Genotypic and phenotypic analyses of hepatitis C virus variants observed in clinical studies of VX-222, a nonnucleoside NS5B polymerase inhibitor.

VX-222, a thiophene-2-carboxylic acid derivative, is a selective nonnucleoside inhibitor of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5B RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. In phase 1 and 2 clinical studies, VX-222 demonstrated effective antiviral efficacy, with substantial reductions in plasma HCV RNA in patients chronically infected with genotype 1 HCV. To characterize the potential for selection of VX-222-resistant variants in HCV-infected patients, the HCV NS5B gene was sequenced at baseline and during and after 3 days of VX-222 dosing (monotherapy) in a phase 1 study. Variants with the substitutions L419C/I/M/P/S/V, R422K, M423I/T/V, I482L/N/T, A486S/T/V, and V494A were selected during VX-222 dosing, and their levels declined over time after the end of dosing. Phenotypic analysis of these variants was conducted using HCV replicons carrying site-directed mutations. Of the 17 variants, 14 showed reduced susceptibility to VX-222 compared with the wild type, with the L419C/S and R422K variants having higher levels of resistance (>200-fold) than the rest of the variants (6.8- to 76-fold). The M423I and A486S variants remained susceptible to VX-222. The 50% effective concentration (EC50) for the L419P variant could not be obtained due to the poor replication of this replicon. The majority of the variants (15/17) were less fit than the wild type. A subset of the variants, predominately the L419S and R422K variants, were observed when the efficacy and safety of VX-222- and telaprevir-based regimens given for 12 weeks were investigated in genotype 1 HCV-infected patients in a phase 2 study. The NS3 and NS5B variants selected during the dual combination therapy showed reduced susceptibility to both telaprevir and VX-222 and had a lower replication capacity than the wild type. The phase 1b study has the ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00911963, and the phase 2a study has ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01080222.

Evolution of treatment-emergent resistant variants in telaprevir phase 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Telaprevir (TVR), a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor, has been approved to treat genotype 1 HCV. To understand the clinical impact of TVR-resistant variants, we analyzed samples from patients in phase 3 clinical trials to determine the frequency and retention of TVR-resistant variants in patients who did not achieve sustained virologic response (SVR). METHODS: A total of 1797 patients were treated with TVR. Resistant variants (V36A/G/I/L/M, T54A/S, I132V [subtype 1a only], R155G/K/T/M, A156F/N/S/T/V, and D168N) were identified after treatment failure and at visits thereafter, by direct (population) sequencing of the NS3/4A region. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine median time to loss of these variants. RESULTS: Resistant variants were observed in 77% (299/388) of patients who did not achieve SVR. Resistance occurred more commonly in subtype 1a (86%; 232/269) than subtype 1b infections (56%; 67/119). After treatment failure, 355 patients had at least 1 follow-up visit (median follow-up period: 9.6 months). Of patients with resistance at time of failure and at least 1 follow-up visit, 60% (153/254) lost resistance. Kaplan-Meier analysis, including all patients with any sequence data after treatment failure, indicated that median time to wild type was 10.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.47-12.20) in subtype 1a and 0.9 months (95% CI, 0.00-2.07) in subtype 1b infections. CONCLUSIONS: After failure to achieve SVR with TVR-based treatment, resistant variants are observed in most patients. However, presumably due to the lower fitness of those variants, they tend to be replaced with wild-type virus over time.

Hepatitis C virus variants with decreased sensitivity to direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) were rarely observed in DAA-naive patients prior to treatment.

The prevalence of naturally occurring hepatitis C virus (HCV) variants that are less sensitive to direct-acting antiviral (DAA) inhibitors has not been fully characterized. We used population sequence analysis to assess the frequency of such variants in plasma samples from 3,447 DAA-naive patients with genotype 1 HCV. In general, HCV variants with lower-level resistance (3- to 25-fold increased 50% inhibitor concentration [IC(50)]) to telaprevir were observed as the dominant species in 0 to 3% of patients, depending on the specific variant, whereas higher-level resistant variants (>25-fold-increased IC(50)) were not observed. Specific variants resistant to NS5A inhibitors were predominant in up to 6% of patients. Most variants resistant to nucleo(s/t)ide active-site NS5B polymerase inhibitors were not observed, whereas variants resistant to non-nucleoside allosteric inhibitors were observed in up to 18% of patients. The presence of DAA-resistant variants in NS5A, NS5B, or NS3 (including telaprevir-resistant variants), in baseline samples of treatment-naive patients receiving a telaprevir-based regimen in phase 3 studies did not affect the sustained viral response (SVR). Treatment-naive patients with viral populations containing the telaprevir-resistant variants NS3 V36M, T54S, or R155K at baseline achieved a 74% SVR rate, whereas patients with no resistant variants detected prior to treatment achieved a 76% SVR rate. The effect of specific resistant variant frequency on response to various DAA treatments in different patient populations, including interferon nonresponders, should be further studied.

Compensatory substitutions in the HCV NS3/4A protease cleavage sites are not observed in patients treated unsuccessfully with telaprevir combination treatment.

BACKGROUND: Development of compensatory mutations within the HIV p7/p1 and p1/p6 protease cleavage site region has been observed in HIV-infected patients treated with protease inhibitors. Mechanisms of fitness compensation may occur in HCV populations upon treatment of HCV protease inhibitors as well. FINDINGS: In this study, we investigated whether substitutions in protease cleavage site regions of HCV occur in response to a treatment regimen containing the NS3/4A protease inhibitor telaprevir (TVR). Evaluation of viral populations from 569 patients prior to treatment showed that the four NS3/4A cleavage sites were well conserved. Few changes in the cleavage site regions were observed in the 159 patients who failed TVR combination treatment, and no residues displayed evidence of directional selection after the acquisition of TVR-resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Cleavage site mutations did not occur after treatment with the HCV protease inhibitor telaprevir.

Hepatitis C viral evolution in genotype 1 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients receiving telaprevir-based therapy in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: In patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection, telaprevir (TVR) in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin (PR) significantly increased sustained virologic response (SVR) rates compared with PR alone. However, genotypic changes could be observed in TVR-treated patients who did not achieve an SVR. METHODS: Population sequence analysis of the NS3•4A region was performed in patients who did not achieve SVR with TVR-based treatment. RESULTS: Resistant variants were observed after treatment with a telaprevir-based regimen in 12% of treatment-naïve patients (ADVANCE; T12PR arm), 6% of prior relapsers, 24% of prior partial responders, and 51% of prior null responder patients (REALIZE, T12PR48 arms). NS3 protease variants V36M, R155K, and V36M+R155K emerged frequently in patients with genotype 1a and V36A, T54A, and A156S/T in patients with genotype 1b. Lower-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by V36A/M, T54A/S, R155K/T, and A156S variants; and higher-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by A156T and V36M+R155K variants. Virologic failure during telaprevir treatment was more common in patients with genotype 1a and in prior PR nonresponder patients and was associated with higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Relapse was usually associated with wild-type or lower-level resistant variants. After treatment, viral populations were wild-type with a median time of 10 months for genotype 1a and 3 weeks for genotype 1b patients. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent, subtype-dependent resistance profile was observed in patients who did not achieve an SVR with telaprevir-based treatment. The primary role of TVR is to inhibit wild-type virus and variants with lower-levels of resistance to telaprevir. The complementary role of PR is to clear any remaining telaprevir-resistant variants, especially higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Resistant variants are detectable in most patients who fail to achieve SVR, but their levels decline over time after treatment.