Implementation of large-scale laboratory-based detection of COVID-19 in the Veterans Health Administration, March 2020 - February 2021.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presented numerous operational challenges to healthcare delivery networks responsible for implementing large scale detection of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the infection caused by SARS-CoV-2. We describe testing performance, review data quality metrics, and summarize experiences during the scale up of laboratory-based detection of COVID-19 in the Veterans Health Administration, the largest healthcare system in the United States. During March 2020 to February 2021, we observed rapid increase in testing volume, decreases in test turnaround time, improvements in testing of hospitalized persons, changes in test positivity, and varying utilization of different tests. Though performance metrics improved over time, surges challenged testing capacity and data quality remained suboptimal. Future planning efforts should focus on fortifying supply chains for consumables and equipment repair, optimizing distribution of testing workload across laboratories, and improving informatics to accurately monitor operations and intent for testing during a public health emergency.

Impact of Sustained Virologic Response with Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment on Mortality in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease.

The impact of sustained virologic response (SVR) on mortality after direct-acting antiviral treatment is not well documented. This study evaluated the impact of direct-acting antiviral-induced SVR on all-cause mortality and on incident hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 15,059 hepatitis C virus-infected patients with advanced liver disease defined by a FIB-4 >3.25. Overall, 1,067 patients did not achieve SVR (no SVR) and 13,992 patients achieved SVR. In a mean follow-up period of approximately 1.6 years, 195 no SVR patients and 598 SVR patients died. Mortality rates were 12.3 deaths/100 patient years of follow-up for no SVR patients and 2.6 deaths/100 patient years for SVR patients, a 78.9% reduction (P < 0.001). Among patients without a prior diagnosis of HCC, 140 no SVR patients and 397 SVR patients were diagnosed with incident HCC. HCC rates were 11.5 HCCs/100 patient years for no SVR patients and 1.9 HCCs/100 patient years for SVR patients, an 83.5% reduction (P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox proportional hazard models controlling for baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities, SVR was independently associated with reduced risk of death compared to no SVR (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.31; P < 0.001). A history of decompensated liver disease (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.83; P < 0.001) and decreased albumin (hazard ratio, 2.70 per 1 g/dL decrease; 95% confidence interval, 2.38-3.12; P < 0.001) were independently associated with increased risk of death. Conclusion: Those achieving SVR after direct-acting antiviral treatment had significantly lower all-cause mortality and lower incident HCC rates than those who did not achieve SVR.

Real-world effectiveness of daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir and velpatasvir/sofosbuvir in hepatitis C genotype 2 and 3.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Understanding the real-world effectiveness of all-oral hepatitis C virus (HCV) regimens informs treatment decisions. We evaluated the effectiveness of daclatasvir + sofosbuvir ±â€¯ribavirin (DCV + SOF ±â€¯RBV) and velpatasvir/sofosbuvir (VEL/SOF) ±â€¯RBV in patients with genotype 2 and genotype 3 infection treated in routine practice. METHODS: This observational analysis was carried out in an intent-to-treat cohort of patients with HCV genotype 2 and genotype 3. Sustained virologic response (SVR) analysis was performed in 5,400 patients initiated on DCV + SOF ±â€¯RBV or VEL/SOF ±â€¯RBV at any Department of Veterans Affairs facility. RESULTS: For genotype 2, SVR rates did not differ between DCV + SOF (94.5%) and VEL/SOF (94.4%) or between DCV + SOF + RBV (88.1%) and VEL/SOF + RBV (89.5%). For genotype 3, SVR rates did not differ between DCV + SOF (90.8%) and VEL/SOF (92.0%) or between DCV + SOF + RBV (88.1%) and VEL/SOF + RBV (86.4%). In multivariate models of patients with genotype 2 and 3 infection, the treatment regimen was not a significant predictor of the odds of SVR. For genotype 3, significant predictors of reduced odds of SVR were prior HCV treatment-experience (odds ratio [OR] 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.72; p <0.001), FIB-4 >3.25 (OR 0.60; 95%CI 0.43-0.84; p = 0.002) and a history of decompensated liver disease (OR 0.68; 95%CI 0.47-0.98; p = 0.04). For patients with genotype 2 and 3, treated with VEL/SOF ±â€¯RBV, 89% and 85% received 12-weeks of treatment, respectively. For DCV + SOF ±â€¯RBV, 56% and 20% of patients with HCV genotype 2 received 12-weeks and 24-weeks of treatment, respectively; while 53% and 23% of patients with HCV genotype 3 received 12-weeks and 24-weeks, with most direct-acting antiviral experienced patients receiving 24-weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In patients infected with HCV genotype 2 and 3, DCV + SOF ±â€¯RBV and VEL/SOF ±â€¯RBV produced similar SVR rates within each genotype, and the regimen did not have a significant impact on the odds of SVR. For patients with genotype 3, prior treatment-experience and advanced liver disease were significant predictors of reduced odds of SVR regardless of regimen. LAY SUMMARY: In clinical practice, cure rates for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 were 94% and cure rates for HCV genotype 3 were 90%. The chance of achieving cure was the same whether a person received daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir or velpatasvir/sofosbuvir. Ribavirin did not affect cure rates. The chance of a cure was lowest in people who had received HCV medication in the past.

