Background/Aims: Direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs) have been approved for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis. Nevertheless, the complicated comedications and their potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with DAAs might limit clinical practice in this special population. Methods: The number, class, and characteristics of comedications and their potential DDIs with five DAA regimens were analyzed among HCV-viremic patients from 23 hemodialysis centers in Taiwan. Results: Of 2,015 hemodialysis patients screened in 2019, 169 patients seropositive for HCV RNA were enrolled (mean age, 65.6 years; median duration of hemodialysis, 5.8 years). All patients received at least one comedication (median number, 6; mean class number, 3.4). The most common comedication classes were ESRD-associated medications (94.1%), cardiovascular drugs (69.8%) and antidiabetic drugs (43.2%). ESRD-associated medications were excluded from DDI analysis. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir had the highest frequency of potential contraindicated DDIs (red, 5.6%), followed by glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (4.0%), sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (1.3%), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (1.3%), and elbasvir/grazoprevir (0.3%). For potentially significant DDIs (orange, requiring close monitoring or dose adjustments), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir had the highest frequency (19.9%), followed by sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (18.2%), glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (12.6%), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (12.6%), and elbasvir/grazoprevir (7.3%). Overall, lipid-lowering agents were the most common comedication class with red-category DDIs to all DAA regimens (n=62), followed by cardiovascular agents (n=15), and central nervous system agents (n=10). Conclusions HCV-viremic patients on hemodialysis had a very high prevalence of comedications with a broad spectrum, which had varied DDIs with currently available DAA regimens. Elbasvir/grazoprevir had the fewest potential DDIs, and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir had the most potential DDIs.

INTRODUCTION: Serum creatinine is crucial in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation. Various methods of measuring GFR have been developed, which vary in their ability to estimate the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and predict consequences associated with CKD. The use of different laboratory devices also results in uncertainty in estimated GFR (eGFR). The purpose of our study was to discuss the effect of differences in laboratory devices on eGFR when performing serum creatinine measurements. METHODS: 163 participants aged 51.22 ± 18.66 years were enrolled during a community health screening programme conducted on 18 June 2011. Samples were sent to four different hospitals using four different devices to check serum creatinine by the Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods. RESULTS: Using Roche Cobas Integra 400, Beckman LX20, Hitachi 7180 and Toshiba TBA - c8000, the proportion of the population with eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m was 11.04%, 6.75%, 20.25% and 20.86%, respectively. Moreover, 3.68% of the participants had eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m in the laboratory when Roche Cobas Integra 400 was used with the enzymatic creatinine method and compensated Jaffe method. CONCLUSION Although standardisation of serum creatinine measurement has been achieved by using isotope dilution mass spectrometry, differences in measurement devices still cause substantial bias in the overall results. This affects the application of GFR in the estimation of CKD progression and outcomes associated with CKD.