The Berlin Hepatitis C Manifesto: access to prevention, testing, treatment and care for people who use drugs.

The treatment of hepatitis C has entered a new era since the advent of curative pharmaceuticals. As policy, government and civil society assemble in response, there are still gaps to be addressed. The Manifesto on Hepatitis C and Drug Use, launched in Berlin during the Correlation Hepatitis C Initiative conference in October 2014, was formulated and endorsed by many key organizations in the hepatitis field. The Manifesto takes strides to pinpoint shortcomings in hepatitis action oriented towards the population most affected by the hepatitis C virus (HCV): active drug users. Despite a considerable amount of evidence that active drug users are disproportionately affected by HCV, barriers to care remain. Engagement with representatives of communities of people who inject drugs (PWID) is imperative in order to effectively create guidelines which reflect reality. Unfortunately, widespread systemic stigmatization and lack of trust between affected communities, decision-makers and healthcare professionals have reproduced this divide. The Berlin Manifesto has identified a disconnect between evidence and action which must be answered. In this roundtable discussion, experts from diverse parts of the hepatitis community have contributed their perspectives and experience on access to prevention, testing, and treatment for HCV in PWID. The authors discuss relevant topics such as realities of access to HCV treatment in the United Kingdom, interventions of a regional network of active drug users in Europe and lack of PWID involvement in government policy in Catalonia. Collectively they challenge the neglect of HCV in PWID by many decision-makers and health care professionals and promote a scale-up of integrated prevention and treatment strategies focusing on this population. The authors' conclusions aim to clarify the discourse on hepatitis in order to prevent disease, save lives and work towards eventual hepatitis elimination

Implementation of the HepClink test-and-treat community strategy targeting Pakistani migrants with hepatitis C living in Catalonia (Spain) compared with the current practice of the Catalan health system: budget impact analysis

Objectives To perform a budget impact analysis of the HepClink test-and-treat strategy in which community health agents offer hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing, diagnosis and treatment to the Pakistani population living in Catalonia compared with the current practice of the Catalan health system (without targeted screening programmes).Methods We estimated the population of adult Pakistani migrants registered at the primary care centres in Catalonia by means of the Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care (n=37 972 in 2019, Barcelona health area). This cohort was followed for a time period of 10 years after HCV diagnosis (2019–2028). The statistical significance of the differences observed in the anti-HCV positivity rate between screened and non-screened was confirmed (α=0.05). The budget impact was calculated from the perspective of the Catalan Department of Health. Sensitivity analyses included different levels of participation in HepClink: pessimistic, optimistic and maximum.Results The HepClink scenario screened a higher percentage of individuals (69.8%) compared with the current scenario of HCV care (39.7%). Viraemia was lower in the HepClink scenario compared with the current scenario (1.7% vs 2.5%, respectively). The budget impact of the HepClink scenario was €884 244.42 in 10 years.Conclusions Scaling up the HepClink strategy to the whole Catalan territory infers a high budget impact for the Department of Health and allows increasing the detection of viraemia (+17.8%) among Pakistani migrants ≥18 years. To achieve a sustainable elimination of HCV by improving screening and treatment rates, there is room for improvement at two levels. First, taking advantage of the fact that 68.08% of the Pakistani population had visited their primary care physicians to reinforce targeted screening in primary care. Second, to use HepClink at the community level to reach individuals with reluctance to use healthcare services

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AimThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery.MethodsThis was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin.ResultsOverall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P ConclusionOne in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery