ABSTRACT
While the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to present global challenges, sufficient time has passed to reflect on lessons learned and use those insights to inform policy and approaches to prepare for the next pandemic. In May 2022, the Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a think tank with thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy, the National Institutes of Health, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to share, firsthand, expert knowledge of the insights gained from the COVID-19 pandemic and how this acquired knowledge can help inform the next pandemic response. The think tank focused on pandemic preparedness, therapeutics, vaccines, and challenges related to clinical trial design and scale-up during the early phase of a pandemic. Based on the multi-faceted discussions, we outline 10 key steps to an improved and equitable pandemic response.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , United States , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)ABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: Elderly subjects have been historically underrepresented in clinical trials involving antiviral hepatitis C therapies. The aim of this analysis was to retrospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) by age groups of <65 years versus ≥65 years among subjects enrolled in phase 3 trials. Four open-label phase 3 clinical trials evaluated the safety and efficacy of LDV/SOF with or without ribavirin (RBV) for the treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus. Sustained virological response at 12 weeks, treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), and graded laboratory abnormalities were analyzed according to age group. Of the 2293 subjects enrolled in four phase 3 trials, 264 (12%) were ≥65 years of age, of whom 24 were aged ≥75 years. Sustained virological response at 12 weeks was achieved by 97% (1965/2029) of subjects aged <65 years and 98% (258/264) of subjects aged ≥65 years. The most common AEs in both LDV/SOF groups that occurred in ≥10% of subjects were headache and fatigue. The rate of study discontinuation due to AEs was similar in the two age cohorts. The use of RBV in 1042 (45%) subjects increased the number of AEs, treatment-related AEs, and AEs leading to study drug modification/interruption, particularly among elderly subjects. CONCLUSIONS: LDV/SOF with or without RBV was highly effective for treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virusin subjects aged 65 and older. Addition of RBV did not increase sustained virological response at 12 weeks rates but led to higher rates of AEs, especially in elderly subjects.
Subject(s)
Benzimidazoles/administration & dosage , Fluorenes/administration & dosage , Hepatitis C, Chronic/drug therapy , Ribavirin/administration & dosage , Sofosbuvir/administration & dosage , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Cohort Studies , Confidence Intervals , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Genotype , Hepatitis C, Chronic/diagnosis , Hepatitis C, Chronic/genetics , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/prevention & control , Liver Cirrhosis/virology , Male , Patient Safety/statistics & numerical data , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Sex Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: This phase II trial assessed the efficacy and safety of a combination regimen of the nonstructural protein (NS)5A inhibitor ledipasvir (LDV), NS3 protease inhibitor vedroprevir (VDV), non-nucleoside NS5B inhibitor tegobuvir (TGV), and ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 without cirrhosis. Patients were randomized 1:2 to LDV 30 mg once daily (QD; Arm 1; n = 46) or LDV 90 mg QD (Arm 2; n = 94); patients in both arms also received VDV 200 mg QD, TGV 30 mg twice-daily, and RBV 1,000-1,200 mg/day. Patients in Arm 2 with vRVR, defined as HCV RNA below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) from treatment weeks 2 to 10, were randomized 1:1 to stop treatment at 12 weeks or continue for 24 weeks. Sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) was higher in patients receiving 90 mg of LDV for 24 weeks (63%), compared with LDV 90 mg for 12 weeks (54%) and LDV 30 mg for 24 weeks (48%). In patients with very rapid virologic response (vRVR) in Arm 2, SVR12 was achieved by 68% and 81% of patients treated for 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. Virologic breakthrough was more common in patients with HCV genotype 1a and was associated with resistance-associated variants for all three direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs); however, in all but 1 patient who relapsed, resistance-associated variants directed against only one or two of the DAAs were detected. The most common adverse events were fatigue, headache, nausea, rash, and diarrhea. CONCLUSION: In patients with HCV genotype 1, an interferon-free regimen containing LDV/VDV/TGV/RBV was well tolerated and led to SVR12 in up to 63% of patients. LDV 90 mg is currently being investigated in combination with the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor, sofosbuvir.
