Barriers to receiving hepatitis C treatment for people who inject drugs: Myths and evidence

Background: Alcohol consumption, current injecting drug use, and pre-existing mental illness have been identified as 3 of the main reasons for excluding patients from treatment for hepatitis C. Objectives: We reviewed the literature to obtain an evidence base for these common exclusion criteria. Materials and Methods: We reviewed original research and meta-analyses investigating the effects of alcohol consumption, current injecting drug use, and pre-existing mental illness. Results: We identified 66 study reports relevant to the review, but found only limited evidence to support withholding of treatment on the basis of the 3 previously mentioned exclusion criteria. Conclusions: Currently, there is a lack of evidence for many of the barriers faced by patients in availing treatment for hepatitis C. Adherence to treatment routine was found to be a better predictor of sustained virological response than injecting drug or alcohol consumption during treatment period or the presence of a pre-existing mental disorder. Although several challenges remain, we need to ensure that treatment decisions are based on the best available evidence and the treatment is performed appropriately on a case-by-case basis. © 2011 Kowsar M.P.Co. All rights reserved

COVID-19 outbreaks in residential aged care facilities: an agent-based modeling study

IntroductionA disproportionate number of COVID-19 deaths occur in Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs), where better evidence is needed to target COVID-19 interventions to prevent mortality. This study used an agent-based model to assess the role of community prevalence, vaccination strategies, and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on COVID-19 outcomes in RACFs in Victoria, Australia.MethodsThe model simulated outbreaks in RACFs over time, and was calibrated to distributions for outbreak size, outbreak duration, and case fatality rate in Victorian RACFs over 2022. The number of incursions to RACFs per day were estimated to fit total deaths and diagnoses over time and community prevalence.Total infections, diagnoses, and deaths in RACFs were estimated over July 2023–June 2024 under scenarios of different: community epidemic wave assumptions (magnitude and frequency); RACF vaccination strategies (6-monthly, 12-monthly, no further vaccines); additional non-pharmaceutical interventions (10, 25, 50% efficacy); and reduction in incursions (30% or 60%).ResultsTotal RACF outcomes were proportional to cumulative community infections and incursion rates, suggesting potential for strategic visitation/staff policies or community-based interventions to reduce deaths. Recency of vaccination when epidemic waves occurred was critical; compared with 6-monthly boosters, 12-monthly boosters had approximately 1.2 times more deaths and no further boosters had approximately 1.6 times more deaths over July 2023–June 2024. Additional NPIs, even with only 10–25% efficacy, could lead to a 13–31% reduction in deaths in RACFs.ConclusionFuture community epidemic wave patterns are unknown but will be major drivers of outcomes in RACFs. Maintaining high coverage of recent vaccination, minimizing incursions, and increasing NPIs can have a major impact on cumulative infections and deaths

Keeping kids in school: modelling school-based testing and quarantine strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia

BackgroundIn 2021, the Australian Government Department of Health commissioned a consortium of modelling groups to generate evidence assisting the transition from a goal of no community COVID-19 transmission to ‘living with COVID-19’, with adverse health and social consequences limited by vaccination and other measures. Due to the extended school closures over 2020–21, maximizing face-to-face teaching was a major objective during this transition. The consortium was tasked with informing school surveillance and contact management strategies to minimize infections and support this goal.MethodsOutcomes considered were infections and days of face-to-face teaching lost in the 45 days following an outbreak within an otherwise COVID-naïve school setting. A stochastic agent-based model of COVID-19 transmission was used to evaluate a ‘test-to-stay’ strategy using daily rapid antigen tests (RATs) for close contacts of a case for 7 days compared with home quarantine; and an asymptomatic surveillance strategy involving twice-weekly screening of all students and/or teachers using RATs.FindingsTest-to-stay had similar effectiveness for reducing school infections as extended home quarantine, without the associated days of face-to-face teaching lost. Asymptomatic screening was beneficial in reducing both infections and days of face-to-face teaching lost and was most beneficial when community prevalence was high.InterpretationUse of RATs in school settings for surveillance and contact management can help to maximize face-to-face teaching and minimize outbreaks. This evidence supported the implementation of surveillance testing in schools in several Australian jurisdictions from January 2022

