Randomized feasibility trial of directly observed versus unobserved hepatitis C treatment with ledipasvir-sofosbuvir among people who inject drugs

Leveraging opportunities for treatment/user simplicity (LOTUS): Navigating the current treatment landscape for achieving hepatitis C virus elimination among persons who inject drugs

All-oral, direct-acting antivirals can cure hepatitis C virus (HCV) in almost all infected individuals; yet, many individuals with chronic HCV are not treated, and the incidence of acute HCV is increasing in some countries, including the United States. Strains on healthcare resources during the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted the progress toward the World Health Organization goal to eliminate HCV by 2030, especially among persons who inject drugs (PWID). Here, we present a holistic conceptual framework termed LOTUS (Leveraging Opportunities for Treatment/User Simplicity), designed to integrate the current HCV practice landscape and invigorate HCV treatment programs in the setting of endemic COVID-19: (A) treatment as prevention (especially among PWID), (B) recognition that HCV cure may be achieved with variable adherence with evidence supporting some forgiveness for missed doses, (C) treatment of all persons with active HCV infection (viremic), regardless of acuity, (D) minimal monitoring (MinMon) during treatment, and (E) rapid test and treat (TnT). The objective of this article is to review the current literature supporting each LOTUS petal; identify remaining gaps in knowledge or data; define the remaining barriers facing healthcare providers; and review evidence-based strategies for overcoming key barriers.

Adherence in Hepatitis C Virus Treatment: What We Know

Although therapy with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents achieves high hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure rates and is forgiving of missed doses, certain patient populations, such as people who inject drugs (PWID), are often denied therapy because of a perceived high risk of nonadherence. However, a relationship between adherence to DAAs for various patient populations and efficacy has not been well defined. The lack of a standardized method for evaluating adherence complicates making comparisons between studies, making it difficult to develop and implement novel measures that may improve adherent behavior. Traditional methods for assessing adherence may overestimate medication adherence, while newer, technology-based methods may assist with accurately assessing and maintaining patient adherence to therapy. Data demonstrate that special populations of patients with HCV, such as PWID, can be successfully treated, with relatively high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) despite less-than-optimal adherence. While rates of adherence, and subsequently SVR, can be improved, antiviral therapy should not be withheld because of fear of nonadherence. This article addresses medication adherence and forgiveness of DAA regimens, such as sofosbuvir/velpatasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, in different patient populations with HCV. Considerations in evaluating adherence in HCV therapy and available methods for assessing adherence are detailed.

Prevention of Viral Hepatitis and HIV Infection among People Who Inject Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This study aimed to explore the current evidence on preventing blood-borne virus infections among people who inject drugs (PWID). We conducted a comprehensive search across three databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) for relevant articles published in English between 2014 and 2023. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, assessed the quality of the paper using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (ROB 2), and conducted a meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3. Completing the harm reduction program (HRP) participation and receiving all three vaccine doses resulted in a 28% reduction in the risk of HBV infection (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.37-1.42). Various interventions increased the willingness of PWIDs to undergo HCV treatment (OR: 5.91, 95% CI: 2.46-14.24) and promoted treatment adherence (OR: 15.04, 95% CI: 2.80-80.61). Taking PrEP, participating in HRP, and modifying risky behaviors were associated with a 33% reduction in the risk of HIV infection (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.61-0.74). Conducting referrals, providing counseling, and implementing antiretroviral therapy resulted in a 44% reduction in the risk of viral transmission (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.47-0.66). Co-infection may potentially compromise effectiveness, so it is important to consider drug resistance.

Determining reinfection rates by hepatitis C testing interval among key populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Detecting hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection among key populations helps prevent ongoing transmission. This systematic review aims to determine the association between different testing intervals during post-SVR follow-up on the detection of HCV reinfection among highest risk populations.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases between January 2014 and February 2023 for studies that tested individuals at risk for HCV reinfection at discrete testing intervals and reported HCV reinfection incidence among key populations. Pooled estimates of reinfection incidence were calculated by population and testing frequency using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-one single-armed observational studies (9453 individuals) were included. Thirty-eight studies (8931 individuals) reported HCV reinfection incidence rate and were included in meta-analyses. The overall pooled estimate of HCV reinfection incidence rate was 4.13 per 100 per person-years (py) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.45-4.81). The pooled incidence estimate among people who inject drugs (PWID) was 2.84 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.19-3.50), among men who have sex with men (MSM) 7.37 per 100 py (95% CI: 5.09-9.65) and among people in custodial settings 7.23 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.13-16.59). The pooled incidence estimate for studies reporting a testing interval of ≤6 months (4.26 per 100 py; 95% CI: 2.86-5.65) was higher than studies reporting testing intervals >6 months (5.19 per 100 py; 95% CI: 3.92-6.46).

CONCLUSIONS

HCV reinfection incidence was highest in studies of MSM and did not appear to change with retesting interval. Shorter testing intervals are likely to identify more reinfections, help prevent onward transmission where treatment is available and enable progress towards global HCV elimination, but additional comparative studies are required.

Clinical trials reimagined

Clinical trials have been a central driver of change and have provided the evidence base necessary to advance new therapies for liver diseases. This review provides a perspective on the status of trials in hepatology and a vantage point into the emerging capabilities and external forces that will shape the conduct of clinical trials in the future. The adaptations to clinical trial operations in response to the disruptions by the COVID-19 pandemic and opportunities for innovation in hepatology trials are emphasized. Future trials in hepatology will be driven by unmet therapeutic needs and fueled by technological advances incorporating digital capabilities with expanded participant-derived data collection, computing, and analytics. Their design will embrace innovative trial designs adapted to these advances and that emphasize broader and more inclusive participant engagement. Their conduct will be further shaped by evolving regulatory needs and the emergence of new stakeholders in the clinical trials ecosystem. The evolution of clinical trials will offer unique opportunities to advance new therapeutics that will ultimately improve the lives of patients with liver diseases.

Evaluation of Hepatitis C Treatment Outcomes Among Patients Enrolled in Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy-Boston, Massachusetts, 2016-2021

In our Boston-based outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) program between 2016 and 2021, we found that a low proportion of patients with active hepatitis C virus (HCV) were prescribed HCV treatment by their OPAT provider and few achieved sustained virologic response. Clinicians should consider concurrent HCV treatment during OPAT.

Closing the hepatitis C treatment gap: United States strategies to improve retention in care

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape is shifting given the advent of direct-acting antivirals and a global call to action by the World Health Organization. Eliminating HCV is now an issue of healthcare delivery. Treatment is limited by the complexity of the HCV care continuum, expensive therapy and competing health burdens experienced by an underserved HCV population. The objective of this literature review was to assess strategies to improve retention in HCV care, with particular focus on those implemented in the United States. We identified barriers in HCV care retention and propose solutions to increase HCV treatment delivery. The following recommendations are herein described: improving the cohesion of health services through localized care and integrated case management, expanding the supply of non-specialist HCV treatment providers, leveraging patient navigators and care coordinators, improving adherence through directly observed therapy and reducing cost barriers through value-based payment and pharmaceutical subscription models.

Randomized clinical trial: Direct-acting antivirals as treatment for hepatitis C in people who inject drugs: Delivered in needle and syringe programs via directly observed therapy versus fortnightly collection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment in people who inject drugs (PWID) is delivered within settings frequented by PWID, such as needle and syringe programs (NSP). The optimal direct-acting antiviral (DAA) dispensing regimen among NSP clients is unknown. This study compared cures (Sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment, [SVR₁₂ ]) across three dispensing schedules to establish non-inferiority of fortnightly dispensing versus directly observed therapy. The ADVANCE HCV study was a randomized, unblinded trial, recruiting PWID attending NSP in Tayside, Scotland, between January 2018 and November 2019. HCV-positive participants were randomized to receive DAAs via directly observed therapy, fortnightly provision or fortnightly provision with psychological intervention. A modified intention to treat analysis was used to identify differences in cures between the three treatment regimes. The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03236506. A total of 110 participants completed the study. 33 participants received directly observed therapy, with 90.91% SVR₁₂ ; 37 received fortnightly provision, with 86.49% SVR₁₂ and 40 received fortnightly provision and psychological intervention at treatment initiation, with 92.50% SVR₁₂ . Analysis showed no significant difference in SVR₁₂ (p = 0.67). This study did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in cure rate between groups. This provides evidence of the non-inferiority of fortnightly dispensing of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) compared to directly observed therapy among PWID. It suggests that tight control of adherence through directly observed therapy dispensing of DAAs among this population offers no therapeutic advantage. Therefore, less restrictive dispensing patterns can be used, tailored to patient convenience.

HCV spread among female incarcerated population and treatment pathways to viral elimination in Italian prison settings: clinical perspectives and medico legal aspects

Background

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is more frequent among incarcerated people than in general population. In the DAAs era, the short schedules and the low risk of adverse reactions, increased the number of HCV treatments. However, the most part of literature reports lack of incarcerated women inclusion in studies on field. Our aim is to assess the screening execution, HCV prevalence, and DAAs treatment among incarcerated women. A focused insight on quick vs standard diagnosis and staging approach will be also provided.

Methods

Incarcerated women from 4 Italian regions’ penitentiary institutes were included. HCV screening was executed with HCV saliva test (QuickOral Test^®) or phlebotomy. Stage of liver fibrosis was evaluated with FIB-4 value or fibroscan^®, based on physicians’ decision. Treatment prescription followed national protocols.

Results

We included 156 women, 89 (57%) were Italian, mean age was 41 ± 10 years, and 28 (17.9%) were people who inject drugs (PWIDs). Overall, the HCV seroprevalence was 20.5%. Being PWID and on opioid substitution therapy (OST) were significantly associated with serological status (p-value < 0.001). Of them, the 75.5% of patients had active infection, the most frequent genotype was 3a (50%). Among them, 4 (16.6%) and 6 (25%) had psychosis or alcohol abuse history. The 62.5%, 25% and 12.5% had low, intermediate, and advanced fibrosis, respectively. Out of the 24 HCV-RNA positive patients, the 75% underwent to DAAs treatment. The sustained virological response (SVR12) was achieved in 88.8% of cases. When evaluating the influence of quick diagnosis and staging methods vs standard phlebotomy and fibroscan^® on SVR12, FIB-4 use showed higher performance for retainment in treatment during prison staying (p = 0.015), while the use of quick saliva test had no influence on the outcome (p = 0.22).

Conclusion

HCV seroprevalence and active infections are very high among incarcerated women. More tailored interventions should be focused on HCV diagnosis and treatment in female prison population. The use of quick staging methods (FIB-4) is useful to increase SVR12 achievement without delays caused by the fibroscan^® awaiting.

Can Telemedicine Optimize the HCV Care Cascade in People Who Use Drugs? Features of an Innovative Decentralization Model and Comparison with Other Micro-Elimination Strategies

People who use drugs (PWUDs) are a crucial population in the global fight against viral hepatitis. The difficulties in linkage to care, the low adherence to therapy, the frequent loss to follow-up and the high risk of re-infection make the eradication process of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) really hard in this viral reservoir. Several management and treatment models have been tested with the aim of optimizing the HCV care cascade in PWUDs. Models of decentralization of the care process and integration of services seem to provide the highest success rates. Giving this, telemedicine could favor the decentralization of diagnostic-therapeutic management, key for the implementation of linkage to care, reduction of waiting times, optimization of adherence and results and reduction of the costs. The purpose of this literature review is to examine the role and possible impact of telemedicine in optimizing the HCV care cascade, comparing the different care models that have shown to improve the linkage to care and therapeutic adherence in this special population.

Interventions to increase linkage to care and adherence to treatment for hepatitis C among people who inject drugs: A systematic review and practical considerations from an expert panel consultation

BACKGROUND

Following advances in treatment for hepatitis C (HCV), optimizing linkage to care and adherence to treatment of people who inject drugs became of pivotal importance. An ECDC/EMCDDA stakeholders survey in 2018 indicated that two components of the cascade of care, linkage to care and adherence to treatment, were priority areas for inclusion in the updated guidance, planned for publication in 2022. This systematic review was commissioned with the aim to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions on HCV linkage to care and adherence to treatment among people who inject drugs.

METHODS

The full study protocol is available at PROSPERO (2020 CRD42020191116). We searched five databases to identify studies published between 2011 and 2020. Studies were included if they had a comparative study design and reported on the primary outcomes for linkage to care (visits, treatment initiation) and/or adherence to treatment (treatment adherence, treatment completion, SVR12) among people who inject drugs/people receiving opioid substitution therapy. Following the risk of bias (EPHPP) and quality of evidence assessment (GRADE), evidence to decision tables were produced and shared for critical review with an expert panel convened by ECDC and EMCDDA. The expert panel provided further considerations on the benefit, acceptability, and transferability of interventions.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (using DAA therapy as well as DAA plus interferon-based therapy) met eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. Integrated care with case management, peer support, psychological interventions, contingency management, and cooperation between health care providers improved engagement in and adherence to HCV care in most studies. However, the quality of evidence was predominantly low to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that integrated, people-centered approaches may improve engagement throughout the continuum of HCV care among people who inject drugs. For progressing HCV elimination efforts, interventions should be implemented in colocation with harm reduction and counselling activities and in combination with additional services, including opioid substitution treatment, directly observed therapy, peer support and/or contingency management.

The use of technology-based adherence monitoring in the treatment of hepatitis C virus

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) achieve high hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure rates and are forgiving to missed doses, but adherence–efficacy relationships have not been well defined. Traditional adherence measures (e.g. pill counts, self-report and pharmacy refills) over-estimate medication adherence. Newer technology-based tools have been used to provide more objective adherence data. Herein, electronic medication diaries (e-diaries), medication events monitoring system (MEMS^®) caps, electronic blister packs, electronic pill boxes, video-based directly observed therapy (vDOT), artificial intelligence platforms (AIPs), and ingestible sensor systems are described, and compared based on existing studies using DAA. Percent adherence, predictors of adherence, and HCV cure rates utilizing these technologies are included. DAA adherence with e-diaries was 95–96%, MEMS^® caps and ingestible biosensors were between 95% and 97%, blister pack weekly dosing ranged 73–98%, and daily dosing 73–94%, whereas electronic pill boxes ranged between 39% and 89%, vDOT was 98% and AIP 91–96%. Despite a wide range of adherence, high sustained virologic response (SVR) rates (86–100%) were observed across all studies utilizing these different technology-based tools. Current data support the forgiveness of DAA therapies to missed doses using tools that provide more quantitative adherence measures compared with self-report and provide insight on adherence–efficacy relationships for contemporary DAA.

Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions: gap analysis, workshop and consultation-informed update

BACKGROUND

The Medical Research Council published the second edition of its framework in 2006 on developing and evaluating complex interventions. Since then, there have been considerable developments in the field of complex intervention research. The objective of this project was to update the framework in the light of these developments. The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design, and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods.

METHODS

There were four stages to the update: (1) gap analysis to identify developments in the methods and practice since the previous framework was published; (2) an expert workshop of 36 participants to discuss the topics identified in the gap analysis; (3) an open consultation process to seek comments on a first draft of the new framework; and (4) findings from the previous stages were used to redraft the framework, and final expert review was obtained. The process was overseen by a Scientific Advisory Group representing the range of relevant National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council research investments.

RESULTS

Key changes to the previous framework include (1) an updated definition of complex interventions, highlighting the dynamic relationship between the intervention and its context; (2) an emphasis on the use of diverse research perspectives: efficacy, effectiveness, theory-based and systems perspectives; (3) a focus on the usefulness of evidence as the basis for determining research perspective and questions; (4) an increased focus on interventions developed outside research teams, for example changes in policy or health services delivery; and (5) the identification of six 'core elements' that should guide all phases of complex intervention research: consider context; develop, refine and test programme theory; engage stakeholders; identify key uncertainties; refine the intervention; and economic considerations. We divide the research process into four phases: development, feasibility, evaluation and implementation. For each phase we provide a concise summary of recent developments, key points to address and signposts to further reading. We also present case studies to illustrate the points being made throughout.

LIMITATIONS

The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods. In many of the areas of innovation that we highlight, such as the use of systems approaches, there are still only a few practical examples. We refer to more specific and detailed guidance where available and note where promising approaches require further development.

CONCLUSIONS

This new framework incorporates developments in complex intervention research published since the previous edition was written in 2006. As well as taking account of established practice and recent refinements, we draw attention to new approaches and place greater emphasis on economic considerations in complex intervention research. We have introduced a new emphasis on the importance of context and the value of understanding interventions as 'events in systems' that produce effects through interactions with features of the contexts in which they are implemented. The framework adopts a pluralist approach, encouraging researchers and research funders to adopt diverse research perspectives and to select research questions and methods pragmatically, with the aim of providing evidence that is useful to decision-makers.

FUTURE WORK

We call for further work to develop relevant methods and provide examples in practice. The use of this framework should be monitored and the move should be made to a more fluid resource in the future, for example a web-based format that can be frequently updated to incorporate new material and links to emerging resources.

