Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (5)
Document Type
- Journal article (5)
Language
- English (5)
Keywords
- infection (2)
- sofosbuvir (2)
- BCOR (1)
- BCORL1 (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- German Hepatitis C-Registry (1)
- HCV genotype 2 (1)
- HCV genotype-2 (1)
- SARS-CoV- 2 (1)
- acute myeloid leukemia (1)
Evidence based clinical guidelines are implemented to treat patients efficiently that include efficacy, tolerability but also health economic considerations. This is of particular relevance to the new direct acting antiviral agents that have revolutionized treatment of chronic hepatitis C. For hepatitis C genotypes 2/3 interferon free treatment is already available with sofosbuvir plus ribavirin. However, treatment with sofosbuvir-based regimens is 10-20 times more expensive compared to pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV). It has to be discussed if PegIFN/RBV is still an option for easy to treat patients. We assessed the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C genotypes 2/3 with PegIFN/RBV in a real world setting according to the latest German guidelines. Overall, 1006 patients were recruited into a prospective patient registry with 959 having started treatment. The intention-to-treat analysis showed poor SVR (GT2 61%, GT3 47%) while patients with adherence had excellent SVR in the per protocol analysis (GT2 96%, GT3 90%). According to guidelines, 283 patients were candidates for shorter treatment duration, namely a treatment of 16 weeks (baseline HCV-RNA <800.000 IU/mL, no cirrhosis and RVR). However, 65% of these easy to treat patients have been treated longer than recommended that resulted in higher costs but not higher SVR rates. In conclusion, treatment with PegIFN/RBV in a real world setting can be highly effective yet similar effective than PegIFN +/- sofosbuvir/RBV in well-selected naive G2/3 patients. Full adherence to guidelines could be further improved, because it would be important in the new era with DAA, especially to safe resources.
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is characterized by recurrent genetic events. The BCL6 corepressor (BCOR) and its homolog, the BCL6 corepressor-like 1 (BCORL1), have been reported to be rare but recurrent mutations in AML. Previously, smaller studies have reported conflicting results regarding impacts on outcomes. Here, we retrospectively analyzed a large cohort of 1529 patients with newly diagnosed and intensively treated AML. BCOR and BCORL1 mutations were found in 71 (4.6%) and 53 patients (3.5%), respectively. Frequently co-mutated genes were DNTM3A, TET2 and RUNX1. Mutated BCORL1 and loss-of-function mutations of BCOR were significantly more common in the ELN2017 intermediate-risk group. Patients harboring loss-of-function mutations of BCOR had a significantly reduced median event-free survival (HR = 1.464 (95%-Confidence Interval (CI): 1.005–2.134), p = 0.047), relapse-free survival (HR = 1.904 (95%-CI: 1.163–3.117), p = 0.01), and trend for reduced overall survival (HR = 1.495 (95%-CI: 0.990–2.258), p = 0.056) in multivariable analysis. Our study establishes a novel role for loss-of-function mutations of BCOR regarding risk stratification in AML, which may influence treatment allocation.
Using data from the German Hepatitis C-Registry (Deutsche Hepatitis C-Register, DHC-R), we report the real-world safety and effectiveness of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) treatment and its impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in underserved populations who are not typically included in clinical trials, yet who will be crucial for achieving hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination. The DHC-R is an ongoing, non-interventional, multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study on patients treated for chronic HCV infection in Germany. The data cutoff was 17 January 2021. The primary effectiveness endpoint was sustained virologic response at post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12). Safety outcomes were assessed in all patients receiving GLE/PIB. PROs were assessed using the SF-36 survey. Of 2354 patients, 1964 had valid SVR12 data (intention-to-treat analysis). Of these, 1905 (97.0%) achieved SVR12 with rates similar across the comorbidities analyzed, except for people who actively use drugs (PWUD (active)) (86.4%). Excluding those who discontinued treatment and did not achieve SVR12, or were reinfected with HCV, the rate was 99.3%, with similar results regardless of comorbidity. PWUD (active) and those with psychiatric disorders had the most meaningful improvements in PROs. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 631/2354 patients (26.8%), and serious AEs in 44 patients (1.9%). GLE/PIB was highly effective and well tolerated in this real-world study of patient groups key to HCV elimination.
Background and purpose
The effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on telemedical care have not been described on a national level. Thus, we investigated the medical stroke treatment situation before, during, and after the first lockdown in Germany.
Methods
In this nationwide, multicenter study, data from 14 telemedical networks including 31 network centers and 155 spoke hospitals covering large parts of Germany were analyzed regarding patients' characteristics, stroke type/severity, and acute stroke treatment. A survey focusing on potential shortcomings of in-hospital and (telemedical) stroke care during the pandemic was conducted.
Results
Between January 2018 and June 2020, 67,033 telemedical consultations and 38,895 telemedical stroke consultations were conducted. A significant decline of telemedical (p < 0.001) and telemedical stroke consultations (p < 0.001) during the lockdown in March/April 2020 and a reciprocal increase after relaxation of COVID-19 measures in May/June 2020 were observed. Compared to 2018–2019, neither stroke patients' age (p = 0.38), gender (p = 0.44), nor severity of ischemic stroke (p = 0.32) differed in March/April 2020. Whereas the proportion of ischemic stroke patients for whom endovascular treatment (14.3% vs. 14.6%; p = 0.85) was recommended remained stable, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower proportion of recommendation of intravenous thrombolysis during the lockdown (19.0% vs. 22.1%; p = 0.052). Despite the majority of participating network centers treating patients with COVID-19, there were no relevant shortcomings reported regarding in-hospital stroke treatment or telemedical stroke care.
Conclusions
Telemedical stroke care in Germany was able to provide full service despite the COVID-19 pandemic, but telemedical consultations declined abruptly during the lockdown period and normalized after relaxation of COVID-19 measures in Germany.
Although sofosbuvir has been approved for patients with genotypes 2/3 (G2/3), many parts of the world still consider pegylated Interferon alpha (P) and ribavirin (R) as standard of care for G2/3. Patients with rapid virological response (RVR) show response rates >80%. However, SVR (sustained virological response) in non-RVR patients is not satisfactory. Longer treatment duration may be required but evidence from prospective trials are lacking. A total of 1006 chronic HCV genotype 2/3 patients treated with P/R were recruited into a German HepNet multicenter screening registry. Of those, only 226 patients were still HCV RNA positive at week 4 (non-RVR). Non-RVR patients with ongoing response after 24 weeks P-2b/R qualified for OPTEX, a randomized trial investigating treatment extension of additional 24 weeks (total 48 weeks, Group A) or additional 12 weeks (total 36 weeks, group B) of 1.5 \(\mu\)g/kg P-2b and 800-1400 mg R. Due to the low number of patients without RVR, the number of 150 anticipated study patients was not met and only 99 non-RVR patients (n=50 Group A, n=49 Group B) could be enrolled into the OPTEX trial. Baseline factors did not differ between groups. Sixteen patients had G2 and 83 patients G3. Based on the ITT (intention-to-treat) analysis, 68% [55%; 81%] in Group A and 57% [43%; 71%] in Group B achieved SVR (p=0.31). The primary endpoint of better SVR rates in Group A compared to a historical control group (SVR 70%) was not met. In conclusion, approximately 23% of G2/3 patients did not achieve RVR in a real world setting. However, subsequent recruitment in a treatment-extension study was difficult. Prolonged therapy beyond 24 weeks did not result in higher SVR compared to a historical control group.