Treatment guidance for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection

Similar documents
HEPATITIS C TREATMENT GUIDANCE

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 22 September 2010 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta200

ةي : لآا ةرقبلا ةروس

Scottish Medicines Consortium

Peginterferon alfa and ribavirin for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. Part review of NICE technology appraisal guidance 75 and 106

29th Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board Meeting

Ribavirin (Medicare Prior Authorization)

Infergen Monotherapy. Infergen (interferon alfacon-1) Description

Express Scripts, Inc. monograph dated 5/25/2011; selected revision 6/1/2011

Glecaprevir-Pibrentasvir in Cirrhotic Genotype 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 EXPEDITION-1

(differs from NICE who recommend 24 weeks for all) *Child Pugh A only

Circle Yes or No Y N. [If yes, skip to question 13 REAUTHORIZATION REQUESTS]

Infergen (interferon alfacon-1) with Ribavirin (Copegus, Rebetol, RibaPak, Ribasphere, RibaTab, ribavirin tablets/capsules - all strengths)

TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 10 December 2008

Glecaprevir-Pibrentasvir in HCV GT 1 or 4 & Prior DAA Treatment MAGELLAN-1 (Part 2)

PEARL-I. Ombitasvir + Paritaprevir + Ritonavir +/- Ribavirin in HCV GT4. Treatment Naïve and Treatment Experienced

2016: The State of HIV & Hepatitis C in the District

Treatment Options in HCV Relapsers and Nonresponders. Raymond T. Chung, M.D.

Pegylated Interferons and Ribavirins

Update on Real-World Experience With HARVONI

CASE STUDY. Adverse Events in treatment chronic hepatitis C patients with PegInterferon and Ribavirin What would your management decision be?

General Statement for Drugs for the Treatment of Hepatitis C

National Clinical Guidelines for the treatment of HCV in adults. Version 4

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EXCELLENCE. Final Appraisal Determination

COMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP) DRAFT

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C in HIV co-infected patients

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Management of Hepatitis C

Horizon Scanning Technology Summary. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for hepatitis B. National Horizon Scanning Centre. April 2007

Should Elderly CHC Patients (>70 years old) be Treated?

Hepatitis C Management and Treatment

Intron A (interferon alfa-2b) with ribavirin, (Moderiba, Rebetol, Ribasphere, RibaTab, ribavirin tablets/capsules - all strengths)

entecavir, 0.5mg and 1mg film-coated tablets and 0.05 mg/ml oral solution, Baraclude SMC No. (747/11) Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Management of CHC G1 patients who are relapsers or non-responders to Peg IFN and RBV therapy: Wait or Triple Therapy?

Update on Real-World Experience With HARVONI

Idenix Pharmaceuticals: Building a Leading Antiviral Franchise. Jean-Pierre Sommadossi Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Spring 2006

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Simeprevir + PEG + RBV in Treatment-Naïve Genotype 1 QUEST-1 Trial

Hepatitis C: Ribavirin/Pegylated Interferon combination therapy

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Topic: Sovaldi, sofosbuvir Date of Origin: March 14, Committee Approval Date: August 15, 2014 Next Review Date: March 2015

Latest Treatment Updates for GT 2 and GT 3 Patients

Martel-Laferrière V, Brinkley S, Bichoupan K, Posner S, Stivala A, Perumalswami P, Schiano T, Sulkowski M, Dieterich DT, Branch AD

Virological Tools and Monitoring in the DAA Era

Delta hepatitis: How to manage and optimize therapy? Dominique ROULOT Unité d Hépatologie, Hôpital Avicenne

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 28 January 2004 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta75

Phase 3. Treatment Experienced. Ledipasvir-Sofosbuvir +/- Ribavirin in HCV Genotype 1 ION-2. Afdhal N, et al. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:

Hepatitis C Medications Prior Authorization Criteria

Hepatitis C Medications Hawaii PRIOR AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FORM

BVHG/BASL/BSG/BHIVA/BIA/CVN Guidelines for management of chronic HCV infection

Emerging Approaches for the Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus

TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE

Optimal Treatment with Boceprevir. Michael Manns

Dr Katharine Cartwright

Criteria Grid Best Practices and Interventions for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatitis C

Pegylated Interferon Agents for Hepatitis C

National Clinical Guidelines for the treatment of HCV in adults. Version 3

Hepatitis C Therapy Falk Symposium September 20, 2008

Hepatitis C Update. Geri Brown, M.D. Associate Professor Department of Internal Medicine March 24, 2011

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 21 February 2018 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta507

The Haemophilia Society s submission to NICE for the appraisal of hepatitis C (mild to moderate) pegylated interferons, ribavirin and alpha interferon

Stick or twist management options in hepatitis C

SYNOPSIS Final Clinical Study Report for Study AI444031

Management of Chronic Hepatitis B in Asian Americans

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of hepatitis B

Interferon free therapy Are we getting there? Graham R Foster Queen Marys University of London

Hepatitis C: Management of Previous Non-responders with First Line Protease Inhibitors

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 24 January 2018 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta499

Intron A Hepatitis B. Intron A (interferon alfa-2b) Description

Pegylated Interferon Alfa-2b (Peg-Intron) Plus Ribavirin (Rebetol)in the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C: A Local Experience

Clinical cases: HIV/HCV coinfection

How to use pegylated Interferon for Chronic Hepatitis B in 2015

National Clinical Guidelines for the treatment of HCV in adults. Version 5

Treatment of HCV in HIV/HCV Coinfection: What Are the New Questions?

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE

Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C in HIV infection

EPIDEMIOLOGY, CLINICAL FEATURES AND OUTCOME OF ACUTE HEPATITIS C IN HIV-POSITIVE PATIENTS: PRESENTATION OF OUR EXPERIENCE

Ledipasvir-Sofosbuvir (Harvoni)

Hepatitis C Genotype 1 (GT 1) Patients in the United States (US)

5/12/2016. Learning Objectives. Management of Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 2 or 3 Infected Treatment-Naive or Experienced Patients

1. SYNOPSIS. AWB-ML21645 Date: April 20, 2016 Title of the observational study

PRACTICE GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION

Current Therapies for Chronic Hepatitis C

How to optimize current therapy for GT1 patients Shortened therapy with IFNa-based therapy

Clinical dilemmas in HBeAg-negative CHB

Hepatitis B Treatment Pearls. Agenda

Introduction. The ELECTRON Trial

SASKATCHEWAN FORMULARY BULLETIN Update to the 62nd Edition of the Saskatchewan Formulary

How do you optimize HCV Treatment for Cirrhotic Patients APASL STC Cebu

Abstract. Background. Conclusions. Aim. Patients and Methods. Acknowledgments. References. Results. Poster #905

Harvoni. Harvoni (ledipasvir & sofosbuvir) Description

Case #1. Case #1. Case #1: Audience vote VS. The Great Debate: When to Treat HCV in our HIV coinfected patients

SECTION 1: OLYSIO with (PEGASYS) AND RIBAVIRIN SECTION 2: OLYSIO with (PEGINTRON) AND RIBAVIRIN RATIONALE FOR INCLUSION IN PA PROGRAM

HCV Case Studies (and Special Populations)

Seyed Moayed Alavian Professor of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Editor in-chief of Hepatitis Monthly E mail:

Clinical Criteria for Hepatitis C (HCV) Therapy

1.0 Abstract. Title. Keywords

Harvoni. Harvoni (ledipasvir & sofosbuvir) Description

Current therapy for hepatitis C: pegylated interferon and ribavirin

Transcription:

Treatment guidance for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection A meeting of the network was held on 11 April 2008 at which the current evidence base for hepatitis C was reviewed. These guidelines have been produced as a result of that meeting for use by Network members. The document is divided into 3 sections: 1. Definitions and agreed testing protocols 2. Treatment protocols 3. Grey areas where cases may need discussing on an individual basis. The guidance is intended to be of use to Network members but is not all inclusive and cannot cover all areas in the field of hepatitis C. Local expertise should be consulted for difficult-to-manage patients where guidelines cannot be written. The and appropriate monitoring of patients with chronic hepatitis C remains the responsibility of the clinician managing that patient and individual patient factors will often have to be taken into consideration. All network members are reminded that some guidance is outside current NICE guidance for hepatitis C and some recommendations include off-label use of the drugs we all use for. Viral load definitions also differ from licensed definitions but are generally more conservative, and duration especially in short course s also differ. The network has not been proscriptive about which products should be used - this is left to the discretion of the prescriber but the licensing indications are listed below for information. 1. Roche Products Licensed for short course s for genotypes 1,2 and 3. Definition of low viral load <800000 copies/ml. Not licensed for re- after failure of standard course s at time of writing. Not licensed for 72 week in genotype 1. 2. Schering Plough products Licenced for short course s for genotype 1 but not 2 or 3. Definition of low viral load <600000 copies/ml. Licensed for re- after failure of standard course s. Not licenced for 72 week in genotype 1 at time of writing.

1. Definitions and agreed testing protocols The following terms are referred to within this document and are defined below: 1. Standard 2. Short course 3. Long course 4. Definitions of viral response Standard These are the durations recommended by NICE and include 48 week protocols for genotype 1 (genotype 4,5,6 to be included here) and 24 week protocols for genotype 2 and 3. Short course s These apply to genotype 1, 2 and 3 infection. Data on genotype 4-6 are too limited and patients should be treated for 48 weeks using the NICE recommended guidelines for genotype 1 - ie check quantitative at 12 weeks and continue only if negative or 2 log drop. We suggest checking at 24 weeks also and if it has risen on at this stage stop therapy. Short course is defined as duration shorter than that currently recommended by NICE ie shorter than 24 weeks for genotypes 2 and 3 and shorter than 48 weeks for genotype 1. Suitable patients are identified by their baseline quantitative and by the rapidity of their viral response as determined by a week 4 (rapid viral response - see below). They must also not have any of the exclusion criteria (see below). The network recognised that this practice was outside NICE recommendations and would therefore be audited region-wide in an audit led by Jacqui Smithson and Peter Moss (Hull). In all 3 of these genotypes there is the possibility for crossover into the standard duration arm if the week 4 is not encouraging. Patients who relapse within 6 months of finishing short course s should be offered standard length re. Exclusions for short course s We have considered the following patients are not suitable for short course : Cirrhotic patients (Stage 5 and 6 if histology known) Coinfected patients (HIV or HBV) Patients with platelet counts less than 140 (surrogate marker for fibrosis), unless there is a known alternative cause for thrombocytopaenia e.g. ITP in which short course may be considered a safer alternative provided selection criteria are met. Patients with BMI greater than 27 Patients older than 45 years

Patients on long-term immunosuppression eg azathioprine etc. Long course Currently refers to 72 week for slow viral responders (see below) with genotype 1 infection. Definitions of viral response Rapid virological response (RVR) Undetectable HCV RNA levels at week 4 Early virological response (EVR) 2 log10 drop in HCV RNA at week 12 Slow virological response HCV RNA positive at weeks 4 and 12, negative at week 24 End-of- response (EOT) Undetectable HCV RNA levels at end of (24 weeks for HCV genotype 2/3, 48 weeks for HCV genotype 1) Sustained virological response (SVR) Undetectable HCV RNA levels at end of and follow-up (24 weeks post) Patients who are negative at end of are end of responders Patients who are positive at end of are end of non-responders Patients who are negative at end of but become positive at 6 months are responder-relapsers Patients who are negative at end of and remain negative 6 months after end of have sustained viral response end of s may be indication for longer course pathway see individual protocols.

