HCV Screening: Supreme Court Ruling Impact
- A Supreme Court decision with implications for the Affordable Care Act's coverage of preventive health screenings could "dramatically change" early detection of hepatitis C virus, according to research...
- Preventive Services Task Force recommendations that guide ACA policy, specifically the mandate to cover preventive services, including hepatitis C screening and colorectal cancer screening, without cost-sharing.
- "We care for people with hepatitis C complications, and while it's curable, we'd rather prevent cirrhosis and its complications," said Dr.
A Supreme Court ruling could jeopardize access to essential hepatitis C virus (HCV) screenings, perhaps hindering early detection and treatment. The Kennedy v.Braidwood decision challenges ACA mandates for preventive services, risking financial barriers for patients and reversing advancements in the fight against HCV. Dr. Elliot B. Tapper emphasizes the curability of HCV and the importance of screening to prevent severe complications like cirrhosis. This ruling could impact more than 2 million Americans living with hepatitis C. News Directory 3 provides insights into these critical developments. Discover what’s next regarding the future of HCV screening.
ACA Ruling Threatens Hepatitis C Screenings
Table of Contents
Key takeaways:
- A court ruling in Kennedy v. Braidwood could eliminate teh ACA mandate for hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening.
- This could create financial obstacles to screening and undo progress in HCV detection and treatment.
A Supreme Court decision with implications for the Affordable Care Act’s coverage of preventive health screenings could “dramatically change” early detection of hepatitis C virus, according to research in gastro Hep Advances.
Kennedy v. Braidwood challenges U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations that guide ACA policy, specifically the mandate to cover preventive services, including hepatitis C screening and colorectal cancer screening, without cost-sharing. Medical societies have urged the court to uphold the mandate.

“We care for people with hepatitis C complications, and while it’s curable, we’d rather prevent cirrhosis and its complications,” said Dr. Elliot B. Tapper, academic chief of hepatology and associate professor at Michigan Medicine. “Reducing barriers to hepatitis C screening would benefit patients.”
‘A silent disease’
more than 2 million Americans live with HCV, according to Tapper and colleagues. Prevalence has more than doubled in the last decade and is projected to rise.
Research indicates that 55% to 85% of those with acute HCV infection develop chronic disease, and 20% to 25% of those will develop cirrhosis within 25 to 30 years.
“Hepatitis C is frequently enough a silent disease,” Tapper said. “It can take 10 to 30 years to cause liver damage.”
Cirrhosis increases the risk of liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma, with liver-associated death risk rising to 4%.
“People with cirrhosis can develop liver cancer or liver failure requiring a liver transplant,” tapper said. “Hepatitis C was once the leading cause of liver transplant and liver cancer in the U.S.”
Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are curative in most cases and have reduced mortality risk by nearly 43%,saving an estimated $15 billion in medicaid costs.
“We can treat liver cancer, but it’s better to prevent it,” Tapper said.
Costly screening ‘will limit our ability’ for care
Tapper noted that improvements in hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment have led to major advancements in disease management.
The USPSTF’s 2020 recommendation for one-time HCV screening for adults without cost-sharing considerably increased screening rates, the authors wrote.
Screening rates among pregnant women increased from 141 to 253 per 1,000 person-years, and among nonpregnant women, rates rose from 29 to 37 per 1,000 person-years. In 2022, reported acute HCV infections decreased for the first time in over a decade.
“We can now test for and effectively treat hepatitis C,” Tapper said. “this has radically changed chronic liver disease epidemiology in the United States.”
However,screening uptake can still improve.
By reversing ACA coverage mandates, Kennedy v. Braidwood could create new screening barriers, Tapper said.
“Instead of low to no cost, it will be costly, and patients may decline the test,” he said. “That will limit our ability to provide effective preventive care.”
Tapper said the paper aims to raise awareness of preventive screening tests and dispel the belief that HCV screening is “easy.”
“People take it for granted, but if it’s not covered at low or no cost, screening won’t be easy. Our ability to find at-risk people will diminish.”
Tapper and his colleagues wrote the paper to highlight the value of HCV screenings and the repercussions of reversing progress.
“We want people to have access to needed health care, including hepatitis C screening,” he said. “Like colon cancer screening, we want people to know about hepatitis C screening and pressure insurers to cover it.”
