Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Feb 2;18(2):e0280165. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280165

Safety and effectiveness of 8 weeks of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in challenging HCV patients: Italian data from the CREST study

Alessio Aghemo 1,2,*, Marcello Persico 3, Roberta D’Ambrosio 4, Massimo Andreoni 5, Erica Villa 6, Abhi Bhagat 7, Valentina Gallinaro 8, Giuliana Gualberti 8, Rocco Cosimo Damiano Merolla 8, Antonio Gasbarrini 9
Editor: Umberto Vespasiani-Gentilucci10
PMCID: PMC9894491  PMID: 36730135

Abstract

Introduction

Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) has demonstrated high rates (>95%) of sustained virologic response at posttreatment Week 12 (SVR12) in treatment-naïve (TN) patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and compensated cirrhosis (CC). Here, in a key real-world subset of TN Italian patients with CC, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 8-week G/P treatment, including subgroups of interest such as those with genotype 3 (GT3) infection, elderly patients, and those with more advanced liver disease.

Methods

Subanalysis of Italian patients enrolled in the CREST study. The full analysis set (FAS) included all patients enrolled in the study; the modified analysis set (MAS) excluded patients who discontinued G/P for nonvirologic failure or who had missing SVR12 results. Primary and secondary endpoints included SVR12 and safety, respectively.

Results

Of 42 patients included in the FAS, 1 discontinued for unknown reasons, and 2 had missing SVR12 data, leaving 39 patients included in the MAS. At treatment initiation, 74% of patients had ≥1 comorbidity, and 62% were receiving concomitant medications, including some that may potentially interact with G/P. SVR12 was achieved in 100% of patients in the MAS, and in 95% in the FAS. In subgroups of interest, the proportion of patients achieving SVR12 in the MAS (and FAS) was: 100% (94%) for patients ≥65 years, 100% (86%) for GT3, and 100% (100%) for patients with platelet count <150 × 109/L and FibroScan® >20 kPa. Overall, 2 (5%) patients had an adverse event and neither were serious.

Conclusion

Results from this real-world Italian cohort demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of 8-week G/P, with SVR12 rate >95%, even in elderly patients. These findings further support real-world evidence of the use of short-course G/P treatment in all patients with CC, including those with GT3, and those with advanced liver disease.

Introduction

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of chronic liver disease worldwide, and approximately 58 million people were estimated to live with HCV infection in 2019 [1, 2]. Highly effective and well-tolerated pangenotypic direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have become the recommended treatment for most patients with chronic HCV infection [1]. The high cure rate of DAAs may allow the achievement of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) goal of global HCV elimination by 2030 [2].

The prevalence of HCV in Italy has been estimated to be higher than anywhere else in Western Europe, particularly in elderly people, who are at a greater risk of developing chronic HCV infection, and are more likely to develop cirrhosis compared with younger patients [37]. A probabilistic model estimated that in January 2020 there were more than 400,000 individuals (prevalence of 0.68%) with chronic HCV infection in Italy, with approximately 73% asymptomatic and potentially undiagnosed or unlinked to care [4]. The remaining 27% of patients were estimated to have cirrhosis, which emphasizes the need to implement plans to improve screening and linkage to care of patients with HCV in Italy [4]. More recent screening studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that depending on the population demographics the HCV prevalence varied from 0.07% up to 2.5%, and up to 29.4% of patients were not aware of their serological status [812].

Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) is approved for the treatment of HCV in treatment-naïve (TN) patients with chronic HCV genotype (GT)1–6 infection without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis (CC; Child-Pugh A) [13, 14]. Randomized controlled trials have shown that G/P therapy was well tolerated and led to high sustained virologic response at posttreatment Week 12 (SVR12) rates (≥93%) over treatment durations of 12 and 8 weeks [1517]. In addition, real-world data, including Italian cohorts, have shown that G/P was effective (virologic cure ≥95%) and well tolerated even in patients traditionally classified as hard-to-treat [1826].

The European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) highlighted that additional data are needed to further consolidate the effectiveness and safety of 8-week G/P treatment in TN patients with CC, with GT3 and/or with signs of portal hypertension (i.e., a liver stiffness >20 kPa with a platelet count <150 × 109/L; according to the Baveno VI classification) [1].

The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of 8-week G/P therapy in Italian TN patients with CC, including subgroups of interest such as GT3, patients ≥65 years, and those with more advanced liver disease.