Eradication of hepatitis C infection: the importance of targeting people who inject drugs

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) affects ~170 million people worldwide and causes significant morbidity and mortality.1 In high-income countries, people who inject drugs (PWID) are at greatest risk of HCV infection.2 Until recently HCV eradication seemed unlikely, but recent advances in HCV treatment and improved understanding of the effectiveness of harm-reduction intervention effectiveness give reason for optimism. Current HCV treatments can cure ~75% of patients and new drugs will further improve effectiveness (over 90% cure) and improve tolerability.3 If HCV treatment can be delivered effectively to those at highest risk of onward transmission, significant reductions in future HCV cases are possible. The feasibility of disease eradication must be assessed on both scientific criteria (e.g., epidemiological susceptibility, effective and practical intervention available, and demonstrated feasibility of elimination) and political criteria (e.g., burden of disease, cost of intervention).4 With effective, curative treatment now available, HCV meets these criteria

Health and economic benefits of achieving hepatitis C virus elimination in Pakistan: A modelling study and economic analysis

Background: Modelling suggests that achieving the WHO incidence target for hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination in Pakistan could cost US$3.87 billion over 2018 to 2030. However, the economic benefits from integrating services or improving productivity were not included.Methods and findings: We adapt a HCV transmission model for Pakistan to estimate the impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of achieving HCV elimination (reducing annual HCV incidence by 80$148 to US$198/DALY). Compared to existing levels of treatment, scaling up screening and treatment to achieve HCV elimination in Pakistan averts 5.57 (95$1.45 (1.32 to 1.60) billion but will result in US$1.30 (0.94 to 1.72) billion in improved economic productivity over 2018 to 2030. This elimination strategy is highly cost-effective (ICER = US$29 per DALY averted) by 2030, with it becoming cost-saving by 2031 and having a net economic benefit of US$9.10 (95% UI 6.54 to 11.99) billion by 2050. Limitations include uncertainty around what level of integration is possible within existing primary healthcare services as well as a lack of Pakistan-specific data on disease-related healthcare management costs or productivity losses due to HCV.Conclusions: Investment in HCV elimination can bring about substantial societal health and economic benefits for Pakistan

Cost-Effectiveness of Treating Hepatitis C in Clients on Opioid Agonist Therapy in Community Pharmacies Compared to Primary Healthcare in Australia

Meeting the World Health Organisation 2030 target of treating 80% of people with hepatitis C virus (HCV) in Australia requires accessible testing and treatment services for at-risk populations. Previous clinical trials, including those in Australia, have demonstrated the efficacy of outreach programmes to community pharmacies offering opioid agonist therapy (OAT). This analysis evaluates the potential cost-effectiveness of introducing an outreach programme in community pharmacies. Using a decision analytic model, we estimated the impact of adding a temporary hepatitis C outreach and treatment programme in community pharmacies to the standard treatment pathway available through general practice. We compared the expected number of tests, diagnoses, cures and costs occurring through the addition of this outreach and treatment programme to those expected through general practice alone over a 12-month time horizon. We examined costs from the perspective of the health system and conducted one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess uncertainty in model parameters and test key assumptions. In the model adding the outreach programme pathway increased the number of tests from 4178 to 8737, the number of diagnoses from 615 to 1285 and the number of cures from 223 to 777 among people on OAT over a 12-month period. Each additional cure achieved through the addition of the outreach programme was estimated to incur 48,964 (AUD 2023) to the health system, with > 85% of these costs attributable to medication and dispensing expenses. The average cost per cure was estimated to be 49,152 through routine care and $49,018 in the outreach programme. Although outreach models of care incur large upfront costs, they can capture otherwise unreached populations and result in comparable or favourable cost per cure, due to higher levels of engagement and lower rates of loss to follow-up