Testing Protocols - all protocols/duration For audit purposes to ensure uniform data could be collected we agreed that testing would be carried out as follows: Baseline All patients - should be done at start of To determine genotype and viral load Week 4 All patients Decision making for short course patients in genotype 1, 2, 3 Will allow comparison data Week 12 All patients Decision making for genotype 1 patients not on short course pathway, or those on short course pathway who need switching to standard course. End of for genotype 2/3 patients in short course pathway Aids decision making about re and slow virological response Week 24 For patients still on End of for short course genotype 1 Stopping decision for standard 48 week course genotype 1 End of for standard course genotype 2+3 Week 48 For standard course genotype 1 patients still on End of Any longer duration - suggest checked 3 monthly - if rising - stop. All patients have end of. All patients have checked 6 months after end of successful therapy (sustained viral response)

Discharge in Sustained viral response patients If this is achieved patients can be discharged back to their GPs if at early stages. At SJUH we continue to keep Ishak stage 5 and 6 patients under 6 monthly review for cirrhosis monitoring. 2. Treatment Algorithms Genotype 1 Genotype 2 Genotype 3

Algorithm for Genotype 1 patients Genotype 1 Check baseline <400 000 iu/ml (low viral load) >400 000 iu/ml (high viral load) Suitable for short course Check exclusion criteria If excluded Not suitable for short course Week 4 Week 4 (audit data) Week 12 Week 12 - if > 2 log drop from baseline continue as per standard arm. If not - stop. Week 24 End of negative or >2 log drop Week 24 positive or <2 log drop Stop Stop Week 48 * End of check 6 months after end of to determine SVR in patients who were negative at end of If negative discharge to GP (unless stage 5/6-cirrhotic) If positive and received short course, re-treat along high viral load pathway *see guidance on potential for 72 week

Algorithm for Genotype 2 Patients Genotype 2 Baseline Week 4 Suitable for short course If excluded 12 week (audit, long 12week End of Stop (failed short course) Treat for 24 weeks Week 24 End of check 6 months after end of to determine SVR in patients who were negative at end of If negative discharge, (unless stage 5/6 - cirrhotic) If positive and received short course, retreat for 24 weeks

Algorithm for Genotype 3 Patients Genotype 3 <600,000 iu/ml (Low viral load) Baseline >600,000 iu/ml (High viral load) Suitable for short course Week 4 If excluded Week 4 Week 12 Week 12 (audit, long, re) End of (failed short Treat for 24 weeks Stop Week 24 End of check 6 months after end of to determine SVR in patients who were negative at end of If negative discharge (unless stage 5/6 - cirrhotic) If positive and received short course, retreat for 24 weeks

3. Grey areas 72 week in genotype 1 patients Re Genotype 4,5,6 HIV co-infection HBV co-infection Supportive therapy Renal failure 72 Week Treatment Protocol for Slow Responders with Genotype 1 Some patients with genotype 1 infection may respond to prolonged courses of combination therapy. These would be the slow viral responders. Definition of slow virological response HCV RNA positive at weeks 4 and 12, negative at week 24 The WYHN did not agree a firm recommendation on this but there will be patients that may want it and which units wish to consider. We suggest therefore: Such patients should be considered on an individual basis. The decision to continue should ideally take place in a multidisciplinary setting. There should be a documented discussion of the benefit and risk of prolonging therapy with the patient. If there have been severe side effects or the need for supportive additional medication during the standard length then long should not be considered. Additional therapy may include Thyroxine/ anti-thyroid drugs Anti-depressant medication started during therapy The need for blood products, erythropoietin of G-CSF during The following patients would meet criteria for 72 week therapy: Patients who have detectable, but > 2 log drop, in at 12 weeks with undetectable at 24 weeks. These patients are slow responders The decision can therefore be made before the end of standard for genotype 1 patients based on the 24 week.

