Interventions to Improve Adherence to Oral Pre-exposure Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

For people at risk of HIV infection, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can reduce the risk of infection in anticipation of exposure to HIV. The effectiveness of PrEP relies upon a user's adherence to their PrEP regimen. We sought to assess the effect of PrEP adherence interventions compared to usual care or another intervention for people at risk of HIV. We searched electronic databases from 2010 onwards for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving persons at risk of HIV randomized to an adherence promoting intervention vs usual care or another intervention. We used network meta-analyses to compare PrEP adherence for all participant populations. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). 21 trials (N = 4917) were included in qualitative analysis (19 in network meta-analyses (N = 4101)). HIV self-testing interventions with adherence feedback elements improved adherence compared to usual care (risk ratio (RR): 1.83, 95%CI 1.19, 2.82). In contrast, HIV self-testing alone was inferior to HIV self-testing with adherence feedback (RR: 0.58, 95%CI 0.37-0.92). Reminders alone also were inferior to HIV self-testing with adherence feedback on adherence (RR: 0.53, 95%CI 0.34-0.84) and had similar effects on adherence as usual care (RR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.86-1.11). Interventions with only one component were inferior for adherence than those with two components (RR: 0.74, 95%CI 0.62-0.88) and those with three components (RR: 0.78, 95%CI 0.65-0.93). The certainty of evidence was moderate for HIV self-testing plus adherence feedback and interventions with two or three components. When designing future PrEP adherence interventions, we recommend strategies with more than one but no more than three components.

Developing a reporting item checklist for studies of HIV drug resistance prevalence or incidence: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate surveillance of HIV drug resistance prevalence is challenged by heterogenous and inadequate data reporting. To address this issue, we recently published reporting guidance documentation for studies of HIV drug resistance prevalence and incidence. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we describe the methods used to develop this reporting guidance. DESIGN: We used a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design involving authors and users of studies of HIV drug resistance prevalence. In the quantitative phase, we conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey (n=51). Survey participants rated various reporting items on whether they are essential to report. Validity ratios were computed to determine the items to discuss in the qualitative phase. In the qualitative phase, two focus group discussions (n=9 in total) discussed this draft item checklist, providing a justification and examples for each item. We conducted a descriptive qualitative analysis of the group discussions to identify emergent themes regarding the qualities of an essential reporting item. RESULTS: We identified 38 potential reporting items that better characterise the study participants, improve the interpretability of study results and clarify the methods used for HIV resistance testing. These items were synthesised to create the reporting item checklist. Qualitative insights formed the basis of the explanation, elaboration, and rationale components of the guidance document. CONCLUSIONS: We generated a list of reporting items for studies on the incidence or prevalence of HIV drug resistance along with an explanation of why researchers believe these items are important. Mixed methods allowed for the simultaneous generation and integration of the item list and qualitative insights. The integrated findings were then further developed to become the subsequently published reporting guidance.

Hydroxychloroquine-Chloroquine, QT-Prolongation, and Major Adverse Cardiac Events: A Meta-analysis and Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the high-quality literature on the frequency and nature of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) associated with either hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) or chloroquine (CQ). DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Cochrane Central from 1996 onward using search strategies created in collaboration with medical science librarians. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English language from January 1996 to September 2022, involving adult patients at least 18 years of age, were selected. Outcomes of interest were death, arrhythmias, syncope, and seizures. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with a Treatment Arm Continuity Correction for single and double zero event studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: By study drug, there were 31 HCQ RCTs (n = 6677), 9 CQ RCTs (n = 622), and 1 combined HCQ-CQ trial (n = 105). Mortality was the most commonly reported MACE at 220 of 255 events (86.3%), with no reports of torsades de pointes or sudden cardiac death. There was no increased risk of MACE with exposure to HCQ-CQ compared with control (risk ratio [RR] = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69-1.17, I2 = 0%). RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: These findings have important implications with respect to patient reassurance and updated guidance for prescribing practices of these medications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite listing as QT-prolonging meds, HCQ-CQ did not increase the risk of MACE.