Ziv Ben Ari

BACKGROUND: Novel interferon- and ribavirin-free regimens are needed to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of grazoprevir (NS3/4A protease inhibitor) and elbasvir (NS5A inhibitor) in treatment-naive patients. DESIGN: Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105467). SETTING: 60 centers in the United States, Europe, Australia, Scandinavia, and Asia. PATIENTS: Cirrhotic and noncirrhotic treatment-naive adults with genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection. INTERVENTION: Oral, once-daily, fixed-dose grazoprevir 100 mg/elbasvir 50 mg for 12 weeks, stratified by fibrosis and genotype. Patients were randomly assigned 3:1 to immediate or deferred therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of patients in the immediate-treatment group achieving unquantifiable HCV RNA 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12); adverse events in both groups. RESULTS: Among 421 participants, 194 (46%) were women, 157 (37%) were nonwhite, 382 (91%) had genotype 1 infection, and 92 (22%) had cirrhosis. Of 316 patients receiving immediate treatment, 299 of 316 (95% [95% CI, 92% to 97%]) achieved SVR12, including 144 of 157 (92% [CI, 86% to 96%]) with genotype 1a, 129 of 131 (99% [CI, 95% to 100%]) with genotype 1b, 18 of 18 (100% [CI, 82% to 100%]) with genotype 4, 8 of 10 (80% [CI, 44% to 98%]) with genotype 6, 68 of 70 (97% [CI, 90% to 100%]) with cirrhosis, and 231 of 246 (94% [CI, 90% to 97%]) without cirrhosis. Virologic failure occurred in 13 patients (4%), including 1 case of breakthrough infection and 12 relapses, and was associated with baseline NS5A polymorphisms and emergent NS3 or NS5A variants or both. Serious adverse events occurred in 9 (2.8%) and 3 (2.9%) patients in the active and placebo groups, respectively (difference <0.05 percentage point [CI, -5.4 to 3.1 percentage points]); none were considered drug related. The most common adverse events in the active group were headache (17%), fatigue (16%), and nausea (9%). LIMITATION: The study lacked an active-comparator control group and included relatively few genotype 4 and 6 infections. CONCLUSION: Grazoprevir-elbasvir achieved high SVR12 rates in treatment-naive cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients with genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection. This once-daily, all-oral, fixed-combination regimen represents a potent new therapeutic option for chronic HCV infection. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Merck & Co.

Features of metabolic syndrome are not uncommon in patients after liver transplantation. To examine the prevalence and risk factors of posttransplantation metabolic syndrome (PTMS), the files of 252 transplant recipients (mean age, 54.5 ± 2.8 years, 57.9% male) were reviewed for pretransplant and posttransplant clinical and laboratory parameters (mean follow-up, 6.2 ± 4.4 years). Rates of obesity (body mass index >30 kg/m(2) ), hypertriglyceridemia (>150 mg/dL), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <40 mg/dL (men) or <50 mg/dL (women), hypertension, and diabetes were significantly higher after transplantation than before. Metabolic syndrome was diagnosed in 5.4% of patients before transplantation and 51.9% after. Besides significantly higher rates of the typical metabolic derangements (P < 0.0001), the patients with PTMS were older and heavier than those without PTMS, and they had a higher rate of pretransplant hepatitis C virus infection (P < 0.03) and more posttransplant major vascular and cardiac events (20 events in 15.2% of patients with PTMS versus 6 events in 4.9% of patients without PTMS; P < 0.007). There was no between-group difference in mortality or causes of death (mainly related to recurrent disease, graft failure, and sepsis). Significant independent predictors of PTMS on logistic regression analysis were age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.04), pretransplant nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (OR = 3.4), body mass index (OR = 1.13), diabetes (OR = 5.95), and triglycerides (OR = 1.01). The rate of metabolic syndrome in liver transplant recipients is more than twice that reported for the general population. PTMS is associated with cardiovascular morbidity but not mortality, and it may be predicted by pretransplantation conditions. Prospective studies are required to determine the significance and management of PTMS.