It is probably more cost effective to have the conversation and decision making discussions before end of than to end and then retreat at a later date. Recheck at 12 weekly intervals: if becomes detectable, stop. Re This is a controversial area at present. NICE guidelines state the following patients are suitable for re If they received interferon alfa (non-pegylated) as part of monotherapy or combination therapy) but remain positive. If they received pegylated interferon monotherapy only and were non-responders or responderrelapsers. At SJUH we are generally following NICE guidance on re. However the term re implies that patients have received standard duration for Hepatitis C before. Therefore patients undergoing short course who are end of non-responders or responderrelapsers should be offered re along standard duration pathways. Re after standard course therapy The other possibilities for re are starting to emerge in the literature and a licence has been recently granted for re in circumstances differing from the current NICE guidance. The data so far suggests it may benefit patients falling into the responder-relapser group ie negative at end of who become positive within 6 months and therefore do not achieve a SVR. Re involves commencing this group back on combination therapy (only pegylated interferon alfa-2b has this licence, and it involves weight based Peg-IFN and ribavirin dosing) and checking the week 12 which must be completely negative to continue for a total of 48 weeks. It makes sense to check the at 24 weeks because there is no point continuing if it becomes positive again on, but by definition of patient selection the chances of this should be very small. Reported results are that overall 37% will get through the negative week 12 requirement, and of those 57% will achieve a SVR. (Overall therefore this looks like chances of achieving a SVR at start of re equate to about 25%). In genotype 1 patients 29% achieve a negative week 12 and of those 48% achieve a SVR. In genotype 2 patients the figures are 77% and 74% respectively and in genotype 3 the figures are 79% and 72% respectively. Adding fibrosis into the mix brings the figures down if advanced but the data has not been subdivided into genotype. For example a cirrhotic patient has around a 30% chance of getting through the week 12 stage, and after that a 46% chance of responding. Therefore it may be worth opting for 72 week in genotype 1 patients who look like they are slow responders but opting to retreat genotype 2 and 3 patients who are responder-relapsers after standard

courses. Cirrhotic patients look less cost effective in this group if judging by SVR rates alone but the consequences of a small chance of success have obvious benefits. Re is left to the discretion of the treating teams. Other areas Genotype 4,5,6 Data probably not sufficient yet to apply short/long course strategies. Stick to standard duration therapy along genotype 1 pathway. HIV and HBV co-infection HIV co-infection should be treated as per the APRICOT trial data (pegylated interferon alfa 2a) - essentially the genotype 1 standard duration pathway - until further data becomes available. Data from the CRESPO trial (pegylated interferon alfa 2b) is also available. All genotypes therefore follow standard course genotype 1 pathway. HBV co-infection should be managed as per HCV mono-infection except that the pegylated interferon should be continued for 48 weeks, if the HBV meets criteria for as per regional guidelines. If the patient has cirrhosis the danger of a flare of hepatitis B causing decompensation needs to be taken into account and if thought to be unreasonable then the hepatitis B should be managed alone according to regional hepatitis B guidelines. Supportive There is no guidance on the use of erythropoietin/blood transfusion and G-CSF to support patients through the side-effects of. Both are expensive and the benefit of must be considered carefully. Their use tends to be higher in patients with cirrhosis. SJUH Liver Unit has departmental guidelines outside the scope of this document but the Liver Unit hepatologists or pharmacist should be able to advise where necessary. Management of thrombocytopaenia also needs consideration on a case by case basis. Renal failure A difficult area and worth discussing on a case by case basis. Look out for license restrictions (Roche is licensed for combination therapy in renal failure at reduced doses, SP is only licenced for monotherapy when Creatinine clearance <50). Guidance: Authored by: RL Jones, S Moreea, CE Millson, J Smithson, F Croxen Oct 2008 For WYHN, later renamed WEYHN. Review overdue at 2012.