FUNDING

This project was jointly funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the National Institute for Health Research (Department of Health and Social Care 73514).

Efficacy and safety of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for hepatitis C among drug users: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Limited data is available on the efficacy of direct acting anti-viral drugs on hepatitis C in drug users. The aim of this meta-analysis was to comprehensively analyze the efficacy and safety of LDV/SOF in drug users infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV).

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published till April 2021 on HCV-positive drug users who were treated with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF). The primary endpoint was pooled sustained virological response at 12 weeks (SVR12) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to assess the publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies and 711 subjects treated with LDV/SOF-based regimen for HCV were included, and the pooled SVR12 rate was 89.8% (95% CI 85.9-92.7). The pooled SVR12 rate of genotype 1 drug users was 92.4% (95% CI 88.6-95.0). Subgroup analysis showed that pooled SVR12 rates of patients treated with LDV/SOF and LDV/SOF ± RBV were 89.2% (95% CI 83.4-93.1), 90.4% (95% CI 83.6-94.5) respectively. In addition, the SVR12 rates were 88% (95% CI 70.7-95.7) for 8 weeks, 89.9% (95% CI 81.0-94.9) for 12 weeks and 82.2% (95% CI 24.9-98.5) for 24 weeks of treatment.

CONCLUSION

LDV/SOF is a safe and relatively effective treatment for hepatitis C in drug users.

High hepatitis C virus seropositivity, viremia, and associated risk factors among trans women living in San Francisco, California

Trans women have been understudied in the Hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic, yet data suggest they may be at elevated risk of the disease. Using data collected from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) survey, we measured HCV seropositivity, viremia, and associated risk factors for HCV infection among trans women in San Francisco from June 2019 to February 2020. Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) was used to obtain a diverse, community-based sample of 201 trans women, of whom 48 (23.9%, 95% CI 17.9% - 30.0%) were HCV seropositive. HCV seropositivity significantly increased with increasing age (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR] 1.04 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.07) and history of injection drug use (APR 4.44, 95% CI 2.15-9.18). We also found that many had HCV viremia as twelve (6.0% of the total sample, 95% CI 2.7% - 9.3%) were RNA-positive for HCV. Trans women are highly impacted by HCV and could benefit from access to regular and frequent HCV screening and treatment access. HCV screening could be offered regularly in trans-specific health services, in the community, in jails and prisons, and integrated syringe exchange programs where treatment access or referral are also available.

Adherence to Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy in People Actively Using Drugs and Alcohol: The INCLUD Study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus treatment in persons who use drugs (PWUD) is often withheld due to adherence and reinfection concerns. In this study, we report treatment outcomes, technology-based adherence data, and adherence predictors in PWUD and/or alcohol.

METHODS

INCLUD was a prospective, open-label study of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for 12 weeks in PWUD aged 18-70 years. Participants were randomized to wireless (wirelessly observed therapy) or video-based directly observed therapy (vDOT). Drug use was assessed every 2 weeks. Sustained virologic response (SVR) was examined by intention-to-treat and as-treated. Factors associated with missing ≥1 dose(s) between visits were examined using generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Sixty participants received ≥1 ledipasvir/sofosbuvir dose (47 human immunodeficiency virus [HIV]/hepatitis C virus [HCV], 13 HCV only; 78% male; 22% black; 25% cirrhotic). Substance use occurred at 94% of person-visits: 60% marijuana, 56% alcohol, 37% methamphetamine, 22% opioids, 17% cocaine, and 20% injection drug use. The SVR by intention-to-treat was 86.7% (52 of 60) and as-treated was 94.5% (52 of 55). Confirmed failures included 1 relapse, 1 reinfection, and 1 unknown (suspected reinfection). Median total adherence was 96% (interquartile range [IQR], 85%-100%; range, 30%-101%), and between-visit adherence was 100% (IQR, 86%-100%; range, 0%-107%). The odds of missing ≥1 dose between visits increased with HIV coinfection (2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-6.32; P = .006), black race (4.09; 95% CI, 1.42-11.74; P = .009), methamphetamine use (2.51; 95% CI, 1.44-4.37; P = .0.001), and cocaine use (2.12; 95% CI, 1.08-4.18; P = .03) and decreased with marijuana use (0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.70; P = .003) and vDOT (0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.87; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Persons who use drugs achieved high SVR rates with high, but variable, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir adherence using technology-based methods. These findings support efforts to expand HCV treatment in PWUD.

