Preferences and feasibility of long-acting technologies for treatment of hepatitis C virus in low- and middle-income countries: A survey of providers and policymakers.

Long-acting technologies (LATs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are under development as a strategy to improve linkage to care, treatment adherence and outcomes. We conducted a survey of HCV treatment prescribers and HCV policymakers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) regarding acceptability and feasibility of HCV LATs. We included one-time intramuscular injection, subdermal implant and transdermal patch as potential LAT options. We surveyed participants regarding optimal health system and patient characteristics, concerns, potential barriers, overall feasibility and preferences for HCV LAT as compared to daily oral medication. Overall, 122 providers and 50 policymakers from 42 LMICs completed the survey. Among providers, 93% (113/122) expressed willingness to prescribe LAT and 72% (88/120) of providers preferred LAT if provided at comparable efficacy, safety and cost as current oral treatments. Of providers preferring HCV LAT to daily oral medication, 67% (59/88) preferred injection, 24% (21/88) preferred patch and 9% (8/88) preferred implant. Only 20% (24/122) would prescribe LAT if it were more costly than oral treatment. In regression analysis, no provider characteristics were associated with preference for LAT over oral treatment. Policymakers reported high likelihood that LAT would be included in treatment guidelines (42/50; 84%) and national drug formularies (39/50; 78%) if efficacy, safety and cost were similar to oral treatment. HCV LATs could advance progress to HCV elimination in LMICs by diversifying treatment options to improve treatment coverage and outcomes. Provider preferences from LMICs are a critical consideration in the development of HCV LATs to ensure its early and equitable availability in LMICs.

Preferences of Patients and Providers in High-Burden Malaria Settings for Long-Acting Malaria Chemoprevention.

Antimalarial medications are recommended for chemoprevention as part of malaria control programs to decrease the morbidity and mortality related to more than 200 million infections each year. We sought to evaluate patient and provider acceptability of malaria chemoprevention in a long-acting formulation. We administered questionnaires to patients and providers in malaria endemic districts in Kenya and Zambia. Questions explored preferences and concerns around long-acting antimalarial formulations compared with oral formulations. We recruited 202 patient respondents (Kenya, n = 102; Zambia, n = 100) and 215 provider respondents (Kenya, n = 105; Zambia, n = 110). Long-acting injection was preferred to oral pills, whereas oral pills were preferred to implant or transdermal administration by patient respondents. Of 202 patient respondents, 80% indicated that they 'definitely would try' malaria chemoprevention offered by injection instead of oral pills. Of parents or guardians, 84% of 113 responded that they 'definitely would' have their child age < 12 years and 90% of 88 'definitely would' have their child ≥12 years receive an injection for malaria prevention. Provider respondents indicated that they would be more likely to prescribe a long-acting injectable product compared with an oral product for malaria chemoprevention in adults (70%), adolescents ages 12 years and older (67%), and children <12 years (81%). Potential for prolonged adverse effects with long-acting products was the highest concern for patient respondents, while higher medication-related cost was cited as the most concerning barrier to implementation by providers. Overall, these findings indicate enthusiasm for the development of long-acting injectable antimalarials to provide individual delivery method options across age groups.