The determinants of poor respiratory health status in adults living with human immunodeficiency virus infection.

The increased longevity afforded by combination antiretroviral therapy in developed countries has led to an increased concern regarding senescence-related diseases in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Previous epidemiologic analyses have demonstrated an increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, as well as a significant burden of respiratory symptoms in HIV-infected patients. We performed the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) in 199 HIV-positive men, and determined the predominant factors contributing to poor respiratory-related health status. In univariate analyses, worse SGRQ scores were associated with respiratory-related variables such as greater smoking pack-year history (p=0.028), lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (p<0.001), and worse emphysema severity as quantified by computed tomographic imaging (p=0.017). In addition, HIV-specific variables, such as a history of plasma viral load >100,000 copies/mL (p=0.043), lower nadir CD4 cell count (p=0.040), and current CD4 cell count ≤350 cells/µL (p=0.005), as well as elevated levels of inflammatory markers, specifically plasma interleukin (IL)-6 (p=0.002) and alpha-1 antitrypsin (p=0.005) were also associated with worse SGRQ scores. In a multiple regression model, FEV1, current CD4 count ≤350 cells/µL, and IL-6 levels remained significant contributors to reduced respiratory-related health status. HIV disease activity as measured by HIV-related immunosuppression in conjunction with the triggering of key inflammatory pathways may be important determinants of worse respiratory health status among HIV-infected individuals. Limitations of this analysis include the absence of available echocardiograms, diffusion capacity and lung volume testing, and an all-male cohort due to the demographics of the clinic population.

Evaluation of treatment tolerability, satisfaction and laboratory parameters in HIV+ patients switching from ritonavir capsule to tablet formulation.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated treatment satisfaction, gastrointestinal tolerability, depressive symptoms and alterations in laboratory parameters before and after switching from ritonavir capsule to tablet formulation. METHODS: HIV+ adults switching from ritonavir capsules to tablets were eligible for the study. The HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ), Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and CES-D Depression inventory were self-administered before, and 3-4 months after switching. Results of laboratory tests within three months of each questionnaire were collected. A subset underwent plasma drug level sampling. Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used for comparison of continuous variables and McNemar's test for dichotomised data. RESULTS: Most of the 71 participants were Caucasian men, median age 51 years. Participants were taking ritonavir in combination with either atazanavir (n=48 [67.6%]), darunavir (n=18 [25.4%]), fosamprenavir (n=3 [4.2%]) or saquinavir (n=2 [2.8%]). In general after the switch to tablets, participants reported improved treatment satisfaction (median [interquartile range] HIVTSQ score 53/60 [48, 58] after vs 49/60 [45, 54] before, p <0.001), fewer gastrointestinal symptoms (GSRS score 4/45 [1, 9] vs 5/45 [3,13], p < 0.001) and had higher HDL cholesterol (1.22 mmol/L [1.07, 1.45] vs 1.09 mmol/L [0.90,1.32], p = 0.003) and lower total cholesterol/HDL ratio (3.82 [3.05, 4.40] vs 4.23 [3.45, 4.84], p<0.001). There were no significant changes in plasma viral load, CD4 counts, depression scores, or atazanavir or ritonavir trough levels. CONCLUSION: Results of this study suggest that the newer tablet formulation of ritonavir is better tolerated and has fewer gastrointestinal side effects than the older capsule formulation.

The financial cost of doctors emigrating from sub-Saharan Africa: human capital analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the lost investment of domestically educated doctors migrating from sub-Saharan African countries to Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. DESIGN: Human capital cost analysis using publicly accessible data. SETTINGS: Sub-Saharan African countries. PARTICIPANTS: Nine sub-Saharan African countries with an HIV prevalence of 5% or greater or with more than one million people with HIV/AIDS and with at least one medical school (Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), and data available on the number of doctors practising in destination countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The financial cost of educating a doctor (through primary, secondary, and medical school), assuming that migration occurred after graduation, using current country specific interest rates for savings converted to US dollars; cost according to the number of source country doctors currently working in the destination countries; and savings to destination countries of receiving trained doctors. RESULTS: In the nine source countries the estimated government subsidised cost of a doctor's education ranged from $21,000 (£13,000; €15,000) in Uganda to $58,700 in South Africa. The overall estimated loss of returns from investment for all doctors currently working in the destination countries was $2.17bn (95% confidence interval 2.13bn to 2.21bn), with costs for each country ranging from $2.16m (1.55m to 2.78m) for Malawi to $1.41bn (1.38bn to 1.44bn) for South Africa. The ratio of the estimated compounded lost investment over gross domestic product showed that Zimbabwe and South Africa had the largest losses. The benefit to destination countries of recruiting trained doctors was largest for the United Kingdom ($2.7bn) and United States ($846m). CONCLUSIONS: Among sub-Saharan African countries most affected by HIV/AIDS, lost investment from the emigration of doctors is considerable. Destination countries should consider investing in measurable training for source countries and strengthening of their health systems.