Hence, our study results should be interpreted with caution and further, larger prospective studies will be required. However, our results demonstrated that pretreatment serum IP-10 level was associated with virological response in patients with genotype 1 CHC undergoing TVR-based triple therapy, and combined evaluation of IP-10 and IL28B genotype may improve prognostication of virological response. In addition, IP-10 correlated well with liver histological findings. In conclusion, we found that pretreatment serum IP-10 concentration correlated with liver fibrosis and inflammation

in SCH772984 patients with HCV genotype 1 treated with TVR-based triple therapy and was predictive of virological responses, especially in patients with the IL28B risk allele. We would like to thank N. Kanazawa, Y. Kasuya-Matsushita and S. Fujii for measurements of serum IP-10 and core 70/91. “
“The role of bridging therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. There is strong evidence to support the effectiveness of sorafenib in extending the time to progression of HCC. Using a Markov model, we compared two strategies: one using sorafenib as neoadjuvant

therapy before LT (Strategy A), and the other using no bridging therapy in the first 6 months (Strategy B). Reference case: T2 HCC patient with compensated cirrhosis. The benefit of sorafenib in delaying BMN673 time to HCC progression

was expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) and taken from recently published randomized trials. The endpoints considered 上海皓元 were: survival benefit measured in quality-adjusted life days (QALDs), transplant probability, costs (C) in €, willingness to pay (WTP), and net health benefit (NHB), where NHB = survival benefit − C/WTP. The calculated WTP of sorafenib in Italy was 346 € per QALD. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a median survival benefit of 94 QALDs (10% percentile = 38, 90% percentile = 210). In the base-case scenario (HR = 0.47, monthly dropout probability = 5%, median time to LT = 3 months), the gain in LT probability due to sorafenib was 5% and it increased proportionally with increasing median times to LT and decreasing HR. In the cost-benefit analysis, the incremental NHB of Strategy A versus Strategy B was 37 QALDs; it increased as sorafenib HR decreased and when median times to LT were shorter than 6 months, whereas for longer times it gradually dropped, particularly when Strategy B included effective locoregional treatments. Conclusion: Sorafenib neoadjuvant therapy is cost-effective by comparison with no therapy for T2-HCC patients waiting for LT, particularly for median times to LT under 6 months. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.