Summary Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major public health problem in the European Union (EU). An estimated 5.6 million Europeans are chronically infected with a wide range of variation in prevalence across European Union countries. Although HCV continues to spread as a largely “silent pandemic,” its elimination is made possible through the availability of the new antiviral drugs and the implementation of prevention practices. On 17 February 2016, the Hepatitis B & C Public Policy Association held the first EU HCV Policy Summit in Brussels. This summit was an historic event as it was the first high‐level conference focusing on the elimination of HCV at the European Union level. The meeting brought together the main stakeholders in the field of HCV: clinicians, patient advocacy groups, representatives of key institutions and regional bodies from across European Union; it served as a platform for one of the most significant disease elimination campaigns in Europe and culminated in the presentation of the HCV Elimination Manifesto, calling for the elimination of HCV in Europe by 2030. The launch of the Elimination Manifesto provides a starting point for action in order to make HCV and its elimination in Europe an explicit public health priority, to ensure that patients, civil society groups and other relevant stakeholders will be directly involved in developing and implementing HCV elimination strategies, to pay particular attention to the links between hepatitis C and social marginalization and to introduce a European Hepatitis Awareness Week.

IntroductionWe present two consensus definitions of advanced and late stage liver disease being used as epidemiological tools. These definitions can be applied to assess the morbidity caused by liver diseases in different health care systems. We focus is on hepatitis B and C virus infections, because effective and well tolerated treatments for both of these infections have greatly improved our ability to successfully treat and prevent advanced and late stage disease, especially if diagnosed early. A consensus definition of late presentation with viral hepatitis is important to create a homogenous, easy-to-use reference for public health authorities in Europe and elsewhere to better assess the clinical situation on a population basis.MethodsA working group including viral hepatitis experts from the European Association for the Study of the Liver, experts from the HIV in Europe Initiative, and relevant stakeholders including patient advocacy groups, health policy-makers, international health organisations and surveillance experts, met in 2014 and 2015 to develop a draft consensus definition of late presentation with viral hepatitis for medical care. This was refined through subsequent consultations among the group.ResultsTwo definitions were agreed upon. Presentation with advanced liver disease caused by chronic viral hepatitis for medical care is defined as a patient with chronic hepatitis B and C and significant fibrosis (≥ F3 assessed by either APRI score > 1.5, FIB-4 > 3.25, Fibrotest > 0.59 or alternatively transient elastography (FibroScan) > 9.5 kPa or liver biopsy ≥ METAVIR stage F3) with no previous antiviral treatment. Late stage liver disease caused by chronic viral hepatitis is clinically defined by the presence of decompensated cirrhosis (at least one symptom of the following: jaundice, hepatic encephalopathy, clinically detectable ascites, variceal bleeding) and/or hepatocellular carcinoma.ConclusionThese consensus definitions will help to improve epidemiological understanding of viral hepatitis and possibly other liver diseases, as well as testing policies and strategies.

In the WHO-EURO region, around 28 million people are currently living with chronic viral hepatitis, and 120,000 people die every year because of it. Lack of awareness and understanding combined with the social stigma and discrimination exacerbate barriers related to access to prevention, diagnosis and treatment services for those most in need. In addition, the persisting economic crisis has impacted on public health spending, thus posing challenges on the sustainable investment in promotion, primary and secondary prevention, diagnosis and treatment of viral hepatitis across European countries. The Hepatitis B and C Public Policy Association in cooperation with the Hellenic Center for Disease Prevention and Control together with 10 partner organizations discussed at the Athens High Level Meeting held in June 2014 recent policy developments, persisting and emerging challenges related to the prevention and management of viral hepatitis and the need for a de minimis framework of urgent priorities for action, reflected in a Call to Action (Appendix S1). The discussion confirmed that persisting barriers do not allow the full realisation of the public health potential of diagnosing and preventing hepatitis B and C, treating hepatitis B and curing hepatitis C. Such barriers are related to (a) lack of evidence-based knowledge of hepatitis B and C, (b) limited access to prevention, diagnosis and treatment services with poor patient pathways, (c) declining resources and (d) the presence of social stigma and discrimination. The discussion also confirmed the emerging importance of fiscal constraints on the ability of policymakers to adequately address viral hepatitis challenges, particularly through increasing coverage of newer therapies. In Europe, it is critical that public policy bodies urgently agree on a conceptual framework for addressing the existing and emerging barriers to managing viral hepatitis. Such a framework would ensure all health systems share a common understanding of definitions and indicators and look to integrate their responses to manage policy spillovers in the most cost-effective manner, while forging wide partnerships to sustainably and successfully address viral hepatitis.