Direct-acting antiviral sustained virologic response: Impact on mortality in patients without advanced liver disease.

The impact of sustained virologic response (SVR) on mortality after direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment is not well documented in patients without advanced liver disease and affects access to treatment. This study evaluated the impact of SVR achieved with interferon-free DAA treatment on all-cause mortality in hepatitis C virus-infected patients without advanced liver disease. This observational cohort analysis was comprised of 103,346 genotype 1, 2, and 3, hepatitis C virus-monoinfected patients without advanced liver disease, defined by FIB-4 ≤3.25 and no diagnosis of cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, or hepatocellular carcinoma or history of liver transplantation, identified from the Veterans Affairs Hepatitis C Clinical Case Registry. Among 40,664 patients treated with interferon-free DAA regimens, 39,374 (96.8%) achieved SVR and 1,290 (3.2%) patients were No SVR; 62,682 patients constituted the untreated cohort. The mortality rate for SVR patients of 1.18 deaths/100 patient-years was significantly lower than the rates for both No SVR patients (2.84 deaths/100 patient-years; P < 0.001) and untreated patients (3.84 deaths/100 patient-years; P < 0.001). SVR patients with FIB-4 <1.45 and 1.45-3.25 had a 46.0% (P = 0.036) and 63.2% (P < 0.001) reduction in mortality rates, respectively, compared to No SVR patients and 66.7% (P < 0.001) and 70.6% (P < 0.001) reduction in mortality rates, respectively, compared to untreated patients. In multivariate Cox proportional hazard models controlling for baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities, SVR was independently associated with reduced risk of death compared to No SVR (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.59; P < 0.001) and compared to untreated patients (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.36; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Successfully treating hepatitis C virus with DAAs in patients without clinically apparent advanced liver disease translates into a significant mortality benefit. (Hepatology 2018).

Effectiveness of All-Oral Antiviral Regimens in 996 Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 1-Coinfected Patients Treated in Routine Practice.

