grazoprevir and Renal-Insufficiency--Chronic

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on dialysis, causes chronic liver disease, may increase the risk of death, and impacts kidney transplant outcomes. Direct-acting antivirals have replaced interferons because of better efficacy and tolerability. This is an update of a review first published in 2015.. We aimed to look at the benefits and harms of interventions for HCV in CKD patients on dialysis: death, disease relapse, treatment response/discontinuation, time to recovery, quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness, and adverse events. We aimed to study comparisons of available interventions, compared with placebo, control, with each other and with newer treatments.. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 23 February 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, handsearching conference proceedings, and searching the International Clinical Trials Register Portal (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov.. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, first period of randomised cross-over studies on interventions for HCV in CKD on dialysis were considered.. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.. Three studies were included in this update, therefore 13 studies (997 randomised participants) met our inclusion criteria. Overall, the risk of bias was judged low in seven studies, unclear in four, low to unclear in one, and high in one study. Interventions included standard interferon, pegylated (PEG) interferon, standard or PEG interferon plus ribavirin; direct-acting antivirals, and direct-acting antivirals plus PEG interferon plus ribavirin. Compared to placebo or control, standard interferon may make little or no difference to death (5 studies, 134 participants: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.23) or relapse (low certainty evidence), probably improves end-of-treatment response (ETR) (5 studies, 132 participants: RR 8.62, 95% CI 3.03 to 24.55; I² = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence), and probably makes little or no difference to sustained virological response (SVR) (4 studies, 98 participants: RR 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.07; I² = 53%), treatment discontinuation (4 studies, 116 participants: RR 4.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 42.69; I² = 63%), and adverse events (5 studies, 143 participants: RR 3.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 13.01; I² = 25%) (moderate certainty evidence). In low certainty evidence, PEG interferon (1 study, 50 participants) may improve ETR (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.15) but may make little or no difference to death (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.81), SVR (RR 2.40, 95% CI 0.99 to 5.81), treatment discontinuation (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.96), adverse events (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.96) and relapses (21/38 relapsed) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.25) compared to standard interferon. In moderate certainty evidence, high-dose PEG interferon (alpha-2a and alpha-2b) may make little or no difference to death (2 studies, 97 participants: RR 4.30, 95% CI 0.76 to 24.33; I² = 0%), ETR (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.51 to 3.90; I² = 20%), SVR (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.07; I² = 0%), treatment discontinuation (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.28; I² = 0%) or adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.83; I² = 27%) compared to low-dose PEG interferon. High-dose PEG interferon may make little or no difference to relapses (1 study, 43 participants: RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.77; low certainty evidence). There were no significant subgroup differences. Standard interferon plus ribavirin may lead to higher treatment discontinuation (1 study, 52 participants: RR 2.97, 95% CI 1.19 to 7.36; low certainty evidence) compared to standard interferon alone.  In low certainty evidence, PEG interferon plus ribavirin. In dialysis patients with HCV infection grazoprevir plus elbasvir probably improves ETR. There is no difference in ETR or SVR for combinations of telaprevir, ribavirin and PEG interferon given for different durations and doses. Though no longer in use, PEG interferon was more effective than standard interferon for ETR but not SVR. Increasing doses of PEG interferon did not improve responses. The addition of ribavirin to PEG interferon may result in fewer relapses, higher SVR, and higher numbers with adverse events.

Topics: Antiviral Agents; Chronic Disease; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Humans; Interferons; Recurrence; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Ribavirin

Chronic HCV infection is a non-traditional (but modifiable) risk factor for chronic kidney disease and has been implicated in glomerular injury and nephrosclerotic disease. Three HCV direct-acting antiviral regimens are available for patients with severe kidney impairment: ombitasvir, paritaprevir with the pharmacokinetic enhancer ritonavir, and dasabuvir; glecaprevir plus pibrentasvir; and elbasvir plus grazoprevir. In patients with severe kidney impairment, sofosbuvir-free regimens are preferred because sofosbuvir accumulation has been associated with a progressive worsening of renal function. In this Review, we provide our expert opinion on the current HCV treatment paradigm and highlight the remaining issues that need to be overcome to improve the treatment of HCV in this population.

