Patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 3 infection, especially those with advanced liver disease, are a challenging population in urgent need of optimally effective therapies. The combination of daclatasvir (DCV; pangenotypic nonstructural protein 5A inhibitor) and sofosbuvir (SOF; nucleotide nonstructural protein 5B inhibitor) for 12 weeks previously showed high efficacy (96%) in noncirrhotic genotype 3 infection. The phase III ALLY‐3+ study (N = 50) evaluated DCV‐SOF with ribavirin (RBV) in treatment‐naïve (n = 13) or treatment‐experienced (n = 37) genotype 3‐infected patients with advanced fibrosis (n = 14) or compensated cirrhosis (n = 36). Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive open‐label DCV‐SOF (60 + 400 mg daily) with weight‐based RBV for 12 or 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response at post‐treatment week 12 (SVR12). SVR12 (intention‐to‐treat) was 90% overall (45 of 50): 88% (21 of 24) in the 12‐week (91% observed) and 92% (24 of 26) in the 16‐week group. All patients with advanced fibrosis achieved SVR12. SVR12 in patients with cirrhosis was 86% overall (31 of 36): 83% (15 of 18) in the 12‐week (88% observed) and 89% (16 of 18) in the 16‐week group; for treatment‐experienced patients with cirrhosis, these values were 87% (26 of 30), 88% (14 of 16; 93% observed), and 86% (12 of 14), respectively. One patient (12‐week group) did not enter post‐treatment follow‐up (death unrelated to treatment). There were 4 relapses (2 per group) and no virological breakthroughs. The most common adverse events (AEs) were insomnia, fatigue, and headache. There were no discontinuations for AEs and no treatment‐related serious AEs. Conclusion: The all‐oral regimen of DCV‐SOF‐RBV was well tolerated and resulted in high and similar SVR12 after 12 or 16 weeks of treatment among genotype 3‐infected patients with advanced liver disease, irrespective of past HCV treatment experience. (Hepatology 2016;63:1430‐1441)

Quiz Ref ID Current estimates indicate that 130 million to 150 million people worldwide are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV), resulting in up to 350 000 deaths per annum due primarily to cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma.^1,2 Of the 7 HCV genotypes identified, genotype 1 is the most prevalent worldwide, accounting for approximately 60% of infections.³ Treatment options for HCV genotype 1 are evolving rapidly from interferon-based regimens to all-oral, direct-acting antiviral (DAA)–only regimens.

Background: Inhibition of human carcinomas has previously been linked to vitamin D due to its effects on cancer cell proliferation, migration, angiogenesis, and apoptosis induction. The anticancer activity of vitamin D has been confirmed by several studies, which have shown that increased cancer incidence is associated with decreased vitamin D and that dietary supplementation of vitamin D slows down the growth of xenografted tumors in mice. Vitamin D inhibits the growth of cancer cells by the induction of apoptosis as well as by arresting the cells at the G0/G1 (or) G2/M phase of the cell cycle. Aim and Key Scientific Concepts of the Review: The purpose of this article is to thoroughly review the existing information and discuss and debate to conclude whether vitamin D could be used as an agent to prevent/treat cancers. The existing empirical data have demonstrated that vitamin D can also work in the absence of vitamin D receptors (VDRs), indicating the presence of multiple mechanisms of action for this sunshine vitamin. Polymorphism in the VDR is known to play a key role in tumor cell metastasis and drug resistance. Although there is evidence that vitamin D has both therapeutic and cancer-preventive properties, numerous uncertainties and concerns regarding its use in cancer treatment still exist. These include (a) increased calcium levels in individuals receiving therapeutic doses of vitamin D to suppress the growth of cancer cells; (b) hyperglycemia induction in certain vitamin D-treated study participants; (c) a dearth of evidence showing preventive or therapeutic benefits of cancer in clinical trials; (d) very weak support from proof-of-principle studies; and (e) the inability of vitamin D alone to treat advanced cancers. Addressing these concerns, more potent and less toxic vitamin D analogs have been created, and these are presently undergoing clinical trial evaluation. To provide key information regarding the functions of vitamin D and VDRs, this review provided details of significant advancements in the functional analysis of vitamin D and its analogs and VDR polymorphisms associated with cancers.

Breast cancer (BC) is the prevailing malignancy and major cause of cancer-related death in females. Doxorubicin is a part of BC neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. The administration of anthracycline derivates, such as doxorubicin, may cause several side effects, including hematological disfunction, gastrointestinal toxicity, hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and cardiotoxicity. Cardiotoxicity is a major adverse reaction to anthracyclines, and it may vary depending on individual differences in doxorubicin pharmacokinetics. Determination of specific polymorphisms of genes that can alter doxorubicin metabolism was shown to reduce the risk of adverse reactions and improve the safety and efficacy of doxorubicin. Genes which encode cytochrome P450 enzymes (CYP3A4 and CYP2D6), p-glycoproteins (ATP-binding cassette (ABC) family members such as Multi-Drug Resistance 1 (MDR1) protein), and other detoxifying enzymes were shown to control the metabolism and pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin. The effectiveness of doxorubicin is defined by the polymorphism of cytochrome p450 and p-glycoprotein-encoding genes. This study critically discusses the latest data about the role of gene polymorphisms in the regulation of doxorubicin’s anti-BC effects. The correlation of genetic differences with the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin may provide insights for the development of personalized medical treatment for BC patients.