# A comparative study of different antiviral treatment protocols in HCV related cryoglobulinemic vasculitis

## TL;DR

This study compares different antiviral treatments for HCV-related vasculitis, finding that interferon-based protocols may reduce DNA damage and relapse risks compared to interferon-free regimens.

## Contribution

The study provides novel comparative insights into DNA damage and relapse rates among different HCV treatment protocols in cryoglobulinemic vasculitis.

## Key findings

- IFN-based treatment showed lower DNA damage compared to IFN-free regimens.
- SOF–RIBA and SOF–DACLA groups had increased BAFF levels and higher relapse rates.
- IFN-based protocols prevented clinical relapse, unlike IFN-free DAAs.

## Abstract

The treatment of HCV and its sequelae are used to be predominantly based on Interferon (IFN). However, this was associated with significant adverse events as a result of its immunostimulant capabilities. Since their introduction, the directly acting antiviral drugs (DAAs), have become the standard of care to treat of HCV and its complications including mixed cryoglobulinemic vasculitis (MCV). In spite of achieving sustained viral response (SVR), there appeared many reports describing unwelcome complications such as hepatocellular and hematological malignancies as well as relapses. Prolonged inflammation induced by a multitude of factors, can lead to DNA damage and affects BAFF and APRIL, which serve as markers of B-cell proliferation. We compared, head-to-head, three antiviral protocols for HCV–MCV treatment As regards the treatment response and relapse, levels of BAFF and APRIL among pegylated interferon α-based and free regimens (Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin; SOF–RIBA, Sofosbuvir + Daclatasvir; SOF–DACLA). Regarding clinical response HCV–MCV and SVR; no significant differences could be identified among the 3 different treatment protocols, and this was also independent form using IFN. We found no significant differences between IFN-based and free regimens DNA damage, markers of DNA repair, or levels of BAFF and APRIL. However, individualized drug-to-drug comparisons showed many differences. Those who were treated with IFN-based protocol showed decreased levels of DNA damage, while the other two IFN-free groups showed increased DNA damage, being the worst in SOF–DACLA group. There were increased levels of BAFF through follow-up periods in the 3 protocols being the best in SOF–DACLA group (decreased at 24 weeks). In SOF–RIBA, CGs relapsed significantly during the follow-up period. None of our patients who were treated with IFN-based protocol had significant clinico-laboratory relapse. Those who received IFN-free DAAs showed a statistically significant relapse of constitutional manifestations. Our findings suggest that IFN-based protocols are effective in treating HCV–MCV similar to IFN-free protocols. They showed lower levels of DNA damage and repair. We believe that our findings may offer an explanation for the process of lymphoproliferation, occurrence of malignancies, and relapses by shedding light on such possible mechanisms.