If you would like to submit an article to this website, email us at info@heart-intl.net for a review of this paper
info@heart-intl.net
Striking Lack of Awareness
TAGline
From the Treatment Action Group (TAG)
Volume 7 Issue 6
August, 2000
Notice Paid: TAG's Hepatitis Project
Bears
Its First and Future Fruit, Issues
Research
and Treatment Policy Recommendations
"People with hepatitis C infection deserve the same tools as those with
HIV so that they can become experts about their virus," explains Michael
Marco in the introduction to TAG's latest analysis of hepatitis C
research and treatment. The complete report can be retrieved at our
website, or by calling the TAG office(971-9022). What follows is a taste
of what's contained inside.
This report is a collaborative effort. Jeffrey Schouten was a great
partner who worked with me over these two years, and he wrote selected
hepatitis C chapters and the section on hepatitis and HIV coinfection.
Version 2.0 of this report, already in production, will include an
analysis of the research and treatment of hepatitis viruses A and B.
Expert hepatitis researchers-including Marion Peters, Thierry Poynard,
Teresa Wright, Jay Hoofnagle, Leonard Seeff, and Douglas Dieterich-went
out of their way in varying capacities to help me, an AIDS treatment
advocate they had never met.
My appreciation of and desire to study
hepatitis C virus research is something new. It started off as mere
curiosity during my research of AIDS-related opportunistic
infections(OIs) when I thought about adding a short chapter on hepatitis
C to TAG's OI Report because it was well-known that many individuals
with HIV are also coinfected with hepatitis C. Two years later, it seems
laughable that one could write a short chapter on hepatitis C. It has
become apparent to me that there is a need for a thorough study, review,
and critical analysis of hepatitis C research and treatment.
Over the years, AIDS treatment advocates have critically analyzed the
numerous facets of HIV clinical and basic research with great aplomb.
They have produced a wealth of patient-readable HIV treatment
information so that people with HIV/AIDS can become experts in
understanding their disease. In my two years of researching hepatitis C,
I found that there were only a few hepatitis C treatment advocates, yet
none had created one text that contained a complete overview of the
disease, analyzed the research, and offered important and sound
hepatitis C treatment information as well as policy recommendations to
move the field of hepatitis C research forward. Since I have been
well-trained and mentored in researching and writing such documents on
HIV-related complications, I felt I would initiate TAG's Hepatitis
Project and write a report on hepatitis C, as well as on hepatitis and
HIV coinfection. People with hepatitis C deserve the same tools as those
with HIV so that they can become experts about their disease.
I
quickly realized that people with hepatitis C were not the only ones who
needed to become experts. Many primary care physicians lack a complete
breath of knowledge of the epidemiology and clinical management of
hepatitis C. This was blatantly obvious in the1999 Hepatology article,
"Current Practice Patterns of Primary Care Physicians in the Management
of Patients with Hepatitis C," by Shehab and colleagues from Anna Lok's
group at the University of Michigan. In a survey of over 400 primary
care physicians from the Detroit area, 20% and 8%, respectively,
considered blood transfusion in 1994 and casual household contact as
significant risk factors for hepatitis C infection. Forty-three percent
overestimated the likelihood of a sustained response to a course of
interferon therapy, while 29% had no idea what the sustained response
rate was. Thirty-eight percent would not refer an individual with a
positive hepatitis C antibody test to a gastroenterologist -- even
though they had no experience in treating hepatitis C themselves.
Another study by Villano and colleagues from Johns Hopkins found that a
majority of the intravenous-drug-using individuals in their natural
history, cohort-tested hepatitis C, antibody-positive their first time
on study -- yet were under the care of clinic or primary care
physicians. This striking lack of awareness by health care providers
about hepatitis C epidemiology, risk factors, and clinical management is
unacceptable. Let us hope that this report gets into the hands of the
physicians and people with Hepatitis C Virus who need it.
I
also wrote the report in an attempt to quell the mass hysteria about
hepatitis C created by major weekly news magazines as well as by the
obnoxious "Get tested, get treated" hepatitis C advertising campaign of
a greedy pharmaceutical company. The push to immediately treat everyone
who tests positive for hepatitis C made my blood boil, because that is
often the same message given to those who initially test positive for
HIV. (For HIV, clinical endpoint studies have shown a survival advantage
to starting potent, combination antiretroviral therapy only once a
person's CD4 count has dropped below 200 cell/mm3. Yet with both
viruses, we still have not fully answered the question, "When should one
initiate antiviral therapy?"
This hepatitis C report attempts to
answer that question and documents what we know and what we don't know
about the epidemiology, natural history, diagnosis, and treatment of
hepatitis C infection.
After an exhaustive analysis of peer-reviewed articles, over 40
researchers, clinicians, primary care physicians, government heath
administrators, industry representatives, and patients with viral
hepatitis were interviewed.
Research and treatment policy recommendations have been issued and will
need to be implemented in order to carefully find answers to the many
basic and clinical science questions in hepatitis C research.
More collaborative and concentrated efforts on the part of industry,
physicians, government, and the hepatitis community alike are needed if
we are to effectively challenge, overcome, and cure hepatitis C
infection.