Promoting treatment for hepatitis C in people who inject drugs: A review of the barriers and opportunities

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.

Does a simplified algorithm and integrated HCV care model improve linkage to care, retention, and cure among people who inject drugs? A pragmatic quality improvement randomized controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

As many as 2.4 million Americans are affected by chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) in the United States.In 2018, the estimated number of adults with a history of HCV infection in San Diego County was 55,354 (95% CI: 25,411-93,329). This corresponded to a seroprevalence of 2.1% (95% CI: 2.1-3.4%). One-third of infections were among PWID. Published research has demonstrated that direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have high efficacy and can now be used by primary care providers to treat HCV. In addition, limited evidence exists to support the effectiveness of simplified algorithms in clinical trial and real-world settings. Even with expanded access to HCV treatment in primary care settings, there are still groups, especially people who inject drugs (PWID) and people experiencing homelessness, who experience treatment disparities due to access and treatment barriers. The current study extends the simplified algorithm with a streetside 'one-stop-shop' approach with integrated care (including the offer of buprenorphine prescriptions and abscess care) using a mobile clinic situated adjacent to a syringe service program serving many homeless populations. Rates of HCV treatment initiation and retention will be compared between patients offered HCV care in a mobile clinic adjacent to a syringe services program (SSP) and homeless encampment versus those who are linked to a community clinic's current practice of usual care, which includes comprehensive patient navigation.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental, prospective, interventional, comparative effectiveness trial with allocation of approximately 200 patients who inject drugs and have chronic HCV to the "simplified care" pathway (intervention group) or the "usual care" pathway (control group). Block randomization will be performed with a 1:1 randomization.

DISCUSSION

Previous research has demonstrated acceptable outcomes for patients treated using simplified algorithms for DAAs and point-of-care testing in mobile medical clinics; however, there are opportunities to explore how these new, innovative systems of care impact treatment initiation rates or other HCV care cascade outcomes among PWID.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

We have registered our study with ClinicalTrials.gov, a resource of the United States National Library of Medicine. This database contains research studies from United States and other countries around the world. Our study has not been previously published. The ClinicalTrials.gov registration identifier is NCT04741750.

Future Prospects, Approaches, and the Government's Role in the Development of a Hepatitis C Virus Vaccine

Developing a safe and effective vaccine against the hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains a top priority for global health. Despite recent advances in antiviral therapies, the high cost and limited accessibility of these treatments impede their widespread application, particularly in resource-limited settings. Therefore, the development of the HCV vaccine remains a necessity. This review article analyzes the current technologies, future prospects, strategies, HCV genomic targets, and the governmental role in HCV vaccine development. We discuss the current epidemiological landscape of HCV infection and the potential of HCV structural and non-structural protein antigens as vaccine targets. In addition, the involvement of government agencies and policymakers in supporting and facilitating the development of HCV vaccines is emphasized. We explore how vaccine development regulatory channels and frameworks affect research goals, funding, and public health policy. The significance of international and public-private partnerships in accelerating the development of an HCV vaccine is examined. Finally, the future directions for developing an HCV vaccine are discussed. In conclusion, the review highlights the urgent need for a preventive vaccine to fight the global HCV disease and the significance of collaborative efforts between scientists, politicians, and public health organizations to reach this important public health goal.

Eliminating hepatitis C in a rural Appalachian county: protocol for the Kentucky Viral Hepatitis Treatment Study (KeY Treat), a phase IV, single-arm, open-label trial of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for the treatment of hepatitis C

OBJECTIVES

The overall goal of the Kentucky Viral Hepatitis Treatment Study (KeY Treat) is to eliminate hepatitis C transmission from a county in Appalachian Kentucky by removing the barriers to accessing hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

KeY Treat is a phase IV, open-label, single-arm clinical trial of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) for the treatment of viraemic HCV infections. Those eligible for KeY Treat are at least 18 years of age, viraemic and are residents of the target county. Pregnant women are not eligible. Rapid HCV RNA screening is used to determine eligibility, and those with a quantifiable viral load (VL) consenting to participate initiate SOF/VEL on the same day. All pharmacologic treatment and related medical care is provided free of charge using a non-specialist provider model. Follow-up visits occur at 2, 6 and 12 weeks during treatment to assess medication adherence (measured via VL and self-report), side effects and engagement in risk behaviours. Post-treatment visits occur at 12 weeks (sustained virologic response (SVR12) visit), 6 months and 12 months post-treatment completion to assess re-infection. A control county has also been identified, and prevalence and incidence of chronic HCV infections will be compared with the target community longitudinally. The primary outcome to assess elimination is SVR12. However, several outcomes will be measured to assess the effectiveness of removing the barriers to HCV treatment, including treatment entry, completion and re-infection. Analyses will be conducted via a generalised linear model framework that can incorporate flexible covariate adjustment and multiple outcome types with a compatible link function. Mathematical modelling will be completed assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

KeY Treat has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Kentucky. Results from KeY Treat will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03949764.

Economic Evaluation of Hepatitis C Treatment Extension to Acute Infection and Early-Stage Fibrosis Among Patients Who Inject Drugs in Developing Countries: A Case of China

We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of (1) treating acute hepatitis C virus (HCV) vs. deferring treatment until the chronic phase and (2) treating all chronic patients vs. only those with advanced fibrosis; among Chinese genotype 1b treatment-naïve patients who injected drugs (PWID), using a combination Daclatasvir (DCV) plus Asunaprevir (ASV) regimen and a Peg-interferon (PegIFN)-based regimen, respectively. A decision-analytical model including the risk of HCV reinfection simulated lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of three treatment timings, under the DCV+ASV and PegIFN regimen, respectively: Treating acute infection (“Treat at acute”), treating chronic patients of all fibrosis stages (“Treat at F0 (no fibrosis)”), treating only advanced-stage fibrosis patients (“Treat at F3 (numerous septa without cirrhosis)”). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare scenarios. “Treat at acute” compared with “Treat at F0” was cost-saving (cost: DCV+ASV regimen—US$14,486.975 vs. US$16,224.250; PegIFN-based regimen—US$19,734.794 vs. US$22,101.584) and more effective (QALY: DCV+ASV regimen—14.573 vs. 14.566; PegIFN-based regimen—14.148 vs. 14.116). Compared with “Treat at F3”; “Treat at F0” exhibited an ICER of US$3780.20/QALY and US$15,145.98/QALY under the DCV+ASV regimen and PegIFN-based regimen; respectively. Treatment of acute HCV infection was highly cost-effective and cost-saving compared with deferring treatment to the chronic stage; for both DCV+ASV and PegIFN-based regimens. Early treatment for chronic patients with DCV+ASV regimen was highly cost-effective.