Differences in viral kinetics between genotypes 1 and 3 of hepatitis C virus and between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients during antiviral therapy

Table 1 Interferon administration schedule (interferon dosage in MU)

Group	d 0	d 1	d 2	d 3	d 4	d 5	d 6	d 7	d 8	d 9	d 10	d 11	d 12	d 13	d 14	d 15	d 16
3 TIW	9	-	3	-	3	-	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	-	3	-	3	3 TIW until wk 48
3 Q2D	9	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	3	-	3	3 Q2D until wk 48
3 QD	9	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	-	3
9 QD	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	9	-	3

All patients received a first dose of 9 Mega units (MU) of IFN-α. Group “3 TIW” received 3 MU doses of IFN-α three times a week until wk 48; group “3 Q2D” received 3 MU doses of IFN-α every other day; group “3 QD” received 3 MU daily after the first dose until d 14, followed by 3 MU every other day until wk 48; group “9 QD” received 9 MU daily after the first dose until d 14, followed by 3 MU every other day until wk 48. All groups received two doses of 500 mg ribavirin daily for 48 wk. -:Interferon was not administered that day.

Table 2 Mean viral kinetic parameters of each HCV genotype and treatment schedule group in non-cirrhotic patients

	IFN doseand schedule	n	1st phase decline1(log IU/mL)	2nd phaseslope2 (log/wk)
HCV genotype 1	3 TIW	5		0.09
	3 Q2D	4		0.12
	3 QD	7		0.15
	9 QD	5		0.27
Total non-cirrhotic		21	1.03	0.18
HCV genotype 3	3 TIW	3		0.9
	3 Q2D	3		0.78
	3 QD	2		0.96
	9 QD	5		1.11b
Total non-cirrhotic		13	1.65b	0.99b

¹Treatment during the 1^st phase decline was equal in all dosing groups and thus was not given separately.

²There was no significant difference in the 2^nd phase decline slope between dosing groups per genotype.

^bP < 0.001 vs genotype 1.

Table 3 Mean viral kinetic parameters for each HCV genotype and histological status

HCVgenotype	Histologystatus	n	Baseline viralload(log IU/mL)	1st phasedecline1(log IU/mL)	2nd phaseslope1(log/wk)
1	cirrhotics	7	5.9	0.69	0.06
	non-cirrhotics	21	6	1.03a	0.18a
Total		28	5.9	0.95	0.15
3	cirrhotics	5	6.4c	1.89b	0.57b
	non-cirrhotics	13	5.7	1.65b	0.99b
Total		18	5.9	1.72d	0.87d

¹Treatment during the 1^st phase decline was equal in all dosing groups and no significant difference was found in the 2^nd phase decline slope between the dosing groups (Table 2), thus the effect of histological status was studied in all dosing groups together.

^aP < 0.02 vs cirrhotic genotype 1 patients;

^cP < 0.03 vs all other patients;

^bP < 0.01,

^dP < 0.001 vs genotype 1 patients.

Table 4 Virological end-points per HCV genotype and histological status n (%)

HCVgenotype	Histologystatus	n	Noresponse	Relapse	Sustained virologicalresponse
1	cirrhotics	7	7 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
	non-cirrhotics	21	13 (62)	4 (19)	4 (19)
Total		28	20 (72)	4 (14)	4 (14)
3	cirrhotics	5	1 (20)	1 (20)	3 (60)a
	non-cirrhotics	13	2 (15)	1 (8)	10 (77)b
Total		18	3 (17)	2 (11)	13 (72)b

^aP < 0.05,

^bP < 0.001 vs genotype 1.