Search

Introduction: In 2009 and 2010, Athens, Greece experienced a hepatitis C virus (HCV) and a Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) outbreak among People Who Inject Drugs (PWID), respectively. The HCV outbreak was not detected, while that of HIV was identified in 2011. The integrated HIV-interventions, launched in early 2012, managed to reduce directly the HIV incidence and indirectly the HCV incidence. This study aims to assess what would have been the course of the HIV outbreak and its associated economic consequences if the 2009 HCV outbreak had been detected and integrated interventions had been initiated 1- or 2-years earlier., Methods: The model was calibrated to reproduce the observed HIV epidemiological and clinical parameters among PWID of Athens, Greece. We examined the effect of the 1- or 2-years earlier detection scenarios, the 1-year later detection, the non-detection scenario, and compared them to the status quo scenario., Results: Cumulative HIV cases, under the status-quo scenario during 2009-2019, were 1360 (90% Credible intervals: 290, 2470). If the HCV outbreak had been detected 1- or 2- years earlier, with immediate initiation of integrated interventions, 740 and 1110 HIV cases could be averted by 2019, respectively. Regarding the costs, if there was an efficient notification system to detect the HCV outbreak 1 or 2 years earlier, 35.2-53.2 million euros could be saved compared to the status quo by 2019., Conclusions: If the HCV outbreak had been detected and promptly addressed, the HIV outbreak would have been prevented and 35.2-53.2 million euros could have been saved., Competing Interests: IG, KS, NG, AF: No conflicts of interest. GT: Grants unrelated to this study and paid to her institution from Gilead Sciences Europe, UCL, ECDC, EU, University of Bristol, Harvard University, and National funds. more...

Background: Elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs (PWID) is a costly investment, so strategies should not only focus on eliminating the disease, but also on preventing disease resurgence. The aims of this study are to compute the minimum necessary antiviral therapies to achieve elimination with and without the additional expansion of harm reduction (HR) programs and to examine the sustainability of HCV elimination after 2030 if treatment is discontinued., Method: We considered two types of epidemic (with low (30%) and high (50%) proportion of PWID who engage in sharing equipment (sharers)) within three baseline chronic HCV (CHC) prevalence settings (30%, 45% and 60%), assuming a baseline HR coverage of 40%. We define sustainable elimination strategies, those that could maintain eliminations results for a decade (2031-2040), in the absence of additional treatment., Results: The model shows that the optimum elimination strategy is dependent on risk sharing behavior of the examined population. The necessary annual treatment coverage to achieve HCV elimination under 45% baseline CHC prevalence, without the simultaneous expansion of HR programs, ranges between 4.7-5.1%. Similarly, under 60% baseline CHC prevalence the needed treatment coverage varies from 9.0-10.5%. Increasing HR coverage from 40% to 75%, reduces the required treatment coverage by 6.5-9.8% and 11.0-15.0% under 45% or 60% CHC prevalence, respectively. In settings with ≤45% baseline CHC prevalence, expanding HR to 75% could prevent the disease from rebounding after elimination, irrespective of the type of the epidemic. In high chronic HCV prevalence, counseling interventions to reduce sharing are also needed to maintain the HCV incident cases in low levels., Conclusions: Harm reduction strategies have a vital role in HCV elimination strategy, as they reduce the required number of treatments to eliminate HCV and they provide sustainability after the elimination. The above underlines that HCV elimination strategies should be built upon the existing HR services, and argue for HR expansion in countries without services., Competing Interests: IG, SB: No conflicts of interest. VS: advisor/lecturer for Gilead and Abbvie. HR: No conflicts of interest. He works and manages the Center for Disease Analysis (CDA). CDA has received research funding from Gilead and Abbvie. AH: Receipt of grants/research support: Gilead, Novartis, Co-Chair of Hepatitis B and C Public Policy Association funded by Gilead, Abbvie, BMS. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Gilead, BMS. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. more...