Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Vaccination in Patients With HIV: A Survey of Clinicians' Current Practices.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hastie E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8494107 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeHepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy that can be largely prevented with medication, provided that asymptomatic HBV carriers are identified. We explored the knowledge, beliefs, and practices of Canadian oncologists/hematologists regarding HBV screening before chemotherapy.MethodsA novel questionnaire was mailed to all practicing hematologists/oncologists, where publicly accessible online physician registries facilitated identification of these specialists (71% of the Canadian physician population).ResultsOf 504 potentially eligible practitioners, 311 (62%) responded, of whom 246 indicated that they administered chemotherapy and were thus included in final analyses. Respondents tended to underestimate the risk of HBV reactivation, and recognition of the major risk factor for HBV carriage (ie, birth in an endemic area) was low. Forty percent of respondents reported rarely or never testing for HBV before chemotherapy, and 36% reported screening only those patients with HBV risk factors. In multivariate analysis, having a predominantly hematologic practice, practitioner experience with HBV reactivation, ability to correctly estimate the risk of HBV reactivation, fewer years in practice, and female sex were independently associated with an increased likelihood of screening for HBV.ConclusionCanadian oncologists and hematologists tend to underestimate the risk of HBV reactivation and report relatively low HBV screening rates. Among those practitioners who do screen, the favored strategy is selective screening of patients with HBV risk factors. However, oncologists'/hematologists' knowledge regarding risk factors for HBV carriage seems to be low, potentially undermining the success of a selective screening strategy.
| S-EPMC3500474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As a result of shared routes of transmission, coinfection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is common in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. The prevalence of HIV/HCV coinfection is particularly high among persons who have used injection drugs; however, more recently, sexual transmission of HCV has been recognized among HIV-infected men who have sex with men (MSM). Over the past decade, the effectiveness of HIV treatment improved substantially, leading to a substantial reduction in HIV/AIDS-related deaths; in this context, liver disease due to HCV infection has emerged as major concern for co-infected patients. Over the same period, treatment of HCV remained stagnant, with pegylated interferon alfa (PegIFN) plus ribavirin (RBV; PegIFN/RBV) entrenched as the standard treatment for HCV infection for co-infected patients, who have the greatest risk for liver disease. However, the effectiveness of HCV treatment in this population has been disappointing because of low rates of treatment initiation and success. In 2011, novel HCV NS3/4A PIs (PIs), telaprevir and boceprevir, were approved for use in combination with PegIFN/RBV for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection; at the time of approval, important questions regarding the efficacy, safety, and potential for drug interactions with telaprevir and boceprevir had not been answered. More recently, data from drug-interaction studies and 2 small, phase II clinical trials indicate that these HCV treatment regimens may lead to higher rates of HCV eradication in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients, with manageable toxicity and pharmacologic interactions with antiretroviral drugs. As such, these HCV PI-based regimens have emerged as the standard for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection in carefully selected HIV-infected patients.
| S-EPMC3565592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Despite the proven effectiveness of immunization in preventing morbidity and mortality, adult vaccines remain underutilized. The objective of this study was to describe clinicians' and pharmacists' self-reported implementation of the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice ("the Standards"; i.e., routine assessment, recommendation, and administration/referral for needed vaccines, and documentation of administered vaccines, including in immunization information systems). METHODS:Two Internet panel surveys (one among clinicians and one among pharmacists) were conducted during February-March 2017 and asked respondents about their practice's implementation of the Standards. T-tests assessed associations between clinician medical specialty, vaccine type, and each component of the Standards (March-August 2017). RESULTS:Implementation of the Standards varied substantially by vaccine and provider type. For example, >80.0% of providers, including obstetrician/gynecologists and subspecialists, assessed for and recommended influenza vaccine. However, 24.3% of obstetrician/gynecologists and 48.9% of subspecialists did not stock influenza vaccine for administration. Although zoster vaccine was recommended by >89.0% of primary care providers, <58.0% stocked the vaccine; by contrast, 91.6% of pharmacists stocked zoster vaccine. Vaccine needs assessments, recommendations, and stocking/referrals also varied by provider type for pneumococcal; tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis; tetanus diphtheria; human papillomavirus; and hepatitis B vaccines. CONCLUSIONS:This report highlights gaps in access to vaccines recommended for adults across the spectrum of provider specialties. Greater implementation of the Standards by all providers could improve adult vaccination rates in the U.S. by reducing missed opportunities to recommend vaccinations and either vaccinate or refer patients to vaccine providers.
