Hepatitis C death rates rise, 1 in 33 baby boomers has disease
AP Graphics
(CBS/AP) Hepatitis C deaths are on the rise, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The report found baby boomers are especially at risk because they account for two-thirds of all hepatitis C cases.
The worrisome news has prompted health officials to wonder whether anyone born between 1945 and 1965 should get a blood test for hepatitis C, because many of these boomers may have had the disease for decades without even realizing it.
"One of every 33 baby boomers are living with hepatitis C infection," says Dr. John Ward, the CDC's hepatitis chief. "Most people will be surprised, because it's a silent epidemic."
Some baby boomers may not think they're at risk because sharing a needle while injecting illegal drugs is the biggest risk factor for becoming infected with this blood-borne virus. But before 1992, when widespread testing of the blood supply began, hepatitis C commonly was spread through blood transfusions. Plus, a one-time experiment with drugs way back when could have been enough.
"Asking someone about a risk that happened 20 to 30 years ago is a lot to ask," says Ward. That's why officials are seeking a new strategy.
About 3.2 million Americans are estimated to have chronic hepatitis C, but at least half of them may not know it. The virus, which affects 170 million people worldwide, can gradually scar the liver and lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, or liver cancer. It is a leading cause of liver transplants.
For the CDC's study, published in the Feb. 21 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers analyzed a decade of death records and found an increase in death rates from hepatitis C. In fact, in 2007 there were 15,000 deaths related to hepatitis C, higher than previous estimates - and surpassing the nearly 13,000 deaths caused by the better-known AIDS virus. Perhaps more surprising, three-fourths of the hepatitis deaths occurred in the middle-aged, people 45 to 64-years old.
"Mortality will continue to grow for the next 10 to 15 years at least unless we do something different" to find and treat the silent sufferers, Ward says.
Current CDC guidelines recommend testing people known to be at high risk, and until last summer there wasn't much enthusiasm even for that step: the reasons are the year-long, two-drug treatment promised to cure only 40 percent of people; treatment was so grueling that many patients refused to try it and treatment could cost up to $30,000.
Two new drugs - Vertex Pharmaceuticals' telaprevir and Merck & Co.'s boceprevir - are starting to change that pessimism. Research suggests adding one of them to standard therapy can boost cure rates as high as 75 percent. While still full of side effects, they can allow some people to finish treatment in just six months. They add to the price, however, another $1,000 to $4,000 a week. Drugs that promise to work even better are also being tested.
Those advances are fueling CDC deliberations of whether to change testing guidelines to recommend that anyone born between 1945 and 1965 get a one-time screening. A second CDC-funded study, also published in the Feb. 21 Annals, analyzed models of that option, and concluded it had the potential to save 82,000 lives.
A third study published Monday from Stanford University looked more closely at the price tag, and concluded the new triple-therapy would be cost-effective for people with advanced disease. It's still cheaper than a transplant costing well over $100,000. But not everyone with hepatitis C will go on to suffer serious liver damage. For those with mild disease, that analysis concluded some gene testing to predict who might really need the costlier triple therapy rather than the older drugs would be a good next step.
It's not clear how quickly the CDC will settle the boomer-screening question. But doctors at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City have started raising the issue. Montefiore internist Dr. Gary Rogg also says a number of patients have sought testing after seeing hepatitis-awareness ads from the drugs' manufacturers.
"Now it's considered a curable disease, that makes all the difference," says Rogg, who was surprised at some longtime patients' test results. Even a nurse he knows learned she had it, and the only risk she could recall was a blood transfusion during surgery when she was 10 years old.
According to WebMD, symptoms of hepatitis C include feeling very tired, joint and belly pain, itchy skin, sore muscles, yellowish eyes and skin, and dark urine. Since many people with the disease don't show symptoms, it is common for people to have hepatitis C for 15 years or longer, before it's diagnosed as chronic hepatitis C.
The CDC has more on hepatitis C.
Popular in Health
- Skin cancer self-exam: What to look for (PHOTOS)
- Controversial update to psychiatry manual, DSM-5, arrives
- Handbags may contain more germs than average toilet flush
- Flesh-eating disease victim gets bionic hands
- Doctor: Gel manicures a potential skin cancer risk
- Consumer Reports rates top sunscreens for 2012
- CDC: One in five U.S. kids has mental health disorder
- What does bipolar II mean for Catherine Zeta-Jones?
One I resent the heck out of continuing to propagate the stigma that only intravenous drug users get the disease - as illustrated by the picture in the story. WHat about the nurse in the story?
And to the ranter about BIG Pharma, I looked into alternative and Chinese solutions as well. Sure, I deliberated about consenting to the tratment, but in the end, it's not so much about dying (we all do that) as the quality of life with the disease versus put in a year of hell and stand a chance of getting your life quality back - maybe more than you expect.
There is certainly the risk of side-effects - but again, if we're going to play the numbers gamne - those numbers are unknown - and in this age bracket, most of our parts are out of warranty anyway and are winding down to a greater or lesser extent.
Baby Boomers that have or have not been diagnosed with hepatitis C are the largest population group at risk for developing cirrosis of the liver, end stage liver disease, cancer from hepatitis C because most infections in this group are old infections.
Treatment advances for HCV have provided the potential to save countless lives but access to treatment has many barriers and inequalities. Evidence based data and recomended treatment guidelines clearly state that the earlier one is treated gives the highest liklihood of a successful treatment outcome.
Treatment for hepatitis C is cost effective when compared to the costs associated with end stage liver disease as well as a liver transplant with life long anti rejection drugs. It is important to note that a liver transplant does not rid the body of the hepatitis c virus and it will reinfect the transplanted liver.
Implementing standard testing for HCV in the "Baby Boomers" age group would be a huge step forward but it also needs to be a global effort with extentions to all population groups who are aligned with statistics of infection.
There is not one population group who is immune to hepatitis c because it has no boundaries and to date many prevention and awareness campaigns have reinforced assumptions about the disease and brought isolation to the hepatitis C communnities. It is encouraging to see that drug manufacturers campaings are forcing change and bringing people out of the wood work. It is my hope that this will build community strength and engagement.
Hepatitis C treatment gave me my life back and my daughter her mother. Treatment should be an informed choice between a patient and Doctor and infrastrutures should be in place to support all dimensions associated with hepatitis C treatment as well as to all individuals living with the disease.
Baby Boomers that have or have not been diagnosed with hepatitis C are the largest population group at risk for developing cirrosis of the liver, end stage liver disease, cancer from hepatitis C because most infections in this group are old infections.
Treatment advances for HCV have provided the potential to save countless lives but access to treatment has many barriers and inequalities. Evidence based data and recomended treatment guidelines clearly state that the earlier one is treated gives the highest liklihood of a successful treatment outcome.
Treatment for hepatitis C is cost effective when compared to the costs associated with end stage liver disease as well as a liver transplant with life long anti rejection drugs. It is important to note that a liver transplant does not rid the body of the hepatitis c virus and it will reinfect the transplanted liver.
Implementing standard testing for HCV in the "Baby Boomers" age group would be a huge step forward but it also needs to be a global effort with extentions to all population groups who are aligned with statistics of infection.
There is not one population group who is immune to hepatitis c because it has no boundaries and to date prevention and awareness campaigns have reinforced assumptions about the disease and isolated the hepatitis C communnities. It is encouraging to see that drug manufacturers campaings are forcing change and bringing people out of the wood work. It is my hope that this will build community strength and engagement.
Hepatitis C treatment gave me my life back and my daughter her mother. Treatment should be a choice between a patient and Doctor and infrastrutures should be in place to support all dimensions associated with hepatitis C treatment and all individuals living with the disease.
Yes, it may kill you, but 15,000 is less than 1/2 of 1% of the people that are estimated to have it, and the odds are overwhelming that it will not kill you.
The drugs used to treat create awful, life diminishing injuries (arthritis, deafness, nerve injuries, brain damage, psoriasis, numerous serious autoimmune disorders), and our insurance pool and Medicare (our tax dollars) are paying bank to BigPharma for drugs that may ruin more lives than they save.
Gastroenterologists generally administer the drugs. Terrible bizarre side effects often occur in the one to three months following cessation of treatment. The gastroenterologists don't treat the side effects and are ignorant about them and minimize them. They focus only on eradication of the virus and not the whole person. If you are left with arthritis that prevents you from skiing or hiking or doing the things you love, or if you are disfigured and socially isolated from hard-to-treat psoriasis, they don't think much (or even know) about it.
It's crazy, and it's scary, and it's just another example of how the short-term corporate profit interest drives what may be bad social policy.
Unless and until there is an objective (read - NOT BIGPHARMA FUNDED) study of long-term side effects and a cost-benefit analysis of treatment vs. long term risk, one is playing Russian roulette with interferon triple combination therapy. Probably a lot better odds to get skinny and eat lots of greens and take milk thistle.
Note that FDA approvals have been granted based only upon side effects that manifest themselves during drug therapy and on the basis of very, very limited studies.
And also, the odds of getting it through unprotected sex are very small - the weatherman and the big snowstorm. It has to be blood on blood (toothbrush or razor?).
http://www.change.org/petitions/nbc-and-cbs-stop-allowing-jokes-about-people-with-hepatitis-c