Tag Archives: HBV

French Study Finds Universal HCV Screening Cost Effective

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

In May 2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted a goal of eliminating Hepatitis B (HBV) and C (HCV) by 2030.  Some major nations are on the way to achieving that goal (Australia, for instance); others, like the U.S., are not. One reason why the U.S. is falling so far behind others is that we frequently fail to identify patients who are infected with HCV because the screening guidelines are woefully outdated, focusing primarily on “one-time testing” for patients in the Birth Cohort (those born between 1945-1965) and patients whose doctors knowthey use or have used injection drugs.

Journal of Hepatology

Photo Source: EASL

A new study out of France, however, has found that a combination of universal screening for and immediate treatment of HCV was the most cost-effective way to combat the virus. The study, published in the Journal of Hepatology, found that, using their model which did away with “highest risk” screening models like the one used in the U.S., reduced the incidence of hepatic events (i.e. – cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, and liver-related mortality) in undiagnosed adults over the age of 18. The model also considered treatment initiation for all patients with fibrosis scores of 2 or higher, which resulted in reduced Chronic HCV prevalence in one year’s time; treatment initiation regardless of fibrosis score decreased prevalence significantly. A Healio article on this study has a much better explanation of the findings than the Journal of Hepatologysummary, and it can be found at this link:

https://www.healio.com/hepatology/hepatitis-c/news/online/%7B7c00ba17-af2b-4ddb-b0b2-26c8d6fed926%7D/universal-hcv-screening-in-adults-cost-effective-decreases-prevalence

While universal screening and treatment likely would be cost-effective in France (as well as other countries that offer Universal Healthcare), I predict that it would be incredibly difficult to replicate that finding here, in the U.S., primarily because of the way our for-profit healthcare system is structured. Between being constantly (and increasingly) bilked by private insurers and pharmaceutical companies, and the resultant exorbitant costs of testing and treatment, the U.S. is not currently positioned to adopt this strategy. In order for this strategy to be successful, the U.S. would have to fundamentally overthrow the existing healthcare payor model and adopt an intelligent policy of universal provision – an unlikely occurrence given the current legislative and executive political makeup.

That said, there is little stopping better prepared and positioned nations from adopting this strategy, and ensuring that their nations are able to eliminate HCV by 2030.

References:

  • Deuffic-Burban, S., Huneau, A., Verleene, A., Brouard, C., Pillonel, J., Le Strat, Y., Cossais, S., et. al. (2018, July 01). Assessing the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C screening strategies in France. Journal of Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.05.027

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Efficacy of Syringe Services Programs in Preventing the Spread of HCV

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

Over the past two weeks, HEAL Blog has covered two separate counties within the state of California that have taken two very different approaches to dealing with access to Syringe Services Programs (SSPs) and the prevention of the spread of diseases such as HIV, Hepatitis B (HBV), and Hepatitis C (HCV).

This past week, Here and Now, a program produced by WBUR, Boston’s National Public Radio (NPR) station, has also been covering issues related to SSPs in a series of interviews. These interviews included:

  • Chelsi Cheatom, Program Manager for Trac-B Exchange in Clark County, Nevada, which established the nation’s first syringe vending machine in Las Vegas, NV (Here and Now, 2018b);
  • Ricky Bluthenthal, Professor of Preventative Medicine at University of Southern California, who studies the efficacy of these programs (Here and Now, 2018a);
  • Danny Jones, Mayor of Charleston, West Virginia, who has led a very vocal campaign against the county health department’s Harm Reduction Clinic (Here and Now, 2018c)

Each of these interviews provides a set of perspectives that are very important to the discussion of SSPs, their efficacy, and their existence in the U.S. – an academic perspective that researches these issues and argues that data show these programs to be highly efficacious; a program worker who can attest to the successes and challenges of these programs; an elected official who must deal with and respond to the outcry and fallout of the very existence of SSPs creates in local settings. While each of these perspectives are important, it is Mayor Jones’ take on the issues in Charleston, WV with which I take issue.

