High uptake of hepatitis C virus treatment in HIV/hepatitis C virus co-infected patients attending an integrated HIV/hepatitis C virus clinic
Department of Genito-Urinary Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Dublin, Ireland. International Journal of STD & AIDS
(Impact Factor: 1.05).
10/2011; 22(10):571-6. DOI: 10.1258/ijsa.2011.010416
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of liver disease in HIV-infected patients. The HCV treatment outcomes and barriers to HCV referral were examined in a centre with a HIV/HCV co-infection clinic. Patients who were antibody positive for both HIV and HCV between 1987 and January 2009 were identified. A retrospective chart review was undertaken. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess predictors of HCV clinic referral. Data were collected on 386 HIV/HCV patients; 202/386 had been referred to the co-infection clinic and 107/202 had HCV treatment. In addition, 29/202 were undergoing pretreatment work-up. Overall sustained virologic response (SVR) was 44%; SVR was equivalent in those who acquired HIV/HCV infection from intravenous drug use (IDU) and others. On multivariate analysis, patients who missed appointments, were younger, with active IDU and advanced HIV and who were not offered HCV treatment were less likely to be referred to the clinic. Patients attending the clinic were more likely to have been screened for hepatocellular carcinoma than those attending the general HIV service. Two-thirds of patients referred to the clinic had engaged with the HCV treatment programme. Dedicated co-infection clinics lower the threshold for treatment and improve management of liver disease in co-infected patients.
Available from: Craig Ballard
- "It could be argued that HCV treatment uptake rate in the HIV primary care model was not ideal (25%). However, our reported HCV-treatment rates are higher than a recently reported aggressive program to engage HIV/HCV co-infected patients in care sponsored by the United States National Institutes of Health  and similar to many European countries, despite the fact we had considerably less accrual time than other clinic-based studies . We believe that our study results underestimate the positive impact of the HIV primary care model in the HCV treatment uptake rate, since 23 patients in this model were excluded from the analysis because: (1) Three patients were still receiving HCV therapy and therefore we could not assess their final outcomes; (2) twenty patients who were staged and eligible for conventional HCV therapy within study period elected to wait for HCV protease inhibitors availability and initiated HCV treatment right before or after 30 July 2011, (Figure 1). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Access to Hepatitis C (HCV) care is low among HIV-infected individuals, highlighting the need for new models to deliver care for this population.
Retrospective cohort analysis that compared the number of HIV patients who initiated HCV therapy: hepatology (2005–2008) vs. HIV primary care model (2008–2011). Logistic-regression modeling was used to ascertain factors associated with HCV therapy initiation and achievement of sustained viral response (SVR).
Of 196 and 163 patients that were enrolled in the HIV primary care and hepatology models, 48 and 26 were treated for HCV, respectively (p = 0.043). The HIV/HCV-patient referral rate did not differ during the two study periods (0.10 vs. 0.12/patient-yr, p = 0.18). In unadjusted analysis, predictors (p < 0.05) of HCV treatment initiation included referral to the HIV primary care model (OR: 1.7), a CD4+ count ≥400/mm3 (OR: 1.8) and alanine aminotranferase level ≥63U/L (OR: 1.9). Prior psychiatric medication use correlated negatively with HCV treatment initiation (OR: 0.6, p = 0.045). In adjusted analysis the strongest predictor of HCV treatment initiation was CD4+ count (≥400/mm3, OR: 2.1, p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in either clinic model (primary care vs. hepatology) in the rates of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (29% vs. 16%), loss to follow-up (8 vs. 8%), or HCV SVR (44 vs. 35%).
Using a HIV primary care model increased the number of HIV patients who initiate HCV therapy with comparable outcomes to a hepatology model.
AIDS Research and Therapy 03/2013; 10(1):9. DOI:10.1186/1742-6405-10-9 · 1.46 Impact Factor
Available from: Kasha Priya Singh
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Co-infection with Hepatitis C (HCV) and HIV is common and HIV accelerates hepatic disease progression due to HCV. However, access to HCV treatment is limited and success rates are generally poor.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess HCV treatment outcomes in observational cohorts. Two databases (Medline and EMBASE) were searched using a compound search strategy for cohort studies reporting HCV treatment outcomes (as determined by a sustained virological response, SVR) in HIV-positive patients initiating HCV treatment for the first time.
40 studies were included for review, providing outcomes on 5339 patients from 17 countries. The pooled proportion of patients achieving SVR was 38%. Significantly poorer outcomes were observed for patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 or 4 (pooled SVR 24.5%), compared to genotypes 2 or 3 (pooled SVR 59.8%). The pooled proportion of patients who discontinued treatment due to drug toxicities (reported by 33 studies) was low, at 4.3% (3.3-5.3%). Defaulting from treatment, reported by 33 studies, was also low (5.1%, 3.5-6.6%), as was on-treatment mortality (35 studies, 0.1% (0-0.2%)).
These results, reported under programmatic conditions, are comparable to those reported in randomised clinical trials, and show that although HCV treatment outcomes are generally poor in HIV co-infected patients, those infected with HCV genotypes 2 or 3 have outcomes comparable to HIV-negative patients.
PLoS ONE 02/2013; 8(2):e55373. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0055373 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Clinical Infectious Diseases 02/2013; DOI:10.1093/cid/cit092 · 8.89 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.