Patient‐specific genetic factors predict treatment failure in sofosbuvir‐treated patients with chronic hepatitis C
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: According to pivotal clinical trials, cure rates for sofosbuvir-based antiviral therapy exceed 96%. Treatment failure is usually assumed to be because of virological resistance-associated substitutions or clinical risk factors, yet the role of patient-specific genetic factors has not been well explored. We determined if patient-specific genetic factors help predict patients likely to fail sofosbuvir treatment in real-world treatment situations. METHODS: We recruited sofosbuvir-treated patients with chronic hepatitis C from five Canadian treatment sites, and performed a case-control pharmacogenomics study assessing both previously published and novel genetic polymorphisms. Specifically studied were variants predicted to impair CES1-dependent production of sofosbuvir's active metabolite, interferon-λ signalling variants expected to impact a patient's immune response to the virus and an HLA variant associated with increased spontaneous and treatment-induced viral clearance. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-nine sofosbuvir-treated patients were available for analyses after exclusions, with 34 (9.5%) failing treatment. We identified CES1 variants as novel predictors for treatment failure in European patients (rs115629050 or rs4513095; odds ratio (OR): 5.43; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.64-18.01; P = .0057), replicated associations with IFNL4 variants predicted to increase interferon-λ signalling (eg rs12979860; OR: 2.25; 95% CI: 1.25-4.06; P = .0071) and discovered a novel association with a coding variant predicted to enhance the activity of IFNL4's receptor (rs2834167 in IL10RB; OR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.01-3.24; P = .047). CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, this work demonstrates that patient-specific genetic factors could be used as a tool to identify patients at higher risk of treatment failure and allow for these patients to receive effective therapy sooner.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".