Documents de recherche

@article{D2021,
title = {Potential interventions to support HCV treatment uptake among HIV co-infected people in Canada: Perceptions of patients and health care providers},
author = {D, Ortiz-Paredes; A, Amoako; D, Lessard; K, Engler; B, Lebouché; M, Klein; },
url = {https://canlivj.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/canlivj-2021-0021},
doi = {10.3138/canlivj-2021-0021},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-11-05},
journal = {Canadian Liver Journal},
abstract = {BACKGROUND: Increasing direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment uptake is key to eliminating HCV infection as a public health threat in Canada. People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C (HCV) co-infection face barriers to HCV treatment initiation. We sought to identify interventions that could support HCV treatment initiation based on patient and HCV care provider perspectives. METHODS: Eleven people living with HIV with a history of HCV infection and 12 HCV care providers were recruited for this qualitative descriptive study. Participants created ranked-ordered lists of potential interventions during nominal groups (n = 4) and individual interviews (n = 6). Following the nominal group technique, transcripts and intervention lists underwent thematic analysis and ranking scores were merged to create consolidated and prioritized lists from patient and provider perspectives. RESULTS: Patient participants identified a total of eight interventions. The highest-ranked interventions were multidisciplinary clinics, HCV awareness campaigns and patient education, nurse- or pharmacist-led care, peer involvement, and more and better-prepared health professionals. Provider participants identified 11 interventions. The highest-ranked were mobile outreach, DAA initiation at pharmacies, a simplified process of DAA prescription, integration of primary and specialist care, and patient-centred approaches. CONCLUSION: Participants proposed alternatives to hospital-based specialist HCV care, which require increasing capacity for nurses, pharmacists, primary care providers, and peers to have more direct roles in HCV treatment provision. They also identified the need for structural changes and educational initiatives. In addition to optimizing HCV care, these interventions might result in broader benefits for the health of HIV–HCV co-infected people.},
keywords = {Direct-acting antivirals, hepatitis C, HIV infection, Indigenous peoples, men who have sex with men, People who inject drugs, Treatment uptake, Women},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Saeed2016,
title = {How Generalizable Are the Results From Trials of Direct Antiviral Agents to People Coinfected With HIV/HCV in the Real World?},
author = {Sahar Saeed and Erin C. Strumpf and Sharon Walmsley and Kathleen C. Rollet-Kurhajec and Neora Pick and Valerie Martel-Laferrière and Mark Hull and John Gill and Joseph Cox and Curtis Cooper and Marina B. Klein},
url = {https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26743093},
doi = {10.1093/cid/civ1222},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-04-15},
journal = {Clinical Infectious Diseases},
abstract = {BACKGROUND:
Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) have been described as revolutionary. However, it remains uncertain how effective these drugs will be for individuals coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-HCV. Bridging this gap between efficacy and effectiveness requires a focus on the generalizability of clinical trials.
METHODS:
Generalizability of DAA trials was assessed by applying the eligibility criteria from 5 efficacy trials: NCT01479868, PHOTON-1 (NCT01667731), TURQUOISE-I (NCT01939197), ION-4 (NCT02073656), and ALLY-2 (NCT02032888) that evaluated simeprevir; sofosbuvir; ombitasvir, paritaprevir/ritonavir/dasabuvir; sofosbuvir/ledipasvir; and daclatasvir/sofosbuvir, respectively, to the Canadian Coinfection Cohort, representing approximately 23% of the total coinfected population in care in Canada.
RESULTS:
Of 874 active participants, 70% had chronic HCV, of whom 410, 26, 94, and 11 had genotypes 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. After applying trial eligibility criteria, only 5.9% (24/410) would have been eligible for enrollment in the simeprevir trial, 9.8% (52/530) in PHOTON-1, 6.3% (26/410) in TURQUOISE-I, and 8.1% (34/421) in ION-4. The ALLY-2 study was more inclusive; 43% (233/541) of the cohort would have been eligible. The most exclusive eligibility criteria across all trials with the exception of ALLY-2 were restriction to specific antiretroviral therapies (63%-79%) and active illicit drug use (53%-55%).
CONCLUSIONS:
DAA trial results may have limited generalizability, since the majority of coinfected individuals were not eligible to participate. Exclusions appeared to be related to improving treatment outcomes by not including those at higher risk of poor adherence and reinfection--individuals for whom real-world data are urgently needed.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.},
keywords = {Clinical trials, Direct-acting antivirals, Generalizability, HIV–hepatitis C coinfection, People who inject drugs},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Klein2012,
title = {Who needs direct acting antivirals for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV)? Challenges faced in advancing HCV therapy for HIV-HCV co-infected persons},
author = {Marina B. Klein and Kathleen C. Rollet-Kurhajec and Mark Hull and Curtis Cooper and Sharon Walmsley and Brian Conway and Neora Pick},
url = {https://www.intmedpress.com/journals/avt/abstract.cfm?id=2484&pid=88},
doi = {10.3851/IMP2484},
year = {2012},
date = {2012-12-04},
journal = {Antiviral Therapy},
volume = {18},
pages = {717-721},
abstract = {Background: The recent availability of new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for HCV treatment, which significantly increase sustained virological response rates for genotype 1 HCV infection, has brought new optimism with respect to curative HCV treatment for HIV–HCV-coinfected patients. We describe the characteristics of coinfected patients who could be eligible for DAAs to determine potential challenges facing clinicians and patients hoping to take advantage of these new therapies.

Methods: We evaluated the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the genotype 1 HCV–HIV-infected participants in a Canadian prospective multicentre cohort study at their most recent visit to assess potential eligibility for combination HCV treatment with boceprevir or telaprevir.

Results: Of the 1,020 coinfected participants enrolled in the cohort, 707 (85%) had evidence of chronic HCV infection (HCV-RNA-positive), of whom 497 (70%) were infected with genotype 1; 375 (75%) were naive to HCV treatment and 122 (25%) had previously received therapy and failed. Only 143 (38%) of HCV treatment-naive and 39 (32%) of treatment-experienced participants had no absolute contraindications for treatment. Alcohol abuse, active depression and decompensated liver disease were the most frequent reasons for treatment ineligibility. The majority would require alterations in antiretroviral regimens to avoid important drug–drug interactions.

Conclusions: Although the need for curative HCV therapy in HIV–HCV coinfection is great, the actual number of patients who could be eligible for DAAs at the present time may be quite low. There remains an urgent need to develop safe, simple and interferon-sparing treatments for coinfected individuals.},
keywords = {Direct-acting antivirals, HCV, HCV therapy, HIV-HCV co-infection},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}