Effectiveness and Safety of Sofosbuvir-Based Regimens for Chronic HCV Genotype 3 Infection: Results of the HCV-TARGET Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sofosbuvir (SOF) is active against all hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes, and SOF-based therapies lead to high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR). However, genotype 3 (GT3) HCV remains a challenge with lower SVR rates reported, particularly in patients with cirrhosis. This study reports the effectiveness and safety of SOF-based therapy in patients with GT3 HCV treated in clinical practice. METHODS: Hepatitis C Virus Therapeutic Registry and Research Network is an international, prospective observational study evaluating patients treated in usual clinical practice. Patients with GT3 HCV were analyzed to assess predictors of treatment response and adverse events using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Treatment outcomes were available for 197 patients treated with SOF and ribavirin (RBV), with or without peginterferon, including 54% with cirrhosis and 49% who failed prior therapy. Of 178 patients treated with SOF/RBV, 60% achieved SVR at 12 weeks (SVR12), compared with 84% of 19 patients treated with SOF/peginterferon/RBV. For patients treated with SOF/RBV, the SVR12 rate was 58% in treatment-naive patients with cirrhosis, and 42% in those with cirrhosis who failed prior therapy. In noncirrhotic patients, SVR12 rates were 89% in treatment-naive and 88% in treatment-experienced patients. After controlling for age and sex, absence of cirrhosis (odds ratio [OR], 6.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.78-14.74), albumin levels ≥3.2 g/dL (OR, 12.48; 95% CI, 3.86-40.33), and platelet count >10(5) cells/µL (OR, 7.44; 95% CI, 3.51-15.78) were associated with greater odds of SVR12 CONCLUSIONS: SVR rates were acceptable in patients with GT3 HCV without cirrhosis; however, in those with cirrhosis, treatment with SOF/RBV was suboptimal, highlighting the need for new therapies for this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".