Trial reportAntiviral therapy2016
Modelling the interaction between danoprevir and mericitabine in the treatment of chronic HCV infection.
Trial report in Antiviral therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical trial simulation of antiviral drugs.Journal of virology · 2026Review
- Model-Informed Drug Development for Anti-Infectives: State of the Art and Future.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Review
- A pharmacokinetic/viral kinetic model to evaluate treatment of chronic HCV infection with a non-nucleoside polymerase inhibitor.Antiviral therapy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundModelling HCV RNA decline kinetics under therapy has proven useful for characterizing treatment effectiveness.
methodsHere we model HCV viral kinetics (VK) in 72 patients given a combination of danoprevir, a protease inhibitor, and mericitabine, a nucleoside polymerase inhibitor, for 14 days in the INFORM-1 trial. A biphasic VK model with time-varying danoprevir and mericitabine effectiveness and Bliss independence for characterizing the interaction between both drugs provided the best fit to the VK data.
resultsThe average final antiviral effectiveness of the drug combination varied between 0.998 for 100 mg three times daily of danoprevir and 500 mg twice daily of mericitabine and 0.9998 for 600 mg twice daily of danoprevir and 1,000 mg twice daily of mericitabine. Using the individual parameters estimated from the VK data collected over 2 weeks, we were not able to reproduce the low sustained virological response rates obtained in a more recent study where patients were treated with a combination of mericitabine and ritonavir-boosted danoprevir for 24 weeks.
conclusionsThis suggests that drug-resistant viruses emerge after 2 weeks of treatment and that longer studies are necessary to provide accurate predictions of longer treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.