DOCSLIB.ORG

Pegylated Interferon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pegylated Interferon Cost-Effectiveness of Elbasvir/Grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for Treatment-Naïve (TN) Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Genotype 1b (GT1b) Infection in Russia Shelby Corman, PharmD, MS, BCPS1; Amy Puenpatom, PhD2; Roza Yagudina, PhD3; Andrey Kulikov, PhD3 VIENNA, AUSTRIA; 10-14 APRIL 2019 1Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA; 3Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia FRI-228 BACKGROUND Table 1: Treatment Inputs RESULTS Figure 2: Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curves for Non-cirrhotic Cirrhotic EBR/GZR±RBV and Comparators • An estimated 4.1% of the population in Russia is infected with HCV, of which Duration SVR Duration SVR Base Case Analysis GT1b is the most common1 Treatment Regimen (weeks) (95% CI) (weeks) (95% CI) References GT1b, Treatment-naïve, Non-cirrhotic • EBR/GZR is less costly and more effective (economically dominant) 1.0 8 (F0-2) 0.982 (0.903-1.000) • EBR/GZR is a direct-acting antiviral (DAA) indicated for the treatment of GT1b EBR/GZR 12 1.000 (0.936-1.000) 2-4 over all comparators in cirrhotic patients (Table 5) in Russia2 12 (F3) 0.979 (0.927-1.000) 0.9 EBR/GZR 8 (F0-2) 0.982 (0.960-1.000) • In non-cirrhotic patients, EBR/GZR was cost-saving vs all comparators 0.8 at: presented Poster • As new DAAs are introduced into the market, cost-effectiveness analyses are 3D 12 1.000 (0.940-1.000) 5-7 SIM+PegIFN+RBV 12 (F3) 0.990 (0.966-0.999) and economically dominant over all comparators except OMB/PAR/ 0.7 needed in order to identify the most efficient use of resources SOF+SIM GLE/PIB 8 0.991 (0.897-1.000) 12 1.000 (0.891-1.000) 8-9 RIT+DAS and GLE/PIB, for which QALY differences were negligible effective - 0.6 SOF+SIM 12 0.974 (0.865-0.999) 12* 0.909 (0.587-0.998) 10-11 OMB/PAR/RIT+DAS 0.5 NAR+RIT+PegIFN+RBV 12 0.891 (0.836-0.932) N/A N/A 12 GLE/PIB 0.4 NAR+RIT+PegIFN+RBV SIM+PegIFN+RBV 24* 0.854 (0.806-0.894) 48* 0.854 (0.806-0.894) 13 Table 5: Base Case Results OBJECTIVE 0.3 SOF+DAC 12 1.000 (0.914-1.000) 12+RBV 1.000 (0.701-1.000) 14 Total Total ICUR, EBR/GZR DAC+ASN 24 0.906 (0.805- 1.000) 24 0.893 (0.858-0.929) 15 Discounted Discounted Incremental Incremental vs Comparator 0.2 To compare the cost-effectiveness of EBR/GZR to regimens currently used in Proportion Cost Treatment Regimen Costs (RUB) QALYs Costs QALYs (RUB/QALY) 0.1 Russia for the treatment of TN patients with GT1b HCV infection. *Regimens consist of 12 weeks of simeprevir followed by an additional 12 or 36 weeks of PegIFN + RBV. Abbreviations: 3D, ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir; 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; ASN, asunaprevir; Non-cirrhotic (F0-3) 0.0 DAC, daclatasvir; EBR, elbasvir, GLE, glecaprevir; GZR, grazoprevir; NAR, narlaprevir; PegIFN, pegylated interferon; 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 PIB, pibrentasvir; RBV, ribavirin; RIT, ritonavir; SIM, simeprevir; SOF, sofosbuvir; SVR, sustained virologic response EBR/GZR 392,220 11.9494 – – – Cost-effectiveness Threshold (thousands) METHODS SIM+PegIFN+RBV 1,078,505 11.6691 -686,285 0.2804 Dominant Table 2: Weekly Costs, Antiviral Therapy 1.0 GT1b, Treatment-naïve, Cirrhotic DAC+ASN 619,030 11.6732 -226,809 0.2762 Dominant • A Markov model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of EBR/GZR Lower Limit Upper Limit 0.9 compared to other DAA regimens over a lifetime time horizon Regimen Base Case (RUB) (–25%) (+25%) OMB/PAR/RIT+DAS 487,042 11.9505 -94,822 -0.0011 Cost saving 