Laboratory for the Identification of Prognostic Factors of Response to the Treatment Against Infectious Diseases, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy.
Infectious Diseases and Viral Hepatitis, Department of Mental and Physical Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy.
J Med Virol. 2018 May;90(5):942-950. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25022. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
The study characterized the virological patterns and the resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) in patients with failure to IFN-free regimens enrolled in the real-life setting. All 87 consecutive HCV patients with failed IFN-free regimens, observed at the laboratory of the University of Campania, were enrolled. All patients had been treated with DAA regimens according to the HCV genotype, international guidelines, and local availability. Sanger sequencing of NS3, NS5A, and NS5B regions was performed at failure by home-made protocols. Of the 87 patients enrolled, 13 (14.9%) showed a misclassified HCV genotype, probably causing DAA failure, 16 had been treated with a sub-optimal DAA regimen, 19 with a simeprevir-based regimen and 39 with an optimal DAA regimen. A major RAS was identified more frequently in the simeprevir regimen group (68.4%) and in the optimal regimen group (74.4%) than in the sub-optimal regimen group (56.3%). The prevalence of RASs in NS3 was similar in the three groups (30.8-57.9%), that in NS5A higher in the optimal regimen group (71.8%) than in the sub-optimal regimen group (12.5%, P < 0.0001) and in the simeprevir regimen group (31.6%, P < 0.0005), and that in NS5B low in all groups (0-25%). RASs in two or more HCV regions were more frequently identified in the optimal regimen group (46.6%) than in the simeprevir-based regimen group (31.6%) and sub-optimal regimen group (18.7%). In our real-life population the prevalence of RASs was high, especially in NS3 and NS5A and in those treated with suitable DAA regimens.
本研究描述了在现实环境中未能使用无干扰素方案的患者的病毒学模式和耐药相关替代(RAS)。在坎帕尼亚大学的实验室中观察到 87 名连续未能使用无干扰素方案的 HCV 患者,他们均被纳入本研究。所有患者均根据 HCV 基因型、国际指南和当地可用性接受了 DAA 方案治疗。在失败时通过自制方案对 NS3、NS5A 和 NS5B 区域进行 Sanger 测序。在纳入的 87 名患者中,有 13 名(14.9%)患者的 HCV 基因型分类错误,可能导致 DAA 失败,16 名患者接受了不适当的 DAA 方案治疗,19 名患者接受了simeprevir 为基础的方案治疗,39 名患者接受了最佳 DAA 方案治疗。主要 RAS 在simeprevir 方案组(68.4%)和最佳方案组(74.4%)中比在不适当方案组(56.3%)更频繁地被识别。在三组中,NS3 中的 RAS 发生率相似(30.8-57.9%),在最佳方案组(71.8%)中高于不适当方案组(12.5%,P<0.0001)和 simeprevir 方案组(31.6%,P<0.0005),在 NS5A 中的发生率较低,在所有组中均较低(0-25%)。在两个或更多 HCV 区域中存在 RAS 的患者在最佳方案组(46.6%)中比在 simeprevir 为基础的方案组(31.6%)和不适当方案组(18.7%)更频繁地被识别。在我们的现实人群中,RAS 的流行率较高,尤其是在 NS3 和 NS5A 中,以及在接受合适的 DAA 方案治疗的患者中。