scholarly journals Direct‐acting antiviral interactions with opioids, alcohol or illicit drugs of abuse in HCV‐infected patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-44
Author(s):  
Kuntheavy Ing Lorenzini ◽  
François Girardin
2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa J. Maier ◽  
Michael P. Schaub

Abstract. Pharmacological neuroenhancement, defined as the misuse of prescription drugs, illicit drugs, or alcohol for the purpose of enhancing cognition, mood, or prosocial behavior, is not widespread in Europe – nevertheless, it does occur. Thus far, no drug has been proven as safe and effective for cognitive enhancement in otherwise healthy individuals. European studies have investigated the misuse of prescription and illicit stimulants to increase cognitive performance as well as the use of tranquilizers, alcohol, and cannabis to cope with stress related to work or education. Young people in educational settings report pharmacological neuroenhancement more frequently than those in other settings. Although the regular use of drugs for neuroenhancement is not common in Europe, the irregular and low-dose usage of neuroenhancers might cause adverse reactions. Previous studies have revealed that obtaining adequate amounts of sleep and using successful learning techniques effectively improve mental performance, whereas pharmacological neuroenhancement is associated with ambiguous effects. Therefore, non-substance-related alternatives should be promoted to cope with stressful situations. This paper reviews the recent research on pharmacological neuroenhancement in Europe, develops a clear definition of the substances used, and formulates recommendations for practitioners regarding how to react to requests for neuroenhancement drug prescriptions. We conclude that monitoring the future development of pharmacological neuroenhancement in Europe is important to provide effective preventive measures when required. Furthermore, substance use to cope with stress related to work or education should be studied in depth because it is likely more prevalent and dangerous than direct neuroenhancement.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-386
Author(s):  
Mircea Manuc ◽  
Carmen M. Preda ◽  
Corneliu P. Popescu ◽  
Cristian Baicuș ◽  
Theodor Voiosu ◽  
...  

Background & Aims: Literature data suggest that HCV genotype-1b is present in 93-99% of the Romanian patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). We present the genotyping tests recently performed on patients with HCV and advanced fibrosis eligible for the Direct-Acting Antiviral (DAA) therapy, as well as the prevalence of these cases across Romania.Methods: The genotyping method was performed on 7,421 HCV patients with advanced fibrosis. The detection method was automatic real time PCR platform M2000 (Abbott). Every subject was introduced into a database including age, sex, county and address.Results: Genotype 1b was almost exclusively present: 7,392/7,421 (99.6%). Genotype 1b patients were 19.6% from Bucharest, 49% were males, with a median age of 60 years. Genotype non-1b was encountered in 29/7,421 subjects (0.4%), 62% were males, 69% from Bucharest and the median age was 52 years. Most of the subjects (75%) were in the 6th and 7th age decade. The prevalence of these cases varied significantly across Romanian counties: the highest was in Bucharest (61.3/105), Bihor (47/105), Iasi (46/105) and Constanța (43/105), and the lowest in Ilfov (2.8/105), Harghita (3.7/105), Covasna (5.4/105) and Maramureș (8.8/105) (p<0.001).Conclusions: Genotype 1b is encountered in 99.6% of patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis from Romania. The presence of genotypes non-1b is more common in Bucharest, in males and at a younger age. There are significant differences regarding the distribution of these cases across Romania: the highest rates are in Bucharest, Bihor, Iasi and Constanta.Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; DAA: direct-acting antiviral agent; GT: genotype; HBV: hepatitis B virus; HCC: hepatocellular carcinoma; HCV: hepatitis C virus; IDU: intravenous drug users; MELD: model for end stage liver disease; NASH: non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; SVR; sustained virologic response.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Al Atbee ◽  
Saad Shaheen Al-Taher ◽  
Majid Alabbood

Background: Up to date, there is no consensus on the best combination of direct-acting antiviral to treat hepatitis C virus in kidney transplant recipients. Objective: This study aims to analyze the efficacy of combination of sofosbuvir and ledipasvir regimen for treatment of hepatitis C virus infected kidney transplant patients. Method: A cross-sectional study conducted in a nephrology clinic and the Nephrology Center in Basrah Teaching Hospital from June 2015 to June 2018. Ledifos (90 mg Ledipasvir and 400 mg Sofosbuvir fixed-dose) was given as a single daily dose for all the participants for 12 weeks. Response for therapy was tested by follow up hepatitis C virus load at the end of 12 weeks and 24 weeks. The sustained virological response was defined as negative viral load of hepatitis C virus (aviremia) at the end of therapy. This study was done according to the Helsinki Congress. Results: A total of 60 (16 females) patients with renal transplantation and hepatitis C virus infection were included. Mean age was 40±6.2 years. A sustained virological response observed in all of the patients who received Ledifos after 12 and 24 weeks of therapy for all genotypes (1a, 1b and 4); p= 0.0001. Genotype 1a was more prevalent among males, 34 (56.6%); p= 0.0001, and it was the most common genotype tested negative serologically, 11 (18.3%). Conclusion: Ledifos therapy is effective and safe option for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in the post–renal transplant setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document