Evaluation of Simplified HCV Diagnostics in HIV/HCV Co-Infected Patients in Myanmar.

To evaluate a decentralised testing model and simplified treatment protocol of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection to facilitate treatment scale-up in Myanmar, this prospective, observational study recruited HIV-HCV co-infected outpatients receiving sofosbuvir/daclatasvir in Yangon, Myanmar. The study examined the outcomes and factors associated with a sustained virological response (SVR). A decentralised "hub-and-spoke" testing model was evaluated where fingerstick capillary specimens were transported by taxi and processed centrally. The performance of the Xpert HCV VL Fingerstick Assay in detecting HCV RNA was compared to the local standard of care ( plasma HCV RNA collected by venepuncture). Between January 2019 and February 2020, 162 HCV RNA-positive individuals were identified; 154/162 (95%) initiated treatment, and 128/154 (84%) returned for their SVR12 visit. A SVR was achieved in 119/154 (77%) participants in the intent-to-treat population and 119/128 (93%) participants in the modified-intent-to-treat population. Individuals receiving an antiretroviral therapy were more likely to achieve a SVR (with an odds ratio (OR) of 7.16, 95% CI 1.03-49.50), while those with cirrhosis were less likely (OR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.88). The sensitivity of the Xpert HCV VL Fingerstick Assay was 99.4% (95% CI 96.7-100.0), and the specificity was 99.2% (95% CI 95.9-99.9). A simplified treatment protocol using a hub-and-spoke testing model of fingerstick capillary specimens can achieve an SVR rate in LMIC comparable to well-resourced high-income settings.

Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population. METHODS: In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895. FINDINGS: We identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively. INTERPRETATION: C-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications. FUNDING: World Health Organization.

Animal bite wounds and their management in tropical Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To define the microbiologic characteristics of animal bites in tropical Australia and the appropriateness of current Australian antimicrobial guidelines for their management. METHODS: This retrospective audit examined hospitalizations in tropical Australia after an animal bite or animal-associated penetrating injury between 2013 and 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of death, intensive care unit admission, amputation, quaternary center transfer, or unplanned rehospitalization. RESULTS: A wide variety of animals were implicated, but snakes (734/1745, 42%), dogs (508/1745, 29%), and cats (153/1745, 9%) were the most common. Hospital presentation after 24 hours (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 68.67 (42.10-112.01)) and a cat-related injury (OR (95% CI): 22.20 (11.18-44.08)) were independently associated with an increased risk of infection. A pathogen not covered by the relevant antimicrobial regimen recommended in Australian guidelines was identified in only 12/1745 (0.7%) cases. The primary outcome occurred in 107/1745 (6%) and was independently associated with tissue trauma (OR (95% CI): 9.29 (6.05-14.25), p<0.001), established deep infection at presentation (OR (95% CI): 2.95 (1.31-6.61), p=0.009) and hospital presentation after 24 hours (OR (95% CI): 1.77 (1.12-2.79), p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A wide variety of animals bite humans in tropical Australia, but empiric antimicrobial regimens recommended in current national guidelines cover almost all the microbiologic isolates from the resulting wounds.