Mayor Jones has, for the past five months, been waging a war against Kanawha County’s Harm Reduction Clinic, and he has, unfortunately, won. As of May 14th, the Clinic is now officially suspended by the state of West Virginia in response to an audit requested by Jones and Interim Health Officer Dr. Dominic Gaziano. The reasons for the suspension, and the findings of the audit, indicate that the clinic failed to build and maintain community support, lack of data indicating that drug users were actually informed of other programs (including treatment and recovery services), insufficient evidence to support the safe recovery and disposal of needles, and insufficient evidence regarding the total number and types of referrals made to drug treatment programs (Takitch & Hoak, 2018).

Kanawha-Charleston Health Department

Photo Source: WV Metro News

I began interviewing the head of the Kanawha County Clinic in September 2017 regarding the successes and challenges of establishing SSPs in the state of West Virginia. This Clinic, in particular, faced significant challenges because it served as one of only two public SSPs that served clients from 9 southern WV counties (Boone, Cabell, Kanawha, Lincoln, Logan, Mason, Mingo, Putnam, and Wayne). Since our conversation, two addition clinics have opened, but they are further East, and stilldo not serve those communities.

To put this into better perspective, here are some frightening statistics regarding HCV in those counties:

  • The rate of new Acute JBV infections in the state of West Virginia is 14.6 (per 100,000) – the highest rate in the nation
  • The rate of new HCV infections in the state of West Virginia is a staggering 7.2 (per 100,000) – the highest rate in the nation
  • The rates of HBV and HCV infection for the aforementioned counties are as follows (WVDHHR, 2018):
    • Boone – (HBV) – 34.2; (HCV) – 0.0
    • Cabell – (HBV) – 17.6; (HCV) – 10.3
    • Kanawha – (HBV) – 29.2; (HCV) – 14.9
    • Lincoln – (HBV) – 56.0; (HCV) – 0.0
    • Logan – (HBV) – 17.3; (HCV) – 8.6
    • Mason – (HBV) 25.9; (HCV) – 0.0
    • Mingo – (HBV) 31.6; (HCV) – 7.9
    • Putnam – (HBV) 28.1; (HCV) – 3.5
    • Wayne – (HBV) 14.6; (HCV) – 0.0
  • The state of West Virginia has an overall drug overdose death rate of 52.0 (per 100,000) – the highest rate in the nation
    • Roughly 86% of those overdose deaths were opioid-related
    • WV has the highest rate over opioid overdose deaths in the nation, with a rate of 44.9
    • These nine counties have the highest rates of drug overdose deaths in the state of West Virginia

To say that the burden placed upon the Kanawha/Putnam Harm Reduction Clinic was high is a gross understatement. If you notice the rate of HCV being lower in some counties, it’s because the state only requires that physicians offer HCV testing to people in the Birth Cohort (born 1945-1965) unless the physician knows about another risk factor in a patient, meaning that patients are disinclined to say they inject drugs. So, HCV cases very likely exist, there, but physicians are not required to test for it on a regular basis, which is dumb, given the high rates of Injection Drug Use in those counties.

In addition to serving essentially nine counties, the Clinic had to do so on a shoestring budget, as state law prohibits the use of funds for specific drug-related expenditures. They had to secure funding for syringes and disposal on their own, meaning significant time was spent fundraising to pay for the very reason why they were there.

Additionally, the Clinic repeatedly requested funds for the purchase and installation of Biohazard Disposal Kiosks – steel, locked mailboxes into which sharps can safely be disposed. Each individual unit costs around $1,500, which includes the cost of purchase, shipping, signage, and installation. The county refused to fund these kiosks (which didn’t stop the Mayor and Police Chief from complaining about the additional biohazard sharps waste around the city), and they were only able to secure funding for a single unit – funding which came notfrom the health department budget, but from the Emergency Medical Technician budget, who were kind enough to supply the funds.

The arguments being made by Mayor Jones and the Police Chief are understandable – there has been an increase in needle waste in the city of Charleston and the surrounding areas…in no small part, because the city steadfastly refused to pony up the funds to install disposal kiosks in these areas.

