Influence of language barrier and cultural background in hepatitis B disease knowledge in a Chinese community of Spain.

Introduction: Hepatitis B infection (HBV) is prevalent in China. Due to language barriers and cultural differences, it is not always straightforward to evaluate disease knowledge in liver clinics. We aimed to assess the awareness on HBV and its mechanisms of transmission in HBV-infected Chinese patients and their household contacts. Methods: HBV-infected Chinese patients and their contacts were interviewed by a native Chinese nurse regarding their knowledge on HBV transmission mechanisms, use of preventive measures and vaccination status. Non-Chinese HBV-infected patients and their household contacts served as a control group. Results: In total 182 patients and 398 contacts participated with 85 (47%) patients and 240 (60%) contacts being from China. Language barrier was reported in 80% of Chinese patients and 44% of their contacts. Knowledge on parenteral and sexual HBV transmission was high in all patients (~90%) but Chinese were more aware of vertical transmission than controls (94% vs. 68%; p < 0.01). Regarding the use of preventive measures, Chinese patients were more forewarned in their use to avoid parenteral transmission (93% vs. 74%, p < 0.01). When assessing household contacts, Chinese used preventive measures more frequently than controls for parenteral and sexual transmission (79% vs. 65 and 81% vs. 48%, p < 0.05). Vaccination coverage was slightly lower in Chinese contacts compared to controls (78% vs. 86%, p = 0.05). Conclusion: Despite relevant language barriers, Chinese patients are well informed on the mechanisms of HBV transmission. Cultural differences may explain a higher use of preventive measures among the Chinese population. HBV vaccination of household contacts should be reinforced in both groups.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients Living with Wilson Disease in Spain: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Wilson disease (WD) is a rare copper metabolism disorder caused by mutations in the ATP7B gene. It usually affects young individuals and can produce hepatic and/or neurological involvement, potentially affecting health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We assessed HRQoL in a cohort of Spanish patients with WD and evaluated disease impact on several domains of patients' lives, treatment adherence, drug preference and satisfaction, and healthcare resource utilisation in a cross-sectional, retrospective, multicentric, observational study. A total of 102 patients were included: 81.4% presented isolated liver involvement (group H) and 18.6% presented neurological or mixed involvement (group EH). Up to 30% of patients reported a deteriorated emotional status with anxiety and depression, which was greater in the EH subgroup; the use of neuropsychiatric drugs was high. Over 70% of the patients were satisfied with their current treatment but complained about taking too many pills, stating they would consider switching to another more patient-friendly treatment if available. The Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire revealed only 22.5% of patients were fully adherent to therapy, suggesting that alternative therapies are needed. This real-world study, even though is highly enriched with hepatic patients and mild disease, shows that WD impacts patients' HRQoL, especially in the emotional domain.

Usefulness of dried blood spot samples for monitoring hepatitis C treatment outcome and reinfection among people who inject drugs in a test-and-treat program.

Dried blood spots (DBS) are a reliable tool to diagnose viremic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We evaluated the clinical performance of a DBS-based molecular assay for the assessment of cure and reinfection after on-site treatment at a harm reduction center (HRC). Genotyping from DBS samples was also assessed to discriminate reinfection from treatment failure. People who inject drugs (PWID) from an ongoing test-and-treat pilot at the largest HRC in Barcelona were included in the study. HCV-RNA detection from DBS collected after treatment (with follow-up at 12, 36, and 60 weeks) was compared with a molecular point-of-care test using finger-stick blood (GeneXpert). Baseline and follow-up DBS samples were genotyped by NS5B sequencing or commercial real-time PCR. Among treated patients, 193 follow-up DBS samples were tested. The DBS-based assay showed 100% specificity (129/129), and sensitivity ranged from 84.4% to 96.1% according to different viral load cut-offs (from detectable to 3000 IU/mL). Sensitivity as test of cure (follow-up 12) ranged from 85.1% to 97.4%. Among the 64 patients with recurrent viremia, 10.9% had low viral loads (≤1000 IU/mL); HCV genotyping allowed us to classify 73.5% of viremic cases either as reinfection or as treatment failure. DBS samples are useful to assess cure and differentiate reinfection from relapse after HCV antiviral treatment in the real world, facilitating decentralization of treatment and posttreatment follow-up in PWID. However, a fraction of patients presented with low viral loads, limiting viremia detection and genotyping in DBS and, therefore, repeat testing is recommended.

HCV microelimination in harm reduction centres has benefits beyond HCV cure but is hampered by high reinfection rates.

Background & Aims: Significant scale-up of treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID) is crucial to achieve WHO HCV elimination targets. We explored the impact of on-site HCV diagnosis and treatment on PWID in an externalised hepatology clinic at the biggest harm reduction centre (HRC) in Barcelona attending to a marginalised PWID population with ongoing high-risk practices. Methods: On-site HCV point-of-care testing was performed for diagnosis and treatment delivery. HCV-RNA was assessed at SVR12 (sustained virologic response at 12 weeks) and every 6 months. The programme included behavioural questionnaires at baseline and after treatment. Results: Between 2018 and 2020, 919 individuals were prospectively enrolled. Of these, only 46% accepted HCV screening. HCV-RNA+ prevalence was 55.7% (n = 234). Of the 168 (72%) individuals starting treatment, 48% were foreigners, 32% homeless, 73% unemployed, and 62% had a history of incarceration. At enrolment, 70% injected drugs daily and 30% reported sharing needles or paraphernalia. Intention-to-treat SVR12 was 60%; only 4% were virological failures, the remaining were either early reinfections (20%) or losses to follow-up (16%). The overall reinfection rate during follow-up was 31/100 persons/year. HIV coinfection and daily injection were associated with a higher risk of reinfection. Nonetheless, beyond viral clearance, antiviral therapy was associated with a significant reduction in injection frequency, risk practices, and homelessness. Conclusions: HCV treatment can be successfully delivered to active PWID with high-risk practices and has a significant benefit beyond HCV elimination. However, approaching this difficult spectrum of the PWID population implies significant barriers such as low rate of screening acceptance and high dropout and reinfection rates. Lay summary: People who inject drugs attending harm reduction centres represent the most difficult population to treat for hepatitis C. We show that hepatitis C treatment has a significant benefit beyond viral cure, including improving quality of life, and decreasing injection frequency and risk practices. However, intrinsic barriers and the high reinfection rates hamper the achievement of viral microelimination in this setting.

Low risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with severe COVID-19 who receive immunosuppressive therapy.

A significant proportion of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop severe respiratory symptoms due to an excessive immune response. Treatment of this condition may include immunosuppressive therapies, such as IL-6 receptor antagonists and corticosteroids, which pose a risk for patients with active or past hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. In this prospective cohort study, we analysed the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with severe COVID-19 and resolved HBV infection undergoing immunosuppressive therapy. From 15th March to 30th April 2020, 600 patients with severe COVID-19 were admitted to our hospital and treated with immune modulators. Data regarding HBV infection were available in 484, of whom 69 (14%) were HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive. For these patients, HBV reactivation prophylaxis with entecavir was strongly recommended. Complete follow-up was available in 61 patients: 72% were male, median age was 67 years, and anti-HBs was >10 IU/mL in 72%. The immunosuppressive drug most used was tocilizumab (72%). Despite HBV prophylaxis recommendation, 38 (62%) patients received entecavir and 23 (38%) did not. Baseline features of both groups were similar. At follow-up, we found no cases of HBsAg seroreversion and only 2 (3%) patients (no prophylaxis group) had detectable serum HBV-DNA (<15 IU/mL). Both were anti-HBs negative and had normal aminotransferase levels. Our data show that the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with severe COVID-19 and resolved HBV infection undergoing immunosuppressive treatment is low. However, if a systematic follow-up after hospital discharge is unfeasible in patients without anti-HBs, a short course of antiviral prophylaxis may be a safe option.