Topics: 2-Naphthylamine; Amides; Aminoisobutyric Acids; Anilides; Antiviral Agents; Benzimidazoles; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Disease Management; Drug Therapy, Combination; Expert Testimony; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Leucine; Macrocyclic Compounds; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Proline; Pyrrolidines; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk Factors; Ritonavir; Sulfonamides; Uracil; Valine

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Currently, direct-acting antiviral drugs (DAAs) are associated with an increased sustained virologic response (SVR) and are the gold standard for treating HCV infection.. The new combination of grazoprevir, an inhibitor of HCV NS3/4A, and elbasvir, an inhibitor of HCV NS5A, once daily will be available for the treatment of HCV infection. This combination therapy has a high efficacy in HCV genotype 1 and 4 infections, inducing a SVR up to 95%, even in difficult to treat patients such as cirrhotic, HIV co-infected, or dialysis-dependent patients, and patients with stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease or those who failed previous therapy. The safety of grazoprevir combined with elbasvir is very good and without significant adverse effects in phase 2 or 3 studies. For patients who failed prior DAA therapy, in vitro and in vivo studies showed that the grazoprevir and elbasvir combination is fully active against resistance to NS3/4A protease inhibitors. Resistance to NS5B inhibitors is least susceptible to grazoprevir or elbasvir.. This new combination of gazoprevir with elbasvir offers an opportunity to cure HCV infection with short interferon-free therapy, even in difficult to treat patients.

Topics: Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Coinfection; Cyclopropanes; Drug Combinations; Drug Resistance, Viral; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; HIV Infections; Humans; Imidazoles; Protease Inhibitors; Quinoxalines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Sulfonamides

In the C-SURFER study, therapy with the all-oral elbasvir plus grazoprevir regimen for 12 weeks in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease resulted in a high rate of virological cure compared with placebo. Here, we report sustained virological response (SVR), safety data, health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL), and virological resistance analyses in patients in C-SURFER who received immediate antiviral therapy or who received placebo before therapy.. In this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study, we randomly assigned adults with HCV genotype 1 infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease enrolled at 68 centres worldwide to either elbasvir 50 mg plus grazoprevir 100 mg once per day for 12 weeks (immediate treatment group) or placebo for 12 weeks followed by elbasvir 50 mg plus grazoprevir 100 mg once per day for 12 weeks beginning at week 16 (deferred treatment group). The primary safety and efficacy endpoints for the immediate treatment group and placebo phase of the deferred treatment group have been reported previously. Here, we report safety and efficacy data for the treatment phase of the deferred treatment group, as well as HRQOL assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey for all groups, and baseline and treatment-emergent resistance-associated substitutions (RASs). SVR at 12 weeks (SVR12) was assessed in the modified full analysis set (FAS), defined as all patients excluding those who did not receive at least one dose of study drug, who died, or who discontinued the study before the end of treatment for reasons determined to be unrelated to HCV treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT02092350.. Between March 30 and Nov 28, 2014, 235 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study drug. The modified FAS included 116 patients assigned to immediate treatment and 99 assigned to deferred treatment. 115 (99·1%; 95% CI 95·3-100·0) of 116 assigned to immediate treatment achieved SVR12 compared with 97 (98·0%; 92·9-99·7) of 99 assigned to deferred treatment. In patients with genotype 1a infections, SVR12 was achieved by 11 (84·6%) of 13 patients with detectable baseline NS5A RASs and in 98 (100%) of 98 without. HRQOL did not differ at week 12 between immediate treatment and the placebo phase of deferred treatment. Safety was generally similar between patients receiving immediate treatment and those receiving placebo in the deferred treatment group. One serious adverse event during deferred treatment (interstitial nephritis) and one during the placebo phase of deferred treatment (raised lipase concentration) were deemed related to study drug. Four patients died, one who received immediate treatment (cardiac arrest) and three who received deferred treatment (aortic aneurysm, pneumonia, and unknown cause); all four deaths were considered unrelated to study drugs. Of the three deaths in the deferred treatment group, one occurred during placebo treatment and two occurred before starting active treatment. There were no notable differences in aminotransferase elevations in the deferred treatment group compared with the immediate treatment group, and no patients in the deferred treatment group had total bilirubin elevations.. These data add to the growing body of clinical evidence for the fixed-dose combination regimen of elbasvir plus grazoprevir for 12 weeks and support use of this therapy in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease.. Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Topics: Adult; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Resistance, Viral; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Outcome Assessment; Quality of Life; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in patients with stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease increases the risk of death and renal graft failure, yet patients with hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease have few treatment options. This study assesses an all-oral, ribavirin-free regimen in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease.. In this phase 3 randomised study of safety and observational study of efficacy, patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and chronic kidney disease (stage 4-5 with or without haemodialysis dependence) were randomly assigned to receive grazoprevir (100 mg, NS3/4A protease inhibitor) and elbasvir (50 mg, NS5A inhibitor; immediate treatment group) or placebo (deferred treatment group) once daily for 12 weeks. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice response system. An additional cohort of patients who were not randomised received the same regimen open-label and underwent intensive pharmacokinetic sampling. The primary efficacy outcome was a non-randomised comparison of sustained virological response at 12 weeks (SVR12) after the end of therapy for the combined immediate treatment group and the pharmacokinetic population with a historical control. The primary safety outcome was a randomised comparison between the immediate treatment group and the deferred treatment group. After 4 weeks of follow-up (study week 16), unmasking occurred and patients in the deferred treatment group received grazoprevir and elbasvir. The primary efficacy hypothesis was tested at a two-sided significance level (type I error) of 0·05 using an exact test for a binomial proportion. Safety event rates were compared between immediate treatment and deferred treatment groups using the stratified Miettinen and Nurminen method with baseline dialysis status as the strata. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092350.. 224 patients were randomly assigned to the immediate treatment group with grazoprevir and elbasvir (n=111) or the deferred treatment group (n=113), and 11 were assigned to the intensive pharmacokinetic population. Overall, 179 (76%) were haemodialysis-dependent, 122 (52%) had HCV genotype 1a infection, 189 (80%) were HCV treatment-naive, 14 (6%) were cirrhotic, and 108 (46%) were African American. Of the 122 patients receiving grazoprevir and elbasvir, six were excluded from the primary efficacy analysis for non-virological reasons (death, lost-to-follow-up [n=2], non-compliance, patient withdrawal, and withdrawal by physician for violent behaviour). No patients in the combined immediate treatment group and intensive pharmacokinetic population and five (4%) in the deferred treatment group discontinued because of an adverse event. Most common adverse events were headache, nausea, and fatigue, occurring at similar frequencies in patients receiving active and placebo drugs. SVR12 in the combined immediate treatment group and intensive pharmacokinetic population was 99% (95% CI 95·3-100·0; 115/116), with one relapse 12 weeks after end of treatment when compared with a historical control of 45%, based on meta-analyses of interferon-based regimens used in clinical trials of patients infected with HCV who are on haemodialysis.. Once-daily grazoprevir and elbasvir for 12 weeks had a low rate of adverse events and was effective in patients infected with HCV genotype 1 and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease.. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.

Topics: Aged; Amides; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Male; Middle Aged; Protease Inhibitors; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; RNA, Viral; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome

Grazoprevir/elbasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) are the two preferred treatment options for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <30 mL/min. Both therapies have been separately analyzed in different real-life cohorts; however, a direct comparison has not been performed so far. We, therefore, analyzed safety and effectiveness of both regimens in a concerted real-life population.. The Germany Hepatitis C-Registry is a prospective national real-world registry. The analysis is based on 2773 patients with documented GFR at baseline treated with grazoprevir/elbasvir (N = 1041), grazoprevir/elbasvir + ribavirin (N = 53) and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (N = 1679).. A total of 93 patients with GFR <30 mL/min were treated with grazoprevir/elbasvir (N = 56), grazoprevir/elbasvir + ribavirin (N = 4), and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (N = 33). They suffered significantly more frequent from diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and coronary heart disease than individuals with GFR >30 mL/min and showed the following baseline characteristics: 20.4, 55.9, 3.2, 12.9, and 5.3% were infected with HCV-genotypes 1a, 1b, 2, 3, and 4; 12.9% suffered from liver cirrhosis; 80.1% were treatment-naïve. Baseline characteristics except distribution of HCV-genotype 1b (n = 43/52 treated with grazoprevir/elbasvir) and sustained virologic response rates (SVR12) did not differ significantly between glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (SVR12: 100%) and grazoprevir/elbasvir (SVR12: 97.9%).Fatigue, headache, abdominal discomfort, and arthralgia were the most frequently reported adverse events without a statistical difference between grazoprevir/elbasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir.. In patients with chronic hepatitis C and a baseline GFR ≤30 mL/min grazoprevir/elbasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir show an equally favorable safety profile and antiviral efficacy and can both be recommended for real-life use.