The role of a hepatitis C virus vaccine:modelling the benefits alongside direct-acting antiviral treatments

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination is being seriously considered globally. Current elimination models require a combination of highly effective HCV treatment and harm reduction, but high treatment costs make such strategies prohibitively expensive. Vaccines should play a key role in elimination but their best use alongside treatments is unclear. For three vaccines with different efficacies we used a mathematical model to estimate the additional reduction in HCV prevalence when vaccinating after treatment; and to identify in which settings vaccines could most effectively reduce the number of treatments required to achieve fixed reductions in HCV prevalence among people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: A deterministic model of HCV transmission among PWID was calibrated for settings with 25, 50 and 75% chronic HCV prevalence among PWID, stratified by high-risk or low-risk PWID. For vaccines with 30, 60 or 90% efficacies, different rates of treatment and vaccination were introduced. We compared prevalence reductions achieved by vaccinating after treatment to prevent reinfection and vaccinating independently of treatment history in the community; and by allocating treatments and vaccinations to specific risk groups and proportionally across risk groups. RESULTS: Vaccinating after treatment was minimally different to vaccinating independently of treatment history, and allocating treatments and vaccinations to specific risk groups was minimally different to allocating them proportionally across risk groups. Vaccines with 30 or 60% efficacy provided greater additional prevalence reduction per vaccination in a setting with 75% chronic HCV prevalence among PWID than a 90% efficacious vaccine in settings with 25 or 50% chronic HCV prevalence among PWID. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccinating after treatment is an effective and practical method of administration. In settings with high chronic HCV prevalence among PWID, even modest coverage with a low-efficacy vaccine could provide significant additional prevalence reduction beyond treatment alone, and would likely reduce the cost of achieving prevalence reduction targets

The Potential Impact of a Hepatitis C Vaccine for People Who Inject Drugs:Is a Vaccine Needed in the Age of Direct-Acting Antivirals?

Background and Aims: The advent of highly effective hepatitis C (HCV) treatments has questioned the need for a vaccine to control HCV amongst people who inject drugs (PWID). However, high treatment costs and ongoing reinfection risk suggest it could still play a role. We compared the impact of HCV vaccination amongst PWID against providing HCV treatment.\ud \ud Methods: Dynamic HCV vaccination and treatment models among PWID were used to determine the vaccination and treatment rates required to reduce chronic HCV prevalence or incidence in the UK over 20 or 40 years. Projections considered a low (50% protection for 5 years), moderate (70% protection for 10 years) or high (90% protection for 20 years) efficacy vaccine. Sensitivities to various parameters were examined.\ud \ud Results: To halve chronic HCV prevalence over 40 years, the low, moderate and high efficacy vaccines required annual vaccination rates (coverage after 20 years) of 162 (72%), 77 (56%) and 44 (38%) per 1000 PWID, respectively. These vaccination rates were 16, 7.6 and 4.4 times greater than corresponding treatment rates. To halve prevalence over 20 years nearly doubled these vaccination rates (moderate and high efficacy vaccines only) and the vaccination-to-treatment ratio increased by 20%. For all scenarios considered, required annual vaccination rates and vaccination-to-treatment ratios were at least a third lower to reduce incidence than prevalence. Baseline HCV prevalence had little effect on the vaccine's impact on prevalence or incidence, but substantially affected the vaccination-to-treatment ratios. Behavioural risk heterogeneity only had an effect if we assumed no transitions between high and low risk states and vaccinations were targeted or if PWID were high risk for their first year.\ud \ud Conclusions: Achievable coverage levels of a low efficacy prophylactic HCV vaccine could greatly reduce HCV transmission amongst PWID. Current high treatment costs ensure vaccination could still be an important intervention option