Search

Since the advent of direct‐acting antiviral hepatitis C treatments, widespread enthusiasm about disease elimination has emerged. This article examines experiences of hepatitis C treatment and cure in this period. Mobilising Fraser and Seear's (Making disease, making citizens: The politics of hepatitis C, Ashgate, 2011) approach to hepatitis C as a 'gathering', we analyse cure not as a biomedical phenomenon but as a social and material event. To do so, we take a Science and Technology Studies‐inspired approach to analyse three complementary cases drawn from an Australian project on experiences of hepatitis C, treatment and cure. First, we analyse the ways a friendship between two women combines with adjustments to treatment access to produce a gathering that makes cure possible. Second, we analyse the forces that gather and distribute responsibility when a cure does not occur in a context shaped by oversimplified treatment logics. Third, we analyse a gathering of relations in which hepatitis C lingers, thereby limiting the cure's possible transformative effects. We argue that, even in an era defined by highly effective medicines, the hepatitis C cure is not necessarily straightforward, but an unpredictable gathering constituted by a fragile coalescing of social and material forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Mathematical modelling has demonstrated the theoretical feasibility of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention strategies in custodial settings, yet limited empirical data exists. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' study is the world's first trial of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment‐as‐prevention in prison. This study aimed to analyse how expert stakeholders involved in the Australian HCV response assessed the acceptability of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention in prison using interview data from the SToP‐C qualitative substudy. Design and setting: Qualitative analysis using semi‐structured interviews in Australia. Participants: Nineteen key HCV experts. Measurements Drawing upon Sekhon's theoretical framework of acceptability, data were organized thematically under four component constructs of acceptability: affective attitude; ethicality; opportunity costs; and perceived effectiveness. Findings Most differences in participant assessments of acceptability were a matter of relative emphasis and prioritization rather than absolute polarity. Nonetheless, a small minority of participants was overtly critical of the approach. Arguing against the focus on treatment, they instead advocated for prevention‐as‐prevention, including the improvement and expansion of existing harm reduction measures. Conclusions: Qualitative analysis of expert stakeholder assessments of the acceptability of hepatitis C virus treatment‐as‐prevention in Australian prisons found no opposition to the universal rollout of direct‐acting anti‐virals, but most voiced concern regarding the lack of effective primary prevention in Australian prisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hepatitis C (HCV) is a global public health concern. There is a global prevalence of 15% among the world's prisoner population, suggesting the need for priority HCV treatment among this population group. New highly efficacious therapies with low side effects, known as directing-acting antivirals, became available under Australia's universal healthcare scheme on 1 March 2016. This creates an opportune time to trial treatment as prevention as an elimination strategy for HCV in prison settings. This paper examines whether policies in Australian jurisdictions support treatment scale-up to achieve elimination among this priority population. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using Google and other web-based search functions to locate all publicly available policies in each Australian state and territory related to HCV health and HCV-related prison health. Ministers (corrections and health) were contacted from each jurisdiction to identify any additional policies. Inductive and deductive analyses were conducted for each jurisdiction, with documents being assessed against a set of four a priori criteria. Documents included in the analysis were current at 1 September 2017, or 18 months following treatment availability. Results: A total of 18 documents were located, including both health ( n = 12) and corrections/prison health ( n = 6) documents relevant to HCV. Jurisdictions ranged in their commitments for delivering HCV harm reduction strategies and treatment availability within the prison setting. Conclusion: Few jurisdictions have updated or published HCV-related health or prisoner health policies following availability of directing-acting antivirals. Current policies do not provide effective support for implementing treatment scale-up that could be possible under universal access to HCV treatment among this priority population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globally, it is estimated that 71.1 million people have chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, including an estimated 7.5 million people who have recently injected drugs (PWID). There is an additional large, but unquantified, burden among those PWID who have ceased injecting. The incidence of HCV infection among current PWID also remains high in many settings. Morbidity and mortality due to liver disease among PWID with HCV infection continues to increase, despite the advent of well-tolerated, simple interferon-free direct-acting antiviral (DAA) HCV regimens with cure rates >95%. As a result of this important clinical breakthrough, there is potential to reverse the rising burden of advanced liver disease with increased treatment and strive for HCV elimination among PWID. Unfortunately, there are many gaps in knowledge that represent barriers to effective prevention and management of HCV among PWID. The Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney and the International Network on Hepatitis in Substance Users (INHSU) established an expert round table panel to assess current research gaps and establish future research priorities for the prevention and management of HCV among PWID. This round table consisted of a one-day workshop held on 6 September, 2016, in Oslo, Norway, prior to the International Symposium on Hepatitis in Substance Users (INHSU 2016). International experts in drug and alcohol, infectious diseases, and hepatology were brought together to discuss the available scientific evidence, gaps in research, and develop research priorities. Topics for discussion included the epidemiology of injecting drug use, HCV, and HIV among PWID, HCV prevention, HCV testing, linkage to HCV care and treatment, DAA treatment for HCV infection, and reinfection following successful treatment. This paper highlights the outcomes of the roundtable discussion focused on future research priorities for enhancing HCV prevention, testing, linkage to care and DAA treatment for PWID as we strive for global elimination of HCV infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is highly prevalent within the prison setting. Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies have changed the HCV treatment landscape, offering simple treatment (with minimal side-effects) and high efficacy. These advances have enabled the first real-world study of HCV treatment as prevention (TasP), the Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with hepatitis C (SToP-C) study. This paper draws on data from qualitative interviews completed with SToP-C participants following prison-wide DAA treatment scale-up.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 23 men in prison following HCV treatment completion to identify ongoing risk practices, perceptions of strategies for HCV prevention within the prison setting, experiences of HCV treatment (as prevention), and perceptions of reinfection following cure. Analysis was undertaken using a counterpublic health lens to identify risks and perceptions of reinfection among people treated for HCV within the prison setting.Results: Participants identified a number of challenges of meaningful HCV 'cure' in the absence of increased access to prevention strategies (e.g., opioid agonist therapy and prison needle syringe programs) along with concerns that 'cure' was only temporary whilst incarcerated. 'Cure' status included self-perceptions of being "clean", while also imposing responsibility on the individual to maintain their 'cure' status.Conclusion: HCV DAA treatment is provided somewhat under the guise of 'cure is easy', but fails to address the ongoing risk factors experienced by people who inject drugs in prisons, as well as other people in prison who may be at risk of blood-to-blood exposure. Health messaging regarding HCV treatment and treatment for reinfection should be tailored to ensure patient-centred care. Health interventions in prison must address the whole person and the circumstances in which they live, not just the illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]