Scott J, Gilles L, Fu M, Brohan E, Panter C, Arbuckle R, Jessner W, Beumont M
Janssen Global Services, LLC, High Wycombe, UK.
Janssen Research and Development, Beerse, Belgium.
J Viral Hepat. 2015 Aug;22(8):639-50. doi: 10.1111/jvh.12365. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
The value of adding simeprevir (SMV) vs placebo (PBO) to peginterferon and ribavirin (PR) for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection was examined using patient-reported outcomes (PROs); further, concordance of PROs with virology endpoints and adverse events (AEs) was explored. Patients (n = 768 SMV/PR, n = 393 PBO/PR) rated fatigue (FSS), depressive symptoms (CES-D) and functional impairment (WPAI: Hepatitis C Productivity, Daily Activity and Absenteeism) at baseline and throughout treatment in three randomised, double-blind trials comparing the addition of SMV or PBO during initial 12 weeks of PR. PR was administered for 48 weeks (PBO group) and 24/48 weeks (SMV group) using a response-guided therapy (RGT) approach. Mean PRO scores (except Absenteeism) worsened from baseline to Week 4 to the same extent in both groups but reverted after Week 24 for SMV/PR and only after Week 48 for PBO/PR. Accordingly, there was a significantly lower area under the curve (baseline-Week 60, AUC60 ) and fewer weeks with clinically important worsening of scores in the SMV/PR group at any time point. Incidences of patients with fatigue and anaemia AEs were similar in both groups, but FSS scores showed that clinically important increases in fatigue lasted a mean of 6.9 weeks longer with PBO/PR (P < 0.001). PRO score subgroup analysis indicated better outcomes for patients who met the criteria for RGT or achieved sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12); differences in mean PRO scores associated with fibrosis level were only observed with PBO/PR. Greater efficacy of SMV/PR enabled reduced treatment duration and reduced time with PR-related AEs without adding to AE severity.
使用患者报告结局(PROs)研究了在聚乙二醇干扰素和利巴韦林(PR)基础上加用simeprevir(SMV)对比安慰剂(PBO)治疗慢性丙型肝炎病毒感染的价值;此外,还探讨了PROs与病毒学终点及不良事件(AEs)的一致性。在三项随机双盲试验中,患者(n = 768,SMV/PR组;n = 393,PBO/PR组)在基线时以及整个治疗过程中对疲劳(疲劳严重程度量表,FSS)、抑郁症状(流调中心抑郁量表,CES-D)和功能损害(工作生产率和活动障碍问卷:丙型肝炎生产力、日常活动和旷工,WPAI:Hepatitis C Productivity, Daily Activity and Absenteeism)进行评分,这些试验比较了在PR治疗的最初12周加用SMV或PBO的情况。采用应答指导治疗(RGT)方法,PBO组PR治疗48周,SMV组PR治疗24/48周。两组从基线到第4周时,平均PRO评分(缺勤情况除外)恶化程度相同,但SMV/PR组在第24周后恢复,而PBO/PR组仅在第48周后恢复。因此,SMV/PR组在任何时间点的曲线下面积(基线至第60周,AUC60)显著更低,且评分出现具有临床意义恶化的周数更少。两组疲劳和贫血不良事件的发生率相似,但FSS评分显示,PBO/PR组疲劳出现具有临床意义增加的持续时间平均比SMV/PR组长6.9周(P < 0.001)。PRO评分亚组分析表明,符合RGT标准或治疗后12周达到持续病毒学应答(SVR12)的患者结局更好;仅在PBO/PR组中观察到与纤维化水平相关的平均PRO评分差异。SMV/PR组更高的疗效使得治疗疗程缩短,与PR相关不良事件的发生时间减少,且未增加不良事件的严重程度。