Tag Archives: West Virginia

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.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

We Have a Cure for HCV; Few People Can Get It

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

Numerous films and novels have predicted this fate: there’s a fatal disease and someone invents a cure, but nobody can get it, and people die because of it. It’s a metaphor about the dangers of unchecked capitalism – the greedy owner of the cure who holds the rest of the world hostage until his demands are met.

And here it is – 2018, and we’ve had a cure for Hepatitis C (HCV) that’s easily tolerated since 2013, but it’s so prohibitively expensive that private and public payors, alike, have strictly limited access to it. They make patients, physicians, and pharmacists jump through as many hoops as possible to get the cure, from the strictest prerequisite abstinence guidelines, to allowing the disease to progress until it’s “bad enough” to cover it.

Medical Benefits Claim Form with the word, "REJECTED"

Photo Source: NPR

Sure, the cost of the newest drugs to cure HCV have dropped to ¼ of the introductory price of Sovaldi (Gilead), but, still – $30k for eight weeks of treatment? That’s still prohibitively expensive, even with the deep discounts and rebates given to many payors by manufacturers during the negotiation process. Those expenditures are only going to increase.

Now, there is evidence suggesting that undiagnosed HCV is more prevalent than undiagnosed HIV (Torian et al, 2018). Since the 1990s, hospitals and emergency departments have actively touted “routine HIV” screening, but have failed to deliver on those promises:

Lessons from HIV are both instructive and sobering: routine HIV screening is not truly routine; linkage continues to challenge even experienced providers; and linkage and treatment initiation vary widely across sites (Torian et al, 2018).

The findings from this study indicate not only a need to increase screening and linkages to care for HIV, but that this increase needs to be spread to HCV, as well. The latter argument, while correct, is unlikely to occur, in no small part because states and patients simply don’t have the resources to successfully implement this type of public health initiative.

Beyond just testing, minorities and Medicaid recipients – a significant portion of those infected with HCV – enjoy some of the lowest treatment rates in the nation (Wong et al, 2018). Hispanic patients were siginifantly less likely to receive treatment for HCV than white patients, and those on Medicaid, state insurance, or indigent care or no insurance were significantly less like to receive treatment than those with commercial insurance.

That last part comes to a head in rural America, where patients are far likelier to rely upon Medicaid as their primary payor for medical services, and where Injection Drug Use (IDU) of prescription opioids and/or heroin is high. In states like Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, and Kentucky, IDU and rates of overdose go hand in hand with increased rates of both Hepatitis B and HCV.

The sad reality is that, given the existing political makeup of both state and Federal legislatures, it’s highly unlikely that the significant resources needed to effectively combat the spread of HCV will be allocated. At a time when budgets are being slashed in order to accommodate tax cuts for corporation and the wealthy, to suggest that conservative lawmakers are suddenly going to provide an exponential (or even incremental) increase in funding is unrealistic.

References:

  • Torian, L.V., Felsen, U.R., Qiang, X., Laraque, F., Rude, E.J., Rose, H., Cole, A., et al. (2018, April 04). Undiagnosed HIV and HCV Infection in a New York City Emergency Department, 2015. American Journal of Public Health 108, no. 5 (May 1, 2018): pp. 652-658. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304321 Retrieved from: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304321
  • Wong, R.J., Jain, M.K., Therapondos, G., Shiffman, M.L., Kshirsagar, O., Clark, C., & Thamer, M. (2018, March 09). Race/ethnicity and insurance status disparities in access to direct acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus treatment. The American Journal of Gastroenterology. DOI: 10.1038/s41395-018-0033-8. Retrieved from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41395-018-0033-8

 __________

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

Prescription Opioid Diversion and Its Role in HCV Transmission

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 last week’s post, we discussed efforts to force pharmaceutical companies to report payments made to nonprofit organizations and patient advocacy groups in an effort to track which groups are funded primarily (or wholly) by pharmaceutical companies to promote their own business interests. Essentially, by funding certain organizations (such as Pain Advocacy groups), these companies can wage war against legislative attempts to restrict access to and/or prescribing of their highly addictive products (thus losing them money). This week, we’re going to take a look at the diversion of prescription opioid drugs, and how this can lead to both an increase in the likelihood of opioid addiction, and how it contributes to an increase in disease transmission via Injection Drug Use (IDU).

Each day, more than 1,000 people are treated in emergency departments for not using prescription opioids as directed

Photo Source: CDC

When I moved back to Kingsport, Tennessee as an adult in my late-20s, I began to notice a pattern: my co-workers and high school friends would tell me about their exploits with illicitly obtained “pills” – mostly OxyContin, as this was the late-00s. While working in a casual dining restaurant, I frequently heard about and witnessed efforts by my co-workers to obtain these drugs from other restaurant employees. Money would change hands, furtive glances were made around the restaurant to ensure no one was watching, and a few pills would be received, either loose or in a plastic bag. This activity was, of course, both illegal and against company policy, but it’s just SO easy to do, and I never reported the activity.