0.8 ® • The target population was patients infected with CHC GT1b, stratified by Elbasvir/grazoprevir (ZEPATIER ) 42,502.95 31,877.21 53,128.69 0.7 GLE/PIB 693,651 11.9653 -301,431 -0.0158 DOI: 10.3252/pso.eu.ILC2019.2019 ® Cost saving effective presence of cirrhosis Sofosbuvir (SOVALDI ) 38,754.29 29,065.72 48,442.87 - 0.6 Pegylated interferon 8,397.61 6,298.21 10,497.01 NAR+RIT+PegIFN+RBV 803,808 11.7130 -411,588 0.2364 Dominant • The model consists of 16 health states comprising fibrosis stages, treatment 0.5 Ribavirin 2,418.28 1,813.71 3,022.85 success or failure, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver SOF+DAC 747,917 11.9312 -355,697 0.0182 Dominant 0.4 Ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + transplant, and liver-related death (Figure 1) 53,801.25 40,350.94 67,251.56 dasabuvir (VIEKIRA PAK®) SOF+SIM 1,266,417 11.9006 -874,197 0.0489 Dominant 0.3 Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (MAVIRET™) 82,500.00 61,875.00 103,125.00 0.2 Cirrhotic (F4) Proportion Cost Figure 1: State Transition Model for Chronic HCV and Liver Disease Model Narlaprevir (ARLANZA®) 30,142.23 22,606.67 37,677.78 0.1 Ritonavir 392.70 294.53 490.88 EBR/GZR 789,288 11.0885 – – – 0.0 ® Simeprevir (SOVRIAD ) 63,795.41 47,846.56 79,744.26 SIM+PegIFN+RBV 1,595,848 10.4310 -806,560 0.6575 Dominant 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Daclatasvir (DACLINZA®) 20,898.61 15,673.96 26,123.27 Cost-effectiveness Threshold (thousands) DAC+ASN 853,733 10.6546 -64,445 0.4339 Dominant OMB/PAR/RIT+DAS 895,848 11.0885 -106,560 0.0000 Dominant Table 3: Annual Health State Cost Inputs GLE/PIB 1,240,233 11.0885 -450,945 0.0000 Dominant Lower Limit Upper Limit Base Case (RUB) (–25%) (+25%) SOF+DAC 995,087 11.0885 -205,799 0.0000 Dominant SVR, F0-3 1,533 1,150 1,916 SOF+SIM 1,518,737 10.7847 -729,449 0.3038 Dominant DC,SVR, decompensated F4 cirrhosis; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; SVR,19,638 sustained virologic response14,729 24,548 CONCLUSION F0-F3 3,427 2,570 4,284 F4 (compensated cirrhosis) 43,172 32,379 53,965 EBR/GZR is economically dominant over other DAA regimens DC 111,499 83,624 139,374 Deterministic Sensitivity Analyses in cirrhotic patients and is economically dominant or cost-saving HCC, first year 154,930 116,198 193,663 • In one-way sensitivity analyses, SVR rates in patients receiving HCC, subsequent years 36,191 27,143 45,239 EBR/GZR most commonly impacted model conclusions Liver transplant (first year) 1,117,900 838,425 1,397,375 • Lower bound of SVR range Liver transplant (subsequent years) 593,759 445,319 742,199 Hepatic fibrosis stage was based on Metavir fibrosis scoring system: F0 = no fibrosis; F1 = portal fibrosis without septa; F2 = portal fibrosis – Non-cirrhotic patients: EBR/GZR was no longer dominant over REFERENCES: with few septa; F3 = portal fibrosis with numerous septa without cirrhosis; and F4 = compensated cirrhosis; DC = decompensated cirrhosis; Annual discount rate of future cost 5% 0% 5% SOF+DAC or SOF+SIM, with ICURs of RUB 4,703,630 /QALY 1. Gower E, Estes C, Blach S, et al. J Hepatol 2014;61:S45-57. HCC = hepatocellular carcinoma; PDC = one-year post decompensated cirrhosis; PHCC = one-year post hepatocellular carcinoma; DC, decompensated cirrhosis; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; SVR, sustained virologic response SVR12 = sustained virologic response 12 weeks after cessation of treatment and RUB 19,155,111 /QALY, respectively 2. Serfaty L, Zeuzem S, Vierling JM, et al. Hepatology 2015;62(Suppl 1): 555A-556A. 3. Zeuzem S, Ghalib R, Reddy KR, et al. Ann Intern Med 2015; 163(1):1-13. – Cirrhotic patients: EBR/GZR was no longer dominant over 4. Jacobson IM, Lawitz E, Kwo PY, et al. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(6):1372-1382.e1372. 16-18 Model Inputs Table 4: Utility Inputs OMB/PAR/RIT+DAS (ICUR, RUB 500,235/QALY), GLE/PIB 5. Welzel TM, Asselah T, Dumas EO, et al. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2(7):494-500. • The proportions of patients achieving sustained virologic response (SVR) were 6. Feld JJ, Moreno C, Trinh R, et al. J Hepatol. 2016;64(2):301-307. Lower Limit Upper Limit (RUB 2,116,920/QALY), and SOF+DAC (RUB 966,106/QALY) 7. Ferenci P, Bernstein D, Lalezari J, et al. N Engl J Med 2014;370:1983-1992. obtained from clinical trials (Table 1) Input Base Case (–5%) (+5%) • Upper bound of the SVR range 8. Zeuzem S, Foster GR, Wang S, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(4):354-369. • Medication (Table 2) and annual health state costs (Table 3) were obtained from Disutility, PegIFN-containing regimens 0.236 0.224 0.248 9. Forns X, Lee SS, Valdes J, et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(10):1062-1068. 10. Kwo P, Gitlin N, Nahass R, et al. Hepatology. 2016;64(2):370-380. local sources F0-F3 0.93 0.88 0.98 – Non-cirrhotic: EBR/GZR became dominant over OMB/PAR/RIT+DAS and GLE/PIB 11. Lawitz E, Sulkowski MS, Ghalib R, et al. Lancet. 2014;384(9956):1756-1765. • Utility values (Table 4) were obtained from the published literature F4 (compensated cirrhosis) 0.90 0.86 0.95 12. Abdurakhmanov D, Bakulin I, Bogomolov P, et al. Hepatology International. 2017;11(1):S305. DC 0.80 0.76 0.84 13. OLYSIO summary of product characteristics. Beerse, Belgium: Janssen-Cilag International NV. Model Outputs Probabilistic Sensitivity Analyses (Figure 2) 14. DAKLINZA summary of product characteristics. Anagni, Italy: Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HCV Protease
    HCV Protease HCV NS3-4A serine protease is a complex composed of NS3 and its cofactor NS4A. It harbours serine protease as well as NTPase/RNA helicase activities and is essential for viral polyprotein processing, RNA replication and virion formation. The HCV NS3/4A protease efficiently cleaves and inactivates two important signaling molecules in the sensory pathways that react to HCV pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) to induce interferons (IFNs), i.e., mitochondrial antiviral signaling protein (MAVS) and Toll-IL-1 receptor domain-containing adaptor inducing IFN-β (TRIF). HCV infection is associated with chronic liver disease, including hepatic steatosis, fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The NS3-4A serine protease of HCV has been one of the most attractive targets for developing specific antiviral agents against HCV. www.MedChemExpress.com 1 HCV Protease Inhibitors & Antagonists ACH-806 Asunaprevir (GS9132) Cat. No.: HY-19512 (BMS-650032) Cat. No.: HY-14434 ACH-806 is an NS4A antagonist which can inhibit Asunaprevir (BMS-650032) is a potent and orally Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) replication with an bioavailable hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3 protease EC50 of 14 nM. inhibitor, with IC50 of 0.2 nM-3.5 nM. Asunaprevir inhibits SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro activity. Purity: >98% Purity: 99.74% Clinical Data: No Development Reported Clinical Data: Launched Size: 1 mg, 5 mg Size: 10 mM × 1 mL, 2 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg, 50 mg BI 653048 BI 653048 phosphate Cat. No.: HY-12946 Cat. No.: HY-12946A BI 653048 is a selective and orally active BI 653048 phosphate is a selective and orally nonsteroidal glucocorticoid (GC) agonist active nonsteroidal glucocorticoid with an IC50 value of 55 nM.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct-Acting Antiviral Medications for Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection
    Direct-Acting Antiviral Medications for Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection Alison B. Jazwinski, MD, and Andrew J. Muir, MD, MHS Dr. Jazwinski is a Fellow and Dr. Muir Abstract: Treatment of hepatitis C virus has traditionally been diffi- is an Associate Professor in the Division cult because of low rates of treatment success and high rates of treat- of Gastroenterology and Duke Clinical ment discontinuation due to side effects. Current standard therapy Research Institute at Duke University consists of pegylated interferon α and ribavirin, both of which have Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina. nonspecific and largely unknown mechanisms of action. New thera- pies are in development that act directly on the hepatitis C virus at various points in the viral life cycle. Published clinical trial data on these therapies are summarized in this paper. A new era of hepatitis Address correspondence to: C virus treatment is beginning, the ultimate goals of which will be Dr. Andrew J. Muir directly targeting the virus, shortening the length of therapy, improv- P.O. Box 17969 Durham, NC 27715; ing sustained virologic response rates, and minimizing side effects. Tel: 919-668-8557; Fax: 919-668-7164; E-mail: [email protected] epatitis C virus (HCV) is a major public health problem, with an estimated 180 million people infected worldwide. Up to 25% of chronically infected patients eventually Hdevelop cirrhosis and related complications, including hepatocellular carcinoma.1 Chronic liver disease secondary to HCV thus remains the leading indication for liver transplantation in the United States.2 The goal of HCV treatment is to eradicate the virus and pre- vent the development of cirrhosis and its complications.
    [Show full text]
  • PI Narlaprevir in Russian Patients with Genotype 1 Chronic Hepatitis C
    The «second wave» PI Narlaprevir in Russian patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C Professor Igor Bakulin Moscow Clinical Scientific Center June 5, 2015 Key points Background Narlaprevir in clinical trials Interim results of Phase III Russian PIONEER study Conclusions 11.06.2015 2 HCV Epidemiology in Russia Total population size1 143 000 000 Anti-HCV Ab-positive1 5 861 000 CHC diagnosed (viremic)1 1 789 500 New cases2 55 900/year AVT3 5 500*/year AVT – antiviral therapy; CHC – chronic hepatitis C 1 2010 data, Saraswat V, Norris S, et al. J Viral Hepat. 2015 ;22 Suppl 1:6-25; 2 Yuschuk ND, Znoyko OO, et al. Epidemiol Vaccine Prevent. 2013; 3 11.06.2015 Regional registries data, 2011 in Saraswat V, Norris S, et al. J Viral Hepat. 2015 ;22 Suppl3 1:6-25 *8 000/year according to IMS Health data calculated on the basis of PegIFN sales for all genotypes in 2014 Access to Direct Acting Antivirals in 2015 SMV SOF SMV No access to PR federal budget SOF SOF LDV Access to new DAA in DCV Russia and some other European countries is limited 3D/r EASL Monothematic Conference on “Liver Disease in Resource Limited Settings”, 2015 11.06.2015 4 EASL Recommendations 2015 IFN-free regimens Genotype Sofosbuvir + RBV 2, 3 Sofosbuvir/Ledipasvir (+/- RBV) 1, 4, 5, 6 Ombitasvir/Paritaprevir/Ritonavir + Dasabuvir (+/- RBV) 1 Sofosbuvir + Simeprevir (+/- RBV) 1, 4 Sofosbuvir + Daclatasvir (+/- RBV) All Ombitasvir/Paritaprevir/Ritonavir (+/- RBV) 4 For countries with limited resources IFN-containing regimens are still relevant PegIFN-α + RBV + Sofosbuvir All PegIFN-α + RBV + Simeprevir 1, 4 11.06.2015 5 HCV Protease Inhibitors Value in Russia Protease inhibitors - a promising DAA group for the treatment of HCV 1b GT, the most prevalent genotype in Russia HCV Genotypes Protease inhibitors Asunaprevir Boceprevir Narlaprevir/r Paritaprevir/r Simeprevir Saraswat V, Norris S, de Knegt RJ, et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Hepatitis C Virus Drugs Simeprevir and Grazoprevir Synergize With