Additionally, both men argue that the privately run facility – Health Right – is doing a better job of providing the service. Perhaps, this is because each client has to be enrolled and create a paper trail to participate? For anyone who’s ever worked with, done research about, or been around People Who Inject Drugs (PWID), the last thing they want to do is create a paper trail that authorities can use to follow them back to their homes and arrest them for illicit drug use, possession, and possession of paraphernalia. This is why the Kanawha facility had exponentially more clients than Health Right – they weren’t creating a paper trail.

Did the Kanawha/Putnam County Harm Reduction Clinic have its issues? Absolutely. The program operated for barely three years, and there will always be a learning period. But, thanks to the unreasonable efforts of Danny Jones, PWID in those nine counties now get to enjoy traveling even further to obtain clean supplies.

Mark my words – this is going to have a serious deleterious impact on the already-highest-in-the-nation infection rates in the state of West Virginia.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Linkages to Care for Current/Former Incarcerated Citizens Living with Hepatitis C

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

On Wednesday, April 26th, 2018, Elizabeth Paukstis, Public Policy Director for the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable (NVHR), joined me in Washington, DC to deliver presentations about Linkages to Care for Current/Former Incarcerated Citizens Living with Hepatitis C. This was the second such meeting held by the Community Access National Network (CANN) in as many years dedicated to the topic of correctional healthcare.

My presentation – Viral Hepatitis in Correctional Settings – included original research conducted by CANN that attempted gather the testing protocols for Hepatitis B (HBV) and Hepatitis C (HCV) from Departments/Divisions of Corrections (DOCs) in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. The findings of this research are as follows:

  • Only fourteen (14) states publicly post specific protocols on their state DOC websites
  • Twenty-five (25) states require or offer HBV testing during intake
  • Thirty-two (32) states require or offer HCV testing during intake
  • Only seven (7) states follow the Federal Board of Prisons’ (BOP) recommendation of offering HBV testing using an Opt-Out delivery model (informed refusal)
  • Only fifteen (15) states offer HCV testing using an Opt-Out delivery model
  • Twenty-three (23) states only test for HBV on inmate request or if they meet clinical criteria (e.g. – inmate has HIV, contact with someone who has HBV, injection drug use)
  • Seventeen (17) states only test for HCV on inmate request or if they meet clinical criteria (Hopkins, 2018)

My report can be found here.

State/Federal HCV-Related Lawsuits Involving Prisons (2017-2018)

Photo Source: CANN

Ms. Paukstis’ presentation – Hepatitis C and Incarceration: Policy Proposals and Challenges – focused on treatment statistics within prisons, the challenges prisons face when procuring prescription drugs, provided a case study regarding Mississippi’s myriad issues related to HCV in their prison populations. Highlights of this presentation include:

  • An estimated 17% of inmates in U.S. state prisons are infected with HCV
  • Less than 1% (0.89%) of those known to have HCV were receiving treatment in 2016
  • The Federal BOP receives at least a 24% discount on HCV drugs – a discount to which state prisons are not privy
  • State prisons are not eligible for discounts under the Federal 340B Drug Pricing Program
  • Incarcerated persons face an additional risk of having their sentences extended if they are charged with “endangerment by bodily substance” (causing a correctional employee, visitor, or another inmate to come into contact with blood, seminal fluid, urine, feces, or saliva)

Download Elizabeth’s report.

References:

 __________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

I Just Want Current Data

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

I’m a data person. While I can feign empathy, when it comes to reporting about HIV, Hepatitis B (HBV), and Hepatitis C (HCV), I’m much more of a “numbers” person. So, when Emory University announced, last year, that they were releasing a pair of websites (funded by Gilead Sciences who, in the effort of full disclosure, also fund the Community Access National Network’s HIV/HCV Co-Infection Watch) that would provide advocates, activists, and organizations with tools to help them advocate, I was super excited.

“You can create one-sheets to serve as starting points for state-level and Federal advocacy,” they announced. This is an awesome tool that saves organizations and individuals from having to dig through mounds of data and create their own one-sheets. This tool has so much potential to be a turning point in the way we organize advocacy efforts.

And then, I visited the sites.

The data was (and still is) out of date. AIDSVu was (and still is) using old numbers. The data presented on AIDSVu haven’t changed, and when the sites rolled out in 2017, they were already a year out of date, presenting 2014 data, when 2015 had been available for nearly six months.

