Resumen de Chronic Hepatitis C Treatment with Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents in a Real-Life Setting

Ruby Ann Chirino Sprung, Margarita Dehesa, Enrique Wolpert Barraza, Clara Corona Lau, Ignacio García Juárez, Juan Francisco Sánchez Ávila, Carlos Moctezuma Velázquez, David Kershenobich Stalnikowitz

• Background: In clinical trials, new oral direct-acting antiviral agent therapies have demonstrated a high sustained virological response rate in patients with hepatitis C virus infection. We aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety data from direct-acting antiviral agent interferon-free therapy in hepatitis C virus infection in a study performed in five different clinical settings in Mexico City; four private practice sites and one academic medical center in a real-world scenario. Methods: Eighty-one patients were treated with seven different direct-acting antiviral agent regimens, in which the end of treatment, sustained virological response at 12 weeks post-treatment, and adverse effects were evaluated. At their discretion, attending physicians selected the treatment regimens and durations. Results: In total, 70.4% of the patients were female and the mean age was 60.7 years;

  74.1% had blood transfusion as a risk factor. The most common genotype was 1b (70.4%). The fibrosis stage was F3 or F4 in 55.5% of patients; liver cirrhosis was present in 44%. The overall end of treatment response was 98.8%, and the rate of sustained virological response was 96%, independent of the regimen. Three patients did not achieve sustained virological response;

  they had cirrhosis and were treatment-experienced, and two had hepatocarcinoma. Non-significant adverse effects during treatment were documented. Conclusions: In this real-life setting in Mexico, a rate of 96% of sustained virological response to direct-acting antiviral agents was achieved in an older population of patients with advanced fibrosis. This study provides data that may be useful in guiding health professionals and authorities in the development of health policies. (REV INVES CLIN.

  2016;68:201-9)