# Talk:Hepatitis C

please change ((Georgia)) to ((Georgia (country)|Georgia))

 Done and thanks Cannolis (talk) 13:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

"arond" = "around" 2605:E000:9149:A600:1DC2:1921:F704:7FAB (talk) 07:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done with thanks, NiciVampireHeart 09:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys!
I expanded the vaccination recommendation sentence in Treatment for better quality. -Mwright1469 (talk) 23:56, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys!
What do we think about converting Medications into a table format for better clarity?
A simpler version of [1] would reduce clutter and make the section more engaging.
-Mwright1469 (talk) 00:21, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I not needed, plus there is the concern that it implied liver failure and liver cancer are not life threatening.
"In some cases, those with cirrhosis will develop complications such as liver failure, liver cancer, or dilated blood vessels in the esophagus and stomach."
All are life threatening.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

If it is not serious it is not much of a complication. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Knowing a number of patients that have died from this and having discussed it with those people and their families they absolutely were not aware of the seriousness of this complication. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Also, relative to the question as to why this complication of the disease merits note as being "life-threatening"? The reason as to why this is beneficial to have in this article is that non-medical/scientific readers who are not familiar with varices (particularly esophageal varices) will be better informed of this issue. This is as opposed to issues like liver failure and liver cancer that are self-evident for being fatal complications to this disease even for non-medical, non-scientific readers. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 10:25, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
It would be better to simple refer to all of them as serious. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds logical, still, in the interest of better informing our readers varices should be given due respect. Average readers are not going to be familiar with varices that do lead to death while they almost certainly will be familiar with those better known complications. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 10:38, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks your most recent change works for me. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:25, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Seemed like a reasonable solution but honestly as you've expressed previously liver failure and liver cancer are given to be serious. Varices not so much. Your suggested "serious" edit more or less groups varices in the same level as the two others so that essentially covers it. As a side note, I know that you work very extensively on wikipedia and related projects and have done so for many years particularly with respect to medical articles and you deserve recognition for that, so thank you for helping to improve the project in the ways that you focus on. OmniArticleEditor (talk) 14:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Jay Hodec This reference https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/hcvfaq.htm
Says "Over 90% of HCV infected persons can be cured of HCV infection regardless of HCV genotype, with 8-12 weeks of oral therapy"
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:37, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

The CDC reference that was originally cited (archived), and which I thus checked, said 80-95%. As far as I know, if the intended reference is the current one, the archived one should not be given. Anyway, as said, the ~90% figure is given earlier, and since the following paragraph of the Wiki article goes on to discuss treatment success rates of earlier treatments:
"Prior to 2011, treatments consisted of a combination of pegylated interferon alpha and ribavirin for a period of 24 or 48 weeks, depending on HCV genotype. This produces cure rates of between 70 and 80% for genotype 2 and 3, respectively, and 45 to 70% for genotypes 1 and 4."
... It made more sense to me contextually to include the figures/info from the source that indicated that treatment advancements have been made in the not so recent past. Sofosbuvir was a big step forward in terms of HepC treatment, and it may be worth at least suggesting this; even I have had it seared in my memory that HepC is a pain to treat/cure, and I'm on the younger side.
By the way, I think it is standard practice on Wiki to add references within the brackets if all the information, and only the information given in the brackets is based on a certain inline citation.
Also: averaging figures given as ranges ... How is this OK? Is there some guideline regarding this, or is there some Wiki convention? When figures are given as a range, e.g. 10-50%, it could mean that these are the extremes given by various primary sources on which the secondary source draws upon, or it could apply to different groups (age, ethnicity, etc.). Thus, it doesn't seem to me at least intuitively reasonable to just give averages ...
Kind regards, -J Jay Hodec (talk) 20:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
User:Thinkinink
Questioned this as well when making copy edits to simplify and add clarity. I added "Depending on a variety of patient factors," to the Spontaneous Resolution statement that "between 15–45% of those with hepatitis C will spontaneously clear the virus within six months." These factors make the percentage spread make sense, though the ranges under No Prior Treatment could use some explaining.
--Thinkinink (talk) 20:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Recommendations (32) on what to do with HCV in chronic kidney disease: doi:10.7326/M19-1539 JFW | T@lk 14:33, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I am working in Infectious Diseases in British Columbia, Canada. We see a large number of hepatitis C patients. A screening tool used to assess the severity of hepatic fibrosis in these patients is a Fibroscan. Adding this method of monitoring for both the need for treatment aswell as the progress of the patient's over hepatic health would be very beneficial to this topic, as one does not need biopsies to assess fibrosis anymore. Thank you EDIT: Please see Elastography Wikipedia link.PenguinKowalski (talk) 21:57, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