Methods

Study design and data collection

CREST is a retrospective noninterventional, multicenter observational study assessing data collected from TN patients with HCV and CC in Canada, Germany, Israel, Italy, France, and Spain, who initiated G/P on or after January 1, 2018. This subanalysis only included patients who received treatment in Italy; according with the local label, national or international recommendations, and/or local clinical practice; G/P treatment was decided before enrollment in the study. Data sources for eligible patients comprised all available medical records, including paper medical charts, electronic medical records, and clinical laboratory records. All data collected was anonymized so that the patient could not be identified. The study was carried out following the Good Clinical Practice guidelines, and according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was granted an exemption from obtaining informed patient consent and was approved by each of the institutional ethics committees for the sites in Italy.

Patient selection

Eligible patients were enrolled in a chronological order by the local principal investigator. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the CREST study have been previously published [27]. Briefly, patients were aged ≥12 years, diagnosed with HCV infection and with CC (documented as Child-Pugh A in the opinion of the investigator), TN to any approved or investigational anti-HCV DAA medication, and treated with G/P for 8 weeks. Patients were also excluded if they had any historical clinical evidence of hepatocellular carcinoma, decompensated cirrhosis, or events possibly related to liver decompensation including any current or past evidence of Child-Pugh B or C. The full analysis set (FAS) included all the patients enrolled in the study who were eligible as per inclusion and exclusion criteria, whereas the modified analysis set (MAS) excluded those patients who discontinued G/P for reasons other than virologic failure and/or who had missing data to document the primary endpoint.

Endpoints

The primary endpoint was to evaluate the effectiveness of 8-week G/P therapy in TN patients with CC, as determined by SVR12, defined as HCV RNA less than lower limit of quantification 12 weeks post G/P treatment in the MAS. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of 8-week G/P therapy by assessing the number of treatment emergent serious and nonserious adverse events (AEs), including changes in laboratory parameters of interest. Exploratory endpoints were to assess the effectiveness and safety of 8-week G/P in subgroups of interest such as patients with GT3, elderly patients, and those with more advanced liver disease (platelet count <150 × 109/L and FibroScan® [EchoSens, Paris, France] >20 kPa). A window of 10–26 weeks posttreatment was deemed acceptable for the determination of the primary and secondary endpoints.

Statistical analysis

Demographic and baseline characteristics were reported using descriptive statistics. Categorical variables were reported using frequency tables, and quantitative variables were reported as mean (± standard deviation) or median (interquartile range [IQR], Q1–Q3). The primary endpoint was assessed by the percentage and the exact Clopper-Pearson 95% [28] confidence interval of patients achieving SVR12; in the FAS population, this was calculated using nonresponder imputation. For quantitative secondary endpoints, the median (IQR, Q3–Q1) were computed.

Results

Patient disposition

In total, the CREST study enrolled 386 patients across 5 countries. This subanalysis included 42 patients enrolled in Italy, of which 1 (2.4%) discontinued for unknown reasons. Of the 41 patients who completed the study, 2 (4.8%) were unable to be assessed for SVR12 due to missing data (Fig 1). This resulted in 39 (93%) patients being included in the MAS.

Fig 1. Patient disposition.

Fig 1

aAlthough treatment was discontinued, this patient achieved SVR12. SVR12 sustained virologic response at posttreatment Week 12.

Demographics and baseline characteristics

Most patients included in the FAS were male (n = 31; 74%); median (range) age was 60 (36–85) years; 26 were aged <65 years (62%), 7 (17%) were aged ≥65 and <70 years, and 9 (21%) were aged ≥70 years (Table 1). HCV GT1 was the most common infection (n = 18; 43%), whereas GT3 was reported in 7 (17%) patients. Five (12%) patients initiated treatment without an established HCV GT. Nine out of 27 patients (33%) had FibroScan ≥20 KPa, and 16 out of 36 (44%) had platelets count <150 × 109/L. Six out of 24 patients had platelets <150 × 109/L and FibroScan >20 kPa.

Table 1. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics.

Characteristic Patients N = 42
Male 31 (73.8)
Age, years
 median (range) 59.5 (36–85)
 <65 26 (61.9)
 ≥65 and <70 7 (16.7)
 ≥70 9 (21.4)
Race, white 42 (100)
HCV genotype
 1 18 (42.9)
 2 11 (26.2)
 3 7 (16.7)
  <65 years 6 (23.1)
  ≥65 years 1 (6.2)
 4 1 (2.4)
 Unknown 5 (11.9)
HCV RNA, median, (range), log10 IU/mL (n = 37) 6.23 (2.78–7.99)
FibroScan® score, kPa, median (range) (n = 27) 16 (8.6–27.7)
 ≥20 (n = 27) 9 (33.3)
  <65 years (n = 16) 5 (31.2)
  ≥65 years (n = 11) 4 (36.4)
Platelets, median (range), 109/L (n = 36) 158.5 (73.0–280.0)
 Platelets <150 (n = 36) 16 (44.4)
  <65 years (n = 23) 11 (47.8)
  ≥65 years (n = 13) 5 (38.5)
 Platelets <100 (n = 36) 6 (16.7)
Platelets <150 × 109/L + FibroScan >20 kPa (n = 24) 6 (25.0)
 <65 years (n = 15) 4 (26.7)
 ≥65 years (n = 9) 2 (22.2)
Bilirubin, median (range), mg/dL (n = 34) 0.7 (0.3–1.9)
Albumin, median (range), g/dL (n = 29) 4.1 (3.6–33.2)
ALT, median, (range), U/L (n = 36) 96 (15–424)
Encephalopathy grade
 None 40 (95.2)
 Unknown 2 (4.8)
Ascites
 None 39 (92.9)
 Slight 1 (2.4)
 Unknown 2 (4.8)

Data are n (%) unless otherwise specified.

FibroScan® is manufactured by EchoSens (Paris, France).

ALT alanine aminotransferase; HCV hepatitis C virus; RNA ribonucleic acid.

At treatment initiation, 19 (45%) patients reported 1 comorbidity, and 12 (29%) more than 1. Although fewer patients aged ≥65 years reported having 1 comorbidity compared with patients aged <65 years (38% vs 50%, respectively), the proportion reporting >1 comorbidity was higher in the elderly cohort (50% vs 15%). The two most common comorbidities were hypertension (23%; n = 6) and active drug use (12%, n = 3) in patients aged <65 years, and hypertension (56%, n = 9) and diabetes mellitus (31%, n = 5) in patients aged ≥65 years (Table 2). Overall, 26 (62%) patients were receiving concomitant medications at treatment initiation. The most frequent medication was acetylsalicylic acid (n = 5; 19%), followed by bisoprolol and metformin (n = 4; 15% each; S1 Table). Out of 45 different medications coadministered with G/P, 28 were predicted to have no interaction, 6 were deemed to have potential interaction, 9 to have potential weak interaction, and 2 (atorvastatin and simvastatin) were suggested to not be coadministered with G/P, according to the University of Liverpool HEP Drug Interactions Checker [29].

Table 2. Comorbidities and use of concomitant medications.

Characteristic All patients <65 years ≥65 years
N = 42 n = 26 n = 16
Comorbidities
 1 19 (45.2) 13 (50.0) 6 (37.5)
 >1 12 (28.6) 4 (15.4) 8 (50.0)
 None 11 (26.2) 9 (34.6) 2 (12.5)
Comorbidities present at treatment initiation a
 Hypertension 15 (35.7) 6 (23.1%) 9 (56.2%)
 Diabetes mellitus 6 (14.3) 1 (3.8%) 5 (31.2%)
 Drug addiction
  Active user 3 (7.1) 3 (11.5%) 0 (0.0%)
  Former user 2 (4.8) 2 (7.7%) 0 (0.0%)
 Alcoholism 2 (4.8) 2 (7.7%) 0 (0.0%)
 Other liver disease 2 (4.8) 2 (7.7%) 0 (0.0%)
 Hyperlipidemia 2 (4.8) 1 (3.8%) 1 (6.2%)
 Hepatitis B 2 (4.8) 2 (7.7%) 0 (0.0%)
 Anxiety 1 (2.4) 0 (0.0%) 1 (6.2%)
 Psychiatric disorders 1 (2.4) 1 (3.8%) 0 (0.0%)
 Other 13 (31.0) 6 (23.1%) 7 (43.8%)
Use of concomitant medications
 Yes 26 (61.9) - -
 No 14 (33.3) - -
 Unknown 2 (4.8) - -

Data are n (%)

aMultiple selection was allowed in the case report form for this variable, so aggregate percentage may exceed 100%.

Efficacy

All patients in the MAS achieved SVR12 (n = 39/39), whereas in the FAS SVR12 was achieved by 95% (n = 40/42) of patients (Fig 2). One patient in the FAS who achieved SVR12 discontinued the treatment after 4 weeks. Of the 2 patients in the FAS who had missing SVR12, one had GT2 and one GT3. The percentages of patients achieving SVR in the MAS (and FAS), stratified by subgroups of interest, were: 100% (94%) for patients aged ≥65 years, and 100% (96%) for patients aged <65 years. Irrespective of the age group, all patients with platelet count <150 × 109/L and FibroScan >20 kPa, achieved SVR12, both in the MAS and in the FAS.

Fig 2. SVR12 by genotype and subgroups of interest.

Fig 2

FAS full analysis set; GT genotype; MAS modified analysis set; SVR12 sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment.

Safety

Of 42 patients in the FAS, 2 (4.8%) patients experienced an AE (fatigue and asthenia [n = 1; 2.4% each]) neither of which were study-drug–related or lead to study-drug discontinuation (Table 3). No patients reported having a serious AE, and no laboratory abnormalities were reported.

Table 3. Adverse events.

Patients with AEs Patients (N = 42)
Any AE 2 (4.8)
Serious AEs 0 (0)
AEs leading to discontinuation of study drug 0 (0)
Any drug-related serious AEs 0 (0)
Common AEs (occurring in ≥1% and <10% of patients)
 Fatigue 1 (2.4)
 Asthenia 1 (2.4)
 Other 1 (2.4)
ALT > 5 x ULN 0 (0)
AST > 5 x ULN 0 (0)

Data are n (%).

AE adverse event; ALT alanine aminotransferase; AST aspartate aminotransferase; ULN upper limit of normal.

Discussion

In the latest guidelines for treatment of HCV, EASL highlighted that additional results are needed to consolidate the recommendations for 8-week G/P in GT3 TN patients with CC, and in patients with CC and signs of portal hypertension (i.e., a liver stiffness >20 kPa with a platelet count <150 × 109/L) [1]. This suggests that real-world data on the use of 8-week G/P in patients with HCV who are considered difficult-to-treat are limited. Here, we provide some data to alleviate this gap.

This retrospective real-world study reported the effectiveness and safety of 8-week G/P in 42 patients with chronic HCV infection treated in Italy. All patients included in the MAS population with GT1–6 infection achieved SVR12, demonstrating high reproducibility of clinical trials’ and real-world studies’ results which have shown that both 8-week and 12-week G/P yields SVR12 rates ≥99 in the per-protocol population [16, 20, 24, 26]. Shortened treatment durations from 12 to 8 weeks can reduce healthcare costs, simplify the treatment pathway, and potentially enable the treatment of more patients over time [30].

EASL guidelines recommend that pangenotypic HCV drug regimens, including G/P, can be used to treat individuals without identifying their HCV genotype and subtype, in order to simplify therapy on a global scale [1]. Notably, 12% of the patients initiated treatment without an established HCV GT; all of these patients achieved SVR12. Furthermore, most patients in this study with known genotype had HCV GT1 or GT3, which is in-line with the worldwide prevalence, suggesting this was a representative population [31].

All patients in subgroups of interest such as patients aged ≥65 years and those with more advanced liver disease achieved SVR12 (MAS), supporting the use of 8-week therapy in these patient populations. This is in-line with previous findings showing that patients with evidence of portal hypertension achieved SVR12 ≥95% [32]. Similar to a previous Italian real-world study, age does not seem to be a predictor of treatment failure [24]. A post-hoc analysis, which includes 9 clinical trials, also showed that >95% of elderly patients receiving 8-week G/P achieved SVR12 [33].

The favorable safety profile observed in the current study is consistent with previous findings from clinical trials and real-world studies of G/P in patients with CC [15, 16, 21]. Two patients experienced an AE, neither of which were related to the study drug or led to study-drug discontinuation. None of the patients experienced serious AEs, and no laboratory abnormalities were reported. Such an encouraging safety profile, even in patients with CC, has the potential to allow patients to complete the treatment and therefore to increase the likelihood of cure.

Consistent with other studies reporting a considerable proportion of patients with comorbidities [20, 24], 73.8% of the patients reported at least one comorbidity, and those aged ≥65 years had at least two comorbidities more frequently than younger patients (50% vs 15%, respectively). The proportion of patients with current or former drug abuse was lower than expected (12%) compared with epidemiological data from Italy which estimated that 49% of patients with HCV are people who inject/injected drugs [4]. The proportion of patients with alcohol dependence was also lower (4.8%) than previously reported [23, 34].

Overall, 62% of the patients were receiving concomitant medications at treatment initiation. The majority of the coadministered medications were predicted to have no interaction with G/P, while 9 were expected to have a potential interaction and 2 (atorvastatin and simvastatin) were suggested not to be coadministered with G/P [29]. These results suggest that in real-world clinical practices, the coadministration of G/P with drugs with potential interactions has no obvious impact on safety. Although it is recommended to conduct a thorough drug–drug interaction assessment prior to a patient initiating treatment [1], interactions between DAAs and most nonprescribed drugs is limited [35], with potential drug–drug interactions often based on predictions or modeling of interaction pathways [29].

There are a few limitations to this study. Given the nature of retrospective chart reviews, not all information was readily available for all patients; therefore, in some instances individuals lost to follow-up lacked a documented reason, making it challenging to entirely evaluate the barriers to treatment completion. Patients with diagnosed decompensated Child-Pugh B or C cirrhosis were excluded from this study because treatment with G/P is not recommended or contraindicated. The cirrhosis status of patients was reported by physicians, although the methodology to assess cirrhosis was documented for every patient from the medical charts.

Conclusions

The prevalence of HCV in Italy is the highest in Western Europe, with a high proportion of elderly patients. Advanced age can make treatment for HCV challenging due to multiple comorbidities and higher pill burden, making this patient population potentially challenging to treat. However, this real-world analysis of an Italian cohort demonstrates that short-course G/P treatment of 8 weeks was well tolerated and effective in TN patients with HCV infection and CC, including elderly patients. The use of DAAs makes it possible to achieve excellent results even in those patients who were traditionally considered difficult to treat. Indeed, these findings further extend real-world evidence, and confirm preliminary results on the effectiveness and safety of 8-week G/P treatment in all patients with CC, including special subgroups of interests such as those with GT3, and those with portal hypertension.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Concomitant medications and their expected interaction with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

Authorship

All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria for authorship for this article, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given their approval for this version to be published.

Medical writing, editorial, and other assistance

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the patients who participated in this study and their families, as well as the study investigators and coordinators of the study. Glecaprevir was identified by AbbVie and Enanta. Medical writing support was provided by Marta Rossi, PhD, and Sean Littlewood, MRes of Fishawack Communications, Ltd, and funded by AbbVie.

Data Availability

AbbVie is committed to responsible data sharing regarding the clinical trials we sponsor. This includes access to anonymized, individual, and trial-level data (analysis data sets), as well as other information (eg, protocols, clinical study reports, or analysis plans), as long as the trials are not part of an ongoing or planned regulatory submission. This includes requests for clinical trial data for unlicensed products and indications. These clinical trial data can be requested by any qualified researchers who engage in rigorous, independent, scientific research, and will be provided following review and approval of a research proposal, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), and execution of a Data Sharing Agreement (DSA). Data requests can be submitted at any time after approval in the US and Europe and after acceptance of this manuscript for publication. The data will be accessible for 12 months, with possible extensions considered. For more information on the process or to submit a request, visit the following link: https://www.abbvie.com/our-science/clinical-trials/clinical-trials-data-and-information-sharing/data-and-information-sharing-with-qualified-researchers.html.

Funding Statement

AbbVie sponsored the study, contributed to its design, and participated in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data and in the writing, reviewing, and approval of the abstract. All authors had access to all relevant data, and participated in the writing, review, and approval of the abstract. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship.

