|
|
||||||||
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE |
Christopher S. Murrill, Howard Weeks, Brian C. Castrucci, and Hillard S. Weinstock are with the National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, Ga. Beth P. Bell is with the Division of Viral Hepatitis, National Center for Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, Ga. Catherine Spruill is with the National Center for Infectious Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, Ga. Marta Gwinn is with the National Center for Environmental Health, CDC, Atlanta, Ga.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Christopher S. Murrill, PhD, MPH, Division of HIV/AIDS PreventionSurveillance and Epidemiology, National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, NE, Mail Stop E-46, Atlanta, GA 30333 (e-mail: csm5{at}cdc.gov).
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objectives. This study measured age-specific seroprevalence of HIV, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among injection drug users (IDUs) admitted to drug treatment programs in 6 US cities.
Methods. Remnant sera collected from persons entering treatment with a history of illicit drug injection were tested for antibodies to HIV, hepatitis C (anti-HCV), and hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc).
Results. Prevalence of anti-HBc and anti-HCV increased with age and reached 80% to 100% among older IDUs in all 6 cities. Although overall age-specific HIV prevalence was lower than anti-HCV or anti-HBc, this prevalence was greater in the Northeast than in the Midwest and West.
Conclusions. The need continues for effective primary prevention programs among IDUs specifically targeting young persons who have recently started to inject drugs. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:385387)
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Sera were originally collected from 1993 to 1994 for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) national HIV seroprevalence surveys to measure the prevalence of anti-HBc, anti-HCV, and HIV among IDUs entering treatment in 6 US cities: Newark, NJ; Baltimore, Md; Detroit, Mich; Denver, Colo; San Francisco, Calif; and Seattle, Wash. By using standardized methods7,8 for measuring prevalence in these 6 cities, we added age-specific and geographic data to the existing body of information about the national HBV, HCV, and HIV endemic among IDUs.
| METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Routine HIV-1 antibody testing was done with an enzyme immunoassay licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration. Sera that were repeatedly reactive were confirmed by Western blot. Western blot band patterns were interpreted according to the recommendations of the Association of Public Health Laboratories and the CDC.9
After HIV testing, stored sera were tested for anti-HBc and anti-HCV at the Hepatitis Reference Laboratory, CDC. Anti-HBc testing was performed with a radioimmunoassay (CORAB; Abbott Laboratories, Inc, Abbott Park, North Chicago, Ill), and anti-HCV testing was done with an enzyme immunoassay (HCV EIA 2.0; Abbott Laboratories, Inc); the first 100 specimens that were repeatedly reactive were tested with a supplemental assay (HCV MATRIX; Abbott Laboratories, Inc). Because 99 of the 100 repeatedly reactive specimens were also positive with the supplemental assay, the remainder of the specimens was considered anti-HCV positive if repeatedly reactive by enzyme immunoassay.
Prevalence was calculated by city and demographic group; age was categorized into 5-year groups.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
2 = 12.8, P < .01), Seattle (74% vs 55%:
2 = 9.5, P < .01), and San Francisco (71% vs 40%:
2 = 31.0, P < .01). Anti-HBc seroprevalence was higher in men than in women in San Francisco (56% vs 39%:
2 = 9.1, P < .01). Anti-HCV seroprevalence differed significantly between non-White and White persons in San Francisco (87% vs 60%:
2 = 28.3, P < .01) and between men and women in Baltimore (96% vs 88%:
2 = 6.1, P = .01). | DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Among IDUs entering treatment in 6 cities in the United States during 1993 to 1994, the greater HIV seroprevalence in the Northeast compared with that in the Midwest and West has been observed in other studies.7,8 In contrast, HBV and HCV prevalence rates were high in all 6 cities.
The higher overall prevalence of HBV and HCV than of HIV in IDUs in all 6 cities was likely related to the size of the reservoirs of these viruses in these communities. Geographic differences in HIV prevalence among IDUs in the United States have remained remarkably consistent since at least the late 1980s,8 an observation that has not been explained. One hypothesis is that higher HIV prevalence is observed in regions with higher population densities; larger social networks in these areas could increase risk for contact with a person who is HIV infected.12
Our study population was limited to a selected group of IDUs who were entering drug treatment programs in 6 US cities. Therefore, the observed seroprevalences of HIV, HBV, and HCV are not generalizable to all IDUs in these 6 cities. IDUs in treatment programs tend to be older than those not in treatment programs because programs usually admit only clients with well-established drug habits; therefore, these seroprevalence rates may be different from those among IDUs in general. However, the observed geographic differences were consistent with those observed in other studies.1,6,13
Given the high prevalence of both HBV and HCV among IDUs, effective primary prevention programs are needed because the likelihood that an uninfected novice IDU will come in contact with an infected IDU is great. Such programs should offer hepatitis B vaccination, provide treatment to stop the use of illicit drugs, and promote the use of sterile needles and the nonsharing of equipment used to prepare and inject drugs (cotton, cookers, and water) for those who are unable to discontinue injection drug use.14 To prevent HBV and HCV infection among IDUs, these programs will need to target young persons who have recently started to inject drugs. Effective programs also should use street-based interventions to locate IDUs currently not accessing treatment programs.15 This approach applies especially to younger IDUs without well-established habits. Intervention research should be conducted to monitor the effectiveness of such programs.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Accepted for publication August 10, 2001.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Loxley W, Phillips M, Carruthers S, Bevan J. The Australian study of HIV and injecting drug use, part 1: prevalence for HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C among injecting drug users in four Australian cities. Drug Alcohol Rev.1997;16:207214.
3. Crofts N, Nigro L, Oman K, et al. Methadone maintenance and hepatitis C virus infection among injecting drug users. Addiction.1997;92:9991005.[Medline]
4. Levine O, Vlahov D, Brookmeyer R, et al. Differences in the incidence of hepatitis B and human immunodeficiency virus infections among injecting drug users. J Infect Dis.1996;173:579583.[Medline]
5. Barbosa de Carvalho H, Mesquita F, Massad E, et al. HIV and infections of similar transmission patterns in a drug injectors community of Santos, Brazil. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol.1996;12:282289.[Medline]
6. Zeldis J, Jain S, Kuramoto I, et al. Seroepidemiology of viral infections among intravenous drug users in northern California. West J Med.1992;156:3035.[Medline]
7.
Prevots D, Allen D, Lehman J, et al. Trends in human immunodeficiency virus seroprevalence among injecting drug users entering drug treatment centers, United States, 198893. Am J Epidemiol.1996;143:733742.
8. National HIV Prevalence Surveys, 1997 Summary. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1998:11.
9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interpretation and use of the Western blot assay for serodiagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infections. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.1989;38(S-7):17.
10.
Levine O, Vlahov D, Koehler J, et al. Seroepidemiology of hepatitis B virus in a population of injecting drug users: association with drug injecting patterns. Am J Epidemiol.1995;142:331341.
11.
Stark K, Bienzle U, Vonk R, et al. History of syringe sharing in prison and risk of hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and human immunodeficiency virus infection among injecting drug users in Berlin. Int J Epidemiol.1997;26:13591366.
12. Neaigus A, Friedman S, Jose B, et al. High-risk personal networks and syringe sharing as risk factors for HIV infection among new drug injectors. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol.1996;11:499509.[Medline]
13. Garfein R, Williams I, Monterosso E, et al. HCV, HBV and HIV infections among young, street recruited injection drug users (IDUs): the Collaborative Injection Drug Users Study (CIDUS II). Antivir Ther.2000;5(suppl 1):64.
14. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for prevention and control of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and HCV-related chronic disease. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.1998;47(RR-19):139.[Medline]
15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hepatitis B vaccination program for injecting drug usersPierce County, Washington, 2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.2001;50(19):388390, 399.[Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |