Skip Page Header

Home > A comparison of two biological markers of recent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection: implications for the monitoring of interventions and strategies to reduce HCV transmission among people who inject drugs.

Hope, Vivian D and Harris, Ross J and Vickerman, Peter and Platt, Lucy and Shute, Justin and Cullen, Katelyn J and Ijaz, Samreen and Mandal, Sema and Ncube, Fortune and Desai, Monica and Parry, John V . (2018) A comparison of two biological markers of recent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection: implications for the monitoring of interventions and strategies to reduce HCV transmission among people who inject drugs. Euro Surveillance. Euro Surveillance, 23 (47)

URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC63419...

Background
Monitoring hepatitis C virus (HCV) incidence is important for assessing intervention impact. Longitudinal studies of people who inject drugs (PWID), using repeated biological tests, are costly; alternatively, incidence can be estimated using biological markers of recent infection in cross-sectional studies.
Aim
We aimed to compare incidence estimates obtained from two different biological markers of recent infection in a cross-sectional study to inform monitoring approaches for HCV elimination strategies.
Method
Samples from an unlinked anonymous bio-behavioural survey of PWID were tested for two recent infection markers: HCV RNA with anti-HCV negative ('RNA') and low-avidity anti-HCV with HCV RNA present ('avidity'). These two markers were used separately and in combination to estimate HCV incidence.
Results
Between 2011 and 2013, 2,816 anti-HIV-negative PWID (25% female) who had injected during the preceding year were either HCV-negative or had one of the two markers of recent infection: 57 (2.0%) had the RNA marker and 90 (3.2%) the avidity marker. The two markers had similar distributions of risk and demographic factors. Pooled estimated incidence was 12.3 per 100 person-years (pyrs) (95% credible interval: 8.8-17.0) and not significantly different to avidity-only (p = 0.865) and RNA-only (p = 0.691) estimates. However, the RNA marker is limited by its short duration before anti-HCV seroconversion and the avidity marker by uncertainty around its duration.
Conclusion
Both markers have utility in monitoring HCV incidence among PWID. When HCV transmission is high, one marker may provide an accurate estimate of incidence; when it is low or decreasing, a combination may be required.


Repository Staff Only: item control page