References

  • 1.European Association for the Study of the Liver, Clinical Practice Guidelines Panel Chair, EASL Governing Board representative, Panel members. EASL recommendations on treatment of hepatitis C: Final update of the series. J Hepatol. 2020;73(5):1170–218. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.08.018 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.World Health Organization (WHO). Global progress report on HIV, viral hepatitis and sexually transmitted infections, 2021. Accountability for the global health sector strategies 2016–2021: actions for impact. 2021 [June 2022]. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240027077.
  • 3.Kondili LA, Andreoni M, Alberti A, Lobello S, Babudieri S, Roscini AS, et al. Estimated prevalence of undiagnosed HCV infected individuals in Italy: A mathematical model by route of transmission and fibrosis progression. Epidemics. 2021;34:100442. doi: 10.1016/j.epidem.2021.100442 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kondili LA, Andreoni M, Alberti A, Lobello S, Babudieri S, De Michina A, et al. A mathematical model by route of transmission and fibrosis progression to estimate undiagnosed individuals with HCV in different Italian regions. BMC Infect Dis. 2022;22(1):1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sangiorgi D, Perrone V, Buda S, Boglione L, Cariti G, Lefevre C, et al. Epidemiology, patient profile, and health care resource use for hepatitis C in Italy. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2017;9:609–16. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S136456 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Reid M, Price JC, Tien PC. Hepatitis C virus infection in the older patient. Infect Dis Clin. 2017;31(4):827–38. doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2017.07.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.World Health Organization (WHO). Hepatitis C Fact Sheet [Internet]. 2021 [October 04, 2021]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hepatitis-c.
  • 8.D’Ambrosio R, Rizzardini G, Puoti M, Fagiuoli S, Anolli MP, Gabiati C, et al. Implementation of HCV screening in the 1969–1989 birth‐cohort undergoing COVID‐19 vaccination. Liver International. 2022;42(5):1012–6. doi: 10.1111/liv.15216 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Beltrami M, Pagani G, Conti F, Pezzati L, Casalini G, Rondanin R, et al. HCV point of care screening in people tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 in a social‐housing neighbourhood of Milan, Italy. Liver International. 2022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Torre P, Coppola C, Masarone M, Persico M. Screening for hepatitis C at the time of the pandemic: Need to adjust the shot. Liver International. doi: 10.1111/liv.15314 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Torre P, Annunziata M, Sciorio R, Coppola C, Masarone M, Persico M. Hepatitis C screening during SARS‐CoV‐2 testing or vaccination. Experience in an area of southern Italy in the province of Salerno. Liver International. 2022. doi: 10.1111/liv.15273 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Viganò M, Cerini F, Ridolfo S, Rumi MG. HCV screening in the 1969–1989 birth-cohort: is not enough! Liver International: Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver. 2022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 13.AbbVie. Maviret EU Summary of Product Characteristics [Internet]. 2021 [October 04, 2021]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/maviret-epar-product-information_en.pdf.
  • 14.AbbVie. Mavyret US Package Insert [Internet]. 2021 [October 04, 2021]. https://www.rxabbvie.com/pdf/mavyret_pi.pdf.
  • 15.Zeuzem S, Foster GR, Wang S, Asatryan A, Gane E, Feld JJ, et al. Glecaprevir-pibrentasvir for 8 or 12 weeks in HCV genotype 1 or 3 infection. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(4):354–69. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1702417 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Brown RS, Buti M, Rodrigues L, Chulanov V, Chuang WL, Aguilar H, et al. Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8 weeks in treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotypes 1–6 and compensated cirrhosis: The EXPEDITION-8 trial. J Hepatol. 2020;72(3):441–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2019.10.020 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Asselah T, Kowdley KV, Zadeikis N, Wang S, Hassanein T, Horsmans Y, et al. Efficacy of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8 or 12 weeks in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 2, 4, 5, or 6 infection without cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16(3):417–26. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.09.027 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kinoshita A, Koike K, Mizuno Y, Ogata I, Kobayashi Y, Hasegawa K, et al. Efficacy and safety of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in patients with hepatitis C virus infection aged ≥75 years. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2020;20(6):578–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lampertico P, Carrion JA, Curry M, Turnes J, Cornberg M, Negro F, et al. Real-world effectiveness and safety of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for the treatment of patients with chronic HCV infection: A meta-analysis. J Hepatol. 2020;72(6):1112–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.01.025 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Flamm SL, Kort J, Marx SE, Strezewski J, Dylla DE, Bacon B, et al. Effectiveness of 8-week glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for treatment-naive, compensated cirrhotic patients with chronic hepatitis C infection. Adv Ther. 2020;37(5):2267–74. doi: 10.1007/s12325-020-01301-5 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Klinker H, Naumann U, Rossle M, Berg T, Bondin M, Lohmann K, et al. Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8 weeks in patients with compensated cirrhosis: Safety and effectiveness data from the German Hepatitis C-Registry. Liver Int. 2021;41(7):1518–22. doi: 10.1111/liv.14937 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lampertico P, Peck-Radosavljevic M, Bondin M, Mazur W, Magenta L, Foucher J, et al. Addressing barriers to hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination: real-world outcomes in historically underserved patients with chronic HCV infection treated with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. Hepatology. 2019;70:954A–5A. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Aghemo A, Horsmans Y, Bourgeois S, Bondin M, Gschwantler M, Hofer H, et al. Real-world outcomes in historically underserved patients with chronic hepatitis C infection treated with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. Infect Dis Ther. 2021; 10.1007/s40121-021-00455-1. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1007/s40121-021-00455-1 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.D’Ambrosio R, Pasulo L, Puoti M, Vinci M, Schiavini M, Lazzaroni S, et al. Real-world effectiveness and safety of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in 723 patients with chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol. 2019;70(3):379–87. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.11.011 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Lampertico P, Mauss S, Persico M, Barclay ST, Marx S, Lohmann K, et al. Real-world clinical practice use of 8-week glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in treatment-naïve patients with compensated cirrhosis. Adv Ther. 2020;37(9):4033–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Persico M, Aglitti A, Milella M, Coppola C, Messina V, Claar E, et al. Real‐life glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in a large cohort of patients with hepatitis C virus infection: The MISTRAL study. Liver International. 2019;39(10):1852–9. doi: 10.1111/liv.14170 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Cornberg M, Ahumada A, Aghemo A, Andreoni M, Bhagat A, Butrymowicz I, et al. Safety and effectiveness using 8 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in HCV-infected treatment-naïve patients with compensated cirrhosis: the CREST Study. Adv Ther. 2022:1–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Clopper C, Pearson E. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika. 1934;26(4):404–13. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Liverpool Uo. Hep drug interactions. https://www.hep-druginteractions.org/checker. Published 2019. [June 2022].
  • 30.Andreoni M, Di Perri G, Persico M, Marcellusi A, Ethgen O, Sanchez Gonzalez Y, et al. Addressing HCV elimination barriers in Italy: healthcare resource utilization and cost impact using 8 weeks’ glecaprevir/pibrentasvir therapy. Infect Dis Ther. 2021;10(2):763–74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Blach S, Zeuzem S, Manns M, Altraif I, Duberg A-S, Muljono DH, et al. Global prevalence and genotype distribution of hepatitis C virus infection in 2015: a modelling study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2(3):161–76. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(16)30181-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Brown RS, Collins MA, Strasser SI, Emmett A, Topp AS, Burroughs M, et al. Efficacy and safety of 8-or 12 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in patients with evidence of portal hypertension. Infect Dis Ther. 2022;11(2):913–24. doi: 10.1007/s40121-022-00599-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Foster GR, Asselah T, Kopecky-Bromberg S, Lei Y, Asatryan A, Trinh R, et al. Safety and efficacy of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in patients aged 65 years or older. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0208506. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208506 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fireman M, Indest DW, Blackwell A, Whitehead AJ, Hauser P. Addressing tri-morbidity (hepatitis C, psychiatric disorders, and substance use): the importance of routine mental health screening as a component of a comanagement model of care. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;40(Supplement_5):S286–S91. doi: 10.1086/427442 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ing Lorenzini K, Girardin F. Direct-acting antiviral interactions with opioids, alcohol or illicit drugs of abuse in HCV-infected patients. Liver Int. 2020;40(1):32–44. doi: 10.1111/liv.14283 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Umberto Vespasiani-Gentilucci