These drugs were often obtained by the seller either through a legitimate prescription for their own pain, or through getting them off of a third party. This type of drug dealing is called “diversion” – when legitimately prescribed opioid drugs are used outside of their prescribed purpose. It’s also the way that most prescription opioid addicts begin their path to addiction.

In 2015, HEAL Blog talked about the havoc prescription opioids wreaked upon my state (Hopkins, 2015). Teenagers would gain access to their parents’, grandparents’, or friends’ legitimately prescribed opioid drugs and use them recreationally. Unbeknownst to them, Purdue Pharma failed to mention that they knew their product was highly addictive, and before long, entire towns were in the throes of addiction. Fast forward to the ‘10s, and many of those prescription opioid addicts have moved away from the now-difficult-to-obtain prescription drugs to the much easier and cheaper to obtain heroin. Unfortunately for them, a good percentage of those heroin batches contain Fentanyl or Carfentanil – highly potent synthetic opioids that often lead to overdoses.

At the end of 2014, Scott County, Indiana, saw an huge spike in new HIV infections, caught because healthcare workers noticed a spike in new Hepatitis C infections. These new infections were driven almost entirely by IDU of Opana – a highly addictive prescription opioid that was removed from the market in 2017 (Kean, 2017). By the end of 2016, the county had 216 new HIV infections in the span of just two years, and of those, 95% were co-infected with HCV (May, 2016). So severe was the problem that Indiana and several surrounding states took the unprecedented approach of legalizing Syringe Services Programs – a move that was nigh unthinkable, since the early days of its proposal in the 1980s.

Here, in West Virginia, the rate of new HCV infections more than doubled from 2015 to 2016, from 3.4 to 7.2 (per 100,000), 68% of which were likely the result of IDU (WVDHHR, 2018). Despite this, Danny Jones, the mayor of Charleston, WV – the state capital – is on the warpath against the Kanawha County Harm Reduction Clinic because of an increase in used needles left throughout the city (Jenkins, 2018). Never mind that much of this refuse could be eliminated would the city spring for the Biohazard Disposal Kiosks requested by the health department, who instead had to fund them using funds from Emergency Medical Services programs.

Prescription drug diversion has led to tragic repercussions for many living in Appalachia who are now struggling with both addiction and comorbid infectious diseases. But, this problem doesn’t just exist in rural Appalachia, the Midwest, and New England – these issues are manifesting all around the U.S., and if we don’t take drastic measures to deal with drastic consequences, we’ll find ourselves faced with expensive outcomes.

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

Who Funds the Opioid Epidemic (and the Subsequent HCV Epidemic)

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

Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is planning to introduce a bill into the Senate that would require drug makers to report payments that are made to nonprofit organizations and patient advocacy groups (Silverman, 2018). This is an issue that HEAL Blog, as well as the Community Access National Network’s HIV/HCV Co-Infection Watch publication, has repeatedly brought up in our reporting.

Sen. Claire McCaskill

Photo Source: The Washington Free Beacon

State and Federal lawmakers have been attempting to place prescribing and use restrictions on prescription opioid drugs for the better part of two decades. There is a natural opposition that state and Federal lawmakers face from opioid manufacturing pharmaceutical companies, such as Purdue Pharma, maker of OxyContin, the first prescription opioid drug made available and marketed to average consumers rather than for use in palliative care and severe injury. But, that’s not where the pressure on lawmakers ends.

Purdue Pharma logo

Photo Source: Purdue Pharma

Where McCaskill’s proposal comes into play goes back much further, with pharmaceutical companies creating and funding nonprofit organizations to advocate for a single issue: Pain. Pain Advocates, since the late-1980s, have been actively lobbying Congress, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), and state legislatures to push for easier access to these powerful drugs. Every time a legislator or the FDA attempts to reign in what was once virtually unfettered access to

Opioid drugs work by binding to opioid receptors in the brain, spinal cord, and other areas of the body and reducing the sending of pain messages to the brain, thereby reducing the feeling of pain. For Pain Advocates who claim to represent patients whose levels of daily or regular pain leave them unable to function normally, these drugs have been seen as necessary for their survival. What drug manufacturers who fought for easy access to these drugs failed to mention (despite knowing from their own research) is that opioid drugs are highly addictive.

