Tools
Tools
Hope, VD, Harris, RJ, Vickerman, P, Platt, L, Shute, J, Cullen, KJ, Ijaz, S, Mandal, S, Ncube, F, Desai, M and Parry, JV (2018) A comparison of two biological markers of recent HCV infection: implications for the monitoring of interventions and strategies to reduce HCV transmission among people who inject drugs. Eurosurveillance, 23 (47). ISSN 1560-7917
|
Text
A comparison of two biological markers of recent HCV infection implications for the monitoring of interventions and strategies to reduce HCV transmission among people who inject drugs..pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (315kB) | Preview |
Abstract
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.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Subjects: | Q Science > QH Natural history > QH301 Biology R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine > RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine > RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine > RA0440 Study and Teaching. Research |
| Divisions: | Public Health Institute |
| Publisher: | European Centre for DIsease Prevention and Control |
| Date Deposited: | 23 Nov 2018 10:51 |
| Last Modified: | 04 Sep 2021 10:28 |
| DOI or ID number: | 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2018.23.47.1700635 |
| URI: | https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/8703 |
 |
View Item |