The Magic Bullet Theory

Waiting for the “Next Best Thing”


Last Tuesday was the annual Holiday Pot Luck for the twice-monthly Hepatitis C support group that meets in the California Pacific Medical Center Pathology Conference room. There were about two dozen people there and, in the tradition of potluck dinners everywhere, enough food for twice that number. Best of all, there were plenty of desserts.

Of the two dozen people or so people attending, about half were either currently in treatment or had successfully completed treatment; another quarter had undergone treatment and either failed to respond or the virus had reappeared after the completion of treatment and the last quarter had yet to make a decision about treatment. About half the folks who had successfully completed treatment and never had a recurrence of the virus were people with Hepatitis C genotype 2. This genotype has about an 80% chance of clearance, and excellent prospects of a sustained viral response, with 24 weeks of standard interferon and ribavirin treatment.

After people had settled down with their plates of food and glasses of non-alcoholic libations (ginger potions of all sorts were quite popular), everyone reported on their general state of health, how they felt and any significant issues they had that might be caused or intensified by the disease or their treatment status. Several common themes emerged as people told their stories.

The people who had successfully completed treatment reported that by and large they felt they were back to normal functioning (one individual reported that she felt that after 2 years she still did not feel she was back to her previous cognitive function level). They felt their energy had returned, they no longer had shortness of breath, their strength was back and generally they were physically in good condition. Most felt that their mental faculties and their memory had returned to pre-treatment levels as well. To a person, they reported that it took considerably longer to return to full function than the time that is considered standard by the medical establishment. The usually quoted time to recover from the effects of interferon, ribavirin and the other associated drugs used in treatment is 3 to 6 months. Everyone reported that the time it took them to recover from treatment was in the range of 6 months to 1 year with a few reporting longer times than that.

The people currently in treatment (and for that matter, the folks who had completed treatment) reported two side effects as most debilitating: fatigue and brain fog. The fatigue ranged from merely difficult to extreme with no one reporting only mild fatigue. That said, person after person stated that the most irritating and frustrating side effect was the cognitive deficit associated with interferon brain fog. It was not just the increased memory difficulties, it was the inability to concentrate, the ease of distraction, the loss of train of thought that drove everyone crazy. Most folks also reported nausea of varying degrees, insomnia, sweats etc.; but those paled in comparison to the frustration of brain fog and the annoyance of being tired all the time.

The rest of the people at the meeting, the non-responders to treatment and the people yet to attempt treatment, all had the same outlook: they were waiting for the new and better drugs to become available. They had very different reasons for this viewpoint, but it was surprising to see the uniformity of their point of view.

The non-responders and fail-to-sustainers had all failed at the standard interferon and ribavirin treatment. They and their doctors had come to the conclusion that the two drug standard treatment was not going to successfully defeat the virus in their bodies. They need the additional punch of one of the new drugs in order to have a real chance at success. You can’t argue with that conclusion, when what is available has failed, you have to await further developments to move forward.

The people who had not done any treatment had different reasons for waiting for the next new and better drugs. Many were afraid of the side effects but most were looking for a therapy with a better chance of success that the standard therapy. The standard treatment has about an 80% chance of clearing genotype 2 Hepatitis C. It has a 40-45% chance to clear genotype 1 Hepatitis C. The drug most likely to be approved next is Telaprevir, a protease inhibitor (Boceprevir, a similar protease inhibitor is supposedly not far behind). Telaprevir has demonstrated in research testing that, in combination with interferon and ribavirin, it has a genotype 1 clearance rate of about 60-65% (Boceprevir has similar test results). On the surface the reasons for waiting for the new drugs are clear-cut, 60% is a much better chance than 40%. There are a lot of other factors to consider before pinning one’s hopes on the next best thing, however.

First is the discovery of variations in the IL28B gene and how these variations affect response to treatment. If you have the CC variant of the gene, the evidence indicates that your chances of responding well to standard treatment rise to the 60% level, or about the same as the telaprevir response rates. The test to determine which variant you have is available, not extremely expensive and clearly gives information you can use to make a decision about treatment. For a more info the link is here.

Secondly, the new drugs are not assured of either approval or timeliness. The latest Telaprevir application was submitted to the FDA in November, 2010 which means a decision is 6 to 10 months away. Boceprevir has not even reached the “it’s coming in the next x months stage of rumor yet.” There is also the, admittedly small, chance that Telaprevir is never approved. I have many friends who are in the gene-splicing and drug development fields who report a number of instances when companies were extremely confident of FDA approval only to be turned down during the final application. The FDA might come back with concerns that require further testing or additional data submissions, all of which could move the timeline much further out. The promising new polymerase inhibitors (RG7128 and RO5024048 for example) are only just beginning phase II trials which means they are at least 3-5 years away from any sort of approval and only if they succeed in further trials. There are other drugs even further away, etc.

Thirdly, these new drugs are expensive. They project to be about twice as expensive as the current interferon and ribavirin. The plan is that you only need 24 weeks of treatment, but it will be a very expensive 24 weeks. Therefore the question of once the drugs are approved how long it will take for them to be added to insurance company drug formularies so they will be covered by your insurance becomes extremely important. As we all know, insurance companies can be quite recalcitrant about approving new therapies.

Finally, there are all the considerations about your personal situation. What stage is your liver disease? What is your viral load? What is your general health? How old are you? These questions only start to list your issues. What is your financial situation? What is your insurance coverage? What is your work situation? Do you have solid family support? If you have to go on disability, how would that affect your job future? Can you even tell your employer, family, friends and coworkers that you have the disease? All of these and more are considerations that may be more important than the rates of viral response of the various drugs.

Remember two things as think about all the ramifications of when and how to deal with your Hepatitis C: first, there is always a newer, shinier, more promising therapy in the future and second, the best is the enemy of the good.