Pediatric HIV Case Identification Across 22 PEPFAR-Supported Countries During the COVID-19 Pandemic, October 2019-September 2020.

During 2020, an estimated 150,000 persons aged 0-14 years acquired HIV globally (1). Case identification is the first step to ensure children living with HIV are linked to life-saving treatment, achieve viral suppression, and live long, healthy lives. Successful interventions to optimize pediatric HIV testing during the COVID-19 pandemic are needed to sustain progress toward achieving Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) 95-95-95 targets.* Changes in HIV testing and diagnoses among persons aged 1-14 years (children) were assessed in 22 U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)-supported countries during October 1, 2019-September 30, 2020. This period corresponds to the two fiscal quarters before the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., Q1 and Q2) and the two quarters after the pandemic began (i.e., Q3 and Q4). Testing was disaggregated by age group, testing strategy, and fiscal year quarter. During October 2019-September 2020, PEPFAR supported 4,312,343 HIV tests and identified 74,658 children living with HIV (CLHIV). The number of HIV tests performed was similar during Q1 and Q2, decreased 40.1% from Q2 to Q3, and increased 19.7% from Q3 to Q4. The number of HIV cases identified among children aged 1-14 years (cases identified) increased 7.4% from Q1 to Q2, decreased 29.4% from Q2 to Q3, and increased 3.3% from Q3 to Q4. Although testing in outpatient departments decreased 21% from Q1 to Q4, testing from other strategies increased during the same period, including mobile testing by 38%, facility-based index testing (offering an HIV test to partners and biological children of persons living with HIV) by 8%, and testing children with signs or symptoms of malnutrition within health facilities by 7%. In addition, most tests (61.3%) and cases identified (60.9%) were among children aged 5-14 years (school-aged children), highlighting the need to continue offering HIV testing to older children. These findings provide important information on the most effective strategies for identifying CLHIV during the COVID-19 pandemic. HIV testing programs should continue to use programmatic, surveillance, and financial data at both national and subnational levels to determine the optimal mix of testing strategies to minimize disruptions in pediatric case identification during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Treatment failure related to intrathecal immunoglobulin M (IgM) synthesis, cerebrospinal fluid IgM, and interleukin-10 in patients with hemolymphatic-stage sleeping sickness.

Human African trypanosomiasis treatment is stage dependent, but the tests used for staging are controversial. Central nervous system involvement and its relationship with suramin treatment failure were assessed in 60 patients with parasitologically confirmed hemolymphatic-stage Trypanosoma brucei gambiense infection (white blood cell count of or=1.9 mg/liter (OR, 11.7; 95% CI, 2.7 to 50), a CSF end titer by the LATEX/IgM assay of >or=2 (OR, 10.4; 95% CI, 2.5 to 44), and a CSF interleukin-10 concentration of >10 pg/ml (OR, 5; 95% CI, 1.3 to 20). The sensitivities of these markers for treatment failure ranged from 43 to 79%, and the specificities ranged from 74 to 93%. The results show that T. brucei gambiense-infected patients who have signs of neuroinflammation in CSF and who are treated with drugs recommended for use at the hemolymphatic stage are at risk of treatment failure. This highlights the need for the development and the evaluation of accurate point-of-care tests for the staging of human African trypanosomiasis.

Equivalence trial of melarsoprol and nifurtimox monotherapy and combination therapy for the treatment of second-stage Trypanosoma brucei gambiense sleeping sickness.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of second-stage sleeping sickness relies mainly on melarsoprol. Nifurtimox has been successfully used to cure melarsoprol-refractory sleeping sickness caused by Trypanosoma brucei gambiense infection. METHODS: An open, randomized trial was conducted to test for equivalence between the standard melarsoprol regimen and 3 other regimens, as follows: standard melarsoprol therapy (3 series of 3.6 mg/kg/day intravenously [iv] for 3 days, with 7-day breaks between the series); 10-day incremental-dose melarsoprol therapy (0.6 mg/kg iv on day 1, 1.2 mg/kg iv on day 2, and 1.8 mg/kg iv on days 3-10); nifurtimox monotherapy for 14 days (5 mg/kg orally 3 times per day); and consecutive 10-day melarsoprol-nifurtimox combination therapy (0.6 mg/kg iv melarsoprol on day 1, 1.2 mg/kg iv melarsoprol on day 2, and 1.2 mg/kg/day iv melarsoprol combined with oral 7.5 mg/kg nifurtimox twice a day on days 3-10). Primary outcomes were relapse, severe adverse events, and death attributed to treatment. RESULTS: A total of 278 patients were randomized. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the standard melarsoprol regimen and the other regimens. Encephalopathic syndromes occurred in all groups and caused all deaths that were likely due to treatment. Relapses (n=48) were observed only with the 3 monotherapy regimens. CONCLUSION: A consecutive 10-day low-dose melarsoprol-nifurtimox combination is more effective than the standard melarsoprol regimen.