Background GRAND PLAN is a prospective, open-label, phase 4 study. Based at a single center and with a single arm, GRAND PLAN evaluated the safety and efficacy of an 8-week course of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) among active drug users with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in a population enriched for factors that may reduce treatment uptake and success, such as disengagement from health care and unstable housing. Methods Participants were ≥19 years old and actively using drugs and were confirmed viremic, noncirrhotic, and HCV treatment naive. All participants provided informed consent before any study procedures. They received G/P for 8 weeks within a multidisciplinary model of care, with daily, weekly, or monthly dispensing of medications to optimize adherence. Results We identified 117 eligible patients with a median age of 46 years (range, 22–75): 27% were female, 21.4% were Indigenous, 48.7% were unstably housed, and 95.7% were active drug users (94.9% fentanyl). One patient did not start treatment, and 4 underwent <1 week of treatment, leaving 112 completed treatments with 94.6% picking up medications weekly. HCV RNA was undetectable at the end of treatment in all 112 patients. One died of unknown causes shortly after treatment. A cure was demonstrated in 108 of 111 (97.3%) cases at the SVR12 time point (sustained virologic response at ≥12 weeks); the other 3 experienced virologic relapse. Considering the entire cohort, the intent-to-treat success rate was 92.3% (108/117). HCV reinfection was documented at SVR24 in 5 cases, 2 of which were successfully retreated. Conclusions GRAND PLAN demonstrates that administration of an 8-week course of G/P to inner-city residents with HCV infection leads to a cure >95%. With a short course of treatment, G/P is an attractive option for this population in helping us achieve the World Health Organization’s HCV objectives by 2030.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Conway et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: