Table 1.
Sample listing for cobas HCV in samples with CAP/CTM target not detected (TND); n = 5.
Fig 1.
Deming Regression Plot of Viral Loads (log10 IU/mL, A) and Bland-Altman bias plot (B) for cobas HCV vs. CAP/CTM (including one statistical outlier).
Fig 2.
Virologic responses at week 1, week 2, week 4, week 8, week 12 and 12 weeks after the end of treatment (FU12) according to cobas HCV and the CAP/CTM.
There was no significant difference between the two assays. *As there are no discordant pairs, p-value cannot be calculated.
Table 2.
Comparison of virologic responses at week 1,2,4,8,12, and at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (FU12) according to cobas HCV and CAP/CTM, respectively.
Fig 3.
Sustained virologic response (SVR) rates according to early HCV RNA response at treatment week 2 and week 4 with different DAA regimens assessed with (A) cobas HCV and (B) CAP/CTM. SVR rates were not significantly different between patients with quantifiable (≥LLOQ) vs. non-quantifiable (<LLOQ and TND) and detectable (≥LLOQ and <LLOQ) vs. undetectable (TND) HCV RNA in the three most commonly used DAA regimens (LDV/SOF, PrOD, DCV/SOF) according to both assays. SVR rates in patients with quantifiable (≥LLOQ) vs. non-quantifiable (<LLOQ and TND) in the SOF/RBV treatment group showed significant difference at week 2 (p = 0.01) and week 4 (p<0.05) when applying CAP/CTM but not with cobas HCV.