MARYLAND HEPATITIS C
STRATEGIC PLAN
Maryland Department of Health
January 2019
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
January 2019
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Hepatitis C is a major cause of chronic liver disease and its related complications, including liver
cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. To continue the work addressing this major health issue,
Maryland intends to work towards the elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) as a public health
threat by prioritizing the prevention, testing and treatment of infection with hepatitis C virus to
reduce the number of new infections, ensure access to high-quality health care services and prevent
the negative health impacts of this disease, particularly among groups at highest risk of disease. A
comprehensive, broad-based strategy includes a 4-pronged approach that encompasses prevention
and education, testing, treatment and strengthening the disease surveillance system.
The goals and strategies for Maryland’s hepatitis C approach are outlined below:
Goal 1: Prevent new hepatitis C infections.
Strategy 1.1: Increase community awareness of viral hepatitis and decrease stigma and
discrimination.
Strategy 1.2: Ensure that all people have access to HCV prevention services that are culturally
and linguistically appropriate.
Goal 2: Expand hepatitis C testing, particularly among people who are high risk.
Strategy 2.1: Identify persons infected with HCV early in the course of disease through
promotion of routine testing at key points of contact with service providers.
Strategy 2.2: Promote complete hepatitis C testing (RNA confirmatory, genotype, and liver
fibrosis assessment) after a positive screening test.
Goal 3: Improve access to treatment and adherence services.
Strategy 3.1: Improve linkage to timely and accessible hepatitis C care and adherence services.
Strategy 3.2: Increase health care provider capacity to screen and treat hepatitis C in both rural
and urban settings.
Strategy 3.3: Address the high cost of treatment drugs.
Goal 4: Enhance hepatitis C surveillance, monitoring and evaluation.
Strategy 4.1: Improve timely submission of complete HCV reports to state and local surveillance
by laboratories and clinical providers.
Strategy 4.2: Expand reporting to include HCV RNA negative test results.
Strategy 4.3: Monitor HCV-related health services and outcomes through clinical data such as
electronic health records, claims data, and information shared over the state’s health information
exchange (CRISP).
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
2
MARYLAND HEPATITIS C STRATEGIC PLAN
Maryland Department of Health
January 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
I. Background
II. Strengths and Challenges of the Hepatitis C
System in Maryland
III. National and Global Perspectives on Hepatitis C
Maryland Hepatitis C Goals and Strategies
I. Mission
II. Goals and Strategies
Goal 1: Prevent new hepatitis C infections
Goal 2: Expand hepatitis C testing
Goal 3: Improve access to treatment and
adherence services
Goal 4: Enhance hepatitis C surveillance
References
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
3
INTRODUCTION
I.
Background
Hepatitis C in Maryland
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of chronic liver disease, which places individuals at risk for
liver cirrhosis, liver failure, hepatocellular cancer and other complications. Infection can be spread
through exposure to infected blood, such as through injection drug use, needle stick injuries, birth to
an HCV-infected mother or sexual activity. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) estimates 3.5 million individuals are living with HCV infection in the United States.
1
In
Maryland, there has continued to be increases in chronic HCV reports with 7,922 cases in 2017
(Figure 1).
2
Between 2015 and 2016, 19 of the 24 Maryland jurisdictions experienced an increase in
reported HCV cases. Seventeen counties had the highest number of HCV cases reported since before
2010.
According to HepVu, a website launched by Emory University Rollins School of Public Health in
April 2017, the estimated number of Marylanders living with HCV antibodies in 2010 was 80,500
which is an estimated prevalence of 1,890 per 100,000 population.
3
This number is only indicative
of people who have been exposed to HCV. In 2017, 7,922 cases of probable and confirmed chronic
HCV were reported.
The statewide average rate for newly reported cases in 2017 was 130.9 cases
per 100,000 people (Figure 2).
4
From 2010 (103.4 cases per 100,000) to 2017 (130.9 cases per
100,000), the rate of chronic HCV reports increased by over 25 percent. Since there are hard-to-reach
populations impacted by HCV that are not connected to care, the burden of the disease in Maryland
is estimated to be higher than what is reported.
Baltimore City has the highest rate in the State of Maryland at 384.9 cases per 100,000 people;
however, Somerset County follows with 335.7 cases per 100,000 people.
5
Cecil, Kent, Washington,
Allegany and Dorchester counties are among the counties with the highest rates at 274.5, 216.7,
216.5, 192.7 and 189.7 reported cases per 100,000 people, respectively.
6
It is important to distinguish that reported cases may have either acute or chronic HCV infection. The
clinical case definition for acute HCV is dependent on the presentation of symptoms (e.g., jaundice,
fever, headache, nausea) or elevated liver enzyme levels detected in a blood test.
7
However, due to
the often-asymptomatic nature of HCV, most who become newly infected are not aware of their
disease status. In addition, about 15-25% of acutely infected individuals spontaneously clear the
virus without treatment.
8
It is thus difficult to make meaningful inferences about acute cases
reported through surveillance because they are often vastly underestimated and not representative of
true disease burden.
Diagnosis of chronic HCV usually occurs if a person has been infected for greater than six months
and is done using two blood tests: a positive test for HCV antibodies (anti-HCV) as well as a positive
RNA confirmatory test (either a nucleic acid test or HCV antigen test).
9
The state relies on
mandatory clinical and laboratory reporting to generate estimates for newly reported cases of chronic
HCV. Due to lack of clinical symptoms and regular screening, as well as the two-step process for
screening, approximately half of individuals with HCV are unaware of their chronic infection.
10
For
this reason, HCV is often referred to as the “silent epidemic.”
Maryland uses the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2016 case definition of chronic hepatitis C available
at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/hepatitis-c-chronic/case-definition/2016/
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
4
Figure 1. Number of Reported Chronic Hepatitis C Cases in Maryland, 2017
Figure 2. Rate of Reported Chronic Hepatitis C Cases in Maryland, 2017
Special Populations
According to estimates by the CDC, 25 percent of people with HIV are co-infected with HCV.
11
Reported data from 2016 showed that 4,032 people living with HIV in Maryland were co-infected
with HCV.
12
Over 55 percent of co-infected people in Maryland live in Baltimore City, followed by
Baltimore County (10 percent), Prince George’s County (9.4 percent), and correctional facilities
located in the State (10 percent).
13
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
5
As seen nationally, in Maryland, the baby boomer cohort has the highest prevalence of HCV
infection among all age groups. Despite making up only 25.7 percent of Maryland’s population, in
2016, people born from 1945-1965 accounted for 54.6 percent of reported chronic HCV cases.
14,15
While information about race and ethnicity is incomplete among reported cases, data from death
certificates show a disproportionate impact among some racial and ethnic minority group. The 2016
U.S. rates of hepatitis C-related deaths are higher among American Indian/Alaskan Natives (10.8
deaths per 100,000 population), black non-Hispanics (7.4 per 100,000), and Hispanics (5.7 per
100,000) compared to white non-Hispanics (4.0 per 100,000).
16
Hepatitis C infection can also occur through mother-to-child transmission during pregnancy. Rates of
transmission vary between 2-14%, with a higher risk in women co-infected with HIV or who have
injection drug use.
17,18
One report showed that the rate of HCV detection among women of
childbearing age (15 to 44 years) being tested increased by 22% between 2011 and 2014 from 139 to
169 per 100,000, demonstrating that the risk in this group is growing, which in some areas of the
country may be related to increasing injection drug use.
19
People who inject drugs (PWID) are also at higher risk for having hepatitis C because needle-sharing
behaviors increase the risk of infection, there is a relatively low utilization of health services and the
stigma of substance use in the community, including among health care providers, which is seen as a
barrier to seeking and obtaining appropriate care. In people 20-59 years with hepatitis C, 51%
reported injection drug use as a potential risk factor or exposure.
20
A higher HCV prevalence exists
among PWID, with some studies showing an estimated HCV antibody prevalence of 73% in the
U.S.
21
In Maryland, 51% of PWID in Baltimore were reported to be HCV antibody positive between
2002 2004, indicating that these individuals have been exposed to HCV.
22
Prevalence and incidence of HCV within corrections systems are also known to be very high,
corresponding in part to the higher prevalence of substance use disorders in this population. The
most recent data from Maryland are from 2002 during which investigators screened for anti-HCV
antibody among newly incarcerated individuals in state correctional facilities over a two-month
period. They found a prevalence of almost 30% in that population.
23
A more recent national estimate
from the CDC reports 17.4% of inmates living with past or present HCV infection.
24
Hepatitis C Treatment
Treatment for hepatitis C has changed considerably in the last decade. Previously, treatment was
primarily comprised of pegylated interferon and ribavirin, which had significant side effects and
relatively low efficacy when compared with the more recently introduced direct acting antivirals
(DAA’s), first approved by the Federal Drug Administration in 2011. The second generation of
DAA’s which came to the market in 2014 represent a significant improvement over the older
treatment regimens because they are >95% effective, are taken for shorter durations, and have
minimal side effects and drug interactions.
25
The primary barrier has been the high cost of an 8- to
12-week course of treatment, which ranged from $26,000 to more than $90,000, before rebates or
discounts.
26
Drug prices have decreased over time with the introduction of lower cost medications
such as glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (Mayvret), and it is anticipated that generic versions of
ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni) and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa) will be introduced in January
2019 at a list price of $24,000.
27
The Maryland Medicaid program has long covered hepatitis C virus treatment in the state plan,
including the newer direct-acting antiviral therapies first approved in 2013. Maryland generally
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
6
follows genotype treatment recommendations for testing, managing, and treating HCV as directed by
the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. As of September 20, 2018, the
Department covers the recently-approved glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (Mavyret) drug, as well as
daclatasvir (Daklinza), elbasvir/grazoprevir (Zepatier), ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni), ombitasvir,
sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa), sofosbuvir (Sovaldi), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir
(Vosevi).
28
The Maryland Medicaid Pharmacy Program requires providers to submit prior authorization for new
HCV therapies. As of December 1, 2018, the program treats patients with a Metavir score of F2 or
above, unless the individual has a viral condition known to result in more rapid disease progression
and/or liver decompensation than normally expected from the course of chronic HCV. However,
Governor Hogan’s most recent budget allowance includes funds to enable expansion of treatment to
those in the Medicaid program with Metavir scores of F1 and above beginning in Fiscal Year 2020.
The Metavir score indicates the level of liver damage, with the scale going from no fibrosis (F0) to
cirrhosis (F4). A patient’s entire medical history is also considered, including treatment history,
history of substance use disorder, history of medication non-adherence, and co-occurring conditions
(such as cancer or HIV) though the program does not have requirements based on specialty provider
care or length of time in substance use treatment.
29
II.
Strengths and Challenges of the Hepatitis C System in Maryland
Maryland’s existing viral hepatitis infrastructure provides a strong foundation for HCV prevention
and control. The state’s public health, healthcare, and other public and private sector partners are
actively engaged in expansion of prevention, diagnosis, care, and treatment services for people living
with HCV. The Maryland Department of Health has established programs that contribute to an
improved HCV care system, including enhanced surveillance, increased screening in key populations
including people with substance use disorders and in corrections facilities, expansion of medication
assisted treatment for substance use disorders and integration of HCV screening and treatment into
primary care.
However, a number of challenges remain. There is a general lack of awareness about the potential
risk factors for having hepatitis C, consequences of infection and the need for testing and treatment.
Because there may be few symptoms early in the disease course, many Marylanders do not know
they are infected with HCV and live in jurisdictions where opportunities for testing are limited. In
addition, the disease surveillance system relies on incomplete reporting from clinicians and
institutions mandated to notify public health and does not have the ability to collect more detailed
clinical information from those who are treated. The current opioid overdose epidemic also presents
a threat for increased spread of the disease, with the increased number of people who are using illicit
opioids and other drugs. Those with confirmed chronic infection may lack social supports and
resources needed to link them to and sustain them during treatment and follow-up care. Both the
disease and people with the disease face stigma, which can also contribute to reluctance to seek
testing or treatment. Finally, while generic pharmaceuticals will be available, the cost has posed a
threat to the health care system’s ability to meet the demands of improving access and the overall
health of the population while containing costs. This includes the state’s responsibility to maximize
public funds to be able to fully support treatment services among the low-income residents of the
state. There is also a need to increase the number of community providers, particularly in
underserved communities.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
7
III.
National and Global Perspectives on Hepatitis C
Worldwide, there are an estimated 130 to 150 million people living with chronic HCV infection. The
advent of highly effective and well tolerated oral medications that cure HCV has led to a shift in
focus from HCV control to disease elimination. According to the World Health Organization, global
elimination of hepatitis C as a public health threat is an achievable goal.
30
In the United States,
multi-disciplinary experts, convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine, also concluded that the nation can eliminate HCV and published comprehensive national
strategies to inform action towards national elimination of hepatitis C as a public health threat.
31,32
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released the National Viral Hepatitis Action
Plan, 2017-2020 that provides a more detailed set of strategies that are similar to the National
Academies’ recommendations, including enhancing hepatitis testing, improving viral hepatitis
surveillance, expanding access to syringe services and medication assisted treatment, and building
the capacity of primary care providers to treat.
33
To progress towards statewide HCV prevention and control, Maryland will build upon an
infrastructure to employ and sustain strategic coordinated multi-sector efforts to increase both the
awareness of the infection as well as opportunities to be tested and treated. This strategic plan
outlines the goals, strategies and current activities to progress towards improved prevention and
management of hepatitis C infection in the state.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
8
MARYLAND HEPATITIS C GOALS AND STRATEGIES
I.
Mission
Maryland will work towards the elimination of hepatitis C disease as a public health threat by
prioritizing the prevention, testing and treatment of infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) to reduce
the number of new infections, ensure access to high-quality health care services and prevent the
negative health impacts of this disease.
II.
Goals and Strategies
Maryland’s Hepatitis C Strategy builds on the foundation of programs and services that have been
established since the 2002 Maryland Hepatitis C Prevention and Control Plan was released.
34
The
plan is based on 4 pillars which provide the structure for the broad-based approaches needed in the
state in order to achieve the mission (see Figure 3). The pillars include:
1)
Prevent new hepatitis C infections;
2)
Expand hepatitis C testing, particularly among people who are high-risk;
3)
Improve access to treatment and adherence services; and
4)
Enhance hepatitis C surveillance, monitoring and evaluation.
Figure 3. Maryland’s Hepatitis C Strategy: Four Pillars
population
Treatment
treatment to
data
prevent
co
with infection,
risk
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
9
Goal 1: Prevent new hepatitis C infections.
Efforts to eliminate HCV must include primary prevention. As noted in the federal Health and
Human Services’ Action Plan, low public awareness about hepatitis and low perceived risk lead to
late diagnoses, more severe disease outcomes, and premature death among those who are chronically
infected.
35
Evidence-based prevention methods include educating individuals and communities
about risk factors for HCV infection, risk reduction techniques, treatment options, and how to access
testing and care. In addition to targeting the general population, Maryland’s prevention efforts should
focus on developing targeted interventions for populations at highest risk for HCV infection,
especially people who inject drugs (PWID). HCV prevention efforts can build on existing
partnerships with community- and faith-based organizations around the state.
Strategy 1.1: Increase community awareness of viral hepatitis and decrease stigma and
discrimination.
Many people may remain unaware of risk factors for contracting HCV infection, such as age (people
born between 1945 and 1965) or risky behaviors such as IV drug use. The introduction of highly
effective cures for HCV is relatively new, and many are still uninformed about the availability of
these new treatments with fewer side effects and better outcomes. An important aspect of promoting
testing and treatment is that curing HCV prevents onward transmission of the infection, a concept of
treatment as prevention. Social stigma about hepatitis C infection as well as about high-risk groups
(e.g. people with history of substance use disorders or incarceration) can prevent people from
seeking testing or treatment. Educating providers, communities, government, and law enforcement
may reduce stigma of both HCV and drug use to further promote a test and treat approach for these
populations. Increased messaging and education about the importance of routine screening is needed
for people at higher risk for infection as well as health care providers. Education should include
information about the availability and effectiveness of treatment and the personal and public health
benefits of treatment.
Strategy 1.2: Ensure that all people have access to HCV prevention services that are culturally
and linguistically appropriate.
Outreach and education on HCV prevention and treatment are needed for everyone, but especially
important for high-risk populations such as people who inject drugs (PWID) and incarcerated
persons. One key strategy is to target programs within settings such as prisons and jails, homeless
and housing services, substance use treatment facilities, and peer networks of active drug users.
Access to high-quality substance use disorder treatment and recovery support services, including
medication-assisted treatment, can also reduce the risk of hepatitis C infection by decreasing risky
behaviors and facilitate hepatitis C testing and linkage to treatment.
