ArticleHepatology communications2020
Safety and Efficacy of Limited Laboratory Monitoring for Hepatitis C Treatment: A Blinded Clinical Trial in Rwanda.
Article in Hepatology communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a Pharmacist-Led HCV Treatment Program at a Federally Qualified Health Center.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are highly effective and well-tolerated. However, only a small percentage of HCV-infected individuals globally have received therapy. Reducing the complexity of monitoring during HCV therapy, if shown to be safe, could facilitate greater access to HCV services, particularly in resource-limited settings such as sub-Saharan Africa. We enrolled a total of 300 patients who were chronically infected with genotype 4 HCV in Rwanda and treated them with fixed-dose ledispasvir/sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. For 60 consecutive participants enrolled, we blinded the study clinician to on-treatment laboratory results. We compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability in those with blinded laboratory results to those with standard laboratory monitoring. Baseline characteristics among those with blinded laboratory values were comparable to those with standard monitoring. Among both groups, the median age was 63 years, and the median HCV viral load was 5.9 log (versus 64 years and 6.0 log, respectively). Sustained virologic response rates at 12 weeks after treatment completion were similar in those with blinded laboratories (87%) compared to those with standard laboratory monitoring (87%). There was no increase in adverse events in those with blinded laboratory results, and no participants discontinued the study medication because of an adverse event.
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.