Kyung-Ah Kim, Sejoon Lee, Hye Jung Park, Eun Sun Jang, Youn Jae Lee, Sung Bum Cho, Young Suk Kim, In Hee Kim, Byung Seok Lee, Woo Jin Chung, Sang Hoon Ahn, Seungtaek Kim, Sook Hyang Jeong
Clin Mol Hepatol 2023;29(2):496-509. Published online March 6, 2023
Background/Aims We used next-generation sequencing (NGS) to analyze resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) and retreatment outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who failed direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA) treatment in South Korea.
Methods Using prospectively collected data from the Korean HCV cohort study, we recruited 36 patients who failed DAA treatment in 10 centers between 2007 and 2020; 29 blood samples were available from 24 patients. RASs were analyzed using NGS.
Result s: RASs were analyzed for 13 patients with genotype 1b, 10 with genotype 2, and one with genotype 3a. The unsuccessful DAA regimens were daclatasvir+asunaprevir (n=11), sofosbuvir+ribavirin (n=9), ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (n=3), and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (n=1). In the patients with genotype 1b, NS3, NS5A, and NS5B RASs were detected in eight, seven, and seven of 10 patients at baseline and in four, six, and two of six patients after DAA failure, respectively. Among the 10 patients with genotype 2, the only baseline RAS was NS3 Y56F, which was detected in one patient. NS5A F28C was detected after DAA failure in a patient with genotype 2 infection who was erroneously treated with daclatasvir+asunaprevir. After retreatment, 16 patients had a 100% sustained virological response rate.
Conclusions NS3 and NS5A RASs were commonly present at baseline, and there was an increasing trend of NS5A RASs after failed DAA treatment in genotype 1b. However, RASs were rarely present in patients with genotype 2 who were treated with sofosbuvir+ribavirin. Despite baseline or treatment-emergent RASs, retreatment with pan-genotypic DAA was highly successful in Korea, so we encourage active retreatment after unsuccessful DAA treatment.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Precision oncology through next generation sequencing in hepatocellular carcinoma Sayali Shinde, Carola Maria Bigogno, Ana Simmons, Nikita Kathuria, Aruni Ghose, Vedika Apte, Patricia Lapitan, Shania Makker, Aydin Caglayan, Stergios Boussios Heliyon.2025; 11(3): e42054. CrossRef
Bridging the Gap in Elimination of Hepatitis C Virus among People Who Use Drugs in South Korea Beom Kyung Kim Gut and Liver.2025; 19(5): 635. CrossRef
Correspondence on Letter regarding “Toward hepatitis C virus elimination using artificial intelligence” Ming-Ying Lu, Ming-Lung Yu Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2024; 30(2): 274. CrossRef
Background/Aims It remains to be determined whether switching from adefovir (ADV) to tenofovir (TDF) provides better virological outcomes in patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV plus nucleoside analogue (ADV+NA) therapy for NA-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB).
Methods In this prospective trial, patients who showed partial responses (defined as serum hepatitis B virus [HBV] DNA >60 IU/mL) to ADV+NA therapy for NA resistance were randomly allocated to receive TDF plus NA (TDF+NA group, n=16) or to continue their current therapy (ADV+NA group, n=16). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with complete virological response (CVR, defined as serum HBV DNA <60 IU/mL) at 48 weeks.
Result s: The median age was 52 years (16 men), and 28 were positive for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg). The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The proportion with CVR was significantly higher in the TDF+NA group than in the ADV+NA group at 24 weeks (81.3% vs. 25.0%, P=0.001) and 48 weeks (87.5% vs. 37.5%, P=0.002). Furthermore, a decrease in the serum HBV DNA level of >2log10 IU/mL was more likely in the TDF+NA group at both 24 and 48 weeks (68.8% vs. 56.3%, P=0.014 vs. 81.3% vs. 56.3%, P=0.001, respectively). During the follow-up, the rate of HBeAg seroconversion was higher in the TDF+NA group than the ADV+NA group (12.5% vs. 6.25%, P=0.640), as was that for the hepatitis B surface antigen (6.25% vs. 0%, P=0.080). No serious adverse events due to antiviral agents occurred.
Conclusions In patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV+NA therapy for NA-resistant CHB, switching from ADV to TDF might provide better virological outcomes.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Comparative efficacy and safety of pegylated interferon-alpha monotherapy vs combination therapies with entecavir or tenofovir in chronic hepatitis B patients Huiqing Liang, Xiaoting Zheng, Qianguo Mao, Jiaen Yang, Qingfa Ruan, Chuncheng Wu, Yaoyu Liu, Siyan Chen, Luyun Zhang, Manying Zhang, Hongli Zhuang, Li Lin, Shaodong Chen, Hyun Jin Kwun Microbiology Spectrum.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Predictive value of hepatic, hematological, and immunological markers and their temporal dynamics in chronic hepatitis B functional cure Jianyong Zeng, Caixia Zheng, Yincheng Zheng, Xiulan Xue, Benjamin M. Liu Microbiology Spectrum.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Entecavir versus tenofovir on the recurrence of hepatitis B–related HCC after liver transplantation: A multicenter observational study Deok-Gie Kim, YoungRok Choi, Jinsoo Rhu, Shin Hwang, Young Kyoung You, Dong-Sik Kim, Yang Won Nah, Bong-Wan Kim, Jai Young Cho, Koo Jeong Kang, Jae Do Yang, Donglak Choi, Dong Jin Joo, Myoung Soo Kim, Je Ho Ryu, Jae Geun Lee Liver Transplantation.2023; 29(12): 1272. CrossRef
KASL clinical practice guidelines for management of chronic hepatitis B
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2022; 28(2): 276. CrossRef
Is tenofovir and entecavir combination therapy still the optimal treatment for chronic hepatitis B patients with prior suboptimal response? Byoung Kuk Jang Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2020; 26(3): 312. CrossRef
Long-term Efficacy of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Monotherapy for Multidrug-Resistant Chronic HBV infection Hye Won Lee, Jun Yong Park, Jin Woo Lee, Ki Tae Yoon, Chang Wook Kim, Hana Park, Young Seok Kim, Soon Ku Paik, Jung Il Lee, Beom Kyung Kim, Kwang-Hyub Han, Sang Hoon Ahn Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2019; 17(7): 1348. CrossRef
Comparison of the long-term efficacy of tenofovir and entecavir in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naïve HBeAg-positive patients with chronic hepatitis B Dachuan Cai, Chen Pan, Weihua Yu, Shuangsuo Dang, Jia Li, Shanming Wu, Nan Jiang, Maorong Wang, Zhaohua Zhang, Feng Lin, Shaojie Xin, Yongfeng Yang, Baoshen Shen, Hong Ren Medicine.2019; 98(1): e13983. CrossRef
Switching from tenofovir and nucleoside analogue therapy to tenofovir monotherapy in virologically suppressed chronic hepatitis B patients with antiviral resistance Dong Yun Kim, Hye Won Lee, Jeong Eun Song, Beom Kyung Kim, Seung Up Kim, Do Young Kim, Sang Hoon Ahn, Kwang‐Hyub Han, Jun Yong Park Journal of Medical Virology.2018; 90(3): 497. CrossRef
Step-down Strategy in Antiviral Resistant Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Who Achieved Viral Suppression With Rescue Combination Therapy Dong Yun Kim, Jun Yong Park Future Virology.2018; 13(10): 711. CrossRef
Efficacy and safety of three adefovir‐based combination therapies in HBeAg‐positive chronic hepatitis B patients with suboptimal response to adefovir monotherapy M.‐L. Wang, E.‐Q. Chen, D.‐M. Zhang, L.‐Y. Du, L.‐B. Yan, T.‐Y. Zhou, X.‐Z. Lei, B.‐J. Lei, J.‐J. Lu, J. Liao, H. Tang Journal of Viral Hepatitis.2017; 24(S1): 21. CrossRef
First
Prev
