13

SVR12 by Baseline Child–Pugh Score

13a 4 patients received RBV for 12 weeks, all were Child–Pugh A, and all achieved SVR12.Missing data for 26 patients of unknown Child–Pugh score, and 2 patients of unknown treatment duration.Child–Pugh AChild–Pugh B or C2430269010012172833

7

10

1

1

12 Weeks

DCV + SOF ± RBV

a

24 Weeks

DCV + SOF

24 Weeks

DCV + SOF + RBV

Overall SVR12:

Child–Pugh A:

87% (142/163)

Child–Pugh B:

67% (18/27)

Child–Pugh C:

50% (3/6)Slide14

Safety and Tolerability: Deaths and Serious AEs

14a Respiratory distress/septic shock (n = 1), sepsis/pulmonary arterial hypertension (n = 1), septic shock (n = 1), liver decompensation (n = 1), acute kidney injury (n = 1) – all considered unrelated to treatment; multi-organ failure/hepatorenal failure of unreported causality (n = 1); unknown cause of death (n = 1); b Both received DCV + SOF + RBV. Treatment maintained for patient with hepatic encephalopathy. Treatment discontinued for patient with allergic dermatitis (achieved SVR12); c Blood/vascular disorders (n = 4); medical procedures (n = 5); general disorders (n = 3); neoplasm (n = 1); respiratory distress (n = 2); alcoholic hepatitis (n = 1); urinary retention (n = 1).n (%)Total (N = 468)

Deathsa

7 (1.5)

Serious AEs

44 (9.4)

SAEs reported as related to treatment

b

Hepatic decompensation (encephalopathy)

Other (allergic dermatitis)

2 (0.4)

1 (0.2)

1 (0.2)

SAEs unrelated to treatment

Hepatic decompensation (ascites,

digestive bleeding, encephalopathy)

Severe infection (dysentery, pneumonia, erysipelas)

Hepatocellular carcinoma

Cholangiocarcinoma

Renal impairment

Liver transplant

Other

c

42

(9.0)

8 (1.9)

6 (1.3)

7 (1.5)

1 (0.2)

2 (0.4)

1 (0.2)

17 (3.8)Slide15

Safety and Tolerability: Common AEs and AE-Related Discontinuations

15a Allergic dermatitis (n = 1); neutropenia (n = 1); unspecified medical decision (n = 1).n (%)Total (N = 468)Discontinuations for AEsa3 (0.6)Common AEs ( 3%)AstheniaSleep disorder/InsomniaHeadacheDiarrheaFatigue

49 (10.5)

30 (6.4)

26 (5.6)

18 (3.8)

15 (3.2)Slide16

Summary and Conclusions16

In this real-world setting, DCV + SOF ± RBV for 12 or 24 weeks was well tolerated and achieved high SVR12 in GT 3 patients with advanced liver disease97% in noncirrhotic patients, mostly with advanced fibrosis 87% in Child–Pugh A cirrhosis, and 82% in all cirrhosis24 weeks of DCV + SOF resulted in 86% SVR12 in cirrhotic patientsNo impact of RBV use on SVR for 24 weeks of treatment (81% SVR12 with RBV)The role of RBV in DCV + SOF treatment < 24 weeks requires randomized evaluation in a larger datasetThese results show the pangenotypic, all-oral regimen of DCV + SOF ± RBV is an effective and well-tolerated option for patients with GT 3 infection and advanced liver diseaseSlide17

Acknowledgments17

The authors thank the patients and their families for their support and dedication, and all physicians, pharmacists, and medical staff at all hospital sitesStudy management and analysis was performed by LincolnEditorial support was provided by Articulate Science and funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb