An Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability Study of TMC435 in Treatment-naive, Genotype 1 Hepatitis C-infected Patients

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVRW72, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at end of treatment (EOT) and at Week 72.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR24, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 24 weeks after planned end of treatment.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a SVR4, defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels 4 weeks after planned end of treatment.

The table below shows the change from baseline in log10 HCV RNA levels.

The table below shows actual values of log10 HCV RNA levels.

The table below shows the percentage of participants with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) plasma levels below the limit of detection (ie, <25 IU/mL undetectable), the percentage of participants with a HCV RNA plasma level below the limit of quantification (ie, < 25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable), the percentage of participants with plasma levels of HCV RNA <100 IU/mL, the percentage of participants with virologic responses of a greater than or equal to 2 log10 change from baseline in plasma levels of HCV RNA.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who achieved a RVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels after receiving 4 weeks of treatment.

The table below shows the percentage of participants who achieved an EVR, defined as having a change from baseline in plasma Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid of greater than or equal to 2 log10 at Week 12.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a cEVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 12.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group who had a eRVR, defined as having undetectable plasma Hepatitis C Virus ribonucleic acid levels at Week 4 and 12.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with <1 log10 HCV RNA decrease at Week 4.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in each treatment group with HCV RNA levels >1000 IU/mL at Week 4.

The table below shows the percentage of participants with null response, defined as <2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline.

The table below shows the percentage of participants with partial response, defined as greater than or equal to 2 log10 reduction in Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid at Week 12 compared to baseline, but not achieving undetectable HCV RNA while on treatment.

The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).

The table below shows the percentage of participants with viral relapse, defined as having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (less than 25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.

The table below shows the percentage of participants in the TMC435 treatment group who met the treatment duration rule (ie, having hepatitis C virus [HCV] ribonucleic acid [RNA] levels <25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable at Week 4 and undetectable HCV RNA levels at Week 12) and completed treatment with PegIFNα-2a and RBV for 24 weeks. Participants in the TMC435 treatment group not meeting RGT criteria and participants in the placebo group were treated with PegIFNα-2a and RBV treatment for 48 weeks.

The table below shows percentage of participants with on-treatment failure defined as confirmed detectable Hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid levels at actual end of treatment.

The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable or detectable.

The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <25 IU/mL undetectable.

The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <100 IU/mL.

The table below shows median time in days to reach HCV RNA levels <1000 IU/mL.

The table below shows the percentage of participants at different time points with viral breakthrough, defined as a confirmed increase of greater than 1 log10 IU/mL in plasma HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) level from the lowest level reached (ie, lowest value measured in between baseline and current value), or a confirmed plasma HCV RNA level of greater than 100 IU/mL in participants whose plasma HCV RNA had previously been below the limit of quantification (25 IU/mL detectable) or undetectable (<25 IU/mL undetectable).

The table below shows the mean number of days to viral relapse, defined as participants having confirmed detectable plasma level of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) during the follow-up period in participants with undetectable plasma HCV RNA (<25 IU/mL undetectable) at the end of treatment.

The percentage of participants analyzed were those with baseline ALT values out of the normal range (ie, 158 of 264 participants in the TMC435 treatment group and 89 of 130 participants in the Placebo group had ALT values at baseline that were out of the normal range.). Normalization of ALT values means that ALT values out of the normal range returned to within the normal range.

The table below shows the median time in weeks to normalization of ALT levels.

The table below shows mean (standard deviation) values of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time of administration to 24 hours after dosing for TMC435 for all participants. To calculate the mean AUC 24 for the study, AUC 24 hr values were derived for each participant at each visit and then a median AUC value calcuated across all visits for each participant. The median AUC value across all visits for each participant was used to calculate the mean AUC 24 hr all participants in the study.

The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) values for the C0h of TMC435.To calculate the mean C0h for the study, C0h values were derived for each participant at each visit and then a median C0H value calculated across visits for each participant. The median COh value for each participant across all visits was used to calculate the mean C0h for the study.

The table below shows the mean (standard deviation) values for the CL of TMC435.To calculate the mean CL for all participants in the study, CL values were first derived for each participant at each visit and then a median CL value calculated across visits for each participant. The median CL value for each participant was used to calculate the mean CL for all participants in the study.

Study participants completed FSS questionnaires during study visits before treatment began and throughout treatment and follow-up to rate the severity and impact of fatigue they experienced in the preceding 2 weeks on their daily lives. FSS total scores are the average of nine questions with a range from 1 [no fatigue] to 7 [worst possible fatigue]. An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the overall severity of fatigue in each treatment group from baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in the amount of fatigue participants experienced throughout the study resulting in equal AUC from baseline to Week 72 (AUC72) for FSS total scores. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.

Impairment in overall work productivity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire completed by participants during study visits throughout the study. WPAI Overall Productivity Scores ranged from 0% to 100% (higher WPAI scores indicated greater impairment in productivity). An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the overall WPAI Overall Work Productivity Scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in the WPAI Overall Work Productivity Scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in WPAI Work Productivity Scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.

Impairment in daily activity was measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire, Question 6. Scores ranged from 0 (no effect on activities) to 10 (completely prevented me from doing my daily activities). An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the impairment in daily activity scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms in impairment in daily activity scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in the impairment in daily activity scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.

Time missed from work in hours because of HCV infection or its treatment was assessed by measuring the change from baseline in the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI): Hepatitis C questionnaire Absenteeism score (time missed from work, question #2). The number of hours missed from work because of HCV was divided by the total number of hours supposed to work, and expressed as a percentage. An area under the curve (AUC) analysis compared the WPAI absenteeism scores in each treatment group from Baseline to Week 72. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the treatment arms WPAI absenteeism scores from Baseline to Week 72. The Table below shows the lease squares (LS) mean estimates of AUC at Week 72 (as well as at Week 60) in WPAI absenteeism scores and the statistical comparison between treatment groups.