Age- and risk factor-based serologic screening for Hepatitis C virus among an Urban, high-risk population.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening among individuals born between 1945 and 1965 (ie birth cohort) may augment risk factor-based screening. We assessed HCV seropositivity among injection drug users (IDUs) and birth cohort members from New York City. We assessed HCV risk factors and seropositivity in 7722 participants from community health, HIV prevention, syringe exchange and drug treatment programmes. A total of 26.6% were HCV seropositive, 55.8% were born between 1945 and 1965, and 82.2% had ever injected drugs. Among all participants, HCV seropositivity was higher among IDUs compared to non-IDUs (60.5% versus 7.7%, odds ratio (OR) = 18.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) [16.2, 21.1], P < .0001) and among birth cohort members compared to non-birth cohort members (31.3% versus 22.3%, OR = 1.6, 95%CI [1.4, 1.8], P < .0001). Within the birth cohort, HCV seroprevalence among IDUs was 68.5% versus 11.8%, OR = 16.2, 95%CI [13.7, 19.3]. After adjustment, HCV seroprevalence was higher in IDUs, previously incarcerated, whites (<42 years) and 'other races' (versus blacks), HIV-infected, those who snorted heroin, those with liver disease history, and those who had sex with an HCV-seropositive partner. HCV seroprevalence among IDU, birth cohort members, was considerably higher than among the general population. In this high-risk, urban population, the association between IDU and HCV seropositivity was approximately ten times that between birth cohort membership and HCV seropositivity.

Undiagnosed HIV and HCV Infection in a New York City Emergency Department, 2015.

OBJECTIVES: To measure undiagnosed HIV and HCV in a New York City emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted a blinded cross-sectional serosurvey with remnant serum from specimens originally drawn for clinical indications in the ED. Serum was deduplicated and matched to (1) the hospital's electronic medical record and (2) the New York City HIV and HCV surveillance registries for evidence of previous diagnosis before being deidentified and tested for HIV and HCV. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of HIV was 5.0% (250/4990; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.4%, 5.7%); the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV was 0.2% (12/4990; 95% CI = 0.1%, 0.4%); and the proportion of undiagnosed HIV was 4.8% (12/250; 95% CI = 2.5%, 8.2%). The overall prevalence of HCV (HCV RNA ≥ 15 international units per milliliter) was 3.9% (196/4989; 95% CI = 2.8%, 5.1%); the prevalence of undiagnosed HCV was 0.8% (38/4989; 95% CI = 0.3%, 1.3%); and the proportion of undiagnosed HCV was 19.2% (38/196; 95% CI = 11.4%, 27.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Undiagnosed HCV was more prevalent than undiagnosed HIV in this population, suggesting that aggressive testing initiatives similar to those directed toward HIV should be mounted to improve HCV diagnosis.

Check Hep C: A Community-Based Approach to Hepatitis C Diagnosis and Linkage to Care in High-Risk Populations.

CONTEXT: In New York City (NYC), an estimated 146 500 people, or 2.4% of the adult population, have chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and half may be unaware of their infection. Despite a 2014 state law requiring health care providers to screen for HCV infection in primary care settings, many high-risk HCV-positive persons are not, and a large proportion of those screened do not receive RNA testing to confirm infection, or antiviral therapies. OBJECTIVE: The NYC Department of Health's Check Hep C program was designed to increase hepatitis C diagnosis and improve linkage to care at community-based organizations. DESIGN: Coordinated, evidence-based practices were implemented at 12 sites, including HCV antibody testing, immediate blood draw for RNA testing, and patient navigation to clinical services. RESULTS: From May 2012 through April 2013, a total of 4751 individuals were tested for HCV infection and 880 (19%) were antibody-positive. Of antibody-positive participants, 678 (77%) had an RNA test, and of those, 512 (76%) had current infection. Of all participants, 1901 were born between 1945 and 1965, and of those, 201 (11%) were RNA-positive. Ever having injected drugs was the strongest risk factor for HCV infection (40% vs 3%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 19.1), followed by a history of incarceration (18% vs 4%; AOR = 2.2). Of the participants with current infection, 85% attended at least 1 follow-up hepatitis C medical appointment. Fourteen patients initiated hepatitis C treatment at a Check Hep C site and 6 initiators achieved cure. CONCLUSION: The community-based model successfully identified persons with HCV infection and linked a large proportion to care. The small number of patients initiating hepatitis C treatment in the program identified the need for patient navigation in high-risk populations. Results can be used to inform screening and linkage-to-care strategies and to support the execution of hepatitis C screening recommendations.

From Care to Cure: Demonstrating a Model of Clinical Patient Navigation for Hepatitis C Care and Treatment in High-Need Patients.

The NYC Department of Health implemented a patient navigation program, Check Hep C, to address patient and provider barriers to HCV care and potentially lifesaving treatment. Services were delivered at two clinical care sites and two sites that linked patients to off-site care. Working with a multidisciplinary care team, patient navigators provided risk assessment, health education, treatment readiness and medication adherence counseling, and medication coordination. Between March 2014 and January 2015, 388 participants enrolled in Check Hep C, 129 (33%) initiated treatment, and 119 (91% of initiators) had sustained virologic response (SVR). Participants receiving on-site clinical care had higher odds of initiating treatment than those linked to off-site care. Check Hep C successfully supported high-need participants through HCV care and treatment, and SVR rates demonstrate the real-world ability of achieving high cure rates using patient navigation care models.

Barriers to Treatment Among New York City Residents with Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection, 2014.

OBJECTIVE: New, highly effective hepatitis C virus (HCV) medications recently changed the landscape of HCV treatment. Access to treatment, however, is limited. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene conducted an enhanced surveillance project to better understand the reasons patients are not treated for HCV. METHODS: In June 2014, we randomly selected 300 adults who were reported through routine surveillance as having a positive HCV ribonucleic acid test result and who had seen a medical provider since June 2012. We collected information on demographics, treatment, and barriers to treatment from these 300 patients and their providers by telephone, fax, mail, and medical record review. RESULTS: Of 179 providers, 74 (41%) cited co-occurring conditions and 50 (28%) cited patients not keeping follow-up or referral appointments with specialists as common barriers to treatment. Forty providers (22%) reported that they do not prescribe HCV medications and instead refer patients to specialists for treatment. Of 89 patients citing barriers to treatment, 30 (34%) cited co-occurring conditions, 26 (29%) cited concerns about side effects, 21 (24%) indicated not feeling sick, 15 (17%) cited waiting for a better treatment regimen, and 12 (13%) cited medication costs or insurance issues. Only 11 providers and 10 patients denied any barriers to treatment. CONCLUSION: Increasing the number of New York City residents with HCV infection who are treated and cured will require programs to increase provider capacity, change provider behavior in treating patients with substance use and medical conditions, improve patient awareness of new medications, provide patient navigation and care coordination support through treatment, and initiate advocacy and policy work.

Public health implications of rapid hepatitis C screening with an oral swab for community-based organizations serving high-risk populations.

OBJECTIVES: Between April and September of 2009 we evaluated the accuracy of the OraQuick HCV rapid antibody test and assessed its feasibility for use by community-based organizations (CBOs) serving populations at high risk for HCV in New York City. METHODS: We compared the results of screening by OraQuick (oral swab) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA; blood draw). We performed ribonucleic acid polymerase chain reaction testing for discordant results. We also assessed research staff perceptions through a survey and focus group. RESULTS: Overall, 97.5% of OraQuick and EIA results matched. Testing of discordant samples indicated that the rapid test was more likely than the EIA to provide a correct diagnosis. Research staff preferred the rapid test and identified challenges that would be overcome with its use. CBOs could benefit from increased testing capacity, and clients might benefit from more rapid access to education, counseling, and referrals. CONCLUSIONS: OraQuick's accuracy is comparable to the EIA. The oral swab rapid test could help HCV screening programs reach individuals unaware of their status and expand testing into nonclinical settings such as mobile units.