4.4 Article

Changing epidemiology of HCV and HBV infections in northern Italy - A survey in the general population

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 42, 期 5, 页码 527-532

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e318030e3ab

关键词

HBV; HCV; epidemiology; general population; immigrants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To evaluate the hepatitis B virus (HBV) and the hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemiology in the general population of Northern Italy, a cohort of 965 subjects, all residents (including 47 immigrants), were anonymously tested for HBV and HCV infections. Material and Methods: Serum samples were assayed for anti-HCV and anti-HBV markers by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and for HCV-RNA by polymerase chain reaction, and the positive cases were genotyped. HBsAg-positive cases were assayed for HBeAg/anti-HBe, whereas HBsAg negatives were tested for both anti-HBc and anti-HBs. Results: The overall prevalence of anti-HCV was 2.6%, with a bimodal distribution characterized by the highest prevalence (12%) in subjects over 75 years old. None of the subjects under 25 years old was anti-HCV positive. Anti-HCV positivity was similar in males and females (2.4% vs. 2.7%). HCV-RNA was positive in 40% of cases and genotype 1 was the most common. The HBsAg prevalence was 1%, with a significant difference according to country of origin (0.8% in Italian subjects vs. 6.4% in immigrants, P = 0.01). HBsAg positivity increased significantly with age (R-2 = 0.57, P < 0.02). The overall percentages for the prevalence of isolated anti-HBs, anti-HBs+/anti-HBc+, and isolated anti-HBc were 23.8%, 8.4%, and 4.2%, respectively. Conclusions: Our study provides a new picture of HCV and HBV epidemiology in Northern Italy, with these features: (1) a cohort effect showing a reduction of HCV infection in the elderly, possible due to age-related mortality; (2) an unchanged overall prevalence of HBV infection, despite continuing immigration of subjects from endemic countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据