The data on HepVu was (and still is) even worse. In 2017, when the site launched, HepVu was using statistics from 2010 – a full four years out of date with the information that was released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in May 2017. Within a month, the data became five years out of date, as the numbers from 2015 were released in summary, and then in detail by June 17th, 2017.

This is a problem.

Any person who works in healthcare advocacy can and will tell you that, unless you have accurate and current data to support your advocacy, you aren’t going to accomplish what you set out to do. The expectation that we are going to sway local, state, and/or Federal legislators with data that are not only woefully out of date, but represent years before there was an explosion of new infections, is a pipe dream.

To use my home state as an example, the data presented by HepVu for West Virginia indicates that in 2010, WV had 21 new Acute HCV infections, with a rate of 1.1 (per 100,000). Had that data been updated in May 2017, they would’ve been using 2015 statistics, in which there were 63 infections, with a rate of 3.4 – literally triple the amount of new infections, and more than triple the rate. Were they using the most recent statistics from the state, they would be showing that, in 2016, there were 132 new HCV infection, with a rate of 7.2 – more than double the year prior.

West Virginia - In 2014, 120 of every 100,000 people were living with diagnosed HIV.

Photo Source: AIDSVu

West Virginia - In 2010, an estimated 24,000 people were living with Hepatitis C.

Photo Source: HepVu

It is easy to understand why the 2016 numbers, which are the most current available, will be more effective in any advocacy efforts.

But, the problem doesn’t just begin and end with AIDSVu/HepVu. As I’ve been gathering state-level data for an upcoming presentation, virtually every state in the U.S. has woefully outdated information available on their respective epidemiology (or equivalent) websites:

Kentucky – the state with the third-highest rate of HCV in the nation (2.7 in 2015) – hasn’t updated its Hepatitis C Department for Public Health website since February 24, 2016, and is still inviting people to attend the 2016 Kentucky Conference on Viral Hepatitis on July 26th, 2016.

Colorado – the state’s quarterly HIV surveillance reports just stop after the 2nd Quarter 2017.

Georgia doesn’t even seem to have published reports on disease statistics, and requesting that data (which, by the way, is supposed to be public data) requires a minimum fee of $25.

Hawaii – the state department of health hasn’t put out an annual report since 2012.

The point is this: there will always be data lag – the time between the end of the year when a state’s data is gathered and the time when it’s verified and published. For most diseases, that seems to be about a two-year lag. But, if we ever intend to become better advocates, we need to rethink how data is gathered and presented in a timely manner.

I get it – not every state has the resources to track every disease, publish a report, and update their website (hell – Alaska’s Medicaid program hasn’t updated its Preferred Drug List since literally March 2015; I even E-mailed to ask, and was told that that date is correct…). But, we are getting to the point where, in 2018, these types of data need to be made readily available quickly and accurately. We literally have the technology; we can do it.

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

2017 Year in Review

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

As it tradition for HEAL Blog, the final post for 2017 will be a look back at the topics we’ve covered over the year and a look forward to the future.

2017 Year End, Turning into 2018

Photo Source: AGH University

HEAL Blog releases 50 posts a year (including this post), and those posts fell within one of five categories: Hepatitis Increases, Incarceration, HCV Drug Discussions, Opioids, and Other. Posts related to Hepatitis Increases focused primarily on reports of increased infection/morbidity rates in various states and population, including Hepatitis A, B, and C. Those related to Incarceration focused primarily on increased infection rates and treatment within incarceration settings (prisons, jail, and juvenile detention centers). Posts related to HCV Drug Discussions focused on pricing, availability, and treatment outcomes. Opioid-related posts focused on the toll of the opioid epidemic in the U.S. and the role they play in increasing rates of infection for HIV and Viral Hepatitis (VH). Posts that fell outside of those specific topics are categorized as “Other.” The distribution of those posts are as follows.