•There are no approved therapies for fatty liver disease.•Dual glucagon/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonism may be beneficial.•Efinopegdutide (dual agonist) improved liver fat content compared with semaglutide.•Efinopegdutide’s tolerability profile was similar to that of semaglutide.•Efinopegdutide may be an effective treatment for fatty liver disease. Background & AimsThis study assessed the effects of the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)/glucagon receptor co-agonist efinopegdutide relative to the selective GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide on liver fat content (LFC) in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).MethodsThis was a phase IIa, randomized, active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, open-label study. A magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction assessment was performed to determine LFC at screening and Week 24. Participants with an LFC of ≥10% at screening were randomized 1:1 to efinopegdutide 10 mg or semaglutide 1 mg, both administered subcutaneously once weekly for 24 weeks. Participants were stratified according to the concurrent diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Both drugs were titrated to the target dose over an 8-week time period. The primary efficacy endpoint was relative reduction from baseline in LFC (%) after 24 weeks of treatment.ResultsAmong 145 randomized participants (efinopegdutide n = 72, semaglutide n = 73), 33.1% had T2DM. At baseline, mean BMI was 34.3 kg/m2 and mean LFC was 20.3%. The least squares (LS) mean relative reduction from baseline in LFC at Week 24 was significantly (p <0.001) greater with efinopegdutide (72.7% [90% CI 66.8–78.7]) than with semaglutide (42.3% [90% CI 36.5–48.1]). Both treatment groups had an LS mean percent reduction from baseline in body weight at Week 24 (efinopegdutide 8.5% vs. semaglutide 7.1%; p = 0.085). Slightly higher incidences of adverse events and drug-related adverse events were observed in the efinopegdutide group compared with the semaglutide group, primarily related to an imbalance in gastrointestinal adverse events.ConclusionsIn patients with NAFLD, treatment with efinopegdutide 10 mg weekly led to a significantly greater reduction in LFC than semaglutide 1 mg weekly.Clinical Trial NumberEudraCT: 2020-005136-30; NCT: 04944992.Impact and implicationsCurrently, there are no approved therapies for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The weight loss associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists has been shown to decrease hepatic inflammation in patients with NASH. In addition to reducing liver fat content (LFC) indirectly through weight loss, glucagon receptor agonism may also reduce LFC by acting on the liver directly to stimulate fatty acid oxidation and reduce lipogenesis. This study demonstrated that treatment of patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with the GLP-1/glucagon receptor co-agonist efinopegdutide (10 mg weekly) led to a significantly greater reduction in LFC compared to treatment with the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide (1 mg weekly), suggesting that efinopegdutide may be an effective treatment for NASH. This study assessed the effects of the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)/glucagon receptor co-agonist efinopegdutide relative to the selective GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide on liver fat content (LFC) in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This was a phase IIa, randomized, active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, open-label study. A magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction assessment was performed to determine LFC at screening and Week 24. Participants with an LFC of ≥10% at screening were randomized 1:1 to efinopegdutide 10 mg or semaglutide 1 mg, both administered subcutaneously once weekly for 24 weeks. Participants were stratified according to the concurrent diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Both drugs were titrated to the target dose over an 8-week time period. The primary efficacy endpoint was relative reduction from baseline in LFC (%) after 24 weeks of treatment. Among 145 randomized participants (efinopegdutide n = 72, semaglutide n = 73), 33.1% had T2DM. At baseline, mean BMI was 34.3 kg/m2 and mean LFC was 20.3%. The least squares (LS) mean relative reduction from baseline in LFC at Week 24 was significantly (p <0.001) greater with efinopegdutide (72.7% [90% CI 66.8–78.7]) than with semaglutide (42.3% [90% CI 36.5–48.1]). Both treatment groups had an LS mean percent reduction from baseline in body weight at Week 24 (efinopegdutide 8.5% vs. semaglutide 7.1%; p = 0.085). Slightly higher incidences of adverse events and drug-related adverse events were observed in the efinopegdutide group compared with the semaglutide group, primarily related to an imbalance in gastrointestinal adverse events. In patients with NAFLD, treatment with efinopegdutide 10 mg weekly led to a significantly greater reduction in LFC than semaglutide 1 mg weekly.