| S-EPMC6166242 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8071612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Eliminating hepatitis C as a public health threat requires an improved understanding of how to increase testing uptake. We piloted point-of-care testing (POCT) for a current HCV infection in an inner-city Emergency Department (ED) and assessed the influence on uptake of offering concomitant screening for HIV. Over four months, all adults attending ED with minor injuries were first invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire then invited to test in alternating cycles offering HCV POCT or HCV+HIV POCT. Viral RNA was detected in finger-prick blood by GeneXpert. 814/859 (94.8%) questionnaires were returned and 324/814 (39.8%) tests were accepted, comprising 211 HCV tests and 113 HCV+HIV tests. Offering concomitant HIV screening reduced uptake after adjusting for age and previous HCV testing (odds ratio 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.68; p < 0.001). HCV prevalence was 1/324 (0.31%; 95% CI 0.05-1.73); no participant tested positive for HIV. 167/297 (56.2%) POCT participants lived in the most deprived neighbourhoods in England. HCV RNA testing using finger-prick blood was technically feasible. Uptake was moderate and the offer of concomitant HIV screening showed a detrimental impact on acceptability in this low prevalence population. The findings should be confirmed in a variety of other community settings.
| S-EPMC6193009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceUniversal screening of patients with newly diagnosed cancer for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HIV is not routine in oncology practice, and experts disagree about whether universal screening should be performed.ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of HBV, HCV, and HIV infection among persons with newly diagnosed cancer.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter prospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed cancer (ie, identified within 120 days of cancer diagnosis) at 9 academic and 9 community oncology institutions affiliated with SWOG (formerly the Southwest Oncology Group) Cancer Research Network, a member of the National Clinical Trials Network, with enrollment from August 29, 2013, through February 15, 2017. The data analysis was conducted using data available through August 17, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresThe accrual goal was 3000 patients and the primary end point was the presence of HBV infection (previous or chronic), HCV infection, or HIV infection at enrollment. Patients with previous knowledge of infection as well as patients with unknown viral viral status were evaluated.ResultsOf 3092 registered patients, 3051 were eligible and evaluable. Median (range) age was 60.6 (18.2-93.7) years, 1842 (60.4%) were female, 553 (18.1%) were black, and 558 (18.3%) were Hispanic ethnicity. Screened patients had similar clinical and demographic characteristics compared with those registered. The observed infection rate for previous HBV infection was 6.5% (95% CI, 5.6%-7.4%; n = 197 of 3050 patients); chronic HBV, 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.0%; n = 19 of 3050 patients); HCV, 2.4% (95% CI, 1.9%-3.0%; n = 71 of 2990 patients); and HIV, 1.1% (95% CI, 0.8%-1.6%; n = 34 of 3045). Among those with viral infections, 8 patients with chronic HBV (42.1%; 95% CI, 20.3%-66.5%), 22 patients with HCV (31.0%; 95% CI, 20.5%-43.1%), and 2 patients with HIV (5.9%; 95% CI, 0.7%-19.7%) were newly diagnosed through the study. Among patients with infections, 4 patients with chronic HBV (21.1%; 95% CI, 6.1%-45.6%), 23 patients with HCV (32.4%; 95% CI, 21.8%-44.5%), and 7 patients with HIV (20.6%; 95% CI, 8.7%-37.9%) had no identifiable risk factors.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study found that a substantial proportion of patients with newly diagnosed cancer and concurrent HBV or HCV are unaware of their viral infection at the time of cancer diagnosis, and many had no identifiable risk factors for infection. Screening patients with cancer to identify HBV and HCV infection before starting treatment may be warranted to prevent viral reactivation and adverse clinical outcomes. The low rate of undiagnosed HIV infection may not support universal screening of newly diagnosed cancer patients.
| S-EPMC6459217 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3826346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes and practices of US healthcare professionals (HCPs) regarding the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) vaccination recommendations on HepA and HepB for adult patients at risk of contracting these infections or experiencing complications of hepatitis disease. This cross-sectional, web-based survey of 400 US HCPs, which included nurse practitioners and family medicine, internal medicine, infectious disease, emergency department, and gastroenterology physicians, assessed HCPs' attitudes and practices regarding the ACIP recommendations for adult patients at risk for hepatitis disease. HCP participants were identified via a survey research panel. A recruitment quota of 400 HCPs was set, including 50 NPs, 100 FMs, 100 IMs, 50 GIs, 50 EDs, and 50 IDs. The most frequently reported reasons for not recommending either HepA or HepB vaccines were "I think the risk of HepA infection is low in this patient population" and "I am uncertain about what the guidelines say about vaccinating this population." The most reported factors considered when determining eligibility for either vaccine were medical history and the patient's willingness/motivation to be vaccinated. Most reported it was extremely or moderately important to prevent hepatitis disease by vaccinating adult patients at risk, and most also reported recommending a HepA vaccine or HepB vaccine to patients at risk. Although most HCPs reported recommending HepA and HepB vaccines to patients at risk, these findings contrast with the low reported vaccination rates among these populations, and improved awareness of the ACIP recommendations among HCPs is needed.
| S-EPMC9746442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe rise in cervical cancer trends in the past two decades has coincided with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic especially in the sub-Saharan African region. Young people (15 to 24?years old) are associated with many risk factors such as multiple sexual partners, early sexual debut, and high HIV incidences, which increase the chances of developing cervical cancer. The National Cancer Prevention and Control Strategy for Zimbabwe (2014-2018) highlights that no cancer communication strategy focusing on risk factors as primary cancer prevention. Therefore, the study aims to determine the knowledge, attitude and practices of young people in Zimbabwe on cervical cancer, screening, human papillomavirus (HPV) and vaccination.MethodsA cross-sectional survey assessing young people's knowledge, attitude and practices concerning cervical cancer was conducted in five provinces in Zimbabwe. A total of 751 young people were recruited through a three-stage cluster design from high schools and universities. Knowledge, attitudes and practices were assessed using questions based and adapted from the concepts of the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Cervical Cancer Measuring tool kit-United Kingdom (UK).ResultsMost young people, 87.47% (656/750) claimed to know what the disease called cervical cancer is, with a mean score of 89.98% [95% CI 73.71.11-96.64] between high school and 86.72% [95% CI 83.48-89.40] among university students. There was no significant difference in mean scores between high school and university students (p?=?0.676). A risk factor knowledge proficiency score of ?13 out of 26 was achieved in only 13% of the high school respondents and 14% of the university respondents with a broad range of misconceptions about cervical cancer risk factors in both females and males. There was not much difference on comprehensive knowledge of cervical cancer and its risk factors between female and male students, with the difference in knowledge scores among high school (p?=?0.900) and university (p?=?0.324) students not statistically significant. In contrast, 43% of respondents heard of cervical cancer screening and prevention, and 47% knew about HPV transmission and prevention. Parents' educational level, province and smoking, were some of the factors associated with knowledge of and attitude towards cervical among high school and university students.ConclusionThis study revealed that young people in Zimbabwe have an idea about cervical cancer and the seriousness thereof, but they lack adequate knowledge of risk factors. Cervical cancer education and awareness emphasising causes, risk factors and care-seeking behaviours should be commissioned and strengthen at the community, provincial and national level. Developing a standard cervical cancer primary prevention tool that can be integrated into schools can be a step towards addressing health inequity.
| S-EPMC6712720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and its complications are major public health problems. As it is hard to treat and control the chronic state, control of disease depends on the prevention especially by vaccination. There is an impaired immune response to vaccinations including HBV in patients with some malignancies. The aim of this study is to assess the response rate of patients undergoing chemotherapy to HBV vaccination.All patients from two hematology/oncology clinics in Isfahan, Iran with the history of at least 1 month chemotherapy who had the inclusion criteria were enrolled in a case control study. Also a sex- and age-matched control group from healthy population was selected. They were vaccinated in a schedule of 0, 1, and 6 months and were examined for antibody titers 1 month after the last dose. The titers more than 10 mIU/ml were determined as positive response to vaccination.In this study, 50 patients and 50 healthy subjects were enrolled. The two groups were age and sex matched (P > 0.05). Frequency of negative responses to HBV vaccination in case and control groups were 9 (18%) and 1 (2%), respectively (OR = 10.75, CI = 1.30-88.47, P = 0.027). Of 50 patients, 54%, 12%, 22%, and 12% had breast cancer, lymphoma, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary cancers, respectively, and frequency of negative responses were 3 (11%), 1 (16%), 4 (36.4%), and 1 (16%), respectively (P = 0.167).According to our results, malignancy and chemotherapy will have an important effect on the immune system and cause negative response to HBV vaccination. Our results revealed the importance of passive immunity and screening for HBV infection in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Also more studies for better vaccination schedules in this group of patients are recommended.
| S-EPMC5549552 | biostudies-other