Search

BackgroundThe Eastern European country of Georgia initiated a nationwide hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination program in 2015 to address a high burden of infection. Screening for HCV infection through antibody testing was integrated into multiple existing programs, including the National Tuberculosis Program (NTP). We sought to compare the hepatitis C care cascade among patients with and without tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis in Georgia between 2015 and 2019 and to identify factors associated with loss to follow-up (LTFU) in hepatitis C care among patients with TB.Methods and findingsUsing national ID numbers, we merged databases of the HCV elimination program, NTP, and national death registry from January 1, 2015 to September 30, 2020. The study population included 11,985 adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with active TB from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019, and 1,849,820 adults tested for HCV antibodies between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2020, who were not diagnosed with TB during that time. We estimated the proportion of patients with and without TB who were LTFU at each step of the HCV care cascade and explored temporal changes. Among 11,985 patients with active TB, 9,065 (76%) patients without prior hepatitis C treatment were tested for HCV antibodies, of which 1,665 (18%) had a positive result; LTFU from hepatitis C care was common, with 316 of 1,557 (20%) patients with a positive antibody test not undergoing viremia testing and 443 of 1,025 (43%) patients with viremia not starting treatment for hepatitis C. Overall, among persons with confirmed viremic HCV infection, due to LTFU at various stages of the care cascade only 28% of patients with TB had a documented cure from HCV infection, compared to 55% among patients without TB. LTFU after positive antibody testing substantially decreased in the last 3 years, from 32% among patients diagnosed with TB in 2017 to 12% among those diagnosed in 2019. After a positive HCV antibody test, patients without TB had viremia testing sooner than patients with TB (hazards ratio [HR] = 1.46, 95% confidence intervals [CI] [1.39, 1.54], p < 0.001). After a positive viremia test, patients without TB started hepatitis C treatment sooner than patients with TB (HR = 2.05, 95% CI [1.87, 2.25], p < 0.001). In the risk factor analysis adjusted for age, sex, and case definition (new versus previously treated), multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB was associated with an increased risk of LTFU after a positive HCV antibody test (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = 1.41, 95% CI [1.12, 1.76], p = 0.003). The main limitation of this study was that due to the reliance on existing electronic databases, we were unable to account for the impact of all confounding factors in some of the analyses.ConclusionsLTFU from hepatitis C care after a positive antibody or viremia test was high and more common among patients with TB than in those without TB. Better integration of TB and hepatitis C care systems can potentially reduce LTFU and improve patient outcomes both in Georgia and other countries that are initiating or scaling up their nationwide hepatitis C control efforts and striving to provide personalized TB treatment.

An increasing amount of infectious diseases research is conducted in low-income countries (LIC) given their high burden of disease; however, the contribution of LIC investigators as measured by authorship metrics, specifically to infectious diseases research, has not been thoroughly studied. We performed a literature search for primary research conducted either within LICs or using samples from LIC participants published between 1998-2017 in the Infectious Disease Society of America-affiliated journals Clinical Infectious Diseases, Journal of Infectious Diseases, and Open Forum Infectious Diseases. Primary outcomes included proportion of LIC-affiliated first and last authors (i.e. lead authors) per year and authorship trends over time. Secondary outcomes included proportion of LIC-affiliated authorship by geographic distribution and disease focus. Among 1308 publications identified, 50% had either a first or last LIC-affiliated author. Among these authors, 48% of LIC-affiliated first authors and 52% of LIC-affiliated last authors also reported a non-LIC institutional affiliation. While the absolute number of articles by LIC-affiliated lead authors increased over the 20-year period, the proportion of articles with LIC-affiliated lead authors decreased. There is a growing literature for infectious disease research conducted in LICs yet authorship trends in a small subset of these publications demonstrate a pronounced and worsening exclusion of LIC-affiliated investigators from publishing as lead authors.