Association of Self-reported Systemic Reactions Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination With Immunological Response in the Danish National Cohort Study of Effectiveness and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines (ENFORCE).

Background: Side effects to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are a key concern contributing to vaccine hesitancy, but more individuals may be encouraged if SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were known to lead to a stronger immune response. Methods: Included were adult participants from the Danish National Cohort Study of Effectiveness and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines (ENFORCE) who completed a questionnaire to assess systemic reactions following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (BTN162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1) and had SARS-CoV-2 spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels measured at baseline and post-vaccine. A symptom score was developed to measure severity of systemic adverse reactions (+1 for each moderate, +2 for each severe). Post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG levels were compared between participants with different scores using multivariable linear regression. Results: A total of 6528 participants were included (56.3% females; median age [interquartile range], 64 [54-75] years). After the first vaccination, no association was found between symptom score and post-vaccine dose spike IgG level (P = .575). Following the second vaccination, significantly higher spike IgG levels were observed according to higher symptom scores (P < .001); adjusted geometric mean ratios were 1.16 (95% CI, 1.04-1.30), 1.24 (95% CI, 1.09-1.41), 1.25 (95% CI, 1.06-1.46), and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.08-1.35), for scores of 2, 3, 4, and ≥5, respectively, compared with a score of 0. After adjustment for pre-vaccine dose spike IgG, this association was attenuated. Conclusions: An association was found between more severe adverse reactions and stronger antibody response after the second vaccination but not the first, likely attributed to higher levels of preexisting immunity gained from response to first vaccination. Regardless of side effects, most people experienced an effective immune response following vaccination.

Changes in body mass index and clinical outcomes after initiation of contemporary antiretroviral regimens.

BACKGROUND: Weight gain is becoming increasingly prevalent amongst people with HIV (PWH) receiving contemporary antiretroviral treatment. We investigated BMI changes and clinical impact in a large prospective observational study. METHODS: PWH aged ≥18 years were included who started a new antiretroviral (baseline) during 2010-2019 with baseline and ≥1 follow-up BMI assessment available. Rates of clinical outcomes (cardiovascular disease [CVD], malignancies, diabetes mellitus [DM] and all-cause mortality) were analysed using Poisson regression to assess effect of time-updated BMI changes (>1 kg/m 2 decrease, ±1 kg/m 2 stable, >1 kg/m 2 increase), lagged by 1-year to reduce reverse causality. Analyses were adjusted for baseline BMI plus key confounders including antiretroviral exposure. RESULTS: 6721 PWH were included; 72.3% were male, median age 48 years (interquartile range [IQR] 40-55). At baseline, 8.4% were antiretroviral-naive, and 5.0% were underweight, 59.7% healthy weight, 27.5% overweight, and 7.8% were living with obesity. There was an 8.2% increase in proportion of overweight and 4.8% in obesity over the study period (median follow-up 4.4 years [IQR 2.6-6.7]).100 CVDs, 149 malignancies, 144 DMs, and 257 deaths were observed with incidence rates 4.4, 6.8, 6.6, 10.6 per 1000 person-years of follow-up, respectively. Compared to stable BMI, >1 kg/m 2 increase was associated with increased risk of DM (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36-2.80) and >1 kg/m 2 decrease with increased risk of death (adjusted IRR: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.73-3.13). No significant associations were observed between BMI changes and CVD or malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: A BMI increase was associated with DM and a decrease associated with death.

