VirA+EmiC project: Evaluating real-world effectiveness and sustainability of integrated routine opportunistic hepatitis B and C testing in a large urban emergency department.

Innovative testing approaches and care pathways are required to meet global hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination goals. Routine blood-borne virus (BBV) testing in emergency departments (EDs) in high-prevalence areas is suggested by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) but there is limited evidence for this. Universal HIV testing in our ED according to UK guidance has been operational since 2015. We conducted a real-world service evaluation of a modified electronic patient record (EPR) system to include opportunistic opt-out HBV/reflex-HCV tests for any routine blood test orders for ED attendees aged ≥16 years. Reactive laboratory results were communicated directly to specialist clinical teams. Our model for contacting patients requiring linkage to care (new diagnoses/known but disengaged) evolved from initially primarily hospital-led to collaborating with regional health and community service networks. Over 11 months, 81,088 patients attended the ED; 36,865 (45.5%) had a blood test. Overall uptake for both HBV and HCV testing was 75%. Seroprevalence was 0.9% for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and 0.9% for HCV antigen (HCV-Ag). 79% of 140 successfully contacted HBsAg+patients required linkage to care, of which 87% engaged. 76% of 130 contactable HCV-Ag+patients required linkage, 52% engaged. Our results demonstrate effectiveness and sustainability of universal ED EPR opt-out HBV/HCV testing combined with comprehensive linkage to care pathways, allowing care provision particularly for marginalized at-risk groups with limited healthcare access. The findings support the ECDC BBV testing guidance and may inform future UK hepatitis testing guidance.

Usability and Acceptability of Home-based Self-testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Antibodies for Population Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: This study assesses acceptability and usability of home-based self-testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies using lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA). METHODS: We carried out public involvement and pilot testing in 315 volunteers to improve usability. Feedback was obtained through online discussions, questionnaires, observations, and interviews of people who tried the test at home. This informed the design of a nationally representative survey of adults in England using two LFIAs (LFIA1 and LFIA2) which were sent to 10 600 and 3800 participants, respectively, who provided further feedback. RESULTS: Public involvement and pilot testing showed high levels of acceptability, but limitations with the usability of kits. Most people reported completing the test; however, they identified difficulties with practical aspects of the kit, particularly the lancet and pipette, a need for clearer instructions and more guidance on interpretation of results. In the national study, 99.3% (8693/8754) of LFIA1 and 98.4% (2911/2957) of LFIA2 respondents attempted the test and 97.5% and 97.8% of respondents completed it, respectively. Most found the instructions easy to understand, but some reported difficulties using the pipette (LFIA1: 17.7%) and applying the blood drop to the cassette (LFIA2: 31.3%). Most respondents obtained a valid result (LFIA1: 91.5%; LFIA2: 94.4%). Overall there was substantial concordance between participant and clinician interpreted results (kappa: LFIA1 0.72; LFIA2 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Impactful public involvement is feasible in a rapid response setting. Home self-testing with LFIAs can be used with a high degree of acceptability and usability by adults, making them a good option for use in seroprevalence surveys.

Clinical and laboratory evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow assays for use in a national COVID-19 seroprevalence survey.

BACKGROUND: Accurate antibody tests are essential to monitor the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) can deliver testing at scale. However, reported performance varies, and sensitivity analyses have generally been conducted on serum from hospitalised patients. For use in community testing, evaluation of finger-prick self-tests, in non-hospitalised individuals, is required. METHODS: Sensitivity analysis was conducted on 276 non-hospitalised participants. All had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription PCR and were ≥21 days from symptom onset. In phase I, we evaluated five LFIAs in clinic (with finger prick) and laboratory (with blood and sera) in comparison to (1) PCR-confirmed infection and (2) presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on two 'in-house' ELISAs. Specificity analysis was performed on 500 prepandemic sera. In phase II, six additional LFIAs were assessed with serum. FINDINGS: 95% (95% CI 92.2% to 97.3%) of the infected cohort had detectable antibodies on at least one ELISA. LFIA sensitivity was variable, but significantly inferior to ELISA in 8 out of 11 assessed. Of LFIAs assessed in both clinic and laboratory, finger-prick self-test sensitivity varied from 21% to 92% versus PCR-confirmed cases and from 22% to 96% versus composite ELISA positives. Concordance between finger-prick and serum testing was at best moderate (kappa 0.56) and, at worst, slight (kappa 0.13). All LFIAs had high specificity (97.2%-99.8%). INTERPRETATION: LFIA sensitivity and sample concordance is variable, highlighting the importance of evaluations in setting of intended use. This rigorous approach to LFIA evaluation identified a test with high specificity (98.6% (95%CI 97.1% to 99.4%)), moderate sensitivity (84.4% with finger prick (95% CI 70.5% to 93.5%)) and moderate concordance, suitable for seroprevalence surveys.

Impact of a community-based participatory research project with underserved communities at risk for hepatitis C virus in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: an evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: Participatory approaches have become a widely applied research approach. Despite their popularity, there are many challenges associated with the evaluation of participatory projects. Here we describe an evaluation of a community-based participatory research study of underserved communities in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam at risk for hepatitis C virus. The goals of our evaluation were to explore the main benefits and challenges of implementing and participating in a participatory study and to describe study impacts. METHODS: We conducted two meetings with leaders and members of the participating groups followed by in-depth interviews with 10 participants. We then held a dissemination meeting with over 70 participants, including the representatives of each group, researchers from non-governmental organizations (community-based, national and international), and govenrment officials from the Vietnam Ministry of Health and the Department of Health of HCMC. RESULTS: Results include four categories where we describe first the participatory impacts, followed by the collaborative impacts. Then we describe the benefits and challenges of creating and belonging to one of the groups, from members' and leaders' points of view. Finally, we describe the key suggestions that participants provided for future research. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the evaluation approach led to both a research reflection on the 'success' of the project and enabled participants themselves to reflect on the outcomes and benefits of the study from their point of view.

Participatory approaches in research aim to include participants in an array of aspects of the study, including developing research questions, collecting data, conducting analysis, etc. It has become a more popular method, however there are still challenges surrounding the evaluation of these projects. Here we describe an evaluation of a community-based participatory research study of underserved communities in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam at risk for hepatitis C virus. The goals of the evaluation were to discuss and explore the main benefits and challenges with those who participated, as well as assess study impacts. To conduct the evaluation, we conducted two meetings with leaders and members of the participating groups followed by interviews with 10 people who were involved. The evaluation results included four categories including impacts for members as well as wider impacts in the community. Then we describe the benefits and challenges of creating and belonging to one of the groups, from members' and leaders' points of view. Finally, we describe the key suggestions that participants provided for future research. In conclusion, the evaluation approach led to both a research reflection on the 'success' of the project and enabled participants themselves to reflect on the outcomes and benefits of the study from their point of view.

Progress towards elimination of viral hepatitis: a Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission update.

The top 20 highest burdened countries (in disability-adjusted life years) account for more than 75% of the global burden of viral hepatitis. An effective response in these 20 countries is crucial if global elimination targets are to be achieved. In this update of the Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission on accelerating the elimination of viral hepatitis, we convene national experts from each of the top 20 highest burdened countries to provide an update on progress. Although the global burden of diseases is falling, progress towards elimination varies greatly by country. By use of a hepatitis elimination policy index conceived as part of the 2019 Commission, we measure countries' progress towards elimination. Progress in elimination policy has been made in 14 of 20 countries with the highest burden since 2018, with the most substantial gains observed in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Japan, and Russia. Most improvements are attributable to the publication of formalised national action plans for the elimination of viral hepatitis, provision of publicly funded screening programmes, and government subsidisation of antiviral treatments. Key themes that emerged from discussion between national commissioners from the highest burdened countries build on the original recommendations to accelerate the global elimination of viral hepatitis. These themes include the need for simplified models of care, improved access to appropriate diagnostics, financing initiatives, and rapid implementation of lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rise in alanine aminotransferase after HCV treatment is a highly sensitive screen for treatment failure.

Nucleic acid testing to confirm sustained virological response (SVR) after HCV therapy is technical, often expensive, and frequently unavailable where disease prevalence is highest. Alternative surrogate biomarkers merit evaluation. In a short-treatment trial in Vietnam (SEARCH-1; n = 52) we analysed how changes in alanine transaminase (ΔALT) and aspartate transaminase (ΔAST), from end of treatment (EOT) to EOT + 12 weeks, related to SVR, defined as HCV RNA < lower limit of quantification 12 weeks after EOT. In a separate UK trial (STOPHCV1; n = 202), we then tested the hypothesis that any elevation in ALT or AST between EOT and EOT12 is a sensitive screen for treatment failure. In SEARCH-1, among 48 individuals with data, 13 failed to achieve SVR. Median ΔALT and ΔAST were negative in cured patients but elevated when treatment failed [median ΔALT (IQR): -2 IU/L (-6, +2)] versus +17 IU/L (+7.5, +38) (p< 0.001). Amongst treatment failures, 12/13 had increase in ALT and 13/13 had increase in AST after EOT, compared with 12/35 in those cured. In STOPHCV1, 196/202 patients had evaluable data, of which 57 did not achieve SVR. A rise in ALT after EOT was 100% sensitive (95% C.I. [93.7 - 100%]) and 51% specific (42.4 - 59.7%) for detecting treatment failure. ΔAST >0 IU/L was 98.1% (89.9 - 99.9%) sensitive and 35.8% (27.3 - 45.1%) specific. A rise in ALT or AST after HCV therapy is a highly sensitive screen for treatment failure in mild liver disease. This finding could reduce costs and complexity of managing HCV.

Efficacy of ultra-short, response-guided sofosbuvir and daclatasvir therapy for hepatitis C in a single-arm mechanistic pilot study.

Background: World Health Organization has called for research into predictive factors for selecting persons who could be successfully treated with shorter durations of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for hepatitis C. We evaluated early virological response as a means of shortening treatment and explored host, viral and pharmacokinetic contributors to treatment outcome. Methods: Duration of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) was determined according to day 2 (D2) virologic response for HCV genotype (gt) 1- or 6-infected adults in Vietnam with mild liver disease. Participants received 4- or 8-week treatment according to whether D2 HCV RNA was above or below 500 IU/ml (standard duration is 12 weeks). Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (SVR12). Those failing therapy were retreated with 12 weeks SOF/DCV. Host IFNL4 genotype and viral sequencing was performed at baseline, with repeat viral sequencing if virological rebound was observed. Levels of SOF, its inactive metabolite GS-331007 and DCV were measured on days 0 and 28. Results: Of 52 adults enrolled, 34 received 4 weeks SOF/DCV, 17 got 8 weeks and 1 withdrew. SVR12 was achieved in 21/34 (62%) treated for 4 weeks, and 17/17 (100%) treated for 8 weeks. Overall, 38/51 (75%) were cured with first-line treatment (mean duration 37 days). Despite a high prevalence of putative NS5A-inhibitor resistance-associated substitutions (RASs), all first-line treatment failures cured after retreatment (13/13). We found no evidence treatment failure was associated with host IFNL4 genotype, viral subtype, baseline RAS, SOF or DCV levels. Conclusions: Shortened SOF/DCV therapy, with retreatment if needed, reduces DAA use in patients with mild liver disease, while maintaining high cure rates. D2 virologic response alone does not adequately predict SVR12 with 4-week treatment. Funding: Funded by the Medical Research Council (Grant MR/P025064/1) and The Global Challenges Research 70 Fund (Wellcome Trust Grant 206/296/Z/17/Z).

Hepatitis C is a blood-borne virus that causes thousands of deaths from liver cirrhosis and liver cancer each year. Antiviral therapies can cure most cases of infection in 12 weeks. Unfortunately, treatment is expensive, and sticking with the regimen for 12 weeks can be difficult. It may be especially challenging for unhoused people or those who use injection drugs and who have high rates of hepatitis C infection. Shorter durations of therapy may make it more accessible, especially for high-risk populations. But studies of shorter antiviral treatment durations have yet to produce high enough cure rates. Finding ways to identify patients who would benefit from shorter therapy is a key goal of the World Health Organization. Potential characteristics that may predict a faster treatment response include low virus levels before initiating treatment, patient genetics, drug resistance mutations in the virus, and higher drug levels in the patient's blood during treatment. For example, previous research showed that a rapid decrease in virus levels in a patient's blood two days after starting antiviral therapy with three drugs predicted patient cures after three weeks of treatment. To test if high cure rates could be achieved in just four weeks of treatment, Flower et al. enrolled 52 patients with hepatitis C in a study to receive the most widely accessible dual antiviral treatment (sofosbuvir and daclatasvir). Participants received four or eight weeks of treatment, depending on the amount of viral RNA in their blood after two days of treatment. The results indicate that a rapid decrease in virus levels in the blood does not adequately predict cure rates with four weeks of two-drug combination therapy. However, eight weeks may be highly effective, regardless of viral levels early in treatment. Thirty-four individuals with low virus levels on the second day of treatment received four weeks of therapy, which cured 21 or 62% of them. All seventeen individuals with higher viral levels on day two were cured after eight weeks of treatment. Twelve weeks of retreatment was sufficient to cure the 13 individuals who did not achieve cure with four weeks of therapy. Even patients with drug resistance genes after the first round of therapy responded to a longer second round. Flower et al. show that patient genetics, virus subtype, drug levels in the patient's blood, and viral drug resistance genes before therapy, were not associated with patient cures after four weeks of treatment. Given that retreatment is safe and effective, larger studies are now needed to determine whether eight weeks of therapy with sofosbuvir and daclatasvir may be enough to cure patients with mild liver disease. More studies are also necessary to identify patients that may benefit from shorter therapy durations. Finding ways to shorten antiviral therapy for hepatitis C could help make treatment more accessible and reduce therapy costs for both individuals and governments.

Treatment of Cryptococcal Meningitis: How Have We Got Here and Where are We Going?

Cryptococcal meningitis is a devastating brain infection cause by encapsulated yeasts of the Cryptococcus genus. Exposure, through inhalation, is likely universal by adulthood, but symptomatic infection only occurs in a minority, in most cases, months or years after exposure. Disease has been described in almost all tissues, but it is the organism's tropism for the central nervous system that results in the most devastating illness. While invasive disease can occur in the immunocompetent, the greatest burden by far is in immunocompromised individuals, particularly people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), organ transplant recipients and those on glucocorticoid therapy or other immunosuppressive drugs. Clinical presentation is variable, but diagnosis is usually straightforward, with cerebrospinal fluid microscopy, culture, and antigen testing proving significantly more sensitive than diagnostic tests for other brain infections. Although disease incidence has reduced since the advent of effective HIV therapy, mortality when disease occurs remains extremely high, and has changed little in recent decades. This Therapy in Practice review is an update of a talk first given by JND at the European Congress on Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases in 2019 in the Netherlands. The review contextualizes the most recently published World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for the treatment of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis in terms of the data from large, randomized, controlled trials published between 1997 and 2022. We discuss the rationale for induction and maintenance therapy and the efficacy and undesirable effects of the current therapeutic armamentarium of amphotericin, flucytosine and fluconazole. We address recent research into repurposed drugs such as sertraline and tamoxifen, and potential future treatment options, including the novel antifungals fosmanogepix, efungumab and oteseconazole, and non-pharmaceutical solutions such as neurapheresis cerebrospinal fluid filtration.

Seroprevalence of Hepatitis B, C and D in Vietnam: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Vietnam has one of the greatest disease burdens from chronic viral hepatitis. Comprehensive prevalence data are essential to support its elimination as a public health threat. Methods: We searched Medline and Embase from 1990 to 2021 for seroprevalence data relating to Hepatitis B (HBV), C (HCV) and D (HDV) in Vietnam. We estimated pooled prevalence with a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model and stratified study populations into i) low-risk ii) high-risk exposure and iii) liver disease. We further estimated prevalence by decade and region and rates of HIV-coinfection. Findings: We analysed 72 studies, including 120 HBV, 114 HCV and 23 HDV study populations. Pooled HBV prevalence was low in blood donors (1.86% [1.82-1.90]) but high in antenatal populations (10.8% [10.1-11.6]) and adults in the general population (10.5% [10.0-11.0]). It was similar or modestly increased in groups at highest risk of exposure, suggesting the epidemic is largely driven by chronic infections acquired in childhood. HCV pooled prevalence in the general population was lower than historical estimates: 0.26% (0.09-0.51) have active infection defined by detectable antigen or HCV RNA. In contrast, there is an extremely high prevalence of active HCV infection in people who inject drugs (PWID) (57.8% [56.5-59.1]), which has persisted through the decades despite harm-reduction interventions. HDV appears mainly confined to high-risk groups. Interpretation: Blood safety has improved, but renewed focus on HBV vaccination at birth and targeted HCV screening and treatment of PWID are urgently required to meet elimination targets. Large cross-sectional studies are needed to better characterize HDV prevalence, but mass screening may not be warranted. Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Population antibody responses following COVID-19 vaccination in 212,102 individuals.

Population antibody surveillance helps track immune responses to COVID-19 vaccinations at scale, and identify host factors that may affect antibody production. We analyse data from 212,102 vaccinated individuals within the REACT-2 programme in England, which uses self-administered lateral flow antibody tests in sequential cross-sectional community samples; 71,923 (33.9%) received at least one dose of BNT162b2 vaccine and 139,067 (65.6%) received ChAdOx1. For both vaccines, antibody positivity peaks 4-5 weeks after first dose and then declines. At least 21 days after second dose of BNT162b2, close to 100% of respondents test positive, while for ChAdOx1, this is significantly reduced, particularly in the oldest age groups (72.7% [70.9-74.4] at ages 75 years and above). For both vaccines, antibody positivity decreases with age, and is higher in females and those with previous infection. Antibody positivity is lower in transplant recipients, obese individuals, smokers and those with specific comorbidities. These groups will benefit from additional vaccine doses.

Simple, sensitive, specific self-sampling assay secures SARS-CoV-2 antibody signals in sero-prevalence and post-vaccine studies.

At-home sampling is key to large scale seroprevalence studies. Dried blood spot (DBS) self-sampling removes the need for medical personnel for specimen collection but facilitates specimen referral to an appropriately accredited laboratory for accurate sample analysis. To establish a highly sensitive and specific antibody assay that would facilitate self-sampling for prevalence and vaccine-response studies. Paired sera and DBS eluates collected from 439 sero-positive, 382 sero-negative individuals and DBS from 34 vaccine recipients were assayed by capture ELISAs for IgG and IgM antibody to SARS-CoV-2. IgG and IgM combined on DBS eluates achieved a diagnostic sensitivity of 97.9% (95%CI 96.6 to 99.3) and a specificity of 99.2% (95% CI 98.4 to 100) compared to serum, displaying limits of detection equivalent to 23 and 10 WHO IU/ml, respectively. A strong correlation (r = 0.81) was observed between serum and DBS reactivities. Reactivity remained stable with samples deliberately rendered inadequate, (p = 0.234) and when samples were accidentally damaged or 'invalid'. All vaccine recipients were sero-positive. This assay provides a secure method for self-sampling by DBS with a sensitivity comparable to serum. The feasibility of DBS testing in sero-prevalence studies and in monitoring post-vaccine responses was confirmed, offering a robust and reliable tool for serological monitoring at a population level.

Detection and quantification of antibody to SARS CoV 2 receptor binding domain provides enhanced sensitivity, specificity and utility.

Accurate and sensitive detection of antibody to SARS-CoV-2 remains an essential component of the pandemic response. Measuring antibody that predicts neutralising activity and the vaccine response is an absolute requirement for laboratory-based confirmatory and reference activity. The viral receptor binding domain (RBD) constitutes the prime target antigen for neutralising antibody. A double antigen binding assay (DABA), providing the most sensitive format has been exploited in a novel hybrid manner employing a solid-phase S1 preferentially presenting RBD, coupled with a labelled RBD conjugate, used in a two-step sequential assay for detection and measurement of antibody to RBD (anti-RBD). This class and species neutral assay showed a specificity of 100 % on 825 pre COVID-19 samples and a potential sensitivity of 99.6 % on 276 recovery samples, predicting quantitatively the presence of neutralising antibody determined by pseudo-type neutralization and by plaque reduction. Anti-RBD is also measurable in ferrets immunised with ChadOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and in humans immunised with both AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines. This assay detects anti-RBD at presentation with illness, demonstrates its elevation with disease severity, its sequel to asymptomatic infection and its persistence after the loss of antibody to the nucleoprotein (anti-NP). It also provides serological confirmation of prior infection and offers a secure measure for seroprevalence and studies of vaccine immunisation in human and animal populations. The hybrid DABA also displays the attributes necessary for the detection and quantification of anti-RBD to be used in clinical practice. An absence of detectable anti-RBD by this assay predicates the need for passive immune prophylaxis in at-risk patients.

Prevalence of antibody positivity to SARS-CoV-2 following the first peak of infection in England: Serial cross-sectional studies of 365,000 adults.

BACKGROUND: The time-concentrated nature of the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in England in March and April 2020 provides a natural experiment to measure changes in antibody positivity at the population level before onset of the second wave and initiation of the vaccination programme. METHODS: Three cross-sectional national surveys with non-overlapping random samples of the population in England undertaken between late June and September 2020 (REACT-2 study). 365,104 adults completed questionnaires and self-administered lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) tests for IgG against SARS-CoV-2. FINDINGS: Overall, 17,576 people had detectable antibodies, a prevalence of 4.9% (95% confidence intervals 4.9, 5.0) when adjusted for test characteristics and weighted to the adult population of England. The prevalence declined from 6.0% (5.8, 6.1), to 4.8% (4.7, 5.0) and 4.4% (4.3, 4.5), over the three rounds of the study a difference of -26.5% (-29.0, -23.8). The highest prevalence and smallest overall decline in positivity was in the youngest age group (18-24 years) at -14.9% (-21.6, -8.1), and lowest prevalence and largest decline in the oldest group (>74 years) at -39.0% (-50.8, -27.2). The decline from June to September 2020 was largest in those who did not report a history of COVID-19 at -64.0% (-75.6, -52.3), compared to -22.3% (-27.0, -17.7) in those with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed on PCR. INTERPRETATION: A large proportion of the population remained susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection in England based on naturally acquired immunity from the first wave. Widespread vaccination is needed to confer immunity and control the epidemic at population level. FUNDING: This work was funded by the Department of Health and Social Care in England.

SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow assays for possible use in national covid-19 seroprevalence surveys (React 2): diagnostic accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of new lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) suitable for use in a national coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) seroprevalence programme (real time assessment of community transmission 2-React 2). DESIGN: Diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: Laboratory analyses were performed in the United Kingdom at Imperial College, London and university facilities in London. Research clinics for finger prick sampling were run in two affiliated NHS trusts. PARTICIPANTS: Sensitivity analyses were performed on sera stored from 320 previous participants in the React 2 programme with confirmed previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Specificity analyses were performed on 1000 prepandemic serum samples. 100 new participants with confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection attended study clinics for finger prick testing. INTERVENTIONS: Laboratory sensitivity and specificity analyses were performed for seven LFIAs on a minimum of 200 serum samples from participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and 500 prepandemic serum samples, respectively. Three LFIAs were found to have a laboratory sensitivity superior to the finger prick sensitivity of the LFIA currently used in React 2 seroprevalence studies (84%). These LFIAs were then further evaluated through finger prick testing on participants with confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection: two LFIAs (Surescreen, Panbio) were evaluated in clinics in June-July 2020 and the third LFIA (AbC-19) in September 2020. A spike protein enzyme linked immunoassay and hybrid double antigen binding assay were used as laboratory reference standards. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of LFIAs in detecting immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 compared with two reference standards. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of seven new LFIAs that were analysed using sera varied from 69% to 100%, and from 98.6% to 100%, respectively (compared with the two reference standards). Sensitivity on finger prick testing was 77% (95% confidence interval 61.4% to 88.2%) for Panbio, 86% (72.7% to 94.8%) for Surescreen, and 69% (53.8% to 81.3%) for AbC-19 compared with the reference standards. Sensitivity for sera from matched clinical samples performed on AbC-19 was significantly higher with serum than finger prick at 92% (80.0% to 97.7%, P=0.01). Antibody titres varied considerably among cohorts. The numbers of positive samples identified by finger prick in the lowest antibody titre quarter varied among LFIAs. CONCLUSIONS: One new LFIA was identified with clinical performance suitable for potential inclusion in seroprevalence studies. However, none of the LFIAs tested had clearly superior performance to the LFIA currently used in React 2 seroprevalence surveys, and none showed sufficient sensitivity and specificity to be considered for routine clinical use.

High Cure Rates for Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 6 in Advanced Liver Fibrosis With 12 Weeks Sofosbuvir and Daclatasvir: The Vietnam SEARCH Study.

BACKGROUND: Genotype 6 is the most genetically diverse lineage of hepatitis C virus, and it predominates in Vietnam. It can be treated with sofosbuvir with daclatasvir (SOF/DCV), the least expensive treatment combination globally. In regional guidelines, longer treatment durations of SOF/DCV (24 weeks) are recommended for cirrhotic individuals, compared with other pangenotypic regimens (12 weeks), based on sparse data. Early on-treatment virological response may offer means of reducing length and cost of therapy in patients with liver fibrosis. METHODS: In this prospective trial in Vietnam, genotype 6-infected adults with advanced liver fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis were treated with SOF/DCV. Day 14 viral load was used to guide duration of therapy: participants with viral load <500 IU/mL at day 14 were treated with 12 weeks of SOF/DCV and those ≥500 IU/mL received 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (SVR). RESULTS: Of 41 individuals with advanced fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis who commenced treatment, 51% had genotype 6a and 34% had 6e. The remainder had 6h, 6k, 6l, or 6o. One hundred percent had viral load <500 IU/mL by day 14, meaning that all received 12 weeks of SOF/DCV. One hundred percent achieved SVR12 despite a high frequency of putative NS5A inhibitor resistance-associated substitutions at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing 12 weeks of SOF/DCV results in excellent cure rates in this population. These data support the removal of costly genotyping in countries where genotype 3 prevalence is <5%, in keeping with World Health Organization guidelines. NS5A resistance-associated mutations in isolation do not affect efficacy of SOF/DCV therapy. Wider evaluation of response-guided therapy is warranted.

Treatment optimisation for hepatitis C in the era of combination direct-acting antiviral therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Prior to direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, personalised medicine played an important role in the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV). Whilst simplified treatment strategies are central to treatment scale-up, some patients will benefit from treatment optimisation. This systematic review and meta-analysis explores treatment optimisation strategies in the DAA era. Methods: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for studies that adopted a stratified or personalised strategy using a licensed combination DAA regimen, alone or with additional agents. We performed a thematic analysis to classify optimisation strategies and a meta-analysis of sustained virologic response rates (SVR), exploring heterogeneity with subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Results: We included 64 studies (9450 participants). Thematic analysis found evidence of three approaches: duration, combination, and/or dose optimisation. We separated strategies into those aiming to maintain SVR in the absence of predictors of failure, and those aiming to improve SVR in the presence of predictors of failure. Shortened duration regimens achieve pooled SVR rates of 94.2% (92.3-95.9%) for 8 weeks, 81.1% (75.1-86.6%) for 6 weeks, and 63.1% (39.9-83.7%) for ≤4 weeks. Personalised strategies (100% vs 87.6%; p<0.001) and therapy shortened according to ≥3 host/viral factors (92.9% vs 81.4% or 87.2% for 1 or 2 host/viral factors, respectively; p=0.008) offer higher SVR rates when shortening therapy. Hard-to-treat HCV genotype 3 patients suffer lower SVR rates despite treatment optimisation (92.6% vs 98.2%; p=0.001). Conclusions: Treatment optimisation for individuals with multiple predictors of treatment failure can offer high SVR rates. More evidence is needed to identify with confidence those individuals in whom SVR can be achieved with shortened duration treatment.

The direct-medical costs associated with interferon-based treatment for Hepatitis C in Vietnam.

Background: Injectable interferon-based therapies have been used to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection since 1991. International guidelines have now moved away from interferon-based therapy towards direct-acting antiviral (DAA) tablet regimens, because of their superior efficacy, excellent side-effect profiles, and ease of administration. Initially DAA drugs were prohibitively expensive for most healthcare systems. Access is now improving through the procurement of low-cost, generic DAAs acquired through voluntary licenses. However, HCV treatment costs vary widely, and many countries are struggling with DAA treatment scale-up. This is not helped by the limited cost data and economic evaluations from low- and middle-income countries to support HCV policy decisions. We conducted a detailed analysis of the costs of treating chronic HCV infection with interferon-based therapy in Vietnam. Understanding these costs is important for performing necessary economic evaluations of novel treatment strategies. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the direct medical costs of treating HCV infection with interferon alpha (IFN) and pegylated-interferon alpha (Peg-IFN), in combination with ribavirin, from the health sector perspective at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, in 2017. Results: The total cost of the IFN treatment regimen was estimated to range between US$1,120 and US$1,962. The total cost of the Peg-IFN treatment regimen was between US$2,156 and US$5,887. Drug expenses were the biggest contributor to the total treatment cost (54-89%) and were much higher for the Peg-IFN regimen. Conclusions: We found that treating HCV with IFN or Peg-IFN resulted in significant direct medical costs. Of concern, we found that all patients incurred substantial out-of-pocket costs, including those receiving the maximum level of support from the national health insurance programme. This cost data highlights the potential savings and importance of increased access to generic DAAs in low- and middle-income countries and will be useful within future economic evaluations.