2008
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8278(08)60005-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

3 Colchicine Versus Peg-Interferon Alfa 2b Long Term Therapy: Results of the 4 Year Copilot Trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
56
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the CO-PILOT trial, 9 patients who were nonresponders to initial IFN-based antiviral therapy were randomized to receive either PEG-IFN alfa2b or colchicine for four years; while in the EPIC 3 trial, 38 nonresponders were randomized to receive either PEG-IFN alfa-2b or no treatment for up to three years. Data from the CO-PILOT and EPIC 3 trials demonstrated no overall benefit of maintenance IFN therapy on occurrence of clinical events (HCC, etc.…”
Section: Cancer Therapymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the CO-PILOT trial, 9 patients who were nonresponders to initial IFN-based antiviral therapy were randomized to receive either PEG-IFN alfa2b or colchicine for four years; while in the EPIC 3 trial, 38 nonresponders were randomized to receive either PEG-IFN alfa-2b or no treatment for up to three years. Data from the CO-PILOT and EPIC 3 trials demonstrated no overall benefit of maintenance IFN therapy on occurrence of clinical events (HCC, etc.…”
Section: Cancer Therapymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[4][5][6][7] However, in those with advanced hepatitis C who did not achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR) to initial IFN-based antiviral therapy, maintenance peginterferon (PEG-IFN) treatment could not reduce overall HCC risk, as reported by the Hepatitis C Antiviral Long-Term Treatment Against Cirrhosis (HALT-C) and Colchicine Versus Pegintron Long-term Therapy (CO-PILOT) trials recently. 8,9 Based on previous reports, several meta-analyses have been performed to evaluate the preventive effect of IFN on development of HCC in HCV-or HBV-infected patients. [10][11][12] However, in these meta-analyses, the authors pooled data mostly from the retrospective or nonrandomized studies, and they also included studies of different publication types (including full papers, abstracts, etc.)…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[71][72][73] A subsequent report of the HALT-C Trial focusing on HCC development with a slightly longer duration of follow-up also showed no difference in the incidence of HCC between the patients that were randomized to the maintenance IFN or no treatment. [74] The same results were observed even when the duration of followup in these studies was more prolonged.…”
Section: Hcvmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Regarding liver decompensation and mortality, we have observed a significant association between virological response and the occurrence of liver events in both patients with and without EV, although the formers maintained a risk to develop liver decompensation and to die in consequence of liver events even after SVR achievement. Further evidences were provided from three randomized controlled trials -HALT-C [34], COPILOT [35] and EPIC-3 [36] -that investigated the effectiveness of a longterm maintenance therapy with pegylated-IFN in nonresponder HCV patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. The outcomes assessed were death, hepatic decompensation, HCC development and an increase in hepatic fibrosis for noncirrhotic patients: overall, a poor benefit of maintenance therapy on clinical outcomes -including HCC -was observed, despite the reduction of viral load and the improvement of inflammatory Cardoso et al…”
Section: Koreamentioning
confidence: 99%