Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
J Viral Hepat. 2022 March 12; Online ahead of print; DOI: 10.1111/jvh.13672
Morgan JR, Marsh E, Savinkina A, Shilton S, Shadaker S, et al.
J Viral Hepat. 2022 March 12; Online ahead of print; DOI: 10.1111/jvh.13672
Achieving global elimination of hepatitis C virus requires a substantial scale-up of testing. Point-of-care HCV viral load assays are available as an alternative to laboratory-based assays to promote access in hard to reach or marginalized populations. The diagnostic performance and lower limit of detection are important attributes of these new assays for both diagnosis and test of cure. Therefore, our objective was to determine an acceptable LLoD for detectable HCV viraemia as a test for cure, 12-weeks post-treatment (SVR12). We assembled a global dataset of patients with detectable viraemia at SVR12 from observational databases from 9 countries (Egypt, the United States, United Kingdom, Georgia, Ukraine, Myanmar, Cambodia, Pakistan, Mozambique), and two pharmaceutical-sponsored clinical trial registries. We examined the distribution of HCV viral load at SVR12 and presented the 90th , 95th, 97th, and 99th percentiles. We used logistic regression to assess characteristics associated with low-level virological treatment failure (defined as <1000 IU/mL). There were 5,973 cases of detectable viremia at SVR12 from the combined dataset. Median detectable HCV RNA at SVR12 was 287,986 IU/mL. The level of detection for the 95th percentile was 227 IU/mL (95% CI 170-276). Females and those with minimal fibrosis were more likely to experience low-level viremia at SVR12 compared to men (adjusted odds ratio AOR = 1.60 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-1.97 and those with cirrhosis (AOR=1.49 95% CI 1.15-1.93). In conclusion, an assay with a level of detection of 1000 IU/mL or greater may miss a proportion of those with low-level treatment failure
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2023 December 1; Volume 27 (Issue 12); 885-898.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0341
du Cros PAK, Greig J, Cross GB, Cousins C, Berry C, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2023 December 1; Volume 27 (Issue 12); 885-898.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0341
English
Français
BACKGROUND
The value, speed of completion and robustness of the evidence generated by TB treatment trials could be improved by implementing standards for best practice.
METHODS
A global panel of experts participated in a Delphi process, using a 7-point Likert scale to score and revise draft standards until consensus was reached.
RESULTS
Eleven standards were defined: Standard 1, high quality data on TB regimens are essential to inform clinical and programmatic management; Standard 2, the research questions addressed by TB trials should be relevant to affected communities, who should be included in all trial stages; Standard 3, trials should make every effort to be as inclusive as possible; Standard 4, the most efficient trial designs should be considered to improve the evidence base as quickly and cost effectively as possible, without compromising quality; Standard 5, trial governance should be in line with accepted good clinical practice; Standard 6, trials should investigate and report strategies that promote optimal engagement in care; Standard 7, where possible, TB trials should include pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic components; Standard 8, outcomes should include frequency of disease recurrence and post-treatment sequelae; Standard 9, TB trials should aim to harmonise key outcomes and data structures across studies; Standard 10, TB trials should include biobanking; Standard 11, treatment trials should invest in capacity strengthening of local trial and TB programme staff.
CONCLUSION
These standards should improve the efficiency and effectiveness of evidence generation, as well as the translation of research into policy and practice.
The value, speed of completion and robustness of the evidence generated by TB treatment trials could be improved by implementing standards for best practice.
METHODS
A global panel of experts participated in a Delphi process, using a 7-point Likert scale to score and revise draft standards until consensus was reached.
RESULTS
Eleven standards were defined: Standard 1, high quality data on TB regimens are essential to inform clinical and programmatic management; Standard 2, the research questions addressed by TB trials should be relevant to affected communities, who should be included in all trial stages; Standard 3, trials should make every effort to be as inclusive as possible; Standard 4, the most efficient trial designs should be considered to improve the evidence base as quickly and cost effectively as possible, without compromising quality; Standard 5, trial governance should be in line with accepted good clinical practice; Standard 6, trials should investigate and report strategies that promote optimal engagement in care; Standard 7, where possible, TB trials should include pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic components; Standard 8, outcomes should include frequency of disease recurrence and post-treatment sequelae; Standard 9, TB trials should aim to harmonise key outcomes and data structures across studies; Standard 10, TB trials should include biobanking; Standard 11, treatment trials should invest in capacity strengthening of local trial and TB programme staff.
CONCLUSION
These standards should improve the efficiency and effectiveness of evidence generation, as well as the translation of research into policy and practice.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
J Viral Hepat. 2022 March 30; Volume 29 (Issue 6); 474-486.; DOI:10.1111/jvh.13672
Morgan JR, Marsh E, Savinkina A, Shilton S, Shadaker S, et al.
J Viral Hepat. 2022 March 30; Volume 29 (Issue 6); 474-486.; DOI:10.1111/jvh.13672
Achieving global elimination of hepatitis C virus requires a substantial scale-up of testing. Point-of-care HCV viral load assays are available as an alternative to laboratory-based assays to promote access in hard to reach or marginalized populations. The diagnostic performance and lower limit of detection are important attributes of these new assays for both diagnosis and test of cure. Therefore, our objective was to determine an acceptable LLoD for detectable HCV viraemia as a test for cure, 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12). We assembled a global data set of patients with detectable viraemia at SVR12 from observational databases from 9 countries (Egypt, the United States, United Kingdom, Georgia, Ukraine, Myanmar, Cambodia, Pakistan, Mozambique) and two pharmaceutical-sponsored clinical trial registries. We examined the distribution of HCV viral load at SVR12 and presented the 90th, 95th, 97th and 99th percentiles. We used logistic regression to assess characteristics associated with low-level virological treatment failure (defined as <1000 IU/mL). There were 5973 cases of detectable viraemia at SVR12 from the combined data set. Median detectable HCV RNA at SVR12 was 287,986 IU/mL. The level of detection for the 95th percentile was 227 IU/mL (95% CI 170-276). Females and those with minimal fibrosis were more likely to experience low-level viraemia at SVR12 compared to men (adjusted odds ratio AOR = 1.60 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-1.97 and those with cirrhosis (AOR = 1.49 95% CI 1.15-1.93). In conclusion, an assay with a level of detection of 1000 IU/mL or greater may miss a proportion of those with low-level treatment failure.