  • Hepatitis Increases – 17
  • Incarceration – 4
  • HCV Drug Discussions – 15
  • Opioids – 9
  • Other – 4

As the incidence of Viral Hepatitis infections continues to rise, there are specific patterns – most of the highest rates exists in states that are primarily rural or suburban (with few densely populated metropolitan areas); new Acute Hepatitis C (HCV) diagnoses tend to be in younger populations (ages 18-45) and are increasingly linked to Injection Drug Use (IDU) as the primary risk factor for infection within this age demographic. Prescription opioid abuse and heroin are playing an increasing role in the spread of HCV, not only in America, but across the globe. In the U.S., many of the rural states where HCV rates are exploding are racially and ethnically homogenous (read: primarily Caucasian/White). Despite this, even in states with low numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, African-Americans are disproportionately impacted by HCV infections as a percentage of the population – despite being fewer in number, the percentage of African-Americans infected is higher than other racial and ethnic groups.

In addition to HCV-related infection increases, homeless and indigent populations are facing vast increases in Hepatitis A (HAV) infections, particularly in metropolitan areas where homeless encampments are more densely packed and infections are more easily spread. Arizona, California, and Minnesota have all experienced high rates of HAV within their respective homeless populations, with California facing the highest rates of both morbidity and mortality. California’s HAV crisis is also quickly spreading along the coastline, heading northward. HEAL Blog will continue to monitor the situation.

As for the forecast into 2018…it’s not looking good for the U.S. With the installation of the Trump Administration’s various secretaries and their approach to management and governance, both healthcare advocates and institutional healthcare presences are considerably concerned with the path being laid before us. In addition to concerns about the appointments being made by the Trump Administration (of which there are many concerns, and far fewer appointments), the Legislative Branch’s stewardship under Republican majority in both houses has proven both hostile to the healthcare concerns of Americans, and incredibly clumsy in their attempts to address virtually any issue put before them. Both the Executive and Legislative Branches have inspired little confidence that anyone – healthy or otherwise – are going to come away from their agendas unscathed.

Both branches have, in 2017, created an environment of legislative and administrational chaos and uncertainty, both of which are reflected in the higher increases in health insurance premiums offers on the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) insurance marketplaces. Between shortened enrollment periods and all-but-eliminated advertising and outreach budgets, enrollment is expected to fall short of its goals for insuring Americans in 2018. Moreover, this type of chaos, unreliability, and unpredictability tend to breed contempt, which may result in Republicans losing their majority in one or both houses during the 2018 midterm elections.

Of significant concern is the Republican Senate’s approach to bill crafting, which has largely been conducted in secret, without input from Democratic lawmakers, and is heavily influenced by the very special interest groups against which many of these politicians campaigned. After failing twice to repeal the ACA in 2017 despite having a majority in both houses, Senate Republicans have repeatedly attempted to cripple the law through various means, the most recent of which involved slipping into their “Tax Reform” bill an effort to repeal the individual mandate provision that requires virtually every American to purchase some sort of qualifying health insurance plan in an effort to stabilize costs once sicker clients entered the market.

In the Administrative Branch, the heads of the various Departments nominated by President Trump have done little to inspire confidence, as well. Tom Price, who was Trump’s initial pick for the Department of Health and Human Services, was forced to resign after reports indicated that he racked up $400,000 in privately chartered flights for personal and professional reasons. This was a significant departure, as previous heads took commercial flights, save for rare exceptions. Now that Price is out of the way, Trump has nominated Alex Azar, a former pharmaceutical company executive whose tenure at Eli Lilly saw a three-fold increase in the cost of the insulin over a ten-year period. Needless to say, it is less than certain that a person who oversaw such price increases will be the “…star for better healthcare and lower drug prices,” as President Trump stated in his tweet announcing his pick for the position.

Given the chaotic and unsteady stewardship of the country, it is hard to express any optimism going forward unless circumstances change dramatically.

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

HHS Releases New HIV Treatment Guidelines

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

The Department of Health and Human Services released updated Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Adults and Adolescents Living with HIV in October 2017, which included updates for best practices, treatment protocols and recommendations, which drugs not to use, treatment for virologic failure, regimen switching, adherence to the continuum of care, drug interactions, and Hepatitis B (HBV) and Hepatitis C (HCV) co-infection treatment guidelines.

Because emtricitabine (FTC – Truvada, Descovy, Stribild, Genvoya, Odefsey), lamivudine (3TC – Epivir, Epivir-HBV, Combivir, Kivexa, Trizivir), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF- Viread, Atripla, Complera, Stribild, Truvada), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF – Genvoya, Odefsey, Descovy) have activity against both HIV and HBV, an Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) should include (TAF or TDF) plus (3TC of FTC) to fully suppress the viruses. Other HBV treatment regimens, including adefovir (Hepsera) alone or in combination with 3TC or FTC, are not recommended for patients co-infected with HIV/HBV.

Rx pill bottles and pills

Photo Source: HIVThrive.Com

HBV reactivation has been observed in persons with HBV infection during interferon-free HCV treatment. For that reason, all patients initiating HCV therapy should be tested for HBV. Persons with HCV/HIV coinfection and active HBV infection should receive two agents with anti-HBV activity prior to initiating HCV therapy.

For HCV, ART may slow the progression of liver disease related to HCV by preserving or restoring immune function and reducing HIV-related immune activation and inflammation. For most persons with HCV/HIV coinfection, including those with cirrhosis, the benefits of ART outweigh concerns regarding drug-induced liver injury. Therefore, ART should be initiated in all patients with HCV/HIV coinfection, regardless of CD4 T-cell count. All patients with HCV/HIV coinfection should be evaluated for HCV therapy and have their liver fibrosis stage assessed to inform the length of their therapy, ribavirin need (a concern with some regimens), and subsequent risk of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver disease complications

The document also includes an extensive list of the various drug interactions between HIV and HCV drugs, including the three newest HCV regimens, Epclusa, Vosevi, and Mavyret. HEAL Blog previously covered HCV and HIV drug interactions (Hopkins, 2016). While the document is clearly meant for medical and other healthcare professionals, if you would like more information, please check out the link below in the citation.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Increase in HCV Cases Calls for Updated Screening Protocols

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

We, here at HEAL Blog, attempt to provide coverage of local outbreaks of Viral Hepatitis (VH), as well as to investigate and report them using evidence-based data to accurately characterize the issues at play. What consistently comes to the forefront of Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is the issue of Injection Drug Use (IDU) and the People Who Inject Drugs (PWID). More than any other risk factor, IDU in consistent across Hepatitis A (HAV), Hepatitis B (HBV), and HCV. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2015, IDU was reported as a risk factor in 36.1% of all Acute HAV cases, ~34.3% of all Acute HBV cases, and 64.2% of all Acute HCV cases (CDC, 2017).

Hepatitis Screening

Photo Source: JAMA

In the five of the states with the highest rates of HCV – Massachusetts (MA), West Virginia (WV), Kentucky (KY), Tennessee (TN), Maine (ME), and Indiana (IN) – these data are undeniable:

And yet, none of these states have amended their HCV screening protocols to include compulsory “Opt-Out” screening in every healthcare setting. This is folly, at best, and dereliction of duty, at worst. If a state’s responsibility is to ensure the health and welfare of its citizens, it is incumbent upon them to take non-extraordinary steps to expand screening protocols. Moreover, they must begin regularly surveilling and reporting, including detailed risk-factor reporting.

If this sounds “revolutionary,” it’s simply not. Given the high rates of infection, mortality, co-morbidities, and the fact that there is a functional cure for the disease, there is simply no excuse for failing to expand testing to include compulsory “Opt-Out” screening for HCV, particularly in states where IDU is high. Is it expensive? Yes. But, again, when it comes to the health and welfare of people, sometimes short-term expenditures outweigh long-term costs of care. This is why there are grants; this is why people pay taxes.

Some of the most successful screening efforts are being conducted not in traditional healthcare settings, but at Syringe Services Programs (SSPs), which remain controversial among those who say that they promote and encourage drug use. These services are, however, vital to stemming the spread of disease. Perhaps the least successful screening efforts are conducted in incarceration settings, despite having essentially a captive demographic. These efforts are hampered, again, by cost concerns, as, if the results come back “Positive,” they are required by law to treat.

While expanding screening may be initially costly, it is the best way for us to go about eliminating HCV in the U.S.

References

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized