© 2002 American Public Health Association
Kimberly A. Page-Shafer is with the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, Calif. Barbara Cahoon-Young is with East Bay Liver Clinic, Oakland, Calif. Jeffrey D. Klausner is with the Division of STD Control, San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, Calif. Scott Morrow is with San Mateo County Department of Public Health, Redwood City, Calif. Fred Molitor and Juan Ruiz are with the Office of AIDS, HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Branch, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, Calif. Willi McFarland is with the HIV Epidemiology Unit, San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, Calif. Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Kimberly A. Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH, Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, UCSF, 74 New Montgomery St, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94105 (e-mail: kshafer{at}psg.ucsf.edu).
Objectives. We evaluated risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in women residing in low-income neighborhoods of northern California. Methods. A population-based sample of 1707 women, aged 18 to 29, were surveyed and screened for sexually transmitted infections and HCV. Results. Women infected with HCV (2.5%) were more likely to have a history of injection and noninjection drug use, to exchange sex for money or drugs, and to have sexually transmitted infections. HCV was independently associated with history of injection drug use, herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) infection, and heroin and cocaine use. Conclusions. Injection drug use is the highest risk exposure for HCV, but HSV-2 and noninjection drug use contribute significantly to increased risk. HCV prevention programs in impoverished areas should integrate drug treatment and sexually transmitted infection control.
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the most important cause of acute and chronic liver disease in the United States. An estimated 4 million people, 1.8% of the US general population, are HCV infected.1 Persistent infection develops in more than 85% of the persons exposed. Chronic hepatitis develops in 50% to 70% of the infected persons, and 10% to 20% of these may go on to develop cirrhosis.2 Liver failure and hepatocellular carcinomas necessitating liver transplantation are some of the most severe consequences of HCV infection. An estimated 8000 to 10 000 deaths per year are attributed to HCV-associated liver disease, a figure expected to triple in the next 10 to 20 years.3 Given the current low response to treatment (< 50%),4,5 primary prevention remains the most important public health control strategy to reduce HCV-related morbidity. HCV infection is most easily acquired parenterally. As a result, prevalence is highest among injection drug users (IDUs) and hemophiliacs.68 Nonparenteral transmission of HCV appears to be inefficient.714 Past research has documented the cofactor role of sexually transmitted infections in amplifying the acquisition and transmission of HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV),1517 but this interrelationship has not been well examined for HCV. High rates of sexually transmitted infections and HCV coinfection among IDUs suggest that ulcerative or nonulcerative urogenital infections may be cofactors for HCV transmission. However, investigation of sexually transmitted infections as potential cofactors for sexual transmission of HCV is hampered by the confounding effects of concomitant high-risk sexual behavior and injection practices.18 Lack of data on the determinants of sexual transmission of HCV has limited the development of guidelines for sexual partners who may be at risk for transmitting or acquiring HCV.9,19 The current study examined HCV in the Young Women's Survey, a population-based sample of young women recruited in lowincome, multiethnic neighborhoods of northern California.20 Analysis focused on sexual behavior and sexually transmitted infections as risk factors for HCV and their associated population attributable fractions.
Study Design The Young Women's Survey was a single-stage, cluster-sample, population-based, door-to-door, cross-sectional survey designed to measure the prevalence of HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, and related risk behavior in young, low-income women in northern California. The Young Women's Survey study methods, study population, and primary outcomes have been described in detail elsewhere.20 HCV testing was conducted on stored sera from participants in 4 counties: Alameda, San Francisco, San Joaquin, and San Mateo.
Study Subjects
Measures
Laboratory Methods
Statistical Methods Multiple logistic regression analysis, adjusting for the survey design, was used to identify independent correlates of HCV infection based on factors significant in bivariate analyses, a priori hypotheses (such as coinfection with HIV or HBV), and other variables of interest or potential confounders (such as age, race/ethnicity, and county). Models were examined with both a backward and a forward stepwise process. Variables were retained in the models if they reached a significance level of .05 or less. The final multiple logistic model and aflogit procedures21 employing Stata statistical software were used to obtain estimates of adjusted population attributable fraction and corresponding 95% confidence intervals with an approach based on unconditional logistic regression.22,23 The 95% confidence intervals associated with the population attributable fraction estimates were adjusted for probability weights but not for the cluster weights.
Prevalence of Anti-HCV, by Social and Demographic Characteristics The population-based estimate of HCV prevalence among women aged 18 to 29 years in low-income neighborhoods of the 4-county target area was 2.5% (95% CI = 1.4, 3.6) (Table 1
The prevalence of HCV varied significantly by county of residence, income level, and race/ethnicity. HCV prevalence was highest in the 2 most urban counties: San Francisco (4.3%; 95% CI = 1.4, 7.1) and Alameda (3.8%; 95% CI = 1.7, 6.0). HCV prevalence increased with decreasing income, reaching 5.1% (95% CI = 2.4, 7.8) among women in the lowest income category (< $500 per month). By race/ethnicity, HCV prevalence was highest among African Americans (4.0%; 95% CI = 2.0, 5.9).
Women for whom sera were not available did not differ significantly from women with sera with respect to age, education, income, or injection drug use history. However, women without sera available were more likely to be single and to have 2 or more male sex partners and less likely to be Latina (
Prevalence of Anti-HCV, by Sexually Transmitted Infections and Sexual Behavior
Prevalence of Anti-HCV, by Injection and Noninjection Drug Use Table 3
Ever and recent use of alcohol was not associated with increased HCV prevalence, but having had sex while high on alcohol was (OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.3, 5.3). HCV prevalence was significantly higher among women reporting use of amphetamine, cocaine, or heroin compared with women not using these drugs. For each of these drugs, HCV prevalence was higher among those reporting recent use compared with ever use and among those reporting injecting compared with those not injecting. Of any risk factor measured, HCV prevalence was highest among women reporting recent cocaine injection (72.6%; 95% CI = 51.0, 94.2), followed by those reporting recent heroin injection (66.7%; 95% CI = 56.1, 77.2).
Independent Risk Factors for HCV Infection
Analyses among women with no history of injection drug use were conducted to evaluate risk factors associated with nonparenteral acquisition of HCV infection. In this subset, 12 women (0.9%) were positive for anti-HCV. Factors associated with HCV among women non-IDUs were African American race/ethnicity, noninjection cocaine use, and lower income (Table 5
Population Attributable Fraction Estimates Adjusted population attributable fraction estimates and 95% confidence intervals for risk factors for HCV are shown in Table 4
The 2.5% prevalence of HCV infection in this population-based survey of young, lowincome women was higher than that reported in a national sample of women, in which prevalence was of 1.2% overall1 and 0.6% among women aged 20 to 29 years (M. Alter, PhD, personal communication, 2000). HCV infection was most highly associated with a history of injection drug use, although noninjection use of heroin and cocaine persisted as independent risk factors. HCV transmission has been hypothesized to occur through sharing of straws or other devices that deliver the virus to hyperemic and traumatized nasal mucosa.7 Very low income was the strongest socioeconomic correlate of HCV infection. Of particular note, HSV-2 infection was independently associated with HCV infection. The independent association of anti-HCV with HSV-2 infection suggests a possible cofactor for sexual transmission or acquisition of HCV. As has been hypothesized with HIV, HSV-2 infection may serve to increase the efficiency of sexual acquisition of HCV infection through enhanced viral reproduction or by providing a portal of entry through ulceration or inflammation. The cross-sectional design of this study, however, precludes confirmation of this hypothesis and limits causal inference. A similar association between HCV and HSV-2 was shown in a study of heterosexual couples who were HCV serodiscordant.24 Alter et al.1 found that HCV infection was associated with HSV-2 infection in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III study in analyses controlling for age but not for drug use and high-risk sexual behaviors. Similarly, in a recent study among drug users in treatment, Hwang et al.25 found no association between HCV and HSV-2 after controlling for the confounding effects of injection history and sexual risk. We recognize that HSV-2 seropositivity may simply serve as a biological marker for underreported sexual risk in our study. However, understanding the role HSV-2 plays in HCV infection could help reduce the potential sexual risk further and clarify prevention messages regarding sexual transmission.6,26 Furthermore, the high attributable risk suggests, first, that if a causal link is established, HSV-2 infection may be an important determinant of sexually acquired HCV, and second, that reducing exposure through condom use and treatment of symptomatic genital herpes infections could avert many infections. Attributable fraction estimates, which combine information on the prevalence of the exposure with an associated measure of excess risk, provide an estimate of the potential effect of preventive interventions.27 Our study suggested that although injection drug use had a significant excess risk associated with HCV infection, the higher prevalence of HSV-2 infection and noninjection drug use resulted in a larger population attributable fraction estimate for these nonparenteral exposures. Results further implied that prevention and control of HCV infection must focus not only on reducing injection drug use, which has a moderately low prevalence, but also on reducing sexually transmitted infections and noninjection drug exposures. However, the etiologic interpretation of population attributable fraction estimates must be approached with caution because of the wide confidence intervals and potential noncausal associations. Given the modest sample size and the limited focus of the population under study (young women from low-income neighborhoods), the reader must not overinterpret the population attributable fraction estimates, which may be subject to both variability and the bias inherent in observational data. Measures of attributable risk provide an important tool for public health planning and should not be considered alternatives to measures of effect.27,28 We recognize other possible limitations of the data. Only women for whom sera were available were included in the analyses, and although these women constituted 81.4% of the participating sample, they represented only 60% of all the eligible women identified. No observations were made of nonparticipants; thus, nonresponse bias is possible. Comparisons of women with and without sera detected some differences; the most significant was due to lack of sera from some women from San Joaquin County. Nonetheless, omitting San Joaquin from the analyses did not substantially change the principal findings of the study. Readers are also cautioned not to overinterpret results based on 40 confirmed HCV infections. Despite these limitations, our data provide rare population-based estimates of HCV prevalence and related risk factors among young, low-income women. Understanding the epidemiology of HCV infection among women in low-income neighborhoods is a critical first step in designing primary and secondary interventions to mitigate the morbidity and mortality of this emerging infection. The growing evidence linking HSV-2 to HIV and HBV1517,29 points to a potential role for HSV-2 as a cofactor in sexual transmission of HCV as well. Strong empirical evidence supports the efficacy of sexually transmitted infection control as a means of reducing HIV risk through clinical and behavioral intervention.15 Prevention of sexual transmission of HCV should be considered from a similar public health perspective. Although the per-contact likelihood of HCV transmission may be lower than through syringe sharing, a large and growing pool of carriers may generate significant numbers of new infections through sexual intercourse. Because many of the risk factors responsible for HCV infection are also related to risk of other adverse health outcomes, public health efforts aimed at reducing drug use and sexual risk vulnerability in very-low-income women should have multiple positive results.
This work was supported in part by cooperative agreements U62/CCU0200, U62/CCU906250-06, U62/CU902019-12, and U61/CCU902019-13 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Additional funding was provided by the AIDS Office and the STD Prevention and Control Section in the city and county of San Francisco. We would like to acknowledge the following people for their expert assistance with this project: Dr Estie Hudes, for her expert assistance with the population attributable fraction analyses, and Drs Michael Busch and Andrew Moss, for reviewing the manuscript and providing valuable comments. We thank the public health laboratory directors in the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and San Joaquin and the staff of the Viral and Rickettsial Disease Laboratory for performing specimen testing. We thank Dr Gail Bolan and Mr Harold Rasmussen for their support. The Young Women's Survey Team also includes (in alphabetical order): Geneva Bell-Sanford, San Joaquin County Department of Public Health, Calif; Gail Bolan, San Francisco Department of Public Health, Calif; Cynthia Cossin, Viral and Rickettsial Disease Laboratory, Berkeley, Calif; Viva Delgado, San Francisco Department of Public Health, Calif; Carla Dillard Smith, CAL-PEP, Oakland, Calif; Maria Hernandez, San Francisco Department of Public Health, Calif; Tanya Holmes, Alameda County Department of Public Health, Calif; Martin Lynch, Contra Costa County Department of Public Health, Calif; Juan Reardon, Contra Costa County Department of Public Health, Calif; Charlotte Smith, San Mateo County Department of Public Health, Calif; Hypolitta Villa, San Joaquin County Department of Public Health, Calif; and Francis Wiser, San Mateo County Department of Public Health, Calif. The California Department of Health Services Institutional Review Board and local institutional review boards, when available, approved all study protocols and materials.
K. A. Page-Shafer conceptualized and designed the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, and drafted the paper. B. Cahoon-Young helped design the study and conducted laboratory analyses. J. D. Klausner contributed to interpretation of the data and to the writing and critical revisions of the paper. S. Morrow and F. Molitor participated in acquisition of the data, administrative and technical support, and revisions of the paper. J. Ruiz contributed to obtaining funding, acquisition of the data, administrative and material support, and revisions of the paper. W. McFarland contributed to conceptualizing the study, designing the questionnaire, analyzing the data, and the writing and revisions of the paper. The Young Women's Survey Team contributed to the conception of the parent study, acquisition of the data, and technical and material support. Accepted for publication September 30, 2001.
1. Alter MJ, Kruszon-Moran D, Nainan OV, et al. The prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection in the United States, 1988 through 1994. N Engl J Med.1999;341:556562.
2.
Kenny-Walsh E. Clinical outcomes after hepatitis C infection from contaminated anti-D immune globulin. Irish Hepatology Research Group. N Engl J Med.1999;340:12281233. 3. Alter MJ, Margolis HS, Krawczynski K, et al. The natural history of community-acquired hepatitis C in the United States. The Sentinel Counties Chronic Non-A, Non-B Hepatitis Study Team [see comments]. N Engl J Med.1992;327:18991905.[Abstract]
4.
Heathcote EJ, Shiffman ML, Cooksley WG, et al. Peginterferon alfa-2a in patients with chronic hepatitis C and cirrhosis. N Engl J Med.2000;343:16731680. 5. Gish RG. Standards of treatment in chronic hepatitis C. Semin Liver Dis.1999;19:3547. 6. Alter MJ. Epidemiology of hepatitis C. Hepatology.1997;26:62S65S.[Medline]
7.
Conry-Cantilena C, VanRaden M, Gibble J, et al. Routes of infection, viremia, and liver disease in blood donors found to have hepatitis C virus infection [see comments]. N Engl J Med.1996;334:16911696.
8.
MacDonald M, Crofts N, Kaldor J. Transmission of hepatitis C virus: rates, routes, and cofactors. Epidemiol Rev.1996;18:137148. 9. Rooney G, Gilson RJ. Sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus infection. Sex Transm Infect.1998;74:399404.[Abstract] 10. Tor J, Llibre JM, Carbonell M, et al. Sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus and its relation with hepatitis B virus and HIV. BMJ.1990;301:11301133. 11. Bresters D, Mauser-Bunschoten EP, Reesink HW, et al. Sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus. Lancet.1993;342:210211.[Medline] 12. Scaraggi FA, Lomuscio S, Perricci A, De Mitrio V, Napoli N, Schiraldi O. Intrafamilial and sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus. Lancet.1993;342:13001302.[Medline]
13.
Piazza M, Sagliocca L, Tosone G, et al. Sexual transmission of the hepatitis C virus and efficacy of prophylaxis with intramuscular immune serum globulin: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med.1997;157:15371544.
14.
Osmond DH, Padian NS, Sheppard HW, Glass S, Shiboski SC, Reingold A. Risk factors for hepatitis C virus seropositivity in heterosexual couples. JAMA.1993;269:361365. 15. Grosskurth H, Gray R, Hayes R, Mabey D, Wawer M. Control of sexually transmitted diseases for HIV-1 prevention: understanding the implications of the Mwanza and Rakai trials. Lancet.2000;355:19811987.[Medline] 16. Hernandez MT, Klausner JD, McFarland W, et al. Hepatitis B prevalence in young women living in low-income areas: the population-based San Francisco Bay Area's Young Women's Survey. Sex Transm Dis.2000;27:539544.[Medline]
17.
Remis RS, Dufour A, Alary M, et al. Association of hepatitis B virus infection with other sexually transmitted infections in homosexual men. Omega Study Group. Am J Public Health.2000;90:15701574. 18. Mertens TE, Hayes RJ, Smith PG. Epidemiological methods to study the interaction between HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases. AIDS.1990;4:5765.[Medline] 19. 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;47:139.[Medline] 20. Ruiz JD, Molitor F, McFarland W, et al. Prevalence of HIV infection, sexually transmitted diseases, and hepatitis and related risk behavior in young women living in low-income neighborhoods of northern California. West J Med.2000;172:368373.[Medline] 21. Stata, Version 6.0 [computer program]. College Station, Tex: Stata Corp; 1999.
22.
Bruzzi P, Green SB, Byar DP, Brinton LA, Schairer C. Estimating the population attributable risk for multiple risk factors using casecontrol data. Am J Epidemiol.1985;122:904914. 23. Benichou J, Gail MH. Variance calculations and confidence intervals for estimates of the attributable risk based on logistic models. Biometrics.1990;46:9911003.[Medline] 24. Shev S, Widell A, Bergstrom T, Hermodsson S, Lindholm A, Norkrans G. Herpes simplex virus-2 may increase susceptibility of the sexual transmission of hepatitis C. Sex Transm Dis.1995;22:210216.[Medline] 25. Hwang LY, Ross MW, Zack C, Bull L, Rickman K, Holleman M. Prevalence of sexually transmitted infections and associated risk factors among populations of drug abusers. Clin Infect Dis.2000;31:920926.[Medline] 26. Zarski JP, Leroy V. Counselling patients with hepatitis C. J Hepatol.1999;31(suppl):136140.
27.
Northridge ME. Public health methodsattributable risk as a link between causality and public health action [annotation]. Am J Public Health.1995;85:12021204. 28. Vittinghoff E, Padian NS. Attributable risk of exposures associated with sexually transmitted disease. J Infect Dis. 1996;174(suppl 2):S182S187. 29. Hook EW, Cannon RO, Nahmias AJ, et al. Herpes simplex virus infection as a risk factor for human immunodeficiency virus infection in heterosexuals. J Infect Dis.1992;165:251255.[Medline] This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||