Topics: Amides; Aminoisobutyric Acids; Antiviral Agents; Benzimidazoles; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Leucine; Proline; Prospective Studies; Pyrrolidines; Quinoxalines; Registries; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Ribavirin; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response

Grazoprevir/elbasvir (GZR/EBR) was approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 and 4 infected patients with or without compensated liver cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to assess GZR/EBR regimen in the real-world experience, particularly in previously "difficult-to-treat" patients with chronic kidney diseases, human immunodeficiency virus-coinfected, cirrhotics, and treatment-experienced.. The analysis included patients treated with GZR/EBR selected from 10 152 individuals from the EpiTer-2 database, large national real-world study evaluating antiviral treatment in 22 Polish hepatology centers between 2015 and 2018. Data were completed retrospectively and submitted online.. A total of 1615 patients who started GZR/EBR therapy in 2017 and 2018 with a female predominance (54%) and median age of 54 years were analyzed. The majority were infected with GT1b (89%) and treatment naïve (81%). Liver cirrhosis was diagnosed in 19%, and 70% of patients had comorbidities, of which chronic renal disease was present in 7% and HIV-coinfection in 4%. Overall, a sustained virologic response (SVR) was achieved by 95% according to intent-to-treat (ITT) and 98% after exclusion of lost to follow up (modified ITT). No differences were found in cure rate between all included patients and subpopulations previously considered as difficult-to-treat. Majority of patients completed the treatment course as scheduled, adverse events were mostly mild and did not lead to therapy discontinuation.. GZR/EBR treatment carried-out in patients infected with HCV genotype 1 and 4 demonstrated good tolerability and an excellent SVR rate with no effectiveness reduction in so called difficult-to-treat populations.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Comorbidity; Cyclopropanes; Data Analysis; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; HIV Infections; Humans; Imidazoles; Liver Cirrhosis; Male; Middle Aged; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Retrospective Studies; Sex Factors; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Randomized controlled trials of EBR/GZR have reported high treatment efficacy, safety and tolerability in patients undergoing dialysis. However, real world effectiveness data for EBR/GZR in this population is lacking. We evaluated the effectiveness of EBR/GZR in an HCV-infected population with all stages of CKD including dialysis compared with control patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection with EBR/GZR prescriptions dispensed during February 1, 2016-August 31, 2017 in 128 VA Medical Centers. We collected patient information regarding history of dialysis, end stage renal disease (ESRD), and/or eGFR values. We measured SVR based on undetectable HCV RNA at least 4 weeks after the completion of treatment. We examined SVR rates by CKD stage compared to control patients and within patient subgroups using logistic regression models.. We identified 5961 patients (42.5% genotype 1a, 55.0% genotype 1b) who met eligibility criteria and completed a EBR/GZR treatment course (≥11 weeks). Approximately 73.2% (n = 4361) had eGFR ≥60 who served as control patients, 14.4% (n = 860) had Stage 3 CKD, and 12.4% (n = 740) had Stage 4-5 CKD or ESRD. Of patients with Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD, 76.1% underwent dialysis (n = 563). The overall SVR was 96.7% in all patients, 96.4% for eGFR≥60, 98.3% in Stage 3 CKD, and 96.5% in Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD. No statistically significant differences were found in the SVR rates in patients with or without dialysis in the Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD patients (adjusted OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.47 and OR 1.74; 95% CI 0.63-4.81) compared with those with eGFR≥60.. We found EBR/GZR was effective in patients with HCV GT1 infection regardless of CKD severity or receipt of dialysis in the US VA population.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Electronic Health Records; Female; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Male; Middle Aged; Quinoxalines; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Retrospective Studies; Severity of Illness Index; Sulfonamides; United States; Veterans; Young Adult

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is very common in maintenance hemodialysis patients, causing high morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in maintenance hemodialysis patients complicated with chronic hepatitis C in real-world clinical practice.In this retrospective observational study, hemodialysis patients with chronic hepatitis C infection in the Third Central Hospital of Tianjin outpatient were screened, and appropriate treatment plans were selected accordingly. Totally 25 patients diagnosed with chronic hepatitis C and treated with DAAs for 12 weeks or 24 weeks were included. The sustained virologic response (SVR) rate obtained 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12) was evaluated. Laboratory indexes and adverse reactions during the treatment process were also assessed.A total of 25 cases met the eligibility criteria and provided informed consent. Except for 1 patient who discontinued the treatment due to gastrointestinal bleeding, the remaining 24 cases completed the treatment cycle with 100% rapid virologic response (RVR) and 100% SVR12, with no serious adverse reactions recorded.Maintenance hemodialysis patients complicated with chronic hepatitis C in Chinese real-world setting tolerate DAAs very well, with a viral response rate reaching 100%.