2 Nov 2022

PONE-D-22-27602Safety and effectiveness of 8 weeks of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in challenging HCV patients: Italian data from the CREST StudyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Aghemo,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 17 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Umberto Vespasiani-Gentilucci, PhD.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1.  Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf  and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35543964/

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.

3. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

4. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

5. Thank you for stating the following in the Competing Interests section:

“Aghemo A: Grant support by AbbVie and Gilead; Advisory board for Alfasigma, Gilead, Intercept, MSD, Mylan, and Sobi.

Persico M: Consultant and speaker for AbbVie, Gilead, and MSD.

D’Ambrosio R: Advisory Board: AbbVie, Gilead, Takeda; Speaking and teaching: AbbVie, Gilead, MSD; Research support: Gilead

Andreoni M: Board membership for AbbVie, Gilead, Merck, and ViiV; grant from Merck; and speaker for BMS, Gilead, and Janssen.

Villa E: Nothing to disclose.

Bhagat A, Gallinaro V, Gualberti G, and Merolla RCD: Employees of AbbVie and may hold stock/options.

Gasbarrini A: Consultant for AbbVie, Actial, Alfasigma, Eisai, Gilead, MSD, Sandoz, Sanofi, and Takeda.”

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).  If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your updated Competing Interests statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

6. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

7. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you for the opportunity to review this article.

In this work, the authors evaluated the real-world safety and effectiveness of 8-week glecaprevir/pibrentasvir therapy in Italian treatment-naïve patients with compensated cirrhosis, analysing data in certain difficult to treat subgroups of interest.

The paper is well written and adds new important data to the real-world experience with the drug, specifically in the Italian context.

Minor comments:

1. I think that study population is not big enough to sustain a robust message on the efficacy and safety of the drug primarily in GT3 patients (7/42) and in patients with signs of portal hypertension. I think that key messages of conclusions (abstract and text) should be re-modulate shedding light mainly on the core message of the work (real-world safety and effectiveness of short course treatment in cirrhotic patients) and on the need to extend the real-world cohort (Italian and beyond) to confirm the preliminary data that appear to confirm safety and effectiveness of the drug also in special subgroups (GT3, portal hypertension).

2. Moreover, Table 3 does not add as much to the work. At best, it could be considered as supplementary material.

Best regards,

Paolo Gallo, M.D.

Clinical Medicine and Hepatology Unit

Department of Medicine

Fondazione Policlinico Campus Biomedico, Rome

Reviewer #2: Dear Editor,

Aghemo et al wrote a paper on a sub-analysis of a large retrospective observational non interventional multicentric study conducted in six countries worldwide to evaluate in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of the Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir direct antiviral agents (DAA) combination for the treatment of HCV-related compensated cirrhosis (CC). The present paper is focused on the Italian sub-cohort of patients included. Even if, nowadays, there are several reports on the efficacy of such drugs in real life settings, some concerns (mostly preconcepts) remain on the safety of NS3-containing DAA combinations, particularly in regards of safety and DDI (drug-drug interactions). For these reasons, every report on the real-life performance of such drugs is welcome and has a potential high interest to the readership of your journal. The paper reports high efficacy and safety both on per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis in the 42 patients with CC included.

Moreover, the paper is lean and well-written in English.

There are only few minor issues to discuss:

Minor Issues:

1) Introduction section, line 69 and beyond: “A probabilistic model estimated that in January 2020 there were more than 400,000 individuals with chronic HCV infection in Italy, with approximately 73% asymptomatic and potentially undiagnosed or unlinked to care”.

There are several reports published in Liver International journal earlier this year that somewhat seem disavowing this projection, please briefly comment this fact and cite these papers (10.1111/liv.15314 ; 10.1111/liv.15273 ; 10.1111/liv.15316; 10.1111/liv.15375).

2) Conclusions section, line 242 and beyond: it could be useful to the aims of the paper to insert a brief sentence in the conclusions on the fact that, with these types of treatment, it could have to be pointed out that the so-called "difficult-to-treat" patients are definitely no longer to be considered in this way .

Kindest regards

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Decision Letter 1

Umberto Vespasiani-Gentilucci

21 Dec 2022

Safety and effectiveness of 8 weeks of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in challenging HCV patients: Italian data from the CREST Study

PONE-D-22-27602R1

Dear Dr. Aghemo,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Umberto Vespasiani-Gentilucci, PhD.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

None

Reviewers' comments:

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Concomitant medications and their expected interaction with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    AbbVie is committed to responsible data sharing regarding the clinical trials we sponsor. This includes access to anonymized, individual, and trial-level data (analysis data sets), as well as other information (eg, protocols, clinical study reports, or analysis plans), as long as the trials are not part of an ongoing or planned regulatory submission. This includes requests for clinical trial data for unlicensed products and indications. These clinical trial data can be requested by any qualified researchers who engage in rigorous, independent, scientific research, and will be provided following review and approval of a research proposal, Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), and execution of a Data Sharing Agreement (DSA). Data requests can be submitted at any time after approval in the US and Europe and after acceptance of this manuscript for publication. The data will be accessible for 12 months, with possible extensions considered. For more information on the process or to submit a request, visit the following link: https://www.abbvie.com/our-science/clinical-trials/clinical-trials-data-and-information-sharing/data-and-information-sharing-with-qualified-researchers.html.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES