Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Nov;28(11):1841-56. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2012.734798. Epub 2012 Oct 31.

Efficacy of telaprevir and boceprevir in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C patients: an indirect comparison using Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Author information

1
OptumInsight, Uxbridge, UK. Sandrine.cure@optum.com

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:

To indirectly compare the efficacy of telaprevir (TVR) and boceprevir (BOC) combined with peginterferon/ribavirin α-2a/2b (PR) in achieving sustained viral response (SVR) in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

METHODS:

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials reporting the efficacy of PR-based treatment in genotype 1 chronic HCV patients. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed on the endpoint of SVR, assuming fixed study effects. For treatment-experienced patients, only previous relapsers and partial responders were included, as no results in prior null responders were available for boceprevir.

RESULTS:

Eleven publications were included. In treatment-naïve patients, the odds ratios (OR) (posterior median [95% credible interval]) for telaprevir (12 weeks + response guided treatment [RGT] 24/48 weeks PR) and boceprevir (24 weeks + RGT 28/48 weeks PR) versus PR were respectively 3.80 (2.78-5.22) and 2.99 (2.23-4.01). The OR for telaprevir versus boceprevir was 1.42 (0.89-2.25), with a probability for telaprevir being more effective (P[OR > 1]) of 0.93. In treatment-experienced patients, the OR of telaprevir (12 weeks + 48 weeks PR) and boceprevir (32 weeks + RGT 36/48 weeks PR) versus PR were respectively 13.11 (7.30-24.43) and 5.36 (2.90-10.30). The OR for telaprevir versus boceprevir was 2.45 (1.02-5.80), with telaprevir having a probability of 0.98 of being more effective.

LIMITATIONS:

The main limitation of this study is the low number of trials included in the analysis, especially for the treatment-experienced patient population, which only allowed random-effect models to be explored. We tried to identify potential biases due to study heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS:

In the absence of direct comparative head-to-head studies between telaprevir and boceprevir for the treatment of chronic HCV genotype 1 patients, an indirect comparison based on Bayesian network meta-analysis suggests better efficacy for telaprevir than boceprevir in both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients.

PMID:
23016967
DOI:
10.1185/03007995.2012.734798
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Taylor & Francis Icon for PubMed Health
    Loading ...
    Support Center