Multiplex Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Assay for Simultaneous Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Ribavirin, Boceprevir, and Telaprevir

New directly acting antivirals (DAAs) that inhibit hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication are increasingly used for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. A marked pharmacokinetic variability and a high potential for drug-drug interactions between DAAs and numerous drug classes have been identified. In addition, ribavirin (RBV), commonly associated with hemolytic anemia, often requires dose adjustment, advocating for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in patients under combined antiviral therapy. However, an assay for the simultaneous analysis of RBV and DAAs constitutes an analytical challenge because of the large differences in polarity among these drugs, ranging from hydrophilic (RBV) to highly lipophilic (telaprevir [TVR]). Moreover, TVR is characterized by erratic behavior on standard octadecyl-based reversed-phase column chromatography and must be separated from VRT-127394, its inactive C-21 epimer metabolite. We have developed a convenient assay employing simple plasma protein precipitation, followed by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) for the simultaneous determination of levels of RBV, boceprevir, and TVR, as well as its metabolite VRT-127394, in plasma. This new, simple, rapid, and robust HPLC-MS/MS assay offers an efficient method of real-time TDM aimed at maximizing efficacy while minimizing the toxicity of antiviral therapy.

Impact of IL28B genotype on first-week response to telaprevir-based therapy in HIV-HCV coinfection

BACKGROUND IL28B genotype predicts response to treatment against hepatitis C virus (HCV) with pegylated interferon/ribavirin (PR) and impacts on the outcome of therapy including telaprevir (TVR). This study aimed to determine the influence of the favorable IL28B genotype on early viral kinetics during therapy with TVR/PR in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients. METHODS All HIV/HCV genotype 1-coinfected subjects who received TVR/PR for at least 4 weeks were included from populations prospectively followed in 22 centers throughout Germany, Switzerland and Spain. RESULTS Of the 129 subjects included, 38 (29.5%) presented with IL28B genotype CC and 94 (72.9%) were treatment-experienced. Ninety-six (73.8%) patients showed undetectable plasma HCV-RNA at treatment week (W) 4: 30 (78.9%) of the IL28B-CC carriers and 65 (71.4%) of the non-CC carriers (p=0.377). Among treatment-naïve patients, proportions of undetectable HCV-RNA among IL28B-CC versus non-CC carriers were 8/9 (88.9%) versus 3/9 (33.3%, p=0.016) and 14/17 (82.4%) versus 11/18 (61.1%, p=0.164) at W2 and W4. The decrease of HCV-RNA at W2 and W4 was similar among the IL28B carriers. CONCLUSIONS IL28B genotype does not predict W4 response to TVR/PR in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients, regardless of their treatment history. However, there is evidence of an impact on response during the first weeks in treatment-naïve patients.

Efficacy of lead-in silibinin and subsequent triple therapy in difficult-to-treat HIV/hepatitis C virus-coinfected patients

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of current hepatitis C virus (HCV) triple therapy, including a protease inhibitor, is limited in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with advanced liver fibrosis and nonresponse to previous peginterferon-ribavirin. These patients have a low chance (only 30%) of achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) during triple therapy and cannot wait for next-generation anti-HCV drugs. In a pilot study, we investigated the efficacy of a lead-in therapy with silibinin before triple therapy in difficult-to-treat patients. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were HIV/HCV coinfection with advanced liver fibrosis and documented failure of previous peginterferon-ribavirin treatment. Intervention was lead-in therapy with intravenous silibinin 20 mg/kg/day for 14 days. Subsequently, peginterferon-ribavirin combined with telaprevir was initiated for 12 weeks, followed by peginterferon-ribavirin dual therapy until week 48 after initiation of triple therapy. The outcome measurements were HCV RNA after silibinin lead-in, at weeks 2, 4 and 12 of triple therapy, and SVR at week 24 after the end of treatment. RESULTS: We examined six HIV/HCV-coinfected patients (four infected with genotype 1a). All had fibrosis grade METAVIR ≥F3 and were on fully suppressive antiretroviral therapy. Mean HCV RNA decline after silibinin therapy was 2.6 log10 IU/mL (range 2-3 log10 IU/mL). Five of the six patients were virologically suppressed at weeks 2 and 4, and all six at week 12 of triple therapy. One experienced a viral breakthrough thereafter. Four of five patients (80%) showed an SVR 24. One patient had an SVR 12 but has not yet reached week 24. CONCLUSIONS: A lead-in with silibinin before triple therapy is highly effective and increases the probability of HCV treatment success in difficult-to-treat HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with advanced liver fibrosis and previous failure of peginterferon-ribavirin.

Protease inhibitors to treat hepatitis C in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study: high efficacy but low treatment uptake

OBJECTIVES Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have become the standard of care for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We aimed to assess treatment uptake and efficacy in routine clinical settings among HIV/HCV coinfected patients after the introduction of the first generation DAAs. METHODS Data on all Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) participants starting HCV protease inhibitor (PI) treatment between September 2011 and August 2013 were collected prospectively. The uptake and efficacy of HCV therapy were compared with those in the time period before the availability of PIs. RESULTS Upon approval of PI treatment in Switzerland in September 2011, 516 SHCS participants had chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. Of these, 57 (11%) started HCV treatment during the following 2 years with either telaprevir, faldaprevir or boceprevir. Twenty-seven (47%) patients were treatment-naïve, nine (16%) were patients with relapse and 21 (37%) were partial or null responders. Twenty-nine (57%) had advanced fibrosis and 15 (29%) had cirrhosis. End-of-treatment virological response was 84% in treatment-naïve patients, 88% in patients with relapse and 62% in previous nonresponders. Sustained virological response was 78%, 86% and 40% in treatment-naïve patients, patients with relapse and nonresponders, respectively. Treatment uptake was similar before (3.8 per 100 patient-years) and after (6.1 per 100 patient-years) the introduction of PIs, while treatment efficacy increased considerably after the introduction of PIs. CONCLUSIONS The introduction of PI-based HCV treatment in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients improved virological response rates, while treatment uptake remained low. Therefore, the introduction of PIs into the clinical routine was beneficial at the individual level, but had only a modest effect on the burden of HCV infection at the population level.