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: 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.
OBJECTIVE: To assist with achieving these goals and to inform the development of a national strategic plan for Malaysia, we estimated the long-term burden incurred by the care and management of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We compared cumulative healthcare costs and disease burden under different treatment cascade scenarios.
METHODS: We attached direct costs for the management/care of chronically HCV-infected patients to a previously developed clinical disease progression model. Under assumptions regarding disease stage-specific proportions of model-predicted HCV patients within care, annual numbers of patients initiated on antiviral treatment and distribution of treatments over stage, we projected the healthcare costs and disease burden [in disability-adjusted life-years (DALY)] in 2018-2040 under four treatment scenarios: (A) no treatment/baseline; (B) pre-2018 standard of care (pegylated interferon/ribavirin); (C) gradual scale-up in direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment uptake that does not meet the WHO 2030 treatment uptake target; (D) scale-up in DAA treatment uptake that meets the WHO 2030 target.
RESULTS: Scenario D, while achieving the WHO 2030 target and averting 253,500 DALYs compared with the pre-2018 standard of care B, incurred the highest direct patient costs over the period 2018-2030: US$890 million (95% uncertainty interval 653-1271). When including screening programme costs, the total cost was estimated at US$952 million, which was 12% higher than the estimated total cost of scenario C.
CONCLUSIONS: The scale-up to meet the WHO 2030 target may be achievable with appropriately high governmental commitment to the expansion of HCV screening to bring sufficient undiagnosed chronically infected patients into the treatment pathway.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional prospective study conducted from September 2007 to September 2013. Consecutive patients who were detected to have anti-HCV antibodies in the University of Malaya Medical Centre were included and tested for the presence of HCV RNA using Roche Cobas Amplicor Analyzer and HCV genotype using Roche single Linear Array HCV Genotyping strip.
RESULTS: Five hundred and ninety-six subjects were found to have positive anti-HCV antibodies during this period of time. However, only 396 (66.4%) were HCV RNA positive and included in the final analysis. Our results showed that HCV genotype 3 was the predominant genotype with overall frequency of 61.9% followed by genotypes 1 (35.9%), 2 (1.8%) and 6 (0.5%). There was a slightly higher prevalence of HCV genotype 3 among the Malays when compared to the Chinese (P=0.043). No other statistical significant differences were observed in the distribution of HCV genotypes among the major ethnic groups. There was also no association between the predominant genotypes and basic demographic variables.
CONCLUSIONS: In a multi-ethnic Asian society in Malaysia, genotype 3 is the predominant genotype among all the major ethnic groups with genotype 1 as the second commonest genotype. Both genotypes 2 and 6 are uncommon. Neither genotype 4 nor 5 was detected. There is no identification of HCV genotype according to ethnic origin, age and gender.