Effectiveness and Safety of Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in Patients With HIV-1 Infection and Ongoing Substance Use Disorder: The BASE Study.

Background: People with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and substance use disorder (PWH/SUD) are at higher risk of nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy. Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) exhibits high rates of efficacy with a favorable adverse event profile. The BASE study (NCT03998176) is a phase 4, single-arm study evaluating the effectiveness and safety of B/F/TAF among PWH/SUD. Methods: Viremic (HIV RNA >1000 copies/mL) PWH/SUD initiated B/F/TAF once daily for 48 weeks (W). The primary endpoint was proportion of participants with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at W24. Secondary endpoints were proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at W48, safety, B/F/TAF adherence (dried blood spot [DBS] concentrations of emtricitabine triphosphate and tenofovir diphosphate [TFV-DP]), substance use (NIDA-ASSIST), and quality of life (SF-12). Results: Forty-three participants were enrolled; 95% reported methamphetamine use. Median age was 38 (range, 21-62) years; 21% were female, 81% White, 14% Black, and 16% Hispanic. Thirty-two (74%) and 21 (49%) participants had HIV RNA <50 copies/mL (intention-to-treat) at W24 and W48, respectively. Seven participants (16%) experienced confirmed virologic failure through W48; 1 developed emergent drug resistance (M184V). Fifteen participants (35%) experienced grade ≥3 adverse events. Five participants (12%) reported suicidal ideation; none resulted in discontinuation. Median DBS concentrations were representative of 5-6 doses/week (TFV-DP, 1603 fmol/punches). NIDA-ASSIST scores declined from baseline to W48 with methamphetamine use decreasing most (-7.9 points; -29%), and SF-12 physical/mental scores increased 1.2 and 7.6 points, respectively. Conclusions: B/F/TAF among a high-risk population of PWH/SUD resulted in an initial 72% viral suppression rate at W24 before dropping to 49% at W48 as retention declined. One participant developed emergent drug resistance (M184V).

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.

Developing Treatment Guidelines During a Pandemic Health Crisis: Lessons Learned From COVID-19.

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.

A Midwestern Academic HIV Clinic Operation during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implementation Strategy and Preliminary Outcomes.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, HIV clinics had to transform care delivery for people with HIV (PWH). We developed a multifaceted telehealth implementation strategy and monitored number of out of care patients (OOC), medical visit frequency (MVF), gap in care (GiC) and viral suppression (VS), and compared measures to baseline data. Between April and October 2020, 1559 visits were scheduled; 328 (21%) were missed, and 63 (4%) were new to care. Of the remaining 1168 follow-up visits, 412 (35%) were telehealth visits. As of October 2020, there were 53 patients OOC, MVF was 55% and GiC was 24% compared to 34, 69% and 14% at baseline, respectively. Overall VS rate remained high at 93% (97% for telehealth and 91% for in-person visits, p = 0.0001). Our implementation strategy facilitated quick provision of telehealth to a third of PWH receiving care in our clinic. While MVF decreased and GiC increased, VS rates remained high.