I’ve personally encountered several pain advocates whose opposition to my advocacy for opioid prescribing restrictions in the state of West Virginia has been boiled down to this line of thinking: “How am I supposed to be a functional human being without these prescriptions?” In a state like West Virginia, which has the highest rate of drug overdose deaths in the nation (52 per 100,000) and potentially the highest rate of Hepatitis C (HCV) in the nation (7.2 per 100,000), this comes across to me as them really saying, “My pain is more important than the preventable spread of disease or others’ lives.”

As the rate of new HCV infections continues to rise, in some states like WV, exponentially, is that opioid drug abuse is directly tied to this meteoric increase. In a report from the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH’s) National Institute on Drug Abuse, data indicate that the incidence of heroin initiation (beginning to use) was 19 times higher among those who reported prior nonmedical pain reliever use than among those who did not. Further, a separate study cited by the NIH found that 86% of young, urban heroin injectors had used opioid pain relievers nonmedically prior to using heroin, and that their introduction into nonmedical use was characterized by three main sources of opioids: family, friends, and personal prescriptions (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2018).

Next week, we’ll take a deeper look at how opioid diversion from legitimate prescriptions can potentially lead to addictions that can increase the risk of acquiring Hepatitis and HIV as a result of Injection Drug Use.

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.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Is it Time for a Rethink on Hepatitis C Care?

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 the state of West Virginia, any Medicaid beneficiary who is diagnosed with Hepatitis C must personally or through their prescribing doctor consult with either an Infectious Disease specialist or a doctor whose specialty includes Hepatitis C (e.g. – a Hepatologist) in order to have their prescription for Hepatitis C (HCV) Direct-Acting Antivirals (DAAs) approved. In addition, the patient must have a Metavir fibrosis score of F2 or higher as a prerequisite, as well as abstain from illicit drug and alcohol use for a period of 3 months.

These additional barriers to treatment are not only time consuming, but potentially costly. The consultation requirement, alone, exponentially increases the amount of money Medicaid must reimburse just in order to fill a prescription that can now be obtained for potentially $10k per patient (this, according to hearsay, since actual prices paid are forbidden from being made public by existing Trade Secrets laws). Beyond that, even current screening practices tend to require patients to see a specialist, just to get screened for the disease. This is both problematic, and relatively easily remedied.

Barriers to seeing out health care. About 1 in 2 Americans admit they have put off needed health care and have avoided going to a doctor when necessary.

Photo Source: VeraQuest

With the introduction of HCV DAAs in 2013, HCV patients gained access to what was once thought improbable – a relatively easily tolerated “cure” with a high level of efficacy and considerably fewer and less serious side effects. Since that time, an additional nine HCV DAAs have been brought to the market, with newer drugs coming down the pike. The most recent release, AbbVie’s Mavyret, is a potential game changer, offering curative treatment in 8-to-12 weeks for roughly 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the most popular drugs on the market, while sharing essentially identical cure rates. In fact, Mavyret has become the Preferred Drug for several Medicaid Fee-for-Service and Managed Care Organization (MCO) plans since its approval in August of last year.

But, still, issues remain. In West Virginia, the rate of HCV more than doubled from 3.4 (per 100,000 persons) in 2015 (CDC, 2017) to a staggering 7.2 in 2016 (West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, 2018). While increased screening may account for this considerable increase, 68% of new Acute HCV infections listed Injection Drug Use (IDU) as the primary risk factor (WV DHHR, 2018), which indicates that increased screening of this community needs to be a priority.

Some of the ways that this can be accomplished is at the regulatory level – requiring screening of all adults in virtually every healthcare setting (e.g. – emergency rooms, primary care, community health centers, urgent care clinics, and correctional settings). In fact, in a simulation model, researchers from Boston Medical Center, Mass. General Hospital, and Stanford University found that this expanded screening protocol would increase life expectancy and quality of life, while also remaining cost effective (Legasse, 2018).

The strategy would also identify an estimated 250,000 more HCV cases than the current U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)-recommended strategy of focusing screening efforts on the Birth Cohort – individuals born between 1945-1965 (Green, 2018). This would have a projected benefit of increasing cure rates from 41% to 61%, while also reducing the risk of death from HCV-linked conditions by more than 20% compared to the current CDC guidelines (Toich, 2018).

It is clear that expanding screening to include all adults, rather than focusing efforts on the Birth Cohort and those whose doctors are aware of any other risk factors (because, let’s be honest – few people who inject drugs are open about that with most doctors, unless they’re there for an IDU-related condition or because of an overdose, at which point, it’s pretty obvious). Once we achieve THAT measure, we can move on to allowing Primary Care Physicians and Registered Nurses begin to administer and monitor HCV DAA therapy, because, it’s just not that difficult to do.

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