4.5 Article

Hepatitis C virus-related symptoms, but not quality of life, were improved by treatment with direct-acting antivirals

Journal

HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH
Volume 48, Issue 3, Pages E232-E239

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/hepr.12974

Keywords

direct-acting antivirals; hepatitis C virus; patient-reported outcomes; quality of life; symptoms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have a significantly high sustained virologic response rate after a short treatment course and do not have any severe adverse effects. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become increasingly important to assess the total impact of a chronic disease. We aimed to evaluate the changes in symptoms of patients with HCV infection treated with DAAs by using PROs. Methods: A total of 107 patients with chronic HCV infection were treated with DAAs. Daclatasvir/asunaprevir or sofosbuvir/ledipasvir was used for HCV 1B infection, and sofosbuvir/ribavirin for HCV 2A/2B infection. The PROs measured at the start of treatment and 1 year after the start of treatment were cirrhosis-related symptom score (CSS), presence of restless legs syndrome (RLS), Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), Pittsburg sleep quality index (PSQI), Kessler 6 score (K-6), and the SF-36 to measure quality of life (QOL). All patients had a sustained virologic response rate of 24. Results: The CSS, PSQI, K-6, and RLS scores were improved 1 year after beginning treatment. However, QOL had not recovered. Changes in total CSS were correlated with HCV genotype, sex, hypertensive drug use, serum low-density lipoprotein, and ESS at the start of treatment and RLS 1 year after the start of treatment. The factors that contributed to worsening of CSS were HCV genotype 2B and RLS 1 year after the start of treatment. Conclusion: Treatment with DAAs eliminated HCV-RNA and improved most symptoms, but QOL did not recover.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available