Impact of all oral anti-hepatitis C virus therapy: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics on studies included in analysis

Ref.	Previous treatment	No. of arms	Study arms/types	No. of patients (n)	Males (n)	Age median (yr)	Median BMI	Cirrhosis (n)
Afdhal et al[12]	Naïve	4	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	865	513	53	27	136
Afdhal et al[11]	NR	4	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	440	287	56	28	88
Bacon et al[13]	NR	3	P + R vs P + R + BOC	403	268	53	28	49
Flamm et al[14]	NR	2	P + R vs P + R + BOC	201	140	53	28	33
Fried et al[15]	Naïve	5	P + R vs P + R + SIM	386	213	46	25	0
Hézode et al[16]	Naïve	4	P + R vs TEL + P vs TEL + P + R	323	192	45	24	1
Jacobson et al[17]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + TEL	1088	636	49	26	68
Kowdley et al[19]	Naïve	3	SOF vs SOF + R	332	214	50	28	0
Kowdley et al[18]	Naïve	3	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	647	375	52	28	0
Kumada et al[20]	Naïve	2	P + R vs P + R + TEL	189	99	54	23	0
Kwo et al[21]	Naïve	5	P + R vs P + R + BOC	520	305	45		37
Lawitz et al[22]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + SOF	121	73	49	27	0
Lawitz et al[23]	NR	2	SOF + LED vs SOF + LED + R	40	29	53	31	22
Lawitz et al[23]	Naïve	3	SOF + LED vs SOF + LED + R	60	37	48	29	0
Marcellin et al[24]	Naïve	4	TEL + Palfa + R	161	80	45	24	4
McHutchison et al[25]	Naïve	4	P + R vs TEL + P + R	250	157	49	27	51
McHutchison et al[26]	NR	4	P + R vs TEL + P vs TEL + P + R	453	306	52	28	74
Osinusi et al[27]	Naïve	2	SOF + R vs SOF + low dose R	50	33	55	29	13
Pearlman et al[28]	Naïve	2	P + R vs P + R + BOC	101	62	53	29	20
Poordad et al[29]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + BOC	1097	656	49		100
Sherman et al[31]	Naïve	3	TEL + P + R (diff dur)	440	271	51		42
Rodríguez-Torres et al[30]	Naïve	4	P + R vs P + R + SOF	63	43	45	28	0
Zeuzem et al[32]	NR	3	P + R vs P + R + TEL	662	460	51	27	169
Zeuzem et al[33]	NR	7	P + R vs P + R + SIM	462	311	50	27	83

BMI: Body mass index; P: Peg interferon; R: Ribavirin; TEL: Telaprevir; BOC: Boceprevir; LED: Ledipasvir; SOF: Sofosbuvir; SIM: Simeprevir; NR: Non-responders.

Table 2 Pooled outcome data

Regimen	Type	n	SVR (%)	SAE (%)	DDR (%)	Cost/wk ($)	Cost/SVR ($)
P + R	Naïve	14	49.4 (42.7-56.2)	10.1 (7.2-14.0)	9 (5.3-14.9)	900	87449
P + R	NR	5	18.5 (15.2-22.4)	7.9 (5.5-11.3)	3.5 (2.1-5.7)	900	233514
TEL or BOC based with P/R	Naïve	8	74.5 (67.8-80.2)	9.4 (6.7-13.0)	11.9 (6.5-20.7)	2300	148188
TEL or BOC based with P/R	NR	4	62.6 (55.9-68.7)	13.7 (11.3-16.5)	12.5 (9.8-15.8)	2300	176358
SOF or SIM based with P/R	Naïve	9	90.3 (83.6-94.4)	5.4 (1.9-12.5)	2.5 (1.1-5.4)	6900	91694
SOF or SIM based with P/R	NR	4	95.9 (91.5-98.1)	6.8 (1.1-12.8)	1.9 (0.5-7.1)	6900	86340
DAA + R	Naïve	5	92.3 (82.9-96.7)	3.1 (1.3-6.8)	0.9 (0.3-2.6)	12200	158613
DAA +R	NR	4	95.9 (91.5-98.1)	3.3 (1.1-9.9)	1.9 (0.5-7.1)	12200	152659
2 DAA, No P/R	Naïve	4	96.4 (93.6-98.0)	1.9 (0.6-5.7)	0.9 (0.3-2.7)	12000	149378
2 DAA, No P/R	NR	3	94.1 (88.9-97.0)	2.3 (0.6-8.8)	1.4 (0.3-6.5)	12000	153029

DAA: Direct acting antivirals; P: Peg interferon; R: Ribavirin; TEL: Telaprevir; BOC: Boceprevir; SOF: Sofosbuvir; SIM: Simeprevir; NR: Non-responders; SVR: Sustained viral response; SAE: Serious adverse events; DDR: Drug discontinuation rate.

Table 3 Various direct acting antivirals: Approved and investigational

Currently FDA approved DAA	Under development butcurrently non-FDA approved
TEL	Daclatasvir,
BOC	Asunaprevir,
LED	Beclabuvir
SOF	Faldaprevir
SIM	Mericitabine
SOF/LED (Harvoni)	Tegobuvir
Ombitasvir/Paritaprevir/Ritonavir with Dasabuvir (Viekira Pak)1	Grazoprevir with Elbasvir

¹FDA has approved Ombitasvir/Paritaprevir/Ritonavir with Dasabuvir (Viekira Pak) on December 19, 2014, i.e., after submission of our manuscript and is not included in our analysis. FDA: Food and Drug Administration; TEL: Telaprevir; BOC: Boceprevir; SOF: Sofosbuvir; SIM: Simeprevir; LED: Ledipasvir.