BACKGROUND.: Large cohorts are needed to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/hepatitis C virus (HCV) real-world treatment outcomes. We examined the effectiveness of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin (LDV/SOF ± RBV) and ombitasvir/ paritaprevir/ritonavir plus dasabuvir (OPrD) ± RBV in HIV/HCV genotype 1 (GT1)-coinfected patients initiating HCV therapy in clinical practice. METHODS.: Observational intent-to-treat cohort analysis using the Veterans Affairs Clinical Case Registry to identify HIV/HCV GT1-coinfected veterans initiating 12 weeks of LDV/SOF ± RBV or OPrD ± RBV. Multivariate models of sustained virologic response (SVR) included age, race, cirrhosis, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescription, prior HCV treatment, body mass index, genotype subtype, and HCV treatment regimen. RESULTS.: Nine hundred ninety-six HIV/HCV GT1-coinfected veterans initiated therapy: 757 LDV/SOF, 138 LDV/SOF + RBV, 28 OPrD, and 73 OPrD + RBV. Overall SVR was 90.9% (823/905); LDV/SOF 92.1% (631/685), LDV/SOF + RBV 86.3% (113/131), OPrD 88.9% (24/27), and OPrD + RBV 88.7% (55/62). SVR was 85.9% (176/205) and 92.4% (647/700) in those with and without cirrhosis (P = .006). SVR was similar between African Americans (90.5% [546/603]) and all others (91.7% [277/302]). PPI use with LDV/SOF ± RBV did not affect SVR (89.7% [131/146] with PPI and 91.5% [613/670] without PPI). Cirrhosis was predictive of reduced SVR (0.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .31-.87]; P = .01). Median creatinine change did not differ among patients receiving LDV/SOF and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) without a protease inhibitor (PI) (0.18 [interquartile range {IQR}, 0.08-0.30]; n = 372), LDV/SOF and TDF/PI (0.17 [IQR, 0.04-0.30]; n = 100), and LDV/SOF without TDF (0.15 [IQR, 0.00-0.30]; n = 423). CONCLUSIONS.: SVR rates in HIV/HCV GT1-coinfected patients were high. African American race or PPI use with LDV/SOF ± RBV was not associated with lower SVR rates, but cirrhosis was. Renal function did not worsen on LDV/SOF regimens with TDF.

Evaluation of hepatitis B reactivation among 62,920 veterans treated with oral hepatitis C antivirals.

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) has been reported in hepatitis C virus-infected individuals receiving direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy. The overall risk among patients with current or prior HBV infection in the context of DAA treatment is unknown. The aim of this evaluation was to identify and characterize HBV reactivation among veterans treated with oral DAA therapy. This retrospective evaluation included 62,290 hepatitis C virus-infected veterans completing oral DAA treatment. Baseline HBV infection status for each veteran was identified from HBV laboratory data performed prior to DAA initiation. To assess for HBV reactivation and hepatitis we identified all hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), HBV DNA, and alanine aminotransferase results obtained while on DAA treatment or 7 days after. HBV reactivation was defined as a >1000 IU/mL increase in HBV DNA or HBsAg detection in a person who was previously negative. Prior to DAA treatment 85.5% (53,784/62,920) had HBsAg testing and 0.70% (377/53,784) were positive; 84.6% (53,237/62,920) had a hepatitis B surface antibody test, of which 42.2% (22,479/53,237) were positive. In all, 9 of 62,290 patients treated with DAAs had evidence of HBV reactivation occurring while on DAA treatment. Eight occurred in patients known to be HBsAg-positive, and 1 occurred in a patient known to be isolated hepatitis B core antibody-positive. Seventeen other patients had small increases in HBV DNA levels that did not qualify as HBV reactivation. Only 3 of the 9 patients identified with HBV reactivation in this cohort exhibited peak alanine aminotransferase elevations >2 times the upper limit of normal. CONCLUSION: HBV reactivation of varying severity, even in the setting of isolated hepatitis B core antibody, with or without accompanying hepatitis can occur-though the occurrence of accompanying severe hepatitis was rare. (Hepatology 2017;66:27-36).

Real-world effectiveness and predictors of sustained virological response with all-oral therapy in 21,242 hepatitis C genotype-1 patients.

BACKGROUND: Predictors of sustained virological response (SVR) to all-oral HCV regimens can inform nuanced treatment decisions. We evaluated effectiveness and identified predictors of SVR for ledipasvir/sofosbuvir ± ribavirin (LDV/SOF ±RBV) and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir (OPrD) ±RBV in patients treated in routine practice. METHODS: Observational, intent-to-treat cohort of 21,142 genotype-1 patients initiating 8 or 12 weeks of LDV/SOF ±RBV or 12 weeks of OPrD ±RBV at any Veterans Affairs facility. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to model SVR and identify predictors. RESULTS: SVR was 91.2% (9,781/10,720) for LDV/SOF, 89.6% (3,266/3,646) for LDV/SOF+RBV, 91.7% (1,197/1,306) for OPrD and 87.8% (3,365/3,832) for OPrD+RBV. For LDV/SOF ±RBV, reduced odds of SVR occurred in African-Americans (0.80, 95% CI 0.70, 0.92, P<0.001), body mass index (BMI)<25 (0.77, 95% CI 0.66, 0.90, P<0.001), BMI≥30 (0.77, 95% CI 0.67, 0.89, P<0.001), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs; 0.81, 95% CI 0.71, 0.92, P<0.001), decompensated liver disease (0.58, 95% CI 0.45, 0.74, P<0.001) and FIB4>3.25 (0.60, 95% CI 0.53, 0.69, P<0.001). For OPrD ±RBV, FIB-4>3.25 negatively predicted SVR (0.72, 95% CI 0.59, 0.88, P<0.001). Detectable 4-week on-treatment HCV RNA≥15 IU/ml reduced SVR odds for both regimens (LDV/SOF ±RBV OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.41, 0.58, P<0.001; OPrD ±RBV OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29, 0.50, P<0.001). Receipt of OPrD+RBV compared to LDV/SOF reduced odds of SVR (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62, 0.80, P<0.001). Mental health diagnosis did not impact likelihood of SVR. CONCLUSIONS: The diversity and size of this cohort allowed for extensive examination of regimen-specific predictors of SVR. FIB-4>3.25 and detectable 4-week on-treatment HCV RNA had the greatest negative impact. African-American race, low or high BMI, and PPIs negatively impacted odds of SVR for LDV/SOF ±RBV. Mental health diagnoses did not.

Real-world effectiveness of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in 4,365 treatment-naive, genotype 1 hepatitis C-infected patients.

UNLABELLED: Real-world effectiveness data are needed to inform hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment decisions. The uptake of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) regimens across health care settings has been rapid, but variations often occur in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess sustained virologic response (SVR) of LDV/SOF±ribavirin (RBV) in routine medical practice. This observational, intent-to-treat cohort was comprised of 4,365 genotype 1, treatment-naive, HCV-infected veterans treated with LDV/SOF±RBV. SVR rates were 91.3% (3,191/3,495) for LDV/SOF and 92.0% (527/573) for LDV/SOF+RBV (P = 0.65). African American race (odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.54-0.90, P = 0.004) and FIB-4 >3.25 (odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.71, P < 0.001) were independently associated with decreased likelihood of SVR; age, sex, body mass index, decompensated liver disease, diabetes, genotype 1 subtype, and regimen did not predict SVR. In models limited to those who completed 12 weeks of treatment, African American race was no longer a significant predictor of SVR but FIB-4 >3.25 (odds ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.50, P < 0.001) remained. Among those without cirrhosis (defined by FIB-4 ≤3.25) and with baseline HCV RNA<6,000,000 IU/mL, SVR rates were 93.2% (1,020/1,094) for those who completed 8 weeks of therapy and 96.6% (875/906) for those who completed 12 weeks of therapy (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world cohort, SVR rates with LDV/SOF±RBV nearly matched the rates reported in clinical trials and were consistently high across all subgroups; those without cirrhosis but with HCV RNA<6,000,000 IU/mL were less likely to achieve SVR with 8 weeks compared to 12 weeks of therapy, although the numeric difference in SVR rates was small. (Hepatology 2016;64:405-414).

Impact of provider type on hepatitis C outcomes with boceprevir-based and telaprevir-based regimens.

GOALS: To examine the effect of provider type on outcomes and safety in a large hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected cohort treated in routine medical practice. BACKGROUND: Nonphysician providers (NPP) are uniquely positioned to expand health care infrastructure to meet HCV treatment demands. STUDY: Retrospective, observational cohort analysis of 820 HCV genotype 1-infected veterans initiated on peginterferon/ribavirin and boceprevir or telaprevir in routine medical practice at 94 VA facilities before January 1, 2012 and followed through July 30, 2013. Provider type was determined from prescription records and included physicians (MD) or NPPs (ie, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and pharmacists). Inverse probability-of-treatment weighting and unweighted logistic regression analysis was used for comparison of sustained virologic response (SVR), treatment discontinuation rates, and adverse hematologic events. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in SVR by provider type overall (NPPs 52% vs. MDs 49%, P=0.33) and within patient subgroups, or in treatment discontinuation rates. In multivariate analyses, provider type was not associated with any significant difference in the odds of achieving SVR (NPP vs. MD; odds ratio 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.63; P=0.37 inverse probability of treatment weighting; odds ration 1.16, 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.59, P=0.38 unweighted). Hematologic adverse event rates were similar: anemia: 57% NPP, 62% MD; thrombocytopenia: 43% NPP, 40% MD; neutropenia: 40% NPP, 39% MD. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment prescribed by NPPs was as likely to result in SVR as treatment prescribed by MDs, even after accounting for patient differences. Engaging more NPPs as HCV treatment providers may allow wider access to HCV treatment.

Impact of race/ethnicity and gender on HCV screening and prevalence among U.S. veterans in Department of Veterans Affairs Care.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed HCV screening and prevalence among veterans and estimated the potential impact of complete birth cohort screening, accounting for the disparate HCV disease burden by race/ethnicity and gender. METHODS: We used the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse to identify birth dates, gender, race/ethnicity, and laboratory tests for veterans with at least 1 VA outpatient visit in 2012. We calculated HCV screening rates, prevalence, and HCV infection incident diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 5,499,743 veterans, 54.7% had HCV screening through the VA. In more than 2.9 million veterans screened, HCV prevalence was 6.1% overall and highest among Blacks (11.8%), particularly Black men born in 1945 to 1965 (17.7%). HCV infection incident diagnosis in 2012 was 5.9% for men and 2.3% for women. An estimated additional 48,928 male veterans, including 12,291 Black men, and 1484 female veterans would potentially be identified as HCV infected with full birth cohort screening. CONCLUSIONS: HCV prevalence was markedly elevated among veterans born in 1945 to 1965, with substantial variation by race/ethnicity and gender. Full adoption of birth cohort screening may reveal substantial numbers of veterans with previously unknown HCV infection.

A population approach to disease management: hepatitis C direct-acting antiviral use in a large health care system.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of the first direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV), telaprevir and boceprevir, marked a unique event in which 2 disease-changing therapies received FDA approval at the same time. Comparative safety and effectiveness data in real-world populations upon which to make formulary decisions did not exist. OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation, measurement, and outcomes of an enduring population-based approach of surveillance of medication management for HCV. METHODS: The foundation of the population approach to HCV medication management used by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) relied upon a basic framework of (a) providing data for effective regional and local management, (b) education and training, (c) real-time oversight and feedback from a higher organization level, and (d) prompt outcome sharing. These population-based processes spanned across the continuum of the direct-acting antiviral oversight process. We used the VA's HCV Clinical Case Registry-which includes pharmacy, laboratory, and diagnosis information for all HCV-infected veterans from all VA facilities-to assess DAA treatment eligibility, DAA uptake and timing, appropriate use of DAAs including HCV RNA monitoring and medication possession ratios (MPR), nonconcordance with guidance for adjunct erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) use, hematologic adverse effects, discontinuation rates, and early and sustained virologic responses. Training impact was assessed via survey and change in pharmacist scope of practice. RESULTS: One year after FDA approval, DAAs had been prescribed at 120 of 130 VA facilities. Over 680 VA providers participated in live educational training programs including 380 pharmacists, and pharmacists with a scope of practice for HCV increased from 59 to 110 pharmacists (86%). HCV RNA futility testing improved such that only 1%-3% of veterans did not have appropriate testing compared with 15%-17% 6 months earlier. By facility, the median proportion of veterans with MPR ≥ 0.95 remained 80% for those prescribed boceprevir; for telaprevir, the median proportion was 75% and improved to 80% 6 months later. Nonconcordance with VA medication guidance was as follows: receipt of an ESA without dose reducing ribavirin, 30% boceprevir, 45% telaprevir; ESA initiated with a hemoglobin greater than 10 g/dL, 42% boceprevir, 25% telaprevir; receipt of GCSF with absolute neutrophil count above the criteria threshold, 84%. CONCLUSIONS: This clinically focused, comprehensive, population-based medication management approach affected real-time change in health services, practice, and outcomes evidenced by widespread and rapid DAA uptake, improved HCV RNA monitoring, attention to adherence, and more appropriate management of DAA-related anemia. Timely outcome sharing provided decision makers and clinicians evidence to support current HCV practices.

Early virologic responses and hematologic safety of direct-acting antiviral therapies in veterans with chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are limited data on the early effectiveness of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in routine medical practice. We aimed to evaluate real-world experience with DAA-based regimens. METHODS: By using the Veterans Affairs' Clinical Case Registry, we conducted a prospective observational intent-to-treat analysis of veterans infected with HCV genotype 1 who began treatment with pegylated interferon, ribavirin, and boceprevir (BOC, n = 661) or telaprevir (TVR, n = 198) before January 2012. We determined rates of virologic response at treatment weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24; futility; early discontinuation; and adverse hematologic events. RESULTS: About one third of patients discontinued treatment by week 24 (30% BOC, 34% TVR). A higher percentage of treatment-naive, noncirrhotic patients receiving BOC had undetectable levels of virus at week 24 than patients receiving TVR (74% vs 60%; P = .03). There were no significant differences in rates of early response within subgroups of cirrhotic patients, prior relapsers, prior partial responders, or prior null responders. By week 24, treatment was determined to be futile for 14% of patients receiving BOC and 17% of those receiving TVR. No differences were observed in overall rates of anemia (50% BOC, 49% TVR) or thrombocytopenia (16% BOC, 18% TVR); higher rates of neutropenia were observed in BOC-treated patients (34% BOC, 21% TVR; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: HCV-infected veterans treated in routine medical practice with DAA-based regimens (BOC or TVR) had rates of early response comparable with those reported in clinical trials. However, they had higher rates of futility and early discontinuation than clinical trial participants. Further studies are needed to determine rates of sustained viral response.

A sustained virologic response reduces risk of all-cause mortality in patients with hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin usually is evaluated by the surrogate end point of sustained virologic response (SVR), although the ultimate goal of antiviral treatment is to reduce mortality. The impact of SVR on all-cause mortality is not well documented by HCV genotype or in populations in routine medical practice with substantial comorbidities. METHODS: From the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), we identified all patients infected with HCV genotypes 1, 2, or 3, without human immunodeficiency virus co-infection or hepatocellular carcinoma before HCV treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin, who started HCV treatment from January 2001 to June 2007, stopped treatment by June 2008, and had a posttreatment HCV RNA test result of SVR or no SVR. Mortality data from VA and non-VA sources were available through 2009. RESULTS: HCV genotypes 1, 2, or 3 cohorts consisted of 12,166, 2904, and 1794 patients, respectively, with SVR rates of 35%, 72%, and 62%, respectively. Each cohort had high rates of comorbidities. During a median follow-up period of approximately 3.8 years, 1119 genotype-1, 220 genotype-2, and 196 genotype-3 patients died. In genotype-specific multivariate survival models that controlled for demographic factors, comorbidities, laboratory characteristics, and treatment characteristics, an SVR was associated with substantially reduced mortality risk for each genotype (genotype-1 hazard ratio, 0.70; P < .0001; genotype-2 hazard ratio, 0.64; P = .006; genotype-3 hazard ratio, 0.51; P = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: An SVR reduced mortality among patients infected with HCV of genotypes 1, 2, or 3 who were being treated by routine medical practice and had substantial comorbidities.

National quality forum performance measures for HIV/AIDS care: the Department of Veterans Affairs' experience.

BACKGROUND: Information technology promises to improve health care through reporting of standardized quality-of-care measures. In 2008, the National Quality Forum (NQF) first endorsed performance measures for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS care. Little is known about performance on these measures in routine medical practice. We assessed performance using available electronic data for the large, diverse population with HIV in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and evaluated the influence of patient and resource factors. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of observational data for 21 564 patients with HIV receiving VA medical care in 2008, we determined performance rates for 10 NQF measures for HIV/AIDS care for the VA nationwide and for 73 facilities with caseloads of 100 or more patients with HIV. RESULTS: National rates for 6 measures were greater than 80%; the remaining measures and their rates were as follows: annual syphilis screening (54%), tuberculosis screening (65%), Pneumocystis pneumonia prophylaxis (72%), and HIV RNA control (73%). For all measures, rates varied across facilities. In multivariate logistic regression models, African Americans and hard drug users were less likely to access care and less likely to receive HIV-specific care but more likely to receive indicated general medical care. Resource factors (number of primary care/infectious disease outpatient visits, duration of care, and larger facility caseload) were associated with increased likelihood of receipt of indicated general and HIV-specific care. CONCLUSIONS: National performance rates were generally high, but variation in rates across facilities revealed room for improvement. Both patient and resource factors had an impact on the likelihood of receipt of indicated care.

Clinical Case Registries: simultaneous local and national disease registries for population quality management.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a system-wide, patient-centric electronic medical record system (EMR) within which the authors developed the Clinical Case Registries (CCR) to support population-centric delivery and evaluation of VA medical care. To date, the authors have applied the CCR to populations with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). Local components use diagnosis codes and laboratory test results to identify patients who may have HIV or HCV and support queries on local care delivery with customizable reports. For each patient in a local registry, key EMR data are transferred via HL7 messaging to a single national registry. From 128 local registry systems, over 60,000 and 320,000 veterans in VA care have been identified as having HIV and HCV, respectively, and entered in the national database. Local and national reports covering demographics, resource usage, quality of care metrics and medication safety issues have been generated.

Provider prescribing of 4 antiretroviral agents after implementation of drug use guidelines in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) develops guidelines for VHA providers that delineate specific criteria for use of certain complex, costly medications indicated for specialized populations. These criteria are disseminated to all VHA facilities. OBJECTIVE: To (a) assess the concordance with VHA guidelines for use of 4 antiretrovirals (atazanavir, darunavir, enfuvirtide, and tipranavir), and (b) to describe prescribing of these agents before and after implementation of the guideline criteria. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated all veterans in VHA care who received their first outpatient prescription for a target antiretroviral between its FDA approval date and December 31, 2007, using outpatient prescription records obtained from the VHA Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Clinical Case Registry (CCR:HIV), an observational registry database created through extraction of specific clinical data from the VHA's electronic medical record. Adherence to the VHA guideline criteria was assessed using CCR:HIV data overall and during 3 time periods: (a) pre-criteria: from FDA approval date to criteria implementation date (range 38 days to 192 days), (b) early-criteria: the first 6 months after criteria implementation, and (c) late-criteria: from 180 days after criteria implementation until December 31, 2007 (range 184 days to 1,525 days). RESULTS: VHA providers prescribed target antiretroviral medications in accordance with the VHA guidelines for use more than 70% of the time. Comparing the pre-criteria with the post-criteria period (i.e., early-criteria and late-criteria combined), no significant differences in the percentages of veterans satisfying all VHA criteria were observed for any drug except atazanavir (P = 0.010). For atazanavir in the post-criteria period compared with the pre-criteria period, significantly more antiretroviral-naive veterans met criteria for cardiovascular disease or risk (72.8% post-criteria vs. 45.5% pre-criteria, P = 0.045), and significantly more antiretroviral-experienced veterans met criteria for resistance to other protease inhibitors requiring the need for ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (61.7% vs. 50.5%, respectively, P < 0.001); however, fewer antiretroviral-experienced veterans met criteria for having documented intolerance to other protease inhibitors (78.9% vs. 89.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). Fewer darunavir-treated patients in the post-criteria period than in the pre-criteria period met the criteria for treatment experience including failure of at least 1 prior protease inhibitor regimen (87.8% vs. 96.0%, respectively, P = 0.002). Adherence to all darunavir criteria significantly waned over time (early-criteria 78.8% vs. late-criteria 62.5%, P < 0.001). Overall, adherence to atazanavir criteria increased over time (66.3% early-criteria vs. 72.9% late-criteria, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After implementation of antiretroviral specific guideline criteria, the proportion of veterans prescribed a target antiretroviral medication in accordance with VHA guideline criteria varied by agent and improved only for atazanavir. Although adherence to criteria for atazanavir, enfuvirtide, and tipranavir persisted or improved during the post-criteria period, darunavir adherence to criteria waned over time, perhaps indicating that later prescribing patterns reflected changing practice patterns and the need for updated criteria. Revisiting and updating criteria may be especially important for HIV due to the speed with which new information becomes available.

Postmarketing use of enfuvirtide in veterans: provider compliance with criteria for use, overall efficacy, and tolerability.

BACKGROUND: Most enfuvirtide outcomes data come from controlled trials of limited duration rather than from routine experience. Because of its uniqueness, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented specific enfuvirtide prescribing and follow-up criteria (criteria for use; CFU) and then assessed providers' compliance with these criteria and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To report routine medical care experience with the prescribing, efficacy, and tolerability of enfuvirtide in a nonselective group of treatment-experienced, older, HIV-infected veterans. METHODS: Veterans receiving at least one outpatient prescription for enfuvirtide between April 2003 and July 2005 were identified from the VHA's HIV Clinical Case Registry (CCR:HIV). Targeted retrospective chart extraction was completed to address inclusion/exclusion criteria and to evaluate patients' continued use, adherence, and tolerance. CCR:HIV data were used for determination of demographics, prescription records, and laboratory results. The final cohort was used to assess providers' compliance with VHA's CFU for enfuvirtide. RESULTS: Of 275 evaluable subjects, between 52% and 93% who were prescribed enfuvirtide met each VHA CFU. Median change in CD4 cells and viral load from baseline to 6 months was +39 cells/mm(3) and -0.79 log(10) (p < 0.001) and at 2 years was +72 cells/mm(3) and -1.57 log(10) (p < 0.001); 41% and 55% of veterans achieved viral load less than 400 copies/mL at 6 months and 2 years, respectively. Seventy percent of veterans experienced injection site reactions (11% were treatment-limiting). New or worsening adverse effects occurred in 56% of veterans: 32% gastrointestinal, 19% musculoskeletal, and 10% respiratory. Seventy percent of veterans discontinued enfuvirtide within 2 years; the largest portion (12%) stopped treatment within the first month. Documented reasons for discontinuation included patient request (42%), suboptimal response/progression (24%), toxicity (18%), death (13%), and transfer of care outside of the VHA (3%). CONCLUSIONS: In this treatment-experienced veteran cohort, providers prescribed enfuvirtide in accordance with most CFU, and favorable treatment responses were sustained in patients able to remain on therapy. Challenges that providers and patients face include ongoing education and support for successful long-term use.