Prospective study for the early detection of lung carcinoma in patients with HIV infection (GESIDA study 8815).

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer (LC) screening detects tumors early. The prospective GESIDA 8815 study was designed to assess the usefulness of this strategy in HIV + people (PLHIV) by performing a low-radiation computed tomography (CT) scan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 371 heavy smokers patients were included (>20 packs/year), >45 years old and with a CD4+ <200 mm3 nadir. One visit and CT scan were performed at baseline and 4 for follow-up time annually. RESULTS: 329 patients underwent the baseline visit and CT (CT0) and 206 completed the study (CT1 = 285; CT2 = 259; CT3 = 232; CT4 = 206). All were receiving ART. A total >8 mm lung nodules were detected, and 9 early-stage PCs were diagnosed (4 on CT1, 2 on CT2, 1 on CT3 and 2 on CT4). There were no differences between those who developed LC and those who did not in sex, age, CD4+ nadir, previous lung disease, family history, or amount of packets/year. At each visit, other pathologies were diagnosed, mainly COPD, calcified coronary artery and residual tuberculosis lesions. At the end of the study, 38 patients quit smoking and 75 reduced their consumption. Two patients died from LC and 16 from other causes (p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: The design of the present study did not allow us to define the real usefulness of the strategy. Adherence to the test progressively decreased over time. The diagnosis of other thoracic pathologies is very frequent. Including smokers in an early diagnosis protocol for LC could help to quit smoking.

Development and validation of a prediction model for 30-day mortality in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: the COVID-19 SEIMC score.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model of mortality in patients with COVID-19 attending hospital emergency rooms. DESIGN: Multivariable prognostic prediction model. SETTING: 127 Spanish hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Derivation (DC) and external validation (VC) cohorts were obtained from multicentre and single-centre databases, including 4035 and 2126 patients with confirmed COVID-19, respectively. INTERVENTIONS: Prognostic variables were identified using multivariable logistic regression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Patients' characteristics in the DC and VC were median age 70 and 61 years, male sex 61.0% and 47.9%, median time from onset of symptoms to admission 5 and 8 days, and 30-day mortality 26.6% and 15.5%, respectively. Age, low age-adjusted saturation of oxygen, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, estimated glomerular filtration rate by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation, dyspnoea and sex were the strongest predictors of mortality. Calibration and discrimination were satisfactory with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve with a 95% CI for prediction of 30-day mortality of 0.822 (0.806-0.837) in the DC and 0.845 (0.819-0.870) in the VC. A simplified score system ranging from 0 to 30 to predict 30-day mortality was also developed. The risk was considered to be low with 0-2 points (0%-2.1%), moderate with 3-5 (4.7%-6.3%), high with 6-8 (10.6%-19.5%) and very high with 9-30 (27.7%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: A simple prediction score, based on readily available clinical and laboratory data, provides a useful tool to predict 30-day mortality probability with a high degree of accuracy among hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