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.13.422511; this version posted December 14, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Hepatitis C Virus Drugs Simeprevir and Grazoprevir Synergize with 2 Remdesivir to Suppress SARS-CoV-2 Replication in Cell Culture 3 Khushboo Bafna1,#, Kris White2,#, Balasubramanian Harish3, Romel Rosales2, 4 Theresa A. Ramelot1, Thomas B. Acton1, Elena Moreno2, Thomas Kehrer2, 5 Lisa Miorin2, Catherine A. Royer3, Adolfo García-Sastre2,4,5,*, 6 Robert M. Krug6,*, and Gaetano T. Montelione1,* 7 1Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, and Center for Biotechnology and 8 Interdisciplinary Sciences, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, 12180 9 USA. 10 11 2Department of Microbiology, and Global Health and Emerging Pathogens Institute, 12 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY10029, USA. 13 14 3Department of Biology, and Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Sciences, 15 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, 12180 USA. 16 17 4Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Icahn School of Medicine at 18 Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA. 19 20 5The Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 21 10029, USA 22 23 6Department of Molecular Biosciences, John Ring LaMontagne Center for Infectious 24 Disease, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas at Austin, 25
    [Show full text]
  • Curing Hepatitis C" by Gregory T
    6 ThE FUTURE of HCV TREATMENT Beyond Triple Therapy I am still on treatment and almost halfway through the trial. I do not have hepatitis C at the present time. I hope this treatment has cured it, and I hope I will not need future treatment. The results were immediate. Before I began the QUAD Therapy clinical trial, there were over four million copies of the virus per milliliter of my blood. After the first week, that was down to only 160 copies per milliliter, and, at week two, I tested negative for hepatitis C. The virus is still undetectable in my blood—hopefully, this is it, and I am cured. — Mark Tw e n ty year s ago, I treated patients with HCV genotype 1 infection with interferon monotherapy, and five percent achieved SVR. Results improved to an SVR of 45 percent with peginterferon/ribavirin. Now, the new standard of care of triple therapy is expected to raise SVR up to 75 percent. What’s next? In this chapter, I look to the future, focusing on the next generation of direct-acting antivirals: new protease inhibitors, polymerase inhibitors, From "Curing Hepatitis C" by Gregory T. Everson Reprinted with permission— 115 by Hatherleigh— Press ISBN: 978-1-57826-425-4 Available wherever books are sold 116 CUR in G H E PA titis C NS5A inhibitors, and others. The future for treating HCV is, indeed, bright. Hopefully, the time will soon arrive when nearly every person infected with HCV will have safe, tolerable, and effective options for treatment. The year 2011 marked the beginning of a new era in the treatment of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) with the introduction of telaprevir and boceprevir.
    [Show full text]
  • 13. Approved and Experimental Therapies
    APPROVED AND EXPERIMENTAL THERAPIES FOR TREATMENT OF HEPATITIS B AND C, AND MUTATIONS 13. ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG RESISTANCE • Luis Menéndez-Arias HEPATITIS B Table 13.1. CURRENT DRUGS FOR TREATMENT OF HEPATITIS B Drug name Drug class Manufacturer Status Pegasys (peginterferon α-2a) Interferon Genentech FDA-approved Intron A (interferon a-2b) Interferon Merck FDA-approved Hepsera (adefovir Nucleotide analogue Gilead Sciences FDA-approved dipivoxil)a Viread (tenofovir Nucleotide analogue Gilead Sciences FDA-approved b disoproxil fumarate) a Epivir-HBV, Zeffix and Nucleoside analogue Glaxo SmithKline FDA-approved Heptodin (lamivudine) a Baraclude (entecavir) Nucleoside analogue Bristol-Myers Squibb FDA-approved Tyzeka, Sebivo Nucleoside analogue Novartis FDA-approved (telbivudine) Vemlidy (TAF, tenofovir Tenofovir prodrug Gilead Sciences FDA-approved alafenamide, GS-7340) Emtriva (emtricitabine; Nucleoside analogue Gilead Sciences FDA-approved b FTC) a Levovir, Revovir Nucleoside analogue Bukwang Studies cancelled c (clevudine, L-FMAU) pharmaceuticals, Eisai (Japan) Besivo (LB80380, Nucleoside analogue IIDong Pharmaceutical Approved in S ANA380) Co. Ltd. Korea Zadaxin (thymosin alpha) Immune enhancer SciClone Approved outside U.S. ABX 203 Therapeutic vaccine ABIVAX Phase IIb/III ARC-520 RNAi gene silencer Arrowhead Research Phase II/III 641 Drug name Drug class Manufacturer Status Myrcludex B Entry inhibitor Hepatera (Russia), Phase IIa Myr-Gmbh (Germany) (Russia) NVR-1221 (NVR 3-778) Capsid inhibitor Novira Therapeutics Phase IIa AGX-1009
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Basis for the Inhibition of the SARS-Cov-2 Main Protease by the Anti-HCV Drug Narlaprevir
    Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy www.nature.com/sigtrans LETTER OPEN Structural basis for the inhibition of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease by the anti-HCV drug narlaprevir Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy (2021) ;6:51 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00468-9 Dear Editor, 21 μM and 0.46 μM, respectively (Supplementary Fig. S1). These The second wave of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) results were consistent with the enzyme activity inhibition assay. pandemic has recently appeared in Europe. Most European Narlaprevir showed an antiviral effect against SARS-CoV-2 with countries, such as France, Germany, and Italy, have announced an EC50 value of 7.23 μM (Fig. 1b). As a positive control, remdesivir the implementation of a new round of epidemic prevention and and boceprevir inhibited SARS-CoV-2 replication with EC50 values control measures. However, no clinical drug or vaccine has been of 0.58 μM and 14.13 μM, respectively. Additionally, narlaprevir approved for the treatment of COVID-19. The interim results of the exhibited no cytotoxicity in Vero cells at different concentrations solidarity therapy trial coordinated by the World Health Organiza- up to 200 μM (Supplementary Fig. S2). Treatment with narlaprevir tion (WHO) indicated that remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopina- infection demonstrated a dose-dependent inhibitory effect on vir/ritonavir, and interferon appear to have little or no effect on the SARS-CoV-2 plaque formation (Fig. 1c). The plaques were 28-day mortality of hospitalized patients or the hospitalization completely inhibited in the presence of 50 μM narlaprevir. process of new COVID-19 patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Tetrazolones As Inhibitors of Fatty Acid Synthase Tetrazolone Als Fettsäuresynthasehemmer Tétrazolones Utilisés En Tant Qu’Inhibiteurs D’Acide Gras Synthase (Fasn)
