Researchers bring in new findings from the largest study to date comparing the efficacy of competing treatments for chronic hepatitis C infection (HCV).
The finding show that the regimens are similar when it comes to safety and their ability to provoke long-term viral eradication, according to researchers at Duke University Medical Center. Still, subgroup analysis reveals provocative data suggesting some approaches might be better than others for women and minorities.
The study findings may be helpful for the estimated 170 million people world-wide who have been diagnosed with hepatitis C as well as the physicians who treat them. Hepatitis C is a major health problem that can lead to liver disease and sometimes death. Recently, there has been considerable controversy over which treatment options are the most effective and the makers of the various medications have a lot at stake. Analysts estimate the U.S. prescription market for hepatitis C to be approximately $3 billion annually.
Treatments for hepatitis C are notoriously difficult, and sometimes the side effects are so debilitating that patients decide to stop therapy rather than endure the consequences. In addition, treatments are curative in less than half the people who receive them.
Current guidelines recommend a combination of peginterferon with the antiviral ribavirin for 48 weeks, "but no one has really compared the therapies prospectively and adequately until now," says John McHutchison, M.D., Associate Director of the Duke Clinical Research Institute and the lead author of the study appearing online in the New England Journal of Medicine.