Identification and validation of clinical phenotypes with prognostic implications in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical presentation of COVID-19 in patients admitted to hospital is heterogeneous. We aimed to determine whether clinical phenotypes of patients with COVID-19 can be derived from clinical data, to assess the reproducibility of these phenotypes and correlation with prognosis, and to derive and validate a simplified probabilistic model for phenotype assignment. Phenotype identification was not primarily intended as a predictive tool for mortality. METHODS: In this study, we used data from two cohorts: the COVID-19@Spain cohort, a retrospective cohort including 4035 consecutive adult patients admitted to 127 hospitals in Spain with COVID-19 between Feb 2 and March 17, 2020, and the COVID-19@HULP cohort, including 2226 consecutive adult patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Madrid between Feb 25 and April 19, 2020. The COVID-19@Spain cohort was divided into a derivation cohort, comprising 2667 randomly selected patients, and an internal validation cohort, comprising the remaining 1368 patients. The COVID-19@HULP cohort was used as an external validation cohort. A probabilistic model for phenotype assignment was derived in the derivation cohort using multinomial logistic regression and validated in the internal validation cohort. The model was also applied to the external validation cohort. 30-day mortality and other prognostic variables were assessed in the derived phenotypes and in the phenotypes assigned by the probabilistic model. FINDINGS: Three distinct phenotypes were derived in the derivation cohort (n=2667)-phenotype A (516 [19%] patients), phenotype B (1955 [73%]) and phenotype C (196 [7%])-and reproduced in the internal validation cohort (n=1368)-phenotype A (233 [17%] patients), phenotype B (1019 [74%]), and phenotype C (116 [8%]). Patients with phenotype A were younger, were less frequently male, had mild viral symptoms, and had normal inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype B included more patients with obesity, lymphocytopenia, and moderately elevated inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype C included older patients with more comorbidities and even higher inflammatory parameters than phenotype B. We developed a simplified probabilistic model (validated in the internal validation cohort) for phenotype assignment, including 16 variables. In the derivation cohort, 30-day mortality rates were 2·5% (95% CI 1·4-4·3) for patients with phenotype A, 30·5% (28·5-32·6) for patients with phenotype B, and 60·7% (53·7-67·2) for patients with phenotype C (log-rank test p<0·0001). The predicted phenotypes in the internal validation cohort and external validation cohort showed similar mortality rates to the assigned phenotypes (internal validation cohort: 5·3% [95% CI 3·4-8·1] for phenotype A, 31·3% [28·5-34·2] for phenotype B, and 59·5% [48·8-69·3] for phenotype C; external validation cohort: 3·7% [2·0-6·4] for phenotype A, 23·7% [21·8-25·7] for phenotype B, and 51·4% [41·9-60·7] for phenotype C). INTERPRETATION: Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can be classified into three phenotypes that correlate with mortality. We developed and validated a simplified tool for the probabilistic assignment of patients into phenotypes. These results might help to better classify patients for clinical management, but the pathophysiological mechanisms of the phenotypes must be investigated. FUNDING: Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Fundación SEIMC/GeSIDA.

Treatment with tocilizumab or corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with hyperinflammatory state: a multicentre cohort study (SAM-COVID-19).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to estimate the association between tocilizumab or corticosteroids and the risk of intubation or death in patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) with a hyperinflammatory state according to clinical and laboratory parameters. METHODS: A cohort study was performed in 60 Spanish hospitals including 778 patients with COVID-19 and clinical and laboratory data indicative of a hyperinflammatory state. Treatment was mainly with tocilizumab, an intermediate-high dose of corticosteroids (IHDC), a pulse dose of corticosteroids (PDC), combination therapy, or no treatment. Primary outcome was intubation or death; follow-up was 21 days. Propensity score-adjusted estimations using Cox regression (logistic regression if needed) were calculated. Propensity scores were used as confounders, matching variables and for the inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). RESULTS: In all, 88, 117, 78 and 151 patients treated with tocilizumab, IHDC, PDC, and combination therapy, respectively, were compared with 344 untreated patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 10 (11.4%), 27 (23.1%), 12 (15.4%), 40 (25.6%) and 69 (21.1%), respectively. The IPTW-based hazard ratios (odds ratio for combination therapy) for the primary endpoint were 0.32 (95%CI 0.22-0.47; p < 0.001) for tocilizumab, 0.82 (0.71-1.30; p 0.82) for IHDC, 0.61 (0.43-0.86; p 0.006) for PDC, and 1.17 (0.86-1.58; p 0.30) for combination therapy. Other applications of the propensity score provided similar results, but were not significant for PDC. Tocilizumab was also associated with lower hazard of death alone in IPTW analysis (0.07; 0.02-0.17; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab might be useful in COVID-19 patients with a hyperinflammatory state and should be prioritized for randomized trials in this situation.

Randomized Trial Evaluating the Neurotoxicity of Dolutegravir/Abacavir/Lamivudine and Its Reversibility After Switching to Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide: GESIDA 9016.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence shown of dolutegravir (DTG)-related neurotoxicity, which may be more common when combined with abacavir (ABC), its reversibility has not been explored in a clinical trial. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, multicenter, open-label, pilot trial to evaluate the reversibility of patient-reported neuropsychiatric symptoms, developed or worsened on DTG/ABC/lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC), in virologically suppressed patients switched to cobicistat-boosted-elvitegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir-alafenamide (EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF). Participants were randomized to immediate switch (baseline) or to defer switch (week 4), and then all completed 24 weeks of follow up on EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF. At each visit, participants completed Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scales and were interviewed about 11 neuropsychiatric symptoms potentially related with DTG through a questionnaire. At baseline and at the end of follow up, they also performed neurocognitive testing. Our primary objective was to compare changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms and PSQI and HAD scales between arms at week 4. Secondary objectives were to evaluate changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms and PSQI and HAD scales at weeks 4, 12, and 24 after switching to EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF and in neurocognitive performance and magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers at end of follow up. RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants were included. Study arms were similar at baseline. At week 4, neuropsychiatric symptoms and PSQI and HAD scores remained unchanged in participants receiving DTG/ABC/3TC and improved significantly in participants receiving EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF. These significant improvements were also observed at weeks 4, 12, and 24 after all participants switched to EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF. In addition, global neurocognitive performance improved (NPZ-7) after switching to EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF. CONCLUSIONS: Neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients on DTG/ABC/3TC could resolve or improve after switching to EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF.

Characteristics and predictors of death among 4035 consecutively hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Spain.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the characteristics and predictors of death in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spain. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed of the first consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 confirmed by real-time PCR assay in 127 Spanish centres until 17 March 2020. The follow-up censoring date was 17 April 2020. We collected demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment and complications data. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with death. RESULTS: Of the 4035 patients, male subjects accounted for 2433 (61.0%) of 3987, the median age was 70 years and 2539 (73.8%) of 3439 had one or more comorbidity. The most common symptoms were a history of fever, cough, malaise and dyspnoea. During hospitalization, 1255 (31.5%) of 3979 patients developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, 736 (18.5%) of 3988 were admitted to intensive care units and 619 (15.5%) of 3992 underwent mechanical ventilation. Virus- or host-targeted medications included lopinavir/ritonavir (2820/4005, 70.4%), hydroxychloroquine (2618/3995, 65.5%), interferon beta (1153/3950, 29.2%), corticosteroids (1109/3965, 28.0%) and tocilizumab (373/3951, 9.4%). Overall, 1131 (28%) of 4035 patients died. Mortality increased with age (85.6% occurring in older than 65 years). Seventeen factors were independently associated with an increased hazard of death, the strongest among them including advanced age, liver cirrhosis, low age-adjusted oxygen saturation, higher concentrations of C-reactive protein and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide comprehensive information about characteristics and complications of severe COVID-19, and may help clinicians identify patients at a higher risk of death.

Raltegravir plus abacavir/lamivudine in virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected patients: 48-week results of the KIRAL study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term combination antiretroviral therapy often results in toxicity/tolerability problems, which are one of the main reasons for switching treatment. Despite the favorable profile of raltegravir (RAL), data on its combination with abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) are scarce. Based on clinical data, we evaluated this regimen as a switching strategy. DESIGN: Multicenter, non-controlled, retrospective study including all virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected patients who had switched to RAL+ABC/3TC. METHODS: We evaluated effectiveness (defined as maintenance of HIV-1-RNA <50 copies/mL at 48 weeks) safety, tolerability, laboratory data, and CD4+ count at week 48 of this switching strategy. RESULTS: The study population comprised 467 patients. Median age was 49 years (IQR: 45-53). Males accounted for 75.4%. Median CD4+ count at baseline was 580 cells/µL (IQR, 409). The main reasons for switching were toxicity/tolerability problems (197; 42.2%) and physician's criteria (133; 28.5%). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA remained at <50 copies/mL in 371/380 (97.6%; 95%CI: 96.4-99.0) when non-virological failure was censured. Virological failure was recorded in 1.9% patients and treatment failure in 20.5% of patients (96/467 [95%CI, 16.9-24.2]). The main reasons for treatment failure included switch to fixed-dose combination regimens (31; 6.6%), toxicity/poor tolerability (27; 5.8%), and physician's decision (17; 3.6%). A total of 73 adverse events were detected in 64 patients (13.7%). These resolved in 43 patients (67.2%). Of the 33 cases related or likely related to treatment, 30 were Grade-1 (90.9%). CD4+ count and renal, hepatic, and lipid profiles remained clinically stable over the 48 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that RAL+ABC/3TC could be an effective, safe/tolerable, and low-toxicity option for virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected patients.

