METHODS: A total of 17 samples collected from December 2009 to January 2011 were analyzed. Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed, followed by sequencing technique. Results were analyzed based on sequence information in GenBank. A second genotyping method (AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT) was done, which differentiates HCV genotypes by means of real-time hybridization-fluorescence detection.
RESULTS: From 17 samples, four were untypeable by AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT. Eleven of 13 (84.6%) results showed concordant genotypes. A specimen that was determined as genotype 3a by sequencing was genotype 1 by the AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT. Another specimen that was genotype 1 by sequencing was identified as genotype 3 by AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT.
CONCLUSION: HCV genotyping with AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT using real-time PCR method provides a much simpler and more feasible workflow with shorter time compared to sequencing method. There was good concordance compared to sequencing method. However, more evaluation studies would be required to show statistical significance, and to troubleshoot discordant results. AmpliSens(®) HCV-1/2/3-FRT does differentiate between genotype but not until subtype level.
METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 2/3 infection were randomized to receive peginterferon alfa-2b (1.5μg/kg/wk) for 24weeks (group A); peginterferon alfa-2b (1.0μg/kg/wk) for 24weeks (group B); or peginterferon alfa-2b (1.5μg/kg/wk) for 16weeks (group C), each in combination with weight-based ribavirin (800-1200mg/d). The study population comprised two cohorts: the Hep-Net cohort enrolled in Germany and an International cohort enrolled at study sites throughout Europe and Asia. The primary end point was sustained virological response (SVR).
RESULTS: The study included 682 patients; 80.2% had genotype 3 infection. In the intent-to-treat population, SVR rates were 66.5%, 64.3%, and 56.6% in groups A, B, and C, and were similar in Asian and white patients. Treatment differences (A vs. B and A vs. C) failed to reach the predefined margin for noninferiority of -10%; and thus groups B and C failed to show noninferiority relative to group A. Among patients with undetectable HCV RNA at week 4, SVR rates were 75.3%, 75.9%, and 72.4%, respectively. Relapse rates were 17.8%, 16.3%, and 29.3%, respectively. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events were highest in group A and lowest in group C, and adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across treatment arms.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 2/3 infection, 24weeks of peginterferon alfa-2b (1.5μg/kg/wk) plus weight-based ribavirin remains a standard-of-care therapy; however, treatment for 16weeks may be considered for patients with undetectable HCV RNA at week 4 of the treatment.
METHODS: A pilot study was conducted in four primary healthcare (PHC) centers in Malaysia. The model's key features included on-site HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) testing using a shared GeneXpert® system; noninvasive biomarkers for cirrhosis diagnosis; and extended care to PWID referred from nearby PHC centers and outreach programs. The feasibility assessment focused on three aspects of the model: demand (i.e., uptake of HCV RNA testing and treatment), implementation (i.e., achievement of each step in the HCV care cascade), and practicality (i.e., ability to identify PWID with HCV and expedite treatment initiation despite resource constraints).
RESULTS: A total of 199 anti-HCV-positive PWID were recruited. They demonstrated high demand for HCV care, with a 100% uptake of HCV RNA testing and 97.4% uptake of direct-acting antiviral treatment. The rates of HCV RNA positivity (78.4%) and sustained virologic response (92.2%) were comparable to standard practice, indicating the successful implementation of the model. The model was also practical, as it covered non-opioid-substitution-therapy-receiving individuals and enabled same-day treatment in 71.1% of the participants.
CONCLUSIONS: The modified same-day test-and-treat model is feasible in improving HCV care for rural PWID. The study finding suggests its potential for wider adoption in HCV care for hard-to-reach populations.
METHODS: This study aimed to conduct a 5-year budget impact analysis of the proposed stratified treatment cascade for HCV treatment in Malaysia. A disease progression model that was developed based on model-predicted HCV epidemiology data was used for the analysis, where all HCV patients in scenario A were treated with SOF/DAC for all disease stages while in scenario B, SOF/DAC was used only for non-cirrhotic patients and SOF/VEL was used for the cirrhotic patients. Healthcare costs associated with DAA therapy and disease stage monitoring were included to estimate the downstream cost implications.
RESULTS: The stratified treatment cascade with 109 in Scenario B was found to be cost-saving compared to Scenario A. The cumulative savings for the stratified treatment cascade was USD 1.4 million over 5 years.
DISCUSSION: A stratified treatment cascade with SOF/VEL was expected to be cost-saving and can result in a budget impact reduction in overall healthcare expenditure in Malaysia.
METHODS: Five databases were searched from 1990-2016 for studies that took place in countries with a GDP per capita of $7,000 to $13,000 USD. The data extraction was performed based on information regarding prevalence, sample size, age of participants, duration of intravenous drug use (IDU), recruitment location, dates of data collection, study design, sampling scheme, type of tests used in identifying antibody reactivity to HCV, and the use of confirmatory tests. The synthesis was performed with a random effects model. The Cochrane statistical Q-test was used to evaluate the statistical heterogeneity of the results.
RESULTS: The 33 studies included in the analysis correspond to a sample of seven countries and 23,342 observations. The point prevalence value estimates and confidence intervals of the random effects model were 0.729 and 0.644-0.800, respectively for all seven countries, and were greatest for China (0.633; 0.522-0.732) as compared to Brazil (0.396; 0.249-0.564). Prevalence for Montenegro (0.416; 0.237-0.621) and Malaysia (0.475; 0.177-0.792) appear to be intermediate. Mexico (0.960) and Mauritania (0.973) had only one study with the largest prevalence. A clear association was not observed between age or duration of IDU and prevalence of HCV, but the data from some groups may indicate a possible relationship. The measures of heterogeneity (Q and I2) suggest a high level of heterogeneity in studies conducted at the country level and by groups of countries.
CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the pooled prevalence of HCV was high (0.729) among a group of seven upper middle income countries. However, there was significant variation in the prevalence of HCV observed in China (0.633) and Brazil (0.396).