Tyng-Yuan Jang1,2, Po-Cheng Liang1, Ta-Wei Liu3, Yu-Ju Wei3, Ming-Lun Yeh1,4, Cheng-Ting Hsu1, Po-Yao Hsu1, Yi-Hung Lin1, Meng-Hsuan Hsieh1,5,6,7,8,9, Ching-I Huang1, Chung-Feng Huang1,4,10, Zu-Yau Lin1,4, Shinn-Cherng Chen1,4, Jee-Fu Huang1,4, Chia-Yen Dai1,4,11, Ming-Lung Yu1,4,9,12,13, Wan-Long Chuang1,4. 1. Hepatobiliary Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Pingtung Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Ping-Tung, Taiwan, ROC. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 4. Faculty of Internal Medicine and Hepatitis Research Center, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, and Center for Cancer Research and Liquid Biopsy, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 5. Health Management Center, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 6. Hepatobiliary Laboratory, Hepatobiliary Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 7. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 8. Faculty of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 9. Institute of Biomedical Sciences, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 10. Department of Occupational Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 11. Department of Preventive Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC. 12. Center For Intelligent Drug Systems and Smart Bio-devices (IDSB) and Department of Biological Science and Technology, College of Biological Science and Technology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC. 13. Center for Lipid Science and Aging Research Center, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) set out to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection by 2030, a goal Taiwan might achieve before 2025. Using effective direct antiviral agents (DAAs) against chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in Taiwan, the treatment of CHC has been initiated in rural areas. Here, we aimed to elucidate the clinical and virological characteristics of HCV infection, and the treatment efficacy of DAAs in patients from Pingtung county in southern Taiwan. METHODS: A total of 152 chronic hepatitis patients treated with DAAs were consecutively enrolled. Baseline characteristics and therapeutic efficacy were evaluated. RESULTS: HCV genotype 2 was the most common viral genotype (39.5%), followed by 1b (36.8%), 6 (10.5%), and 1a (9.2%). The sustained virological response (SVR) rate was 98.7%. Hakka patients accounted for 22.4% of the study cohort, of which 14.7% had HCV genotype 6. There were no differences in clinical characteristics between Hakka and non-Hakka patients. Patients with HCV genotype 6 were younger in age (OR/CI: 0.95/0.91-1.00, p = 0.04) and composed of more people who inject drugs (PWID) (OR/CI: 17.6/3.6-85.5, p <0.001), when compared with other patients. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that DAA therapy can achieve a 98.7% SVR rate among CHC patients in Pingtung county of southern Taiwan, with a relative higher prevalence of genotype 6. The most important factor attributed to genotype 6 infection was PWID.
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) set out to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection by 2030, a goal Taiwan might achieve before 2025. Using effective direct antiviral agents (DAAs) against chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in Taiwan, the treatment of CHC has been initiated in rural areas. Here, we aimed to elucidate the clinical and virological characteristics of HCV infection, and the treatment efficacy of DAAs in patients from Pingtung county in southern Taiwan. METHODS: A total of 152 chronic hepatitis patients treated with DAAs were consecutively enrolled. Baseline characteristics and therapeutic efficacy were evaluated. RESULTS: HCV genotype 2 was the most common viral genotype (39.5%), followed by 1b (36.8%), 6 (10.5%), and 1a (9.2%). The sustained virological response (SVR) rate was 98.7%. Hakka patients accounted for 22.4% of the study cohort, of which 14.7% had HCV genotype 6. There were no differences in clinical characteristics between Hakka and non-Hakka patients. Patients with HCV genotype 6 were younger in age (OR/CI: 0.95/0.91-1.00, p = 0.04) and composed of more people who inject drugs (PWID) (OR/CI: 17.6/3.6-85.5, p <0.001), when compared with other patients. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that DAA therapy can achieve a 98.7% SVR rate among CHC patients in Pingtung county of southern Taiwan, with a relative higher prevalence of genotype 6. The most important factor attributed to genotype 6 infection was PWID.