Does a simplified algorithm and integrated HCV care model improve linkage to care, retention, and cure among people who inject drugs? A pragmatic quality improvement randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: As many as 2.4 million Americans are affected by chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) in the United States.In 2018, the estimated number of adults with a history of HCV infection in San Diego County was 55,354 (95% CI: 25,411-93,329). This corresponded to a seroprevalence of 2.1% (95% CI: 2.1-3.4%). One-third of infections were among PWID. Published research has demonstrated that direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have high efficacy and can now be used by primary care providers to treat HCV. In addition, limited evidence exists to support the effectiveness of simplified algorithms in clinical trial and real-world settings. Even with expanded access to HCV treatment in primary care settings, there are still groups, especially people who inject drugs (PWID) and people experiencing homelessness, who experience treatment disparities due to access and treatment barriers. The current study extends the simplified algorithm with a streetside 'one-stop-shop' approach with integrated care (including the offer of buprenorphine prescriptions and abscess care) using a mobile clinic situated adjacent to a syringe service program serving many homeless populations. Rates of HCV treatment initiation and retention will be compared between patients offered HCV care in a mobile clinic adjacent to a syringe services program (SSP) and homeless encampment versus those who are linked to a community clinic's current practice of usual care, which includes comprehensive patient navigation. METHODS: A quasi-experimental, prospective, interventional, comparative effectiveness trial with allocation of approximately 200 patients who inject drugs and have chronic HCV to the "simplified care" pathway (intervention group) or the "usual care" pathway (control group). Block randomization will be performed with a 1:1 randomization. DISCUSSION: Previous research has demonstrated acceptable outcomes for patients treated using simplified algorithms for DAAs and point-of-care testing in mobile medical clinics; however, there are opportunities to explore how these new, innovative systems of care impact treatment initiation rates or other HCV care cascade outcomes among PWID. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We have registered our study with ClinicalTrials.gov, a resource of the United States National Library of Medicine. This database contains research studies from United States and other countries around the world. Our study has not been previously published. The ClinicalTrials.gov registration identifier is NCT04741750.

COVID-19 monoclonal antibody treatment impact on symptoms and post-COVID conditions among high-risk patients at a Federally Qualified Health Center.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment for COVID-19 is associated with improved clinical outcomes. However, there is limited information regarding the impact of treatment on symptoms and the prevalence of post-COVID Conditions (PCC). Understanding of the association between time to mAb infusion and the development of PCC is also limited. METHODS: This longitudinal study was conducted among patients with COVID-19 who received mAb infusions at a Federally Qualified Health Center in San Diego, CA. A series of telephone interviews were conducted at baseline and follow-up (14 days and 28+ days). A comprehensive symptom inventory was completed and physical and mental health status were measured using PROMIS-29 and PHQ-2. Pearson's Chi-squared tests and independent two-sample t-tests were performed to test for association between time to mAb infusion and outcomes at follow-up. A Poisson regression model was used to analyze whether time to mAb infusion predicts risk of developing PCC. RESULTS: Participants (N = 411) were 53% female, ranged in age from 16 to 92 years (mean 50), and a majority (56%) were Latino/Hispanic. Cross-sectional findings revealed a high symptom burden at baseline (70% of patients had cough, 50% had fever, and 44% had headache). The prevalence of many symptoms decreased substantially by the final follow-up survey (29% of patients had cough, 3% had fever, and 28% had headache). Longitudinal findings indicated that 10 symptoms decreased in prevalence from baseline to final follow-up, 2 remained the same, and 14 increased. The severity of symptoms and most patient-reported physical and mental health measure scores decreased over time. The prevalence of PCC was 69% when PCC was defined as ≥ 1 symptom at final follow-up. Time to mAb infusion was not significantly associated with any outcome at follow-up. Time to infusion was not associated with PCC status at final follow-up in the crude or adjusted Poisson regression models. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of PCC was high among this patient population following COVID-19 mAb treatment. Time to mAb infusion did not predict the development of PCC. Further research in these areas is essential to answer urgent clinical questions about effective treatments of COVID-19.