Global & National Perspectives on HIV & HCV Co-Infection
On April 26, UNAIDS issued a report briefly detailing the state of HIV and Hepatitis deaths, globally, taking particular note of the issue of coinfection among people who inject drugs. Here in the United States, multiple jurisdictions have declared new HIV and ongoing Hepatitis C outbreaks, all combined with a surge in overdose deaths.
Domestically, federal public health initiatives have long sought to understand and address intersections of these issues, offer guidance, and shifted – albeit slowly – to understand HIV, HCV, and SUD exist as syndemics. And I want to talk about this language.
Syndemic, in general, means two or more linked health problems, interacting synergistically, and contributing to the disease burden of a given population; operating in a fashion that feed one another. To prevent or treat a syndemic, entities must not only treat each health problem but also the social ills that bridge these health problems.
This distinction is important – if we are to meet any of our public health goals on any of these, we need expertise, advocates, and structural support that both address the singular nature of each and the intersections, un-siloed from one another. Unique expertise in designing solutions is as valuable and necessary as expertise with the vision to see the whole system.
As we move through the COVID-19 pandemic, well-publicized discussion on the conflicts between national strategies and local actions mirrors fights patient and policy advocates have been fighting for four decades and continue to fight today. Even as we’ve made progress in ensuring direct acting agents (DAAs) are included in AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) formularies, at least one state has set an unchallenged precedent of denying this basic care to incarcerated people based on budgets and the Democratic mayor of the city with the “most concerning” HIV outbreak in the nation has back tracked on commitments to work with local public health experts.
This quarter’s HIV-HCV Coinfection Watch Report highlights some progress in syndemic-oriented policy changes and some more…unfortunate changes. While the American Rescue Plan, passed earlier this year, provides for more funding to address state budgets harmed by COVID-19 related revenue decreases, a few states have instituted – and currently maintain – restricted services. For example, while Georgia’s ADAP maintains DAAs on the formulary, payment for same is halted due to funding and Texas’s ADAP has removed all HCV medications, except one DAA from the formulary. Positive notes from earlier this year include Kentucky’s Medicaid program moving to a universal preferred drug list (PDL).
Of the space that has the greatest amount of room to progress and needing nuanced advocacy changes is harm reduction policies. Well-established federal policy and laws only reach so far if state and local laws act in direct opposition to those model positions or even merely lack the funding to establish comprehensive programs. One such space is the near universal adoption of “Good Samaritan Laws”, wherein, generally speaking, if a person, regardless of capacity, does their level best to help another, they cannot be held liable. However, several states have amended their “Good Samaritan Laws” or criminal codes to remove that liability protection from people who distribute illicit substances – disincentivizing reporting of overdose incidents and calling for medical help as they happen. Along the same lines, doctor shopping laws are aimed at preventing patients from seeking multiple prescriptions or seeking multiple providers if one is unsatisfied with their care. However, many states rely upon “lock-out” programs administered by insurance providers or managed care plans to implement under the guise of preventing “drug seeking behavior”. As Alison Gaye stated in a recent presentation to Louisiana’s Commission on HIV, AIDS, and Hepatitis C Education, Prevention, and Treatment, “drug seeking behavior often looks like care seeking behavior, subject to the personal biases of the examining provider”.
Harm reduction policies are in dire need to evolve and delve into the difficult nuanced spaces currently unaddressed if we’re to meaningfully work to end the syndemics of HIV and HCV. Far, far too often the solution found by policy makers in addressing public health needs has been to incarcerate those among us who need help. Driven by stigma, whether the issue is HIV criminalization or lack of access to standard HCV care or refusing adequate insurance coverage for recovery programs, shoving people into prisons has not served this country well on any front.
As we step into the next phase of our advocacy, evaluating existing programs, practices, and priorities cannot include a carceral mindset if we are to effectively reduce the harm caused by these syndemics and our past policies.
Covid-19: How Far We’ve Come & How Far We Have to Go
Unraveling a tangle of yarn can be maddening. Pull here, threads get tighter. Pull there, you’ve created another knot. Now, imagine having to weave with the same tangle – “undo” a well-organized mess and make it something functional, beautiful even. The fragile public health system in United States during the Covid-19 pandemic is much like that tangled yarn.
This dual task is very much an oversimplified explanation of where the American health care landscape exists in this moment. Like most collective traumas, this stage isn’t the “undoing” stage, it’s the stop the damage stage. In writing the first blog of the year, tracking site Worldometers reported 20 million confirmed COVID-19 cases in the United states and about 345,000 COVID-19 deaths. As of the time of this writing, the same site is reporting more than 30 million confirmed COVID-19 cases in the US and about 550,000 COVID-19 deaths. Daily case counts continue to remain high at around 50 thousand confirmed cases a day and around 1,100 deaths per day on average. While the introduction of 3 vaccine products has brought hope and another tool to our COVID toolkit, and daily new cases and deaths are far below their height, the pandemic still rages on.
Which is…concerning for the entirety of the health care spectrum and especially so for those spaces that have been historically underserved or needing additional protection or funding. From the Centers for Disease Control report at the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) the United States performed at least 700,000 fewer HIV screenings and 5,000 fewer new diagnoses in the first 6 months of the pandemic (compared to the same time in 2019) to the extraordinary implications of COVID among vulnerable populations to Senators Grassley and Klobuchar introducing legislation to allow drug importation (despite very clear warnings about why this is not a great idea) to the Biden Administration issuing a formal disapproval of Medicaid work requirements, to say information is coming at “break neck speed” may well be as much of an understatement as a tangled ball of yarn.
