Elbasvir and grazoprevir for hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection in people with recent injecting drug use (DARLO-C): An open-label, single-arm, phase 4, multicentre trial

Predictors of engagement in screening for a hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment trial in a rural Appalachian community

An HCV treatment trial was initiated in September 2019 to address the opioid/hepatitis C virus (HCV) syndemic in rural Kentucky. The focus of the current analysis is on participation in diagnostic screening for the trial. Initial eligibility (≥18 years of age, county resident) was established by phone followed by in-person HCV viremia testing. 900 rural residents met the inclusion criteria and comprised the analytic sample. Generalized linear models were specified to estimate the relative risk of non-attendance at the in-person visit determining HCV eligibility. Approximately one-quarter (22.1%) of scheduled participants were no-shows. People who inject drugs were no more likely than people not injecting drugs to be a no-show; however, participants ≤35 years of age were significantly less likely to attend. While the median time between phone screening and scheduled in-person screening was only 2 days, each additional day increased the odds of no-show by 3% (95% confidence interval: 2%-3%). Finally, unknown HCV status predicted no-show even after adjustment for age, gender, days between screenings and injection status. We found that drug injection did not predict no-show, further justifying expanded access to HCV treatment among people who inject drugs. Those 35 years and younger were more likely to no-show, suggesting that younger individuals may require targeted strategies for increasing testing and treatment uptake. Finally, streamlining the treatment cascade may also improve outcomes, as participants in the current study were more likely to attend if there were fewer days between phone screening and scheduled in-person screening.

What Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Diagnostic Tools Are Needed to Advance Diagnosis of Current HCV Infection in Outreach Settings and in a Nonclinical Setting?

Given the growing hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic in the United States, it is imperative to implement a coordinated, equitable public health approach to HCV testing that will facilitate immediate access to treatment, especially for individuals with limited healthcare access and those who inject drugs. Point-of-care RNA diagnostic tests have the greatest potential to address this need. Future regulatory approval has been facilitated by a recent change in the US Food and Drug Administration's approach to evaluating point-of-care diagnostic tests that have been developed and validated.

Personalized care approaches to hepatitis C therapy: recent advances and future directions

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has significantly transformed the therapeutic landscape for chronic C hepatitis virus (HCV) infection. However, there is still room for further improvement in optimizing therapy efficacy and minimizing adverse effects.

AREAS COVERED

This review is devoted to the rationale for adopting a personalized approach to HCV therapy. Specifically, we explore the role of host-related factors, such as sex or the presence of comorbidities. We thoroughly examine the implications of commonly encountered comorbidities, including HIV infection, chronic renal disease, liver cirrhosis, and other chronic viral hepatitis infections. Additionally, we discuss the prevalent drug-to-drug interactions between DAAs and other medications, while providing guidance on their management. Finally, we investigate viral-related issues that can influence treatment outcomes, such as viral genotype, quasi-species, and the presence of resistance-associated mutations.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite pivotal trials demonstrating efficacy rates exceeding 90% for currently available DAA regimens, there are still opportunities to optimize therapy outcomes and tailor treatment to each patient. This can be achieved through a meticulous evaluation of the patient's specific clinical conditions and comorbidities, a vigilant approach to manage potential drug interactions, and diligent patient follow-up.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care HCV Viral Load Assays for HCV Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Despite the widespread availability of curative treatment with direct-acting antivirals, a significant proportion of people with HCV remain undiagnosed and untreated. New point-of-care (PoC) HCV RNA assays that can be used in clinical settings may help expand access to testing and treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of PoC HCV viral load assays compared to laboratory-based testing. Methods: We searched three databases for studies published before May 2021 that evaluated PoC HCV RNA assays against a laboratory NAT reference standard (Prospero CRD42021269022). Random effects bivariate models were used to summarize the estimates. Stratified analyses were performed based on geographic region, population (PWID, etc.), and specimen type (serum/plasma or fingerstick; fresh or frozen). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. Results: A total of 25 studies were eligible. We evaluated five different commercially available viral load assays. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 99% (95% CI: 98−99%) and 99% (95% CI: 99−100%), respectively. High sensitivity and specificity were observed across different assays, study settings (including LMICs and HICs), and populations. There was a small but statistically significant reduction in sensitivity for fingersticks compared to serum or plasma samples (98% vs. 100%, p < 0.05), but the specificity was similar between frozen and fresh samples. The evidence was rated as moderate-high certainty. Conclusions: PoC HCV viral load assays demonstrate excellent diagnostic performance in various settings and populations. The WHO now recommends using PoC HCV viral load assays as an additional strategy to promote access to confirmatory viral load testing and treatment.

Impact of an Accelerated Pretreatment Evaluation on Linkage-to-Care for Hepatitis C-infected Persons Who Inject Drugs

Background:

Historically, hepatitis C virus (HCV) pretreatment evaluation has required multiple visits, frequently resulting in loss to follow-up and a delayed initiation of treatment. New technologies can accelerate this process. We investigated the feasibility of a single-day evaluation program and its impact on evaluation completion, treatment eligibility awareness, and treatment initiation among people who inject drugs (PWIDs).

Methods:

HCV-infected PWID who were unaware if they were eligible for treatment were recruited in a prospective evaluation of an accelerated model of care between 2017 and 2019 and compared to a historical cohort. The patients underwent a medical evaluation, rapid HCV viral load testing, and transient elastography during a single visit, at the end of which they were informed whether they were eligible for treatment. A historical cohort of patients fulfilling the same inclusion criteria and evaluated with the usual standard of care spanning several visits who were examined at the addiction medicine clinic from 2014 to 2016 served as the comparison group.

Results:

The accelerated and historical cohorts included 99 and 76 patients, respectively. The cohorts did not differ significantly by age and gender, but more patients in the historical cohort were undergoing opioid agonist therapy, while more patients in the accelerated cohort injected drugs in the last month. An accelerated evaluation resulted in a higher rate of evaluation completion (100% vs 67.1%; P < .001). Among those eligible for treatment, the proportion of those initiating treatment was similar between the groups (51/64 (79.7%) vs. 26/37 (70.3%); P = .28). The delay in the initiation of treatment was shorter in the accelerated cohort than in the historical cohort (69 (IQR: 49-106) days vs. 219 (IQR: 141-416) days; P < .001).

Conclusions:

Accelerated evaluation enhanced the awareness of eligibility and reduced the time to initiation among eligible patients.

Trial Registration:

This study is registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02755402).