Dual Therapy With Darunavir and Ritonavir Plus Lamivudine vs Triple Therapy With Darunavir and Ritonavir Plus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate and Emtricitabine or Abacavir and Lamivudine for Maintenance of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Viral Suppression: Randomized, Open-Label, Noninferiority DUAL-GESIDA 8014-RIS-EST45 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the therapeutic noninferiority of dual therapy with darunavir/ritonavir and lamivudine compared to triple therapy with darunavir/ritonavir plus 2 nucleos(t)ides for maintenance of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) suppression. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial (margin 12%). Patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL for 6 months or longer on triple therapy with darunavir/ritonavir and 2 nucleos(t)ides (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine or abacavir and lamivudine) and with no resistance were randomized to continue therapy (n = 128) or switch to darunavir/ritonavir and lamivudine (n = 129). The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL after 48 weeks of follow-up according to the snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 249 participants received study drugs (intention-to-treat exposed). The proportion of participants with HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL in the dual- and triple-therapy arms was 88.9% (112/126) and 92.7% (114/123; difference, -3.8%; 95% confidence interval, -11.0 to 3.4), respectively. Four participants in the dual-therapy arm and 2 in the triple-therapy arm developed protocol-defined virological failure. Switching to dual therapy was associated with a significant increase in total, low-density lipoprotein, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, but not in the total-to-HDL cholesterol ratio. Serious adverse events and study drug discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in 4.8% vs 4.9%P = .97) and in 0.8% (1/126) vs 1.6% P = .55) in dual therapy vs triple therapy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Dual therapy with darunavir/ritonavir and lamivudine demonstrated noninferior therapeutic efficacy and similar tolerability compared to triple therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02159599.

Correction: Abacavir/Lamivudine plus Rilpivirine Is an Effective and Safe Strategy for HIV-1 Suppressed Patients: 48 Week Results of the SIMRIKI Retrospective Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164455.].

Abacavir/Lamivudine plus Rilpivirine Is an Effective and Safe Strategy for HIV-1 Suppressed Patients: 48 Week Results of the SIMRIKI Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: Based on data from clinical practice, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of switching to abacavir/lamivudine plus rilpivirine (ABC/3TC+RPV) treatment in virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, non-controlled, retrospective study of HIV-1-infected patients who switched treatment to ABC/3TC+RPV. Patients had an HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL for at least 24 weeks prior to changing treatments. The primary objective was HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48. Effectiveness was analyzed by intention-to-treat (ITT), missing = failure and on-treatment (OT) analyses. The secondary objectives analyzed were adverse effects changes in renal, hepatic or lipid profiles, changes in CD4+ cell count and treatment discontinuations. RESULTS: Of the 205 patients included, 75.6% were men and the median age was 49. At baseline, before switching to ABC/3TC+RPV, median time since HIV diagnosis was 13.1 years, median time with undetectable HIV-1 RNA was 6.2 years and median time of previous antiretroviral regimen was 3.1 years (48.3% patients were taking efavirenz and ABC/3TC was the most frequent backbone coformulation in 69.7% of patients). The main reasons for switching were drug toxicity/poor tolerability (60.5%) and simplification (20%). At week 48, the primary objective was achieved by 187 out of 205 (91.2%) patients by ITT analysis, and 187 out of 192 (97.4%) patients by OT analysