New Therapies, Evidence, and Guidance in Hepatitis C Management: Expert Practices and Insights from an Educational Symposium at the AMCP 27th Annual Meeting Expo
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The 2013-2014 approvals of new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have engendered a paradigm shift in HCV treatment and management, offering the potential for a cure at a population level. The availability of the highly effective and relatively safe DAAs prompted revisions to guidance recommendations based on new clinical trial evidence. In the context of this paradigm shift and considerations of the costs associated with the new DAAs, managed care professionals face new questions and challenges regarding HCV treatment and management approaches. To address the continuing education needs of this group, PRIME Education, Inc. (PRIME) conducted a symposium on HCV at the 27th Annual Meeting Expo of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. Moderated by Michael R. Stinchon, Jr., RPh, the program panel featured 2 internationally recognized leaders in hepatitis C treatment and research: Norah Terrault, MD, MPH, and Alex Monto, MD. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the educational symposium presentations and discussions. METHODS: This article is organized by key questions that the panelists and attendees raised for discussion during the 2-hour symposium. The questions addressed methods for assessing liver fibrosis; comprehensive patient assessment to inform treatment decisions; the influence of viral load on decisions about treatment duration; the role of ribavirin in optimizing treatment efficacy; unmet treatment needs for patients with HCV genotype 3 or advanced liver disease; and managed care strategies for patient education, adherence promotion, and care coordination. In answering attendee questions on these issues, the expert panelists presented established evidence, and recognizing limitations to current evidence and guidance recommendations, they discussed applications of clinical judgment and offered their views and practices regarding individualized care for patients with HCV. SUMMARY: In response to questions about the utility of noninvasive methods for assessing liver fibrosis, the expert panel presented a comparative overview of the methodology, accuracy, risks, limitations, and costs of noninvasive tests and liver biopsy. Discussion highlighted the strengths of noninvasive methods for diagnosing advanced disease and cirrhosis and the methods' limitations that pose barriers to ensuring that patients receive necessary antiviral therapy. Based on guidance recommendations, treatment should be prioritized in patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis (Metavir score F3 to F4). While acknowledging the importance of this recommendation, the symposium panelists also argued that making effective decisions about whom, and when, to treat requires a more comprehensive clinical approach to patient assessment and adjusting recommended priorities according to individual patient considerations. This approach involves evaluating outcomes such as extrahepatic complications, including those affecting quality of life, functional status, and work productivity. In response to questions regarding decisions about DAA therapy duration based on viral load, the panel engaged the audience in thinking critically about evidence-based cutoff values and natural fluctuations of HCV RNA concentrations. Discussions centered on the importance of clinical judgment to ensure that the treatment duration promotes the highest efficacy and avoids risks of relapse. The panel responded to several audience questions about the role of ribavirin in new DAA regimens. Evidence-based presentations and discussions focused on patient-specific factors that must be considered to inform effective decisions about adding ribavirin. The panel took a similar approach to answering questions about emerging challenges and the difficult-to-treat populations of patients with HCV genotype 3 or advanced liver disease. The symposium concluded with presentation of, and discussion on, managed care strategies for educating patients about appropriate HCV medication use, improving adherence, and coordinating care provided by the interprofessional team. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of new DAAs for HCV raises new questions and challenges for managed care professionals, especially regarding prioritizing patients for immediate therapy as well as treatment and management approaches that account for the needs of individual patients and subpopulations. The educational symposium summarized in this article directly addressed key questions and challenges through presentations of evidence, guidance recommendations, and interactive discussions on the views and practices of international leaders in HCV treatment and research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».