Topics: Alanine Transaminase; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Aspartate Aminotransferases; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Genotype; Hemoglobins; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Isoquinolines; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrrolidines; Quinoxalines; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Retrospective Studies; RNA, Viral; Sofosbuvir; Sulfonamides; Valine; Viral Load

The real-world effectiveness and safety of all-oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis C (HCV) infection and chronic kidney disease (CKD) have not been fully elucidated. This study assesses elbasvir (EBR) plus grazoprevir (GZR) for patients with HCV genotype 1 infection in the clinical setting, focusing on CKD stage 3-5D. This multicenter, real-world cohort study consisted of 282 Japanese patients who were treated with EBR (50 mg) plus GZR (100 mg) for a fixed 12-week duration. We evaluated the sustained viral response rate 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12), longitudinal liver and renal parameters, and adverse effects according to the cirrhosis and CKD status. Of those enrolled, 89 (31.6%) were CKD stage 3-5 and 21 (7.4%) were CKD stage 5D (hemodialysis-dependent). The overall and CKD stage 3-5D SVR12 rates in the per protocol populations were 98.6% (272/276) and 98.1% (101/103). High SVR12 rates were observed in almost all groups, except for prior all-oral DAA failure with NS5A resistance-associated substitutions. There was no significant change during treatment or follow-up period in estimated glomerular filtration rate, irrespective of CKD status. In contrast, the serum complement level (C3 and C4) increased, with significance for C3. Serious adverse effects were very rare, both in the groups with normal eGFR and CKD, and discontinuation was required for only six (2.1%) patients. EBR plus GZR for HCV genotype 1 was highly effective with a low rate of adverse effects, regardless of CKD status. In addition, liver parameters and complement levels improved longitudinally.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Cohort Studies; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Liver Cirrhosis; Male; Middle Aged; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; RNA, Viral; Sulfonamides; Sustained Virologic Response; Young Adult

Among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the United States, HCV infection causes significant morbidity and mortality and results in substantial healthcare costs. A once-daily oral regimen of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for 12 weeks was found to be a safe and efficacious treatment for HCV in patients with CKD. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of EBR/GZR in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced CKD patients compared with no treatment (NoTx) and pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (peg-IFN/RBV) using a computer-based model of the natural history of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, CKD and liver disease. Data on baseline characteristics of the simulated patients were obtained from NHANES, 2000-2010. Model inputs were estimated from published studies. Cost of treatment with EBR/GZR and peg-INF/RBV were based on wholesale acquisition cost. All costs were from a third-party payer perspective and were expressed in 2015 U.S. dollars. We estimated lifetime incidence of liver-related complications, liver transplantation, kidney transplantation, end-stage live disease mortality and end-stage renal disease mortality; lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALY); and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR). The model predicted that EBR/GZR will significantly reduce the incidence of liver-related complications and prolong life in patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection and CKD compared with NoTx or use of peg-IFN/RBV. EBR/GZR-based regimens resulted in higher average remaining QALYs and higher costs (11.5716, $191 242) compared with NoTx (8.9199, $156 236) or peg-INF/RBV (10.2857, $186 701). Peg-IFN/RBV is not cost-effective, and the ICUR of EBR/GZR compared with NoTx was $13 200/QALY. Treatment of a patient on haemodialysis with EBR/GZR resulted in a higher ICUR ($217 000/QALY). Assuming a threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained for cost-effectiveness, use of elbasvir/grazoprevir to treat an average patient with CKD can be considered cost-effective in the United States.

Topics: Amides; Antiviral Agents; Benzofurans; Carbamates; Computer Simulation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Cyclopropanes; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Imidazoles; Interferon-alpha; Quinoxalines; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Ribavirin; Sulfonamides; United States