    (19) TZZ ¥_T (11) EP 2 566 853 B1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT SPECIFICATION (45) Date of publication and mention (51) Int Cl.: of the grant of the patent: C07D 257/04 (2006.01) C07D 401/06 (2006.01) 25.01.2017 Bulletin 2017/04 C07D 401/12 (2006.01) C07D 403/06 (2006.01) C07D 403/12 (2006.01) C07D 407/12 (2006.01) (2006.01) (2006.01) (21) Application number: 11731538.2 C07D 413/06 C07D 413/12 C07D 417/04 (2006.01) C07D 417/06 (2006.01) A61K 31/41 (2006.01) A61P 3/00 (2006.01) (22) Date of filing: 04.05.2011 A61P 29/00 (2006.01) A61P 35/00 (2006.01) (86) International application number: PCT/US2011/035141 (87) International publication number: WO 2011/140190 (10.11.2011 Gazette 2011/45) (54) TETRAZOLONES AS INHIBITORS OF FATTY ACID SYNTHASE TETRAZOLONE ALS FETTSÄURESYNTHASEHEMMER TÉTRAZOLONES UTILISÉS EN TANT QU’INHIBITEURS D’ACIDE GRAS SYNTHASE (FASN) (84) Designated Contracting States: • KEANEY, Gregg, F. AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB Lexington GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO MA 02421 (US) PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR • NEVALAINEN, Marta Weymouth (30) Priority: 02.12.2010 US 419174 P MA 02189 (US) 06.04.2011 US 472566 P • NEVALAINEN, Vesa 28.01.2011 US 437564 P Weymouth 05.05.2010 US 331644 P MA 02189 (US) 05.05.2010 US 331575 P • PELUSO, Stephane Brookline (43) Date of publication of application: MA 02446 (US) 13.03.2013 Bulletin 2013/11 • SNYDER, Daniel, A.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT: Targeting SARS-Cov-2 M3clpro by HCV Ns3a/4 Inhibitors: in Silico Modeling and in Vitro Screening
    DRAFT: Targeting SARS-CoV-2 M3CLpro by HCV NS3a/4 Inhibitors: In Silico Modeling and In Vitro Screening. Anjela Manandhar1, Benjamin E Blass2, Dennis J Colussi2, Imane Almi2,3, Magid Abou-Gharbia2, Michael L. Klein1, Khaled M. Elokely1* 1Institute for Computational Molecular Science and Department of Chemistry, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122, United States 2 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Moulder Center for Drug Discovery Research, Temple University School of Pharmacy, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140, United States 3 Group of Computational and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, LMCE Laboratory, University of Biskra, BP 145 Biskra, 07000, Algeria Corresponding author: Khaled M. Elokely - Institute for Computational Molecular Science and Department of Chemistry, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122, United States Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Currently the entire human population is in the midst of a global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV- 2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome–CoronaVirus-2). This highly pathogenic virus has to date caused >71 million infections and >1.6 million deaths in >180 countries. Several vaccines and drugs are being studied as possible treatment or prophylactics of this viral infection. M3CLpro (coronavirus main cysteine protease) is a promising drug target as it has a significant role in viral replication. Here we use the X-ray crystal structure of M3CLpro in complex with Boceprevir to study the dynamic changes of the protease upon ligand binding. The binding free energy was calculated for water molecules at different locations of the binding site, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations were carried out for the M3CLpro/Boceprevir complex, to thoroughly understand the chemical environment of the binding site.
    [Show full text]
  • Repurposing of FDA Approved Drugs
    Antiviral Drugs (In Phase IV) ABACAVIR GEMCITABINE ABACAVIR SULFATE GEMCITABINE HYDROCHLORIDE ACYCLOVIR GLECAPREVIR ACYCLOVIR SODIUM GRAZOPREVIR ADEFOVIR DIPIVOXIL IDOXURIDINE AMANTADINE IMIQUIMOD AMANTADINE HYDROCHLORIDE INDINAVIR AMPRENAVIR INDINAVIR SULFATE ATAZANAVIR LAMIVUDINE ATAZANAVIR SULFATE LEDIPASVIR BALOXAVIR MARBOXIL LETERMOVIR BICTEGRAVIR LOPINAVIR BICTEGRAVIR SODIUM MARAVIROC BOCEPREVIR MEMANTINE CAPECITABINE MEMANTINE HYDROCHLORIDE CARBARIL NELFINAVIR CIDOFOVIR NELFINAVIR MESYLATE CYTARABINE NEVIRAPINE DACLATASVIR OMBITASVIR DACLATASVIR DIHYDROCHLORIDE OSELTAMIVIR DARUNAVIR OSELTAMIVIR PHOSPHATE DARUNAVIR ETHANOLATE PARITAPREVIR DASABUVIR PENCICLOVIR DASABUVIR SODIUM PERAMIVIR DECITABINE PERAMIVIR DELAVIRDINE PIBRENTASVIR DELAVIRDINE MESYLATE PODOFILOX DIDANOSINE RALTEGRAVIR DOCOSANOL RALTEGRAVIR POTASSIUM DOLUTEGRAVIR RIBAVIRIN DOLUTEGRAVIR SODIUM RILPIVIRINE DORAVIRINE RILPIVIRINE HYDROCHLORIDE EFAVIRENZ RIMANTADINE ELBASVIR RIMANTADINE HYDROCHLORIDE ELVITEGRAVIR RITONAVIR EMTRICITABINE SAQUINAVIR ENTECAVIR SAQUINAVIR MESYLATE ETRAVIRINE SIMEPREVIR FAMCICLOVIR SIMEPREVIR SODIUM FLOXURIDINE SOFOSBUVIR FOSAMPRENAVIR SORIVUDINE FOSAMPRENAVIR CALCIUM STAVUDINE FOSCARNET TECOVIRIMAT FOSCARNET SODIUM TELBIVUDINE GANCICLOVIR TENOFOVIR ALAFENAMIDE GANCICLOVIR SODIUM TENOFOVIR ALAFENAMIDE FUMARATE TIPRANAVIR VELPATASVIR TRIFLURIDINE VIDARABINE VALACYCLOVIR VOXILAPREVIR VALACYCLOVIR HYDROCHLORIDE ZALCITABINE VALGANCICLOVIR ZANAMIVIR VALGANCICLOVIR HYDROCHLORIDE ZIDOVUDINE Antiviral Drugs (In Phase III) ADEFOVIR LANINAMIVIR OCTANOATE
    [Show full text]
  • Criteria Grid Best Practices and Interventions for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatitis C
    Criteria Grid Best Practices and Interventions for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatitis C Best Practice/Intervention: Chevaliez S. et al. (2011) Mechanisms of non‐response to antiviral treatment in chronic hepatitis C. Clinics & Research in Hepatology & Gastroenterology, 35(Suppl 1):31‐41. Date of Review: February 8, 2015 Reviewer(s): Christine Hu Part A Category: Basic Science Clinical Science Public Health/Epidemiology Social Science Programmatic Review Best Practice/Intervention: Focus: Hepatitis C Hepatitis C/HIV Other: Level: Group Individual Other: Target Population: people with HCV infection Setting: Health care setting/Clinic Home Other: Country of Origin: France Language: English French Other: Part B YES NO N/A COMMENTS Is the best practice/intervention a meta‐analysis or Overview of the mechanisms involved in primary research? non‐response (lack of sustained virological response) to the current and future standard treatment of chronic hepatitis C infection through the use of published data The best practice/intervention has utilized an evidence‐based approach to assess: Efficacy Effectiveness The best practice/intervention has been evaluated in more than one patient setting to assess: Efficacy Effectiveness YES NO N/A COMMENTS The best practice/intervention has been Articles referenced may originate from operationalized at a multi‐country level: various countries. There is evidence of capacity building to engage individuals to accept treatment/diagnosis There is evidence of outreach models and case studies to improve access
    [Show full text]
  • New Treatment Approaches and Cure Strategies
    Hepatitis C: New Therapies in 2016-2017 Mark Sulkowski, MD Professor of Medicine Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Medical Director, Viral Hepatitis Center Divisions of Infectious Diseases and Gastroenterology/Hepatology Baltimore, Maryland Current HCV direct acting antiviral regimens cure the majority of persons treated in phase 3 trials Highly efficacious DAAs target New England Journal of Medicine trials in GT 1 1 Receptor binding different points in the HCV lifecycle published in 20142 and endocytosis Transport 96% and release Fusion and uncoating Virion assembly (+) RNA ER lumen Translation and LD polyprotein LD processing NS5A inhibitors LD 3680/ Membranous 3826 web RNA replication ER lumen Sustained Virologic NS3 protease inhibitors Nucleos(t)ide and Non- Response nucleoside NS5B inhibitors [SVR] 1. Lindenbach BD, Rice CM. Nature 2005;436(Suppl):933–8; 2. Liang J, Ghany MG. N Engl J Med 2014;370:2043–7; 3. Burki T. Lancet Infect Dis 2014;14:452–3 Globally, 150 million people are infected with hepatitis C and 350,000 to 500,000 people die each year Messina JP et al, Hepatology, 2015; 61: 77-87. WHO Global Health Sector HCV Strategy Global targets for 2030 Reduce Expand and Decrease new Decrease global enhance services infections deaths suffering and costs • 90% diagnosed • 70% reduction in • 60% reduction in • 90% of eligible HCV incidence HCV-related deaths people treated • 50% reduction by • 90% of those treated 2020 are cured • Zero new infections • 50% of PWID due to unsafe blood covered by harm transfusions reduction services • 75% reduction in by 2020 new infections due to unsafe medical practices by 2020 WHO.
    [Show full text]