@Article{Flisiak2016,
journal="Clinical and Experimental Hepatology",
issn="2392-1099",
volume="2",
number="4",
year="2016",
title="Efficacy of HCV treatment in Poland at the turn of the interferon era – the EpiTer study",
abstract=" The aim of the study  was to analyze the efficacy achieved with regimens available for chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in Poland between 2013 and 2016.    Material and methods : Data were collected from 29 centers and included 6786 patients with available sustained virologic response (SVR) data between 1 January 2013 and 31 March 2016.    Results : The sustained virologic response rate for genotypes (G) 1a, 1b, 2, 3 and 4 was 62%, 56%, 92%, 67% and 56% respectively; 71% patients (n = 4832) were treated with pegylated interferon  (Peg-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV), with SVR rates of 58%, 49%, 92%, 67% and 55% respectively. The sustained virologic response among 5646 G1 infected patients was the lowest with natural interferon  (7%, n = 70) or PegIFN (50%, n = 3779) with RBV, and improved in those receiving triple regimens of Peg-IFN + RBV combined with boceprevir (47%, n = 485), telaprevir (64%, n = 805), simeprevir (73%, n = 132) or sofosbuvir (70%, n = 23). The sustained virologic response with interferon-free regimens of sofosbuvir and RBV (n = 7), sofosbuvir and simeprevir (n = 53), and ledipasvir and sofosbuvir (n = 64) achieved 86%, 89% and 94% respectively. The highest SVR of 98% was observed with ombitasvir/paritaprevir combined with dasabuvir (n = 227). Patients infected with G3 (n = 896) and G4 (n = 220) received mostly Peg-IFN + RBV with SVR of 67% and 56% respectively. Interferon-free regimens were administered in 18 G3/G4 patients and all achieved an SVR. Sofosbuvir combined with Peg-IFN and RBV was administered to 33 patients with an SVR rate of 94%, and a similar rate was achieved among 13 G2 patients treated with interferon and RBV.    Conclusions : We observed significant differences in efficacy of HCV regimens available in Poland at the turn of the interferon era. The data will be useful as a comparison for therapeutic options expected in the next few years.",
author="Flisiak, Robert
and Pogorzelska, Joanna
and Berak, Hanna
and Horban, Andrzej
and Orłowska, Iwona
and Simon, Krzysztof
and Tuchendler, Ewelina
and Madej, Grzegorz
and Piekarska, Anna
and Jabłkowski, Maciej
and Deroń, Zbigniew
and Mazur, Włodzimierz
and Kaczmarczyk, Marcin
and Janczewska, Ewa
and Pisula, Arkadiusz
and Smykał, Jacek
and Nowak, Krzysztof
and Matukiewicz, Marek
and Halota, Waldemar
and Wernik, Joanna
and Sikorska, Katarzyna
and Mozer-Lisewska, Iwona
and Rozpłochowski, Błażej
and Garlicki, Aleksander
and Tomasiewicz, Krzysztof
and Krzowska-Firych, Joanna
and Baka-Ćwierz, Barbara
and Kryczka, Wiesław
and Zarębska-Michaluk, Dorota
and Olszok, Iwona
and Boroń-Kaczmarska, Anna
and Sobala-Szczygieł, Barbara
and Szlauer, Bronisława
and Korcz-Ondrzejek, Bogumiła
and Sieklucki, Jerzy
and Pleśniak, Robert
and Ruszała, Agata
and Postawa-Kłosińska, Barbara
and Citko, Jolanta
and Lachowicz-Wawrzyniak, Anna
and Musialik, Joanna
and Jezierska, Edyta
and Dobracki, Witold
and Dobracka, Beata
and Hałubiec, Jan
and Krygier, Rafał
and Strokowska, Anna
and Chomczyk, Wojciech
and Witczak-Malinowska, Krystyna",
pages="138--143",
doi="10.5114/ceh.2016.63870",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/ceh.2016.63870"
}