In addition to reducing overdose deaths and drug-use related injury, syringe service programs (SSP)
can reduce new HIV and viral hepatitis infections by decreasing needle and other equipment sharing,
providing infectious disease prevention education, and offering HIV and viral hepatitis testing. SSP’s
provide ongoing contact with, improve the health of, and encourage treatment for, persons who inject
drugs. The 2016 authorization of SSP’s in Maryland counties presented the opportunity for
statewide implementation of harm reduction models that incorporate infectious disease prevention.
The Department has partnered with local health departments and community-based programs to
implement SSP, with 4 jurisdictions having operational programs as of August 2018. Local
communities should work together across health, public safety, and community advocates to expand
access to syringe services programs.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
10
Goal 2: Expand hepatitis C testing, particularly among people who are high risk.
Identification of people with HCV requires that diverse and flexible opportunities for screening and
confirmatory testing are available. Methods to increase universal testing in Maryland should build
upon existing healthcare provider trainings on screening and diagnosis of HCV and increase
resources to support testing, diagnosis, and linkage to care in non-clinical settings, including in the
community. Increasing knowledge of hepatitis C status can also impact behaviors that can transmit
infection; some studies have shown that people who are aware of being infected with hepatitis C
have a decrease in risky behaviors such as needle sharing and injection drug use.
36
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends HCV testing for people based
on their individual risks:
37
Adults born from 1945 through 1965 should be tested once (without prior ascertainment of
HCV risk factors).
HCV testing is recommended for those who:
Currently injecting drugs.
Ever injected drugs, including those who injected once or a few times many years ago.
Have certain medical conditions, including persons:
who received clotting factor concentrates produced before 1987.
who were ever on long-term hemodialysis.
with persistently abnormal alanine aminotransferase levels (ALT)
who have HIV infection.
Were prior recipients of transfusions or organ transplants, including persons who:
were notified that they received blood from a donor who later tested positive for
HCV infection.
received a transfusion of blood, blood components, or an organ transplant before July
1992.
HCV- testing based on a recognized exposure is recommended for:
Healthcare, emergency medical, and public safety workers after needle sticks, sharps, or
mucosal exposures to HCV-positive blood.
Children born to HCV-positive women.
However, while not explicitly included in the CDC recommended screening categories, there may be
other groups who may benefit for hepatitis C screening, including pregnant women and people who
have a history of incarceration, use non-injection illicit drugs or frequent non-licensed tattoo
parlors.
38
It is also important to conduct risk-based screening for women of child-bearing age to
prevent mother-to-child transmission.
Strategy 2.1: Identify persons infected with HCV early in the course of disease through
promotion of routine testing at key points of contact with service providers.
Promoting routine testing is a key component of a comprehensive plan, particularly among high-risk
individuals, including people who inject drugs (PWID), persons born between 1945 and 1965,
persons who were formerly or are currently incarcerated. Approaches to improve the availability of
testing in the community must engage all providers of care and services, including primary care
providers, pharmacies, local health departments, syringe service programs, substance use disorder
treatment centers, urgent care centers, hospital emergency departments, and community-based
organizations.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
11
In 2017, the Department launched a rapid HCV testing program to identify individuals with HCV
who are unaware of their status. The program provides free HCV rapid test kits and controls to a
growing number of local health departments and agencies that serve populations at risk for HCV.
Modeled after the Department’s HIV testing and linkage-to-care program, initial efforts focused on
integration of HCV rapid testing at existing HIV testing partner sites. While still limited in scope,
increasing access to rapid testing in more locations has the potential to reach even more people.
Strategy 2.2: Promote complete hepatitis C testing (RNA confirmatory, genotype, and liver
fibrosis assessment) after a positive screening test.
After an initial screening test is found positive, a viral RNA test is necessary to confirm HCV
infection and is also used to track treatment response. Despite long standing clinical guidelines
emphasizing the need for confirmatory HCV RNA testing following an initial reactive HCV
antibody test, recent surveys have indicated that 50% of those with a positive HCV antibody have
not completed HCV RNA testing.
39,40
New York City recently made RNA reflex testing a
requirement for laboratories when they identify a reactive antibody test, and this may also be a
strategy in Maryland. Additional testing, including viral genotyping and liver fibrosis assessment
should be completed when an individual with confirmed hepatitis C infection is connected to a
treatment provider to guide clinical decision making. At this time, Maryland law does not require
reporting of this additional information to the MDH disease surveillance program.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
12
Goal 3: Improve access to treatment and adherence services.
Early treatment in the course of HCV is associated with an overall reduction in morbidity and
mortality as well as health care costs for treatment of complications of advanced disease including
cirrhosis, liver transplant and liver cancer. A significant challenge to treatment of HCV has been the
relatively high cost of new medications. Efforts to expand treatment access must continue to include
strategies to reduce the cost of HCV medications. Some states have explored opportunities to work
directly with pharmaceutical companies to negotiate lower drug costs charged to Medicaid to
improve the feasibility of expanding HCV treatment criteria. Working towards removing barriers to
treatment in Medicaid and commercial insurers and addressing care for those without insurance are
key strategies.
Maryland must have a healthcare workforce sufficiently resourced, sizeable, and competent enough
to address the burden of HCV in the state. The National Academies of Science recommend building
the capacity of primary care providers to address HCV as a strategy for elimination. To expand the
capacity of primary care in Maryland, clinicians need training to provide them with the tools and
skills required to screen, diagnose, and treat HCV. Clinicians must also be able to effectively
communicate to patients the benefits of screening, the benefits and risks of HCV treatment, and
describe potential barriers HCV patients may encounter when seeking treatment coverage.
Strategy 3.1: Improve linkage to timely and accessible hepatitis C care and adherence services.
Screening is essential to identify persons living with HCV, and by increasing testing opportunities
across the state, a greater number of previously undiagnosed individuals will be identified who will
need to be referred for follow-up testing and treatment. A number of barriers can prevent or delay
linkage to treatment and adherence to treatment regimens, including unknown insurance status, lack
of provider referral, and patient drug or alcohol misuse. The next crucial step is linking diagnosed
individuals to appropriate care and support, so they can receive and be able to adhere to the
prescribed treatment and follow-up care. This is a strategy that has been successful among people
with HIV such as through Ryan White case management services and has also shown similar
positive outcomes among people with HCV infection.
41,42,43
Maryland Medicaid currently provides hepatitis C treatment services to its enrollees who meet
certain clinical criteria, including having a Metavir score of F2 or above. Table 1 presents HCV-
related intervention data for CY 2016. Of the approximate 1.5 million individuals with any period of
Medicaid enrollment in CY 2016, 61,849 received an HCV antibody test and 12,436 received an
HCV RNA test for diagnosis of HCV. A total of 22,352 unique participants had an HCV diagnosis
code, corresponding to an HCV prevalence of 1.47 percent among all Maryland Medicaid
participants. Of the 22,352 participants with HCV diagnoses, 1,041 received non-interferon-based
treatment. Assuming only people with an F2 score or above (an estimated 54 percent of people with
chronic HCV are F2 or above, or 12,070 people) accessed treatment, the overall treatment rate was
8.62 percent.
44
Overall for CY 2015 and CY 2016, the percentage of eligible people receiving
treatment is 11.64 percent across all Metavir score groups (average of proportion of people with F2
Metavir score or above that received DAA treatment in CY 2015 and CY 2016). Working towards
the expansion of treatment criteria for low-income residents will allow additional people to be
treated and cured.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
13
Table 1. Frequency of Hepatitis C Interventions Among Medicaid Participants Meeting
Clinical Criteria and with Any Period of Enrollment, CY 2016.
Total
Number of
Unique
Participants
Unique
Participants
with HCV
Antibody
Test
Unique
Participants
with HCV
RNA Test
Unique
Participants
with HCV
Diagnosis
Code
Unique
Participants
with
Prescription for
Interferon-
Based HCV
Treatment
Unique
Participants
with
Prescription for
Non-Interferon-
Based HCV
Treatment
1,535,414
61,849
12,436
22,352
*
1,041
*Not reported due to small cell size.
In addition to these efforts, targeted work must be done to address the special needs of key
populations often at highest risk for infection.
People Who Inject Drugs
People who inject drugs (PWID) are one of the populations at highest risk for chronic HCV infection
in Maryland. Therefore, primary care-based HCV interventions present one means to engage PWID.
Partnerships with substance use providers and recovery support services are another key strategy in
reaching this population. Syringe service programs (SSP) are also an important avenue to offer a
comprehensive approach to harm reduction and support services for PWID. These programs include
the integration of HCV testing and linkage to care. In 2019, the Department will launch a hepatitis C
peer navigation program to help newly diagnosed SSP clients navigate linkage to HCV care in their
respective communities.
Women of Child-Bearing Age
The number and rate of HCV infections among women of child-bearing age in the U.S. has
increaseddriven at in least in part by the opioid epidemic in some geographic locations.
19
Therefore, in addition to increased HCV screening among high-risk women of child-bearing age,
additional efforts are needed to ensure that women who are diagnosed with HCV receive follow up
care and treatment prior to becoming pregnant. Women diagnosed during pregnancy should receive
HCV management in accordance with accepted standards of care to protect the health of the woman
and her infant. This requires that providers have access to comprehensive guidance on how to care
for pregnant women with HCV and monitoring of infants at risk for vertical transmission.
Currently or Previously Incarcerated Individuals
Hepatitis C disproportionately affects individuals who are currently incarcerated and
individuals with a history of incarceration. The Maryland Department of Public Safety and
Correctional Services (DPSCS) enrolls incarcerated individuals with HCV in a chronic care clinic.
Each individual is then referred to and assessed by an infectious disease specialist. Finally, DPSCS’
HCV panel completes a comprehensive clinical review and determines whether the inmate will begin
treatment while incarcerated. Although a person may be released prior to treatment initiation,
DPSCS makes every effort to begin treatment as soon as possible after a positive screening. In
October 2017, the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS)
launched a Testing and Linkage to Care program in collaboration with Maryland Department of
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
14
Health. This program aims to increase the number of inmates who are aware of their HCV status
prior to being released into the general population. Inmates due for release from corrections are
tested using rapid HCV test kits. All inmates with a positive rapid HCV result and those known to be
HCV positive are linked to clinical providers in their respective communities.
Strategy 3.2: Increase health care provider capacity to screen and treat hepatitis C in both
rural and urban settings.
The burden of HCV disease far outstrips the capacity to treat expeditiously. More providers must be
engaged to treat HCV in their practices. This means moving beyond specialist-only treatment.
Studies have found no significant difference in sustained virologic response (SVR) among patients
treated with direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapy prescribed by non-specialists versus specialists.
45
By engaging both specialists and non-specialists in HCV treatment, the state’s overall capacity to
cure HCV infection can be increased.
To increase the availability of HCV care in Maryland, health care providers throughout the state have
taken the initiative to integrate HCV services into their practices or expand their HCV patient panel
size to facilitate increased treatment access. To meet this need, the Department established the
Maryland Community-based Programs to Test and Cure Hepatitis C (“Test and Cure Program”)
through a CDC grant totaling $1.2 million. This four-year cooperative agreement with CDC supports
a multi-pronged approach to clinical integration of HCV testing, care, and treatment at health care
settings in Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Montgomery County, and Prince George’s County,
which are the Maryland counties with the highest prevalence of HCV. This work has revealed the
substantial infrastructure and coordination necessary to implement and maintain high quality HCV
service delivery. Additionally, it has demonstrated the need to develop clinical expertise related to
HCV screening, care and treatment in community-based health care centers. Most importantly, it has
increased the availability of HCV care in settings where individuals in the state’s highest burden
jurisdictions already access health care and other services. The Maryland Primary Care Program, an
essential element of the State’s Total Cost of Care Model,
19
launched in 2018 and will include
primary care providers from across the state who could be part of these efforts to increase integration
of comprehensive HCV care into their practices. Governor Hogan’s Fiscal Year 2020 budget
allowance includes state funds to continue the HCV surveillance after the CDC funding ends.
In 2015, the Johns Hopkins University, in collaboration with the Maryland Department of Health,
launched a comprehensive clinical hepatitis C training and certification program for primary care
providers in Baltimore City and Baltimore County. Titled Sharing the Cure, the HCV training and
certification program for clinicians (physicians, physicians assistants, and nurse practitioners) was
modeled after the University of New Mexico’s Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare
Outcomes), clinicians from the participating clinical sites receive HCV certification upon completion
of a one-day intensive training, a half-day preceptorship at an HCV specialty clinic, and ongoing
videoconference training by leading specialists. Additionally, the training addresses the need for
improved cultural competency of providers to care for the key populations noted in Strategy 3.1.
Provider training in conjunction with developing internal clinical infrastructure to support HCV
services is leading to the overall aims of increased screening and treatment at participating clinics.
The program’s success is evidenced not only by staff outreach to over 1,600 people for HCV linkage
to care and over 5,000 patients seen by trained providers, but also by interest in the training that
surpasses the program’s current capacity and requests from specialists and other medical
professionals (e.g., pharmacists) seeking to participate in the training program. In 2019, the training
program will expand to include clinicians who provide Ryan White HIV/AIDS services throughout
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
15
the state, including western Maryland and the lower Eastern Shore. Initiating an HCV training cohort
for HIV care providers will increase HCV treatment among individuals co-infected with HIV and
HCV. Additionally, the training program will run two simultaneous training cohorts for primary care
providers, thereby doubling the number of trainees that will be certified in the coming year.
Strategy 3.3: Address the high cost of treatment drugs.
Hepatitis C drug pricing is a significant barrier to HCV treatment. The cost of some of the newer
HCV direct-acting antivirals have been upwards of $90,000 for 8-12 weeks of treatment per patient.
While the recent introduction of lower cost and effective DAA’s have created downward market
pressures on prices, many states continue actively exploring options to drive down the cost of HCV
DAAs through a variety of strategies such as use of multi-state agreements with pharmacy benefit
management companies, direct negotiation with pharmaceutical companies or purchasing patents for
HCV DAAs. Generic versions of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni) and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir
(Epclusa) will be introduced in the U.S. in January 2019, which will also continue to drive down
costs and improve treatment accessibility. However, people who have high-deductible insurance or
are uninsured may not be able to afford the total cost of treatment, including not only the medications
but also health care provider visits and testing.
In the state’s Medicaid program, due to the high cost of treatment, new HCV drugs are carved out of
MCO capitation rates. The Department makes supplemental payments to the MCOs for the
prescriptions prescribed to Medicaid participants. The Department pays the cost for Fee for Service
(FFS) enrollees directly. Both the FFS program and MCOs are eligible for rebates, which make
estimating the total cost of treatment difficult.
Using Medicaid data from CY 2016 about people treated with new HCV drugs, the total cost of
treating 1,042 participants in Medicaid MCOs or FFS was $138,912,867, or about $133,000 per
person before rebates. The cost was $71,000 after rebates, which accounts for 47 percent of the total
per-person cost.
46
The actual amount per person may be lower if certain individuals required
retreatment (if their HCV was not cured by the initial treatment course) or became re-infected. The
cost per person has decreased further since that time as lower cost drugs have been introduced.
Similar to approaches employed by other states, the state may consider options to lower HCV drug
costs paid by including an intra-agency approach to negotiation with pharmaceutical companies.
Options to negotiate may include bulk purchasing at a fixed price. In considering these options, the
state can utilize the assistance of and lessons learned from the National Governors Association’s
initiative to lower HCV treatment costs through collaboration between states and pharmaceutical
companies. Additionally, the state could coordinate with all payers to identify strategies that can
address costs to expand treatment availability and establish a standardized approach for covering
HCV care and treatment.
For Medicaid, this would represent the pre-rebate cost.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
16
Goal 4: Enhance hepatitis C surveillance, monitoring and evaluation.
Both knowing the burden of HCV in Maryland and having the capacity to evaluate whether efforts to
prevent and cure HCV infection are successful are essential to the development of effective
elimination strategies. The Maryland Department of Health’s Infectious Disease Epidemiology and
Outbreak Response Bureau manages statewide surveillance processes and data for reportable
infectious diseases, including hepatitis C. Currently, Maryland has a passive surveillance system
with a limited capacity to investigate and monitor HCV infections at the local and state level.
Reported cases often have incomplete information, such as about race demographics, which limits
the ability to fully characterize the disease in Maryland. Working towards an improved HCV data
collection system will allow the state to better understand the burden of HCV in Maryland and to
evaluate whether efforts to prevent and cure HCV infection are successful, both of which are
essential to the development of effective prevention and control strategies.
Strategy 4.1: Improve timely submission of complete HCV reports to state and local
surveillance by laboratories and clinical providers.
Maryland has continued to expand electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), which will vastly
strengthen HCV surveillance data. Laboratories are the source of the majority of reports of HCV in
the state and ELR reduces the need for hand entry by surveillance staff at local health departments
and makes timely data available through the electronic National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance
System (NNDSS). In addition to laboratories, health providers are also accountable for reporting
cases of HCV per COMAR 10.06.01.03. Educating providers about reporting responsibilities and
encouraging adherence to regulation ensures more complete demographic and health data are
included in surveillance cases reports. More complete and accurate surveillance data will require
additional follow-up with providers by local and state health department staff. Such detail allows the
state and local surveillance teams to better quantify and characterize disease burden, outcomes, and
HCV-related health disparities. Governor Hogan’s fiscal year 2020 budget allowance also includes
state funds to further enhance the HCV surveillance system.
Strategy 4.2: Expand reporting to include HCV RNA negative test results.
Currently, only positive/reactive RNA tests for HCV are reportable. In order to accurately
characterize the burden of HCV and the success of cure efforts, the Department must also have
negative RNA test results. A negative HCV RNA test result after an initial positive test reflects cure
(if tested twelve weeks after completion of a full treatment course) or spontaneous clearance of the
virus, which occurs in about 15 25% of those infected. Without negative results, the prevalence of
chronic HCV disease cannot be accurately reported, nor can the population-level impacts of the
state’s efforts to cure and prevent HCV. The Department will consider regulatory changes to
establish a requirement for laboratories and providers to also report negative RNA test results.
Strategy 4.3: Monitor HCV-related health services and outcomes through clinical data such as
electronic health records, claims data, and information shared over the state’s health
information exchange (CRISP).
Even with expanded surveillance activity, HCV population-level data will remain limited for some
time and will likely not include important data points such as fibrosis staging and complete SVR
data. These data could be monitored within other systems, such as large medical systems and
insurers, to be able to follow more detailed information about testing, staging, and cure. Promising
avenues for data to supplement surveillance include Medicaid and other insurers, large specialty
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
17
providers such as Johns Hopkins Viral Hepatitis Center, University of Maryland Medical System,
and providers participating in the MDH-JHU Community Based HCV Test and Cure project.
In 2017, Maryland Medicaid and the Infectious Disease Bureau at the Prevention and Health
Promotion Administration (PHPA) partnered to participate in a national Affinity Group for states
working on hepatitis C-related projects. The Maryland team is working to improve collaboration and
data sharing to gain a better understanding of the continuum from initial diagnosis to treatment for
Medicaid enrollees. The team is developing a Cure Cascade, which is a visual representation of
people in all stages of HCV care, from tested and diagnosed to treated and cured. Maryland
anticipates developing Cure Cascades for each Medicaid MCO to identify strengths and
opportunities for improvement in testing, diagnosis, and treatment. Additionally, Medicaid and
PHPA are in the process of finalizing a data use agreement that will facilitate data matching to better
identify high-risk enrollees with HIV/AIDS and HCV.
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
18
REFERENCES
1
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Press Release. “New Hepatitis C Infections
Nearly Tripled over Five Years.” May 2017. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p-
hepatitis-c-infections-tripled.html.
2
Maryland Department of Health (MDH), Prevention and Health Promotion Administration. Maryland
National Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NEDSS), 2017.
3
HepVu State Profile Maryland. Available at: https://hepvu.org/state/maryland/.
4
MDH, Prevention and Health Promotion Administration. Maryland National Electronic Disease
Surveillance System (NEDSS), 2017.
5
Ibid.
6
Ibid.
7
CDC. National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System. Hepatitis C, Acute 2016 Case Definition.
Available at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/hepatitis-c-acute/case-definition/2016/.
8
CDC. Hepatitis C Questions and Answers for Health Professionals. Available at:
https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/hcvfaq.htm#Ref0.
9
CDC. National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System. Hepatitis C, Chronic 2016 Case Definition.
Available at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/hepatitis-c-chronic/case- definition/2016/.
10
Denniston MM, Klevens RM, McQuillan GM, and Jiles RB. “Awareness of Infection, Knowledge
of Hepatitis C, and Medical Follow-Up Among Individuals Testing Positive for Hepatitis C: National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001-2008.” Hepatology (Baltimore, Md). 2012;55(6):1652-
1661.
11
CDC. HIV/AIDS and Viral Hepatitis. Available at:
https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/populations/hiv.htm.
12
MDH, Prevention and Health Promotion Administration. Maryland National Electronic Disease
Surveillance System (NEDSS), 2016 and Enhanced HIV/AIDS Reporting System (eHARS), 2016.
13
Ibid.
14
Maryland Department of Planning. Summary Data for Maryland State Total Population Estimates
by Single-Year Age, Gender and Median Age, 4/1/2010 to 7/1/2016. Available at:
http://planning.maryland.gov/MSDC/Documents/pop_estimate/ARS/MD_Single_year_age_sex_med
ians.xlsx.
15
MDH, Prevention and Health Promotion Administration. Maryland National Electronic Disease
Surveillance System (NEDSS), 2016.
16
CDC. “Viral Hepatitis Surveillance. United States, 2016.” Available at:
https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/statistics/2016surveillance/pdfs/2016HepSurveillanceRpt.pdf.
17
Mavilia MG, Wu GY. “Mechanisms and Prevention of Vertical Transmission in Chronic Viral
Hepatitis.” J Clin Transl Hepatol 2017;5(2):119–129.
18
Roberts EA, Yeung L. “Maternal-Infant Transmission of Hepatitis C Virus Infection.” Hepatology.
2002;36(5):S106-S113.
19
Koneru A, Nelson N, Hariri S, Canary L, et.al. “Increased Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Detection in
Women of Childbearing Age and Potential Risk for Vertical Transmission United States and
Kentucky, 2011–2014.” MMWR. July 22, 2016;65(28):705–710.
20
Denniston MM, Jiles RB, Drobeniuc J, et.al. “Chronic Hepatitis C Infection in the United States,
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
19
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003-2010.” Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(5):293-
300.
21
Nelson P, Mathers B, Cowie B, et.al. “The epidemiology of viral hepatitis C among people who
inject drugs: Results of global systematic reviews.” Lancet. 2011;378(9791):571-583.
22
Amon JJ, Garfein RS, Ahdieh-Grant L, et.al. “Prevalence of Hepatitis C Infection among Injection
Drug Users in the United States, 1994-2004.” Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:1852-1858.
23
Solomon L, Flynn C, Muck K, and Vertefeuille J. “Prevalence Of HIV, Syphilis, Hepatitis B, and
Hepatitis C Among Entrants to Maryland Correctional Facilities.” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of
the New York Academy of Medicine. 2004;81(1):25-37.
24
Varan AK, Mercer DW, Stein MS, and Spaulding AC. “Hepatitis C Seroprevalence Among Prison
Inmates since 2001.” Public Health Reports. 2014;129:187-195.
25
Asselah T, Marcellin P, and Schinazi RF. “Treatment of hepatitis C virus infection with direct-
acting antiviral agents.” Liver International. 2017;38(Suppl.1):7-13.
26
Maryland Department of Health. “2017 Joint Chairman’s Report (p. 87) Report on Criteria Used
for Individuals to be Eligible for New Therapies Used for Hepatitis C Treatment.” January 24, 2018.
Available at: https://mmcp.health.maryland.gov/Documents/JCRs/2017/hepcJCRfinal10-17.pdf.
27
Gilead Sciences. “Gilead Subsidiary to Launch Authorized Generics of Epclusa®
(Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir) and Harvoni® (Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir) for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis
C.” Press Release. September 24, 2018. Available at: http://www.gilead.com/news/press-
releases/2018/9/gilead-subsidiary-to-launch-authorized-generics-of-epclusa-sofosbuvirvelpatasvir- and-
harvoni-ledipasvirsofosbuvir-for-the-treatment-of-chronic-hepatitis-c).
28
MDH Clinical Criteria for Hepatitis C (HCV) Therapy. Updated 9/20/2018. Available at:
https://mmcp.health.maryland.gov/pap/docs/HCV%20%20Clinical%20Criteria%20updated%20final.
Pdf.
29
Maryland Department of Health. “2017 Joint Chairman’s Report (p. 87) Report on Criteria Used
for Individuals to be Eligible for New Therapies Used for Hepatitis C Treatment.” January 24, 2018.
Available at: https://mmcp.health.maryland.gov/Documents/JCRs/2017/hepcJCRfinal10-17.pdf.
30
World Health Organization. “Combating Hepatitis B and C to Reach Elimination by 2030.”
Advocacy Brief. 2016. Available at:
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/206453/WHO_HIV_2016.04_eng.pdf;jsessionid=B7
B1DE5F0D11D02EEC4EB45774615760?sequence=1
31
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Eliminating the public health
problem of hepatitis B and C in the United States: Phase one report. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press.
32
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. A national strategy for the
elimination of hepatitis B and C: Phase two report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
33
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “National Viral Hepatitis Action Plan 2017-
2020.” January 2017. Available at:
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/National%20Viral%20Hepatitis%20Action%20Plan%202017
-2020.pdf.
34
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. “Maryland Hepatitis C Prevention and
Control Plan.” September 2002. Available at:
https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OIDPCS/AVHPP/AVHPP%20Documents/md_hepc_plan.pdf.
35
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “National Viral Hepatitis Action Plan, 2017-
2020.” January 2017. Available at:
Maryland Hepatitis C Strategic Plan
20
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/National%20Viral%20Hepatitis%20Action%20Plan%202017
-2020.pdf.
36
Bruneau J, Zang G, Abrahamowicz M, et.al. “Sustained Drug Use Changes After Hepatitis C
Screening and Counseling Among Recently Infected Persons Who Inject Drugs: A Longitudinal
Study.” Clin Inf Dis. 2014;58:755-761.
37
CDC. Testing Recommendations for Hepatitis C Virus Infection (last updated Oct. 15, 2015),
Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/guidelinesc.htm.
38
AASLD. “HCV Guidance: Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C.”
Available at: https://www.hcvguidelines.org/.
39
CDC. “Vital Signs: Evaluation of hepatitis C virus infection testing and reporting Eight U.S.
Sites, 2005–2011.” MMWR. 2013;62(18):357-361.
40
McGibbon E, Bornschlegel K, and Balter S. “Half a diagnosis: Gap in confirming infection among
hepatitis C antibody-positive patients.” The American Journal of Medicine. 2013;126:718-722.
41
Castrejon M, Chew KW, Javanbakht M, et.al. “Implementation of a Large System-Wide Hepatitis C
Virus Screening and Linkage to Care Program for Baby Boomers.” Open Forum Inf Diseases.
2017;4(3).
42
Falade-Nwulia O, Mehta SH, Lasola J, et.al. “Public Health Clinic Based Hepatitis C Testing and
Linkage to Care in Baltimore.” J Viral Hepatitis. 2016;23(5):366-374.
43
Horstmann E, Brown J, Islam F, et.al. “Retaining HIV-Infected Patients in Care: Where are We?
Where Do We Go From Here?” Clinical Inf Diseases. 2010;50:752-761.
44
Rein DB, Wittenborn JS, et.al. “The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new
antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.” Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2015;61(2):157-168.
45
Kattakuzhy S, Gross C. et.al. “Expansion of Treatment for Hepatitis C Virus Infection by Task
Shifting to Community-Based Non-specialist Providers: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.” Annals of
Internal Medicine. 2017;167(5):311-318.
46
Maryland Department of Health. “2017 Joint Chairman’s Report (p. 87) – Report on Criteria Used for
Individuals to be Eligible for New Therapies Used for Hepatitis C Treatment.” January 24, 2018.
Available at: https://mmcp.health.maryland.gov/Documents/JCRs/2017/hepcJCRfinal10-17.pdf.