Comparison of prescriber evaluations and patient-directed self-reports in office-based practice for buprenorphine treatment of opiate-dependent individuals in France, 2002.

The objective of this cross-sectional evaluation study was to compare data generated through prescriber assessments, and data generated from independent direct contact with opiate-dependent patients in office-based practice to evaluate buprenorphine treatment for modality of buprenorphine absorption, benzodiazepine use, and depressive symptoms. A group of buprenorphine office-based practice prescribers was selected to participate in this study. They were asked to screen for inclusion all their patients coming for a visit from February to August 2002. Once included by their prescribing physician, patients were given a series of self-administered questionnaires to be returned directly to the research staff, independently of their prescriber. Each prescriber was given a questionnaire to complete based on their knowledge and interview of the patient. Items assessed were history of current treatment, current substance use, buprenorphine treatment related behavior (daily frequency of intake, route of administration), benzodiazepine use and existence of a major depressive episode. Prescribers and patients' questionnaires were compared. Concordance of both assessments was assessed by kappa statistics. The sensitivity and specificity as well as the positive and negative predictive values of prescriber collected information were compared to that of their patients'. There was an overall good correlation between both data sources on the procedures for buprenorphine use especially for intravenous use of buprenorphine. There were important variations: obtaining buprenorphine without a prescription or with a prescription made by another doctor, intravenous administration of buprenorphine, use of benzodiazepines, and depression were underestimated by prescribers.

HEPACOM: multicenter, observational prospective study of outcome and monitoring of HCV positive antiviral-naïve patients managed in the French health care system.

OBJECTIVE: To study management practices in the French health care system for antiviral-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. METHODS AND PATIENTS: Two groups of general practitioners, group I (special training and experience in drug addiction) and group II (other general practitioners) enrolled untreated HCV positive patients and noted management practices for a 12-month period. RESULTS: Among 4660 enrolled patients, 2038 enrolled by 462 general practitioners in group I and 1756 enrolled by 588 general practitioners in group II were retained for analysis. These patients were adults, aged 42+/-14 years, who were naïve to antiviral treatment. The male/female ratio was 1: 7. Ten percent were coinfected with HIV, 12% had excessive alcohol intake, and 61% were current drug users, 75% of whom (45% of the total population) were taking replacement therapy. Minimal hepatic lesions (stageor=F2). At the end of the monitoring period, 64% of the patients had been referred to a specialist. Antiviral treatment had been started in 20%, i.e. 32% of the patients who consulted a specialist. Occupational activity (P<0.0001), young age (P=0.007), more recent diagnosis (P<0.0001), lack of HIV co-infection (P=0.015), male gender (P=0.006), lack of replacement treatment (P=0.006), previous liver histology with METAVIR A and F>or=2 (P<0.0001) and enrollment by a group I general practitioner (P<0.007) were the independent predictive factors of initiation of antiviral treatment. CONCLUSION: Only one-third of patients with access to the French health care system started antiviral treatment and some categories of patients, including women, patients co-infected with HIV and patients on replacement therapy, were less likely to be treated than others. The recommendations of the French Consensus Conference, held in the middle of the study period (2002), might have been implemented (probably followed) by a minority of general practitioners.

[The diagnostic tools of hepatitis C virus infections]. / Les outils du diagnostic de l'infection par le virus de l'hépatite C.

SERIOLOGICAL TESTS IN FIRST INTENTION: Aimed at revealing antibodies demonstrating the contact of the patient with the hepatitis C virus. There are two types of serological tests: ELISA for the global screening of various antibodies and immunoblot for the isolation of the various antibodies. QUALITATIVE RNA OF HCV: The positive qualitative detection of RNA of the hepatitis C virus in a patient exhibiting anti-HCV antibodies confirms an active infection. In the case of negative qualitative detection in a patient exhibiting anti-HCV antibodies, viral eradication is probable and should be controlled later on. MEASURING THE VIRAL LOAD: Two types of measuring techniques are used to quantify the circulating viral RNA: gene amplification and amplification of the signal. The extent of the viral load will help to guide the selection and duration of the anti-HCV dual therapy, associating pegylated interferon and ribavirin. The kinetics of the decrease in viral load are part of the therapeutic follow-up. HCV typing Many viral strains have been isolated, demonstrating its genetic variability and have led to the development of genotyping. The latter is useful in selecting the right therapy and duration of treatment, because the response depends on the genotype (better response rate for the genotypes 2 and 3).

[The prognostic tools of hepatitis C virus infections]. / Les outils du pronostic de l'infection par le virus de l'hépatite C.

INCREASE IN ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE (ALAT): Used for many Years in the diagnosis and follow-up of chronic hepatic diseases related to HCV, the determination of ALAT presents various limits: variation from one patient to the other and in the same patient over time, absence of specificity and inconstant increase. HISTOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE LIVER: The hepatic needle-biopsy remains the best means of assessing precisely the hepatic impact. Several scores of hepatic involvement exist, the most frequently used is the Metavir score that takes into account not only the necrotic-inflammatory activity but also the fibrosis. OTHER THAN THE HEPATIC NEEDLE-BIOPSY: There are complications with the hepatic needle-biopsy and non-invasive markers of fibrosis and hepatic necrotic-inflammatory activity have been looked for. Two scores have hence been developed from the measurement in the blood of 4 proteins (apolipoprotein A1, alpha2 macroglobulin, haptoglobin and bilirubin) and 2 enzymes (alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase) which provide an acurate assessment of the fibrosis (Fibrotest) and the necrotic-inflammatory activity (Actitest).

[A pluridisciplinary point of view of hepatitis C virus infections]. / Un point de vue pluridisciplinaire sur l'infection par le VHC.

Various complementary actors are implied in the management of HCV infections: virologists, general practitioners, hepato-gastroenterologists and hospital residents, and they should all cooperate together. The role of biologist is crucial in assisting the practitioners in the choice of examinations to be prescribed for the diagnosis of HCV infections (search for RNA HCV), in establishing a prognosis and in deciding on the therapeutic strategy (genotyping, Fibrotest and Actitest). The role of the general practitioner is important at all stages of the management. The practitioner's involvement is also crucial in the recognition and follow-up of the concomitant diseases. THE ROLE OF THE SPECIALIST: The hepatologist, together with the general practitioner, are inseparable partners in the management of a patient suffering from hepatitis C. The specialist should only see patients exhibiting hepatitis C who are participating in a treatment program, since the indication for treatment is usually decided on by the specialist. The hepatologist should be informed of the various concomitant diseases and the treatments (replacement therapy or others) prescribed for them. CRUCIAL QUESTIONS: For the management of an HCV infection, in general 3 questions require an answer: who should be screened for such infections, what explorations should be performed in the case of positive serology and what follow-up is required during and after anti-HCV treatment?