The majority of people infected with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) in the European Union (EU) remain undiagnosed and untreated. During recent years, immigration to EU has further increased HCV prevalence.

BackgroundMarginalised communities such as homeless people, people who use drugs (PWUD), lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people (LGBTI), prisoners, sex workers and undocumented migrants are at high risk of poor health and yet face substantial barriers in accessing health and support services. The Nobody Left Outside (NLO) Service Design Checklist aims to promote a collaborative, evidence-based approach to service design and monitoring based on equity, non-discrimination and community engagement.MethodsThe Checklist was a collaborative project involving nine community advocacy organisations, with a focus on homeless people, PWUD, LGBTI people, prisoners, sex workers, and undocumented migrants. The Checklist was devised via a literature review; two NLO platform meetings; a multistakeholder policy workshop and an associated published concept paper; two conference presentations; and stakeholder consultation via a European Commission-led Thematic Network (including webinar).ResultsThe NLO Checklist has six sections in line with the WHO Health Systems Framework. These are: (1) service delivery, comprising design stage (6 items), services provided (2 items), accessibility and adaptation (16 items), peer support (2 items); (2) health workforce (12 items); (3) health information systems (7 items); (4) medical products and technologies (1 item); (5) financing (3 items); and (6) leadership and governance (7 items). It promotes the implementation of integrated (colocated or linked) healthcare services that are community based and people centred. These should provide a continuum of needs-based health promotion, disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment and management, together with housing, legal and social support services, in alignment with the goals of universal health coverage and the WHO frameworks on integrated, people-centred healthcare.ConclusionsThe Checklist is offered as a practical tool to help overcome inequalities in access to health and support services. Policymakers, public health bodies, healthcare authorities, practitioner bodies, peer support workers and non-governmental organisations can use it when developing, updating or monitoring services for target groups. It may also assist civil society in wider advocacy efforts to improve access for underserved communities.

No abstract

BackgroundPrevalence of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs (PWID) is high. Risky injecting behaviours have been found to decrease in drug consumption rooms (DCRs) and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs), yet HCV prevention and treatment in these settings have not been extensively explored.MethodsTo determine the range and scope of HCV prevention and treatment options in these services, we assessed DCR/SIF operational features, their clients’ characteristics and the HCV-related services they provide. A comprehensive online survey was sent to the managers of the 91 DCRs/SIFs that were operating globally as of September 2016. A descriptive cross-country analysis of the main DCR/SIF characteristics was conducted and bivariate logistic models were used to assess factors associated with enhanced HCV service provision.ResultsForty-nine valid responses were retrieved from DCRs/SIFs in all countries where they were established at the time of the survey (Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Switzerland). Internationally, the operational capacities of DCRs/SIFs varied in terms of funding, location, size and staffing, but their clients all shared common features of vulnerability and marginalisation. Estimated HCV prevalence rates were around 60%. Among a range of health and social services and referrals to other programs, most DCRs/SIFs provided HCV testing onsite (65%) and/or offered liver monitoring or disease management (54%). HCV treatment onsite was offered or was planned to be offered by 21% of DCRs/SIFs. HCV testing onsite was associated with provision of other services addressing blood-borne diseases and HCV treatment was linked to the provision of OST. HCV disease management was associated with employing a nurse at a DCR/SIF and HCV treatment was associated with employing a medical doctor.ConclusionsDCRs/SIFs offer easy-to-access HCV-related services for PWID. The availability of onsite medical professionals and provision of support and education to non-medical staff are key to enhanced provision of HCV-related services in DCRs/SIFs. Funding and support for HCV treatment at the community level, via low-threshold services such as DCRs/SIFs, are worthy of action.

No abstract