Impact of all oral anti-hepatitis C virus therapy: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics on studies included in analysis

Ref.	Previous treatment	No. of arms	Study arms/types	No. of patients (n)	Males (n)	Age median (yr)	Median BMI	Cirrhosis (n)
Afdhal et al[12]	Naïve	4	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	865	513	53	27	136
Afdhal et al[11]	NR	4	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	440	287	56	28	88
Bacon et al[13]	NR	3	P + R vs P + R + BOC	403	268	53	28	49
Flamm et al[14]	NR	2	P + R vs P + R + BOC	201	140	53	28	33
Fried et al[15]	Naïve	5	P + R vs P + R + SIM	386	213	46	25	0
Hézode et al[16]	Naïve	4	P + R vs TEL + P vs TEL + P + R	323	192	45	24	1
Jacobson et al[17]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + TEL	1088	636	49	26	68
Kowdley et al[19]	Naïve	3	SOF vs SOF + R	332	214	50	28	0
Kowdley et al[18]	Naïve	3	LED + SOF vs LED + SOF + R	647	375	52	28	0
Kumada et al[20]	Naïve	2	P + R vs P + R + TEL	189	99	54	23	0
Kwo et al[21]	Naïve	5	P + R vs P + R + BOC	520	305	45		37
Lawitz et al[22]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + SOF	121	73	49	27	0
Lawitz et al[23]	NR	2	SOF + LED vs SOF + LED + R	40	29	53	31	22
Lawitz et al[23]	Naïve	3	SOF + LED vs SOF + LED + R	60	37	48	29	0
Marcellin et al[24]	Naïve	4	TEL + Palfa + R	161	80	45	24	4
McHutchison et al[25]	Naïve	4	P + R vs TEL + P + R	250	157	49	27	51
McHutchison et al[26]	NR	4	P + R vs TEL + P vs TEL + P + R	453	306	52	28	74
Osinusi et al[27]	Naïve	2	SOF + R vs SOF + low dose R	50	33	55	29	13
Pearlman et al[28]	Naïve	2	P + R vs P + R + BOC	101	62	53	29	20
Poordad et al[29]	Naïve	3	P + R vs P + R + BOC	1097	656	49		100
Sherman et al[31]	Naïve	3	TEL + P + R (diff dur)	440	271	51		42
Rodríguez-Torres et al[30]	Naïve	4	P + R vs P + R + SOF	63	43	45	28	0
Zeuzem et al[32]	NR	3	P + R vs P + R + TEL	662	460	51	27	169
Zeuzem et al[33]	NR	7	P + R vs P + R + SIM	462	311	50	27	83

BMI: Body mass index; P: Peg interferon; R: Ribavirin; TEL: Telaprevir; BOC: Boceprevir; LED: Ledipasvir; SOF: Sofosbuvir; SIM: Simeprevir; NR: Non-responders.