The clinical benefits of antiretroviral therapy in severely immunocompromised HIV-1-infected patients with and without complete viral suppression.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a protective effect of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) on the development of clinical events in patients with ongoing severe immunosuppression. METHODS: A total of 3,780 patients from the EuroSIDA study under follow-up after 2001 with a current CD4(+) T-cell count ≤200 cells/mm(3) were stratified into five groups: group 1, viral load (VL)<50 copies/ml on cART; group 2, VL 50-99,999 copies/ml on cART; group 3, VL 50-99,999 copies/ml off cART; group 4, VL≥100,000 copies/ml on cART; and group 5, VL≥100,000 copies/ml off cART. Poisson regression was used to identify the risk of (non-fatal or fatal) AIDS- and non-AIDS-related events considered together (AIDS/non-AIDS) or separately as AIDS or non-AIDS events within each group. RESULTS: There were 428 AIDS/non-AIDS events during 3,780 person-years of follow-up. Compared with group 1, those in group 2 had a similar incidence of AIDS/non-AIDS events (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.04; 95% CI 0.79-1.36). Groups 3, 4 and 5 had significantly higher incidence rates of AIDS/non-AIDS events compared with group 1; incidence rates increased from group 3 (IRR 1.78; 95% CI 1.25-2.55) to group 5 (IRR 2.36; 95% CI 1.66-3.40), demonstrating the increased incidence of AIDS/non-AIDS events associated with increasing viraemia. After adjustment, the use of cART was associated with a 40% reduction in the incidence of AIDS/non-AIDS events in patients with VL 50-99,999 copies/ml (IRR 0.59; 95% CI 0.41-0.85) and in those with a VL>100,000 copies/ml (IRR 0.66; 95% CI 0.44-1.00). Similar relationships were seen for non-AIDS events and AIDS events when considered separately. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ongoing severe immunosuppression, cART was associated with significant clinical benefits in patients with suboptimal virological control or virological failure.

Estimating prevalence of accumulated HIV-1 drug resistance in a cohort of patients on antiretroviral therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Estimating the prevalence of accumulated HIV drug resistance in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) is difficult due to lack of resistance testing at all occasions of virological failure and in patients with undetectable viral load. A method to estimate this for 6498 EuroSIDA patients who were under follow-up on ART at 1 July 2008 was therefore developed by imputing data on patients with no prior resistance test results, based on the probability of detecting resistance in tested patients with similar profiles. METHODS: Using all resistance test results available, predicted intermediate/high-level resistance to specific drug classes [nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and protease inhibitors (PIs)] was derived using the Stanford algorithm v5.1.2. Logistic regression models were then employed to estimate predicted probability of resistance to each drug class for given values of current viral load, history of virological failure and previous virological suppression. Based on these predicted probabilities and patients' covariate profiles, estimates of prevalence in 5355 patients with no prior test results were obtained. Overall prevalence of resistance was estimated by pooling these data with those observed in the remaining 1143 tested patients. RESULTS: Prevalence of NRTI, NNRTI and PI resistance was estimated as 43% (95% confidence interval: 39%-46%), 15% (13%-18%) and 25% (22%-28%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This method provides estimates for the proportion of treated patients in a cohort who harbour resistance on a given date, which are less likely to be affected by selection bias due to missing resistance data and will allow us to estimate prevalence of resistance to different drug classes at specific timepoints in HIV-infected populations on ART.

Absence of a relation between efavirenz plasma concentrations and toxicity-driven efavirenz discontinuations in the EuroSIDA study.

BACKGROUND: Co1nflicting data exist regarding the effect of efavirenz (EFV) plasma concentrations on central nervous system (CNS) toxicity. We aimed to determine whether patients with high EFV plasma concentrations have an increased likelihood of toxicity-driven EFV discontinuations. METHODS: EFV plasma concentrations were measured from patients in the EuroSIDA study starting EFV after 1 January 1999. Patients with a plasma concentration available were divided into those that discontinued EFV because of any toxicity or by the choice of the patient or physician within 2 years (TOXPC group) and those that continued EFV for > or = 2 years (no toxicity group). Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to investigate the effects of the EFV plasma concentration and those of other potentially relevant factors on the risk of toxicity-induced EFV discontinuations. RESULTS: A total of 843 patients were included. Of these patients, 138 patients (16.4%) discontinued EFV because of TOXPC and 705 (83.6%) patients continued EFV for 22 years. A total of 20 (14.5%) patients in the TOXPC group had high EFV plasma concentrations (>4.0 mg/l) compared with 99 (14.0%) patients in the no toxicity group (P = 0.890). A positive hepatitis C status (P = 0.026), but not the EFV plasma concentration, was an independent predictor of toxicity-driven EFV discontinuations. CONCLUSIONS: No association was found between EFV plasma concentrations and the risk of EFV discontinuations because of (CNS) toxicity. This result questions the designation of EFV plasma concentrations >4.0 mg/l as being 'toxic', at least when defined by treatment discontinuation.

Incidence of abacavir hypersensitivity reactions in euroSIDA.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the incidence of abacavir-related hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) and associated deaths in EuroSIDA HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: Poisson regression models were developed to compare incidence of abacavir discontinuation according to the line of therapy within which abacavir was received, geographical regions, calendar time and drug formulation (abacavir/lamivudine combination tablet versus abacavir as a single drug or abacavir/zidovudine/lamivudine combination). RESULTS: Of 3,278 patients that started abacavir, 2,101 (64.1%) discontinued. Of these, 167 (5.1%) discontinued abacavir within 3 months due to HSR with an incidence of 22.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.7-25.4) per 100 person-years of follow-up. After adjustment for gender, prior AIDS, hepatitis C serostatus, baseline CD4+ T-cell count, region and calendar time, HSR incidence was significantly higher in those starting abacavir in a first-line regimen compared with second-line (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 2.04 [95% CI 1.24-3.38]; P=0.005). There was no significant difference between regions. HSR incidence from 2005 onwards was significantly lower compared with 1999-2000 (IRR 0.54 [95% CI 0.32-0.92]; P=0.024). There was a lower observed incidence in patients starting abacavir/lamivudine compared with other formulations (IRR 0.33 [95% CI 0.13-0.88]; P=0.027), however, available data were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of abacavir-related HSR is higher in patients starting abacavir in first-line therapy, which could indicate increased over-diagnosis. HSR incidence has decreased in recent years, which might reflect the wider availability of genetic screening and improved awareness of symptoms. There were no reported deaths due to abacavir HSR.

Transmitted drug resistant HIV-1 and association with virologic and CD4 cell count response to combination antiretroviral therapy in the EuroSIDA Study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate prevalence of transmitted drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus (TDR) and factors associated with TDR and to compare virological and CD4 count response to combination antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: In this study, 525 mostly chronically infected EuroSIDA patients were included who had genotypic resistance tests performed on plasma samples collected while antiretroviral therapy naive. TDR was defined as at least one resistance mutation from a list proposed for genotypic TDR surveillance. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with detection of TDR, with virological (viral load<500 copies/mL) and CD4 count response (>or=50% increase) to combination antiretroviral therapy at months 6-12. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of TDR was 11.4%, which was stable over 1996-2004. There were no significant differences in virological suppression (those resistant to at least one drug prescribed versus susceptible), adjusted odds ratio: 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.27 to 1.71; P=0.408) or CD4 count response, adjusted odds ratio: 1.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 3.73; P=0.231). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of TDR in antiretroviral-naive patients was found to be in line with other European studies. No significant differences were found in virological and CD4 count response after initiation of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy between resistant and susceptible patients, possibly due to the small number of patients with resistance and consequently low power.

Comparison of genotypic resistance profiles and virological response between patients starting nevirapine and efavirenz in EuroSIDA.

OBJECTIVE: To compare virological outcome and genotypic resistance profiles in HIV-1-infected patients starting non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-containing regimens. METHODS: NNRTI-naive patients were included who started treatment with nevirapine (NVP) or efavirenz (EFV) with genotypic resistance test results available at time of initiation (baseline). Virological failure was defined as two consecutive values > 500 copies/ml after starting the regimen. Cox models were used to investigate time to virological failure (the first of two values). RESULTS: A total of 759 patients were included (13% antiretroviral-naive): 389 initiated NVP and 370 initiated EFV. Baseline IAS-USA NNRTI resistance mutations were detected in 3%. Using the Rega algorithm (version 7.1) to interpret resistance, 460 (64%) patients had resistance (full or intermediate) to at least one drug they were starting (69% NVP, 60% EFV, P = 0.011); 287 (74%) NVP and 168 (45%) EFV patients experienced virological failure after treatment initiation, P < 0.001. After adjustment for previous antiretroviral use, previous AIDS, year started NNRTI, CD4 cell count (baseline, nadir), viral load (baseline, maximum), and baseline drug resistance (measured by Rega), the relative hazards (EFV versus NVP) of virological failure was 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.65, P < 0.001. At time of virological failure, comparable levels of NNRTI resistance were detected. The K103N mutation emerged more in patients failing EFV and Y181C in patients failing NVP. CONCLUSIONS: NVP may be associated with an inferior virological outcome compared to EFV in NNRTI-naive patients with extensive resistance to other drug classes. The profile of NNRTI resistance mutations when virologically failing an NNRTI-containing regimen appears to depend on the NNRTI the patients fail.

Regional changes over time in initial virologic response rates to combination antiretroviral therapy across Europe.

BACKGROUND: Changes in virologic response to initial combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) over calendar time may indicate improvements in cART or emergence of primary resistance. Regional variations may identify differences in available antiretroviral drugs or patient management. METHODS: Virologic response (viral load < 500 copies/mL) 6 to 12 months after starting cART was analyzed in antiretroviral-naive EuroSIDA patients. Analyses were stratified by region (south, central west, north, east) or time started cART (early, 1996-1997; mid, 1998-1999; late, 2000-1904). RESULTS: Virologic suppression was achieved by 60% of 2102 patients: 57% south (n = 560), 61% central west (n = 466), 63% north (n = 606), 58% east (n = 470) (P = 0.091). An increase was observed over time: 52% early cART, 56% mid cART, 69% late cART (P < 0.001). Overall, there were significant effects of region (P = 0.026) and time (P < 0.001) on virologic response after adjustment for confounders. Stratified by period, regional differences were less evident (early cART, P = 0.967; mid cART, P = 0.291; late cART, P = 0.163). Stratified by region, temporal changes were observed (south, P = 0.061; central west, P < 0.001; north: P = 0.070; east, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was some evidence of regional differences in initial virologic response to cART. Improvements over time were observed, suggesting that so far, the effect of primary resistance has not been of sufficient magnitude to prevent increasing suppression rates.

HIV-1 subtypes and response to combination antiretroviral therapy in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) may vary in ability to suppress viral load and increase CD4+ T-cell count in people infected with different HIV-1 subtypes, possibly due to differences in resistance development. Antiretroviral drugs have predominantly been developed in Western Europe/North America on the basis of the most prevalent subtype, B. However, non-B subtypes are increasingly spreading worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To compare virological and immunological response to cART between patients infected with B and non-B subtypes across Europe. DESIGN: EuroSIDA prospective, observational cohort with 11,928 HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: Response to cART was analysed in patients with subtypes determined pre-cART, via multivariable logistic regression on the first measurements 6-12 months after starting cART. A virological response was defined as a viral load <500 copies/mi and immunological response as a CD4+ T-cell count increase of > or =100 cells/mm(3). RESULTS: Forty-five percent of patients were antiretroviral naive at initiation of cART. Virological suppression was achieved by 58% of 689 subtype-B-infected patients and 66% of 102 non-B-infected patients (P=0.159). After adjustment for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in odds of achieving virological suppression (non-B compared with B; odds ratio [OR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-1.93, P=0.866). An immunological response was achieved by 43% of 753 B-infected patients and 48% of 114 non-B-infected patients (P=0.334). After adjustment, there was no significant difference in odds of an immunological response (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.73-1.87, P=0.524). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of significant differences in virological or immunological response to cART between patients infected with HIV-1 B and non-B subtypes.