With an emerging “surveillance gap” for both HIV and HCV, a startling HIV outbreak in West Virginia, overdoses increasing as a result of COVID, some of greatest tools gained in combating this pandemic, even those advocated for by the CDC, have already started to go away as states begin to “open up”. Indeed, Congress has already begun taking up old questions regarding telehealth restrictions and payment systems designs, this time with an eye for permanency.
While President Joseph R. Biden’s American Rescue Plan, recently passed by Congress and signed into law, offers a great deal of funding to address the needs of certain entities and programs to tackle COVID and even offers the most meaningful adjustments to the Affordable Care Act by expanding subsidies, the existing needs of the health care ecosystem have largely been neglected for the last year. Well…far longer…but I digress. Like any trauma, our need to strengthen patient protections and access, incentivize quality of care over quantity of services, and meaningfully reduce health disparities have been the ends of thread tightening around the knot of COVID. This pandemic did not create these disparities and the needs outlined above – but not having a plan for a pandemic, not addressing structural inequities and these burning policy needs with the urgency they so deserve absolutely made us more vulnerable to the most devastating impacts of any pandemic.
This isn’t “the end”, certainly. For advocates, this has always been our “normal”. We need those who have hung on our every word and insight through this emergency to stay at the table – we’re not done yet. Everything you were outraged by (and may still be enraged by thanks to vaccine access scarcity) remains and will continue to loom just over our shoulders, waiting to be exploited by an opportunistic disaster.
Indeed, the ghost of Scott County may well continue to haunt us for some time to come. This is, after all, a very big ball of very tangled yarn.
The Future is Now: Welcome to the Age of Injectables
For years, HIV advocates have anticipated injectable antiretroviral therapies (ART) – often with a level of excitement. I recall listening to robust discussions between advocates and officials in statewide meetings, reviewing candidate treatments, discussing labor and staffing needs for providers, potential regulatory changes needed to ensure programs could cover the actual syringes associated with injectable ART, given state-based restrictions. The excitement extended from a sense of no longer needing daily tablets (pills) in order to maintain adherence and thus an undetectable viral load, extend quality of life for those experiencing barriers to care like homelessness, and otherwise welcome a new age of treatment – if only by new method of delivery.
In late 2019, we seemed on the edge of such an accomplishment. ART focused pharmaceutical manufacturers Glaxo Smith Kline subsidiary, ViiV, and Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, Janssen, had paired up in an effort to provide the world with its first long-acting ART via injection. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) refused to grant the companies an approval for the dual shot regimen of cabotegravir and rilpivirine (together, “Cabenuva”) due to concerns related to “Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls”. Thirteen months later, on January 21, 2021, Janssen and ViiV announced FDA approval of Cabenuva.
ViiV Healthcare understands the transformative nature of Cabenuva and the many “firsts” associated with a provider-administered injectable therapy for HIV. We will be educating HCPs on how to identify appropriate patients who may prefer or benefit from an option other than daily, oral therapy. Two key considerations are that patients agree to the required monthly dosing schedule and understand the importance of adherence to scheduled dosing visits. We also will be helping educate people living with HIV about Cabenuva and these commitments. - ViiV
According to the product monograph, Cabenuva is a dual intramuscular injection protocol (requiring one shot of cabotegravir and one shot of rilpivirine) monthly, administered by a health care provider. Prior to starting the monthly injections, providers should test tolerability via “oral lead-in” via once daily tablets of both cabotegravir and rilpivirine with a meal. If consumers expect to miss a monthly injection by more than 7 days, once daily oral tablets of cabotegravir and rilpivirine may be used to replace the injections for up to two injection cycles (or 2 months). Contraindictions include any known or suspected resistance to either or both drugs and any intolerability of components of either or both drugs. The injections cannot, at this time, be self-administered.
Despite all of the antici…pation and data showing a higher level of satisfaction than with current regimens among trial participants, some advocates are still cautious and concerns remain regarding logistical accessibility. Regarding financial accessibility, ViiV has already launched its patient assistance program for Cabenuva through ViiVConnect. Florida advocates and members of Florida HIV/AIDS Advocacy Network, Ken Barger, Joey Wynn, and David Brakebill, discussed in…spirited detail varying perspectives on rural access.
Wynn advocated for diversifying public funds, if rural health departments couldn’t meet the demand of a once monthly injection protocol, “If a rural health department can’t do a monthly injection [for ART], when they do injections for all sorts of other disease states, they need to give their money to providers who can.” Barger and Brakebill pointed out that for many rural counties, the health department may be the only provider in the area that’s accessible, with a highlight on concern regarding capacity. Wynn suggested the need for investment in better planning and preparation – not just for injectables, but for situations of natural disasters which have been known to disrupt access to medications and care in the state regularly.
When asked about these concerns, ViiV acknowledged the challenges and provided the following commitment to invest in ensuring more equitable access to care: ViiV Healthcare is also dedicated to improving how HIV treatment and care are delivered in the “real-world” environment through our Implementation Science program. One example of this focus is a study evaluating how improvements in transportation and use of digital tools can help get people living with HIV to their healthcare providers on a regular basis, which if successful we’ll look to implement on a broader scale
This week’s HEAL blog wouldn’t have been possible without the coverage of and reporting on treatment developments in this and other therapeutic areas by Liz Highleyman.
Quotes attributed to ViiV Healthcare are direct and were provided by Robin Gaitens, Product Communications Director.