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

Vivian D. Hope*, Ross J. Harris, Peter Vickerman, Lucy Platt, Justin Shute, Katelyn J. Cullen, Samreen Ijaz, Sema Mandal, Fortune Ncube, Monica Desai, John Parry

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1700635
JournalEurosurveillance
Volume23
Issue number47
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Nov 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
We would like to thank all those who took part in the survey and those who assisted with its delivery. The survey is core funded by Public Health England (PHE), the retrospective HCV RNA testing of anti-HCV negative was funded by the a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) research grant (PHR Project: 12/3070/13), and by NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Blood Borne and Sexually Transmitted Infections at University College London in partnership with PHE, and in collaboration with London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The NIHR HPRU in Blood Borne and Sexually Transmitted Infections Steering Committee: Caroline Sabin (Director), Anthony Nardone (PHE Lead), Catherine Mercer, Gwenda Hughes, Jackie Cassell, Greta Rait, Samreen Ijaz, Tim Rhodes, Kholoud Porter, Sema Mandal, and William Rosenberg. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research, the Department of Health or Public Health England.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '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'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this