In section "Surgery": reinfetcted -> reinfected 65.112.8.53 (talk) 01:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for pointing it out.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 01:24, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32320-7 JFW | T@lk 11:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54418463  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C1:C001:E860:6154:8770:91BF:16C8 (talk) 10:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC) 

A note about the 2020 Nobel Prize in Medicine has since been added to the article. -- Beland (talk) 07:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

This is a really controversial subject which is not treated in that way in this article. For instance, there have been no reported reactivations of hepatitis C infection in persons who successfully have been treated against hepatitis C and that later receive immunosuppressive treatment. This is the opposite to occult hepatitis B which is well described combined with a plausable theory of how occult infection is maintained.
It´s also suspicious that the majority of citations is from a group propagating for the existence of occult hepatitis C infection, a condition not generally accepted among hepatitis C researchers.
I recommend a total make-over of that section to improve the quality of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eda001 (talk • contribs) 09:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

A lot of information in this article is out of date and incorrect. Some parts are updated to current practice (DAA treatment for different genotypes) while other parts, like post-transplant treatment and research, are hopelessly out of date (seems to be written around 2011-2014). 
This article doesn´t meet the criteria for high quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eda001 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

This was added. It is based on a primary source so not quite suitable:

Interestingly, the ability to produce interferon lambda 4 (i.e., carriage of IFNL4 rs12979860 CT or TT genotype), in addition to male gender, absent/mild steatosis, and lower viral load, augments antibody levels against HCV. Waldenström J, Hellstrand K, Westin J, Nilsson S, Christensen P, Färkkilä M, Mørch K, Langeland N, Norkrans G, Lagging M. "Presence of Interferon-λ 4, Male Gender, Absent/Mild Steatosis and Low Viral Load Augment Antibody Levels to Hepatitis C Virus". Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology. doi:10.1080/00365521.2021.1922750. PMID 34078234.
Comments welcome. JFW | T@lk 21:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

WHO's latest reports and newer data sources are now available, but updating this section may take some time. Worldwide infection, mortality and treatment numbers have been updated, as has the "infection rate by country" map. More edits to this section and possibly reorganizing paragraph/data order would e helpful.
--Thinkinink (talk) 18:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

There can be symptoms. I will edit this in a few days 216.197.136.87 (talk) 02:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

This NPR piece was quite interesting, and probably deserves mention with medical sources: Hep C has a secret strategy to evade the immune system. And now we know what it is -- Beland (talk) 07:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

This is the original paper in Nature:
Sherwood, A. V., Rivera-Rangel, L. R., Ryberg, L. A., Larsen, H. S., Anker, K. M., Costa, R., Vågbø, C. B., Jakljevič, E., Pham, L. V., Fernandez-Antunez, C., Indrisiunaite, G., Podolska-Charlery, A., Grothen, J. E. R., Langvad, N. W., Fossat, N., Offersgaard, A., Al-Chaer, A., Nielsen, L., Kuśnierczyk, A., Sølund, C., Weis, N., Gottwein, J. M., Holmbeck, K., Bottaro, S., Ramirez, S., Bukh, J., Scheel, T. K. H., Vinther, J. (2023). "Hepatitis C virus RNA is 5′-capped with flavin adenine dinucleotide". Nature. 619 (7971): 811–818. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06301-3. ISSN 0028-0836.
Capped mRNA is common among eukaryotes and many viruses but not hepatitis C virus. This report shows that hepatitis C virus uses a cellular product as a cap instead during the viruses replication, which has a similar function. Although this is interesting, it's sensationalising to call it a "secret strategy". I'm not sure if NPR passes WP:MEDRS as a reliable medical source, but if used with caution the Nature paper, despite being a primary source, would probably be suitable. We could add a sentence to the article along the lines of "although not capped, hepatitis mRNA attaches to a cell-derived metabolite (flavin adenine dinucleotide) which serves a similar function" and cite the Nature paper, but this would be better placed in Hepatitis  C virus article. Graham Beards (talk) 08:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

The History section feels polemical against the medical consensus on the disease and is downright conspiratorial in parts. I think it could do with some serious rework. Typedrat (talk) 02:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)