Hepatitis C virus genotypes in Adana and Antakya regions of Turkey*

Abstract

Background/aim: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 was found to be dominant in Turkey. In this study, HCV genotypes were examined in the Adana and Antakya regions of Turkey. Materials and methods: The study consisted of 639 HCV-RNA–positive patients with chronic HCV infection in Adana (214 males and 101 females) and Antakya (139 males and 185 females) in Turkey. Real time-polymerase chain reaction was used for genotype determination. Results: In Antakya, it was determined that the percentages of genotypes of type 1a (0.31%), 1b (86.73%), 2 (9.26%), 3 (0.93%), and 4 (2.78%) were compatible with the nationwide results seen in Turkey. In Adana, the percentages of genotypes of type 1a (3.49%), 1b (55.24%), 2 (14.60%), 3 (26.03%), and 4 (0.63%) were found to be different. This difference was mainly due to the infection rates in males: genotype 1b was significantly lower (42.5% versus 82.2%, P < 0.001) in men in Adana, but genotype 2 (17.8% versus 7.9%, P = 0.021) and genotype 3 (34.6% versus 7.9%, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in men than in women in Adana. Conclusion: Rates of genotypes 2 and 3 were unexpectedly high in Adana compared to other parts of Turkey

Background/aim: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 was found to be dominant in Turkey. In this study, HCV genotypes were examined in the Adana and Antakya regions of Turkey. Materials and methods: The study consisted of 639 HCV-RNA–positive patients with chronic HCV infection in Adana (214 males and 101 females) and Antakya (139 males and 185 females) in Turkey. Real time-polymerase chain reaction was used for genotype determination. Results: In Antakya, it was determined that the percentages of genotypes of type 1a (0.31%), 1b (86.73%), 2 (9.26%), 3 (0.93%), and 4 (2.78%) were compatible with the nationwide results seen in Turkey. In Adana, the percentages of genotypes of type 1a (3.49%), 1b (55.24%), 2 (14.60%), 3 (26.03%), and 4 (0.63%) were found to be different. This difference was mainly due to the infection rates in males: genotype 1b was significantly lower (42.5% versus 82.2%, P < 0.001) in men in Adana, but genotype 2 (17.8% versus 7.9%, P = 0.021) and genotype 3 (34.6% versus 7.9%, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in men than in women in Adana. Conclusion: Rates of genotypes 2 and 3 were unexpectedly high in Adana compared to other parts of Turkey