Patient Centeredness in Hepatitis C Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment Delivery to People Who Inject Drugs: A Scoping Review

Background and Objective

Patient-centered care (PCC) is crucial for value-based care. We aimed to assess PCC dimensions addressed in hepatitis C virus direct-acting antiviral treatment delivery to people who inject drugs.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review to identify the studies that described hepatitis C virus treatment delivery to people who inject drugs in the direct-acting antiviral treatment era. We analyzed the included studies against eight PCC dimensions: (1) access to care; (2) coordination and integration of care; (3) continuity and translation; (4) physical comfort; (5) information, education, and communication; (6) emotional support; (7) involvement of family and friends; and (8) respect for individual patient preferences, perceived needs, and values. Additionally, we assessed the use of patient-centered terminology and the recognition of PCC importance and its relevance to treatment outcomes.

Results

None of the identified 36 studies addressed all PCC dimensions (highest seven, lowest two). Our findings revealed that PCC dimensions are prioritized differently and addressed using different approaches and strategies. Studies that used PCC terminology referred to personalized activities, which does not imply comprehensive PCC. About one-third of the studies acknowledged the importance of patient centeredness and two-thirds recognized its relevance to treatment outcomes.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest more engagement of people who inject drugs and comprehensive involvement of their families and friends in hepatitis C virus treatment journey, decisions, and outcomes. The recognition of PCC importance and its relevance to treatment outcomes in the analyzed studies emphasizes the need for more patient-centered hepatitis C virus treatment for people who inject drugs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-020-00489-6.

Hepatitis C reinfection after successful antiviral treatment among people who inject drugs: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

HCV reinfection following successful treatment can compromise treatment outcomes. This systematic review assessed the rate of HCV reinfection following treatment among people with recent drug use and those receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT).

METHODS

We searched bibliographic databases and conference abstracts for studies assessing post-treatment HCV reinfection rates among people with recent drug use (injecting or non-injecting) or those receiving OAT. Meta-analysis was used to cumulate reinfection rates and meta-regression was used to explore heterogeneity across studies.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included (6,311 person-years of follow-up). The overall rate of HCV reinfection was 5.9/100 person-years (95% CI 4.1-8.5) among people with recent drug use (injecting or non-injecting), 6.2/100 person-years (95% CI 4.3-9.0) among people recently injecting drugs, and 3.8/100 person-years (95% CI 2.5-5.8) among those receiving OAT. Reinfection rates were comparable following interferon-based (5.4/100 person-years; 95% CI 3.1-9.5) and direct-acting antiviral (3.9/100 person-years; 95% CI 2.5-5.9) therapy. In stratified analysis, reinfection rates were 1.4/100 person-years (95% CI 0.8-2.6) among people receiving OAT with no recent drug use, 5.9/100 person-years (95% CI 4.0-8.6) among people receiving OAT with recent drug use, and 6.6/100 person-years (95% CI 3.4-12.7) among people with recent drug use not receiving OAT. In meta-regression analysis, longer follow-up was associated with lower reinfection rate (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] per year increase in mean/median follow-up 0.77; 95% CI 0.69-0.86). Compared with people receiving OAT with no recent drug use, those with recent drug use receiving OAT (aRR 3.50; 95% CI 1.62-7.53), and those with recent drug use not receiving OAT (aRR 3.96; 95% CI 1.82-8.59) had higher reinfection rates.

CONCLUSION

HCV reinfection risk following treatment was higher among people with recent drug use and lower among those receiving OAT. The lower rates of reinfection observed in studies with longer follow-up suggested higher reinfection risk early post-treatment.

LAY SUMMARY

Our findings demonstrate that although reinfection by hepatitis C virus occurs following successful treatment in people with recent drug use, the rate of hepatitis C reinfection is lower than the rates of primary infection reported in the literature for this population - reinfection should not be used as a reason to withhold therapy from people with ongoing injecting drug use. The rate of hepatitis C reinfection was lowest among people receiving opioid agonist therapy with no recent drug use. These data illustrate that harm reduction services are required to reduce the reinfection risk, while regular post-treatment hepatitis C assessment is required for early detection and retreatment.