The Asia-Pacific region has disparate hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemiology, with prevalence ranging from 0·1% to 4·7%, and a unique genotype distribution. Genotype 1b dominates in east Asia, whereas in south Asia and southeast Asia genotype 3 dominates, and in Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos), genotype 6 is most common. Often, availability of all-oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is delayed because of differing regulatory requirements. Ideally, for genotype 1 infections, sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir, sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir, or ombitasvir, paritaprevir, and ritonavir plus dasabuvir are suitable. Asunaprevir plus daclatasvir is appropriate for compensated genotype 1b HCV if baseline NS5A mutations are absent. For genotype 3 infections, sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir for 24 weeks or sofosbuvir, daclatasvir, and ribavirin for 12 weeks are the optimal oral therapies, particularly for patients with cirrhosis and those who are treatment experienced, whereas sofosbuvir, pegylated interferon, and ribavirin for 12 weeks is an alternative regimen. For genotype 6, sofosbuvir plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin, sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir, or sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks are all suitable. Pegylated interferon plus ribavirin has been replaced by sofosbuvir plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and all-oral therapies where available, but cost and affordability remain a major issue because of the absence of universal health coverage. Few patients have been treated because of multiple barriers to accessing care. HCV in the Asia-Pacific region is challenging because of the disparate epidemiology, poor access to all-oral therapy because of availability, cost, or regulatory licensing. Until these problems are addressed, the burden of disease is likely to remain high.
Worldwide, some 240 million people have chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV), with the highest rates of infection in Africa and Asia. Our understanding of the natural history of HBV infection and the potential for therapy of the resultant disease is continuously improving. New data have become available since the previous APASL guidelines for management of HBV infection were published in 2012. The objective of this manuscript is to update the recommendations for the optimal management of chronic HBV infection. The 2015 guidelines were developed by a panel of Asian experts chosen by the APASL. The clinical practice guidelines are based on evidence from existing publications or, if evidence was unavailable, on the experts' personal experience and opinion after deliberations. Manuscripts and abstracts of important meetings published through January 2015 have been evaluated. This guideline covers the full spectrum of care of patients infected with hepatitis B, including new terminology, natural history, screening, vaccination, counseling, diagnosis, assessment of the stage of liver disease, the indications, timing, choice and duration of single or combination of antiviral drugs, screening for HCC, management in special situations like childhood, pregnancy, coinfections, renal impairment and pre- and post-liver transplant, and policy guidelines. However, areas of uncertainty still exist, and clinicians, patients, and public health authorities must therefore continue to make choices on the basis of the evolving evidence. The final clinical practice guidelines and recommendations are presented here, along with the relevant background information.
Due to the introduction of newer, more efficacious treatment options, there is a pressing need for policy makers and public health officials to develop or adapt national hepatitis C virus (HCV) control strategies to the changing epidemiological landscape. To do so, detailed, country-specific data are needed to characterize the burden of chronic HCV infection. In this study of 17 countries, a literature review of published and unpublished data on HCV prevalence, viraemia, genotype, age and gender distribution, liver transplants and diagnosis and treatment rates was conducted, and inputs were validated by expert consensus in each country. Viraemic prevalence in this study ranged from 0.2% in Hong Kong to 2.4% in Taiwan, while the largest viraemic populations were in Nigeria (2 597 000 cases) and Taiwan (569 000 cases). Diagnosis, treatment and liver transplant rates varied widely across the countries included in this analysis, as did the availability of reliable data. Addressing data gaps will be critical for the development of future strategies to manage and minimize the disease burden of hepatitis C.
Factors influencing the morbidity and mortality associated with viremic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection change over time and place, making it difficult to compare reported estimates. Models were developed for 17 countries (Bahrain, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana, Hong Kong, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Qatar and Taiwan) to quantify and characterize the viremic population as well as forecast the changes in the infected population and the corresponding disease burden from 2015 to 2030. Model inputs were agreed upon through expert consensus, and a standardized methodology was followed to allow for comparison across countries. The viremic prevalence is expected to remain constant or decline in all but four countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, Jordan and Oman); however, HCV-related morbidity and mortality will increase in all countries except Qatar and Taiwan. In Qatar, the high-treatment rate will contribute to a reduction in total cases and HCV-related morbidity by 2030. In the remaining countries, however, the current treatment paradigm will be insufficient to achieve large reductions in HCV-related morbidity and mortality.
The hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic was forecasted through 2030 for 17 countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and the Middle East, and interventions for achieving the Global Health Sector Strategy on viral hepatitis targets-"WHO Targets" (65% reduction in HCV-related deaths, 90% reduction in new infections and 90% of infections diagnosed by 2030) were considered. Scaling up treatment and diagnosis rates over time would be required to achieve these targets in all but one country, even with the introduction of high SVR therapies. The scenarios developed to achieve the WHO Targets in all countries studied assumed the implementation of national policies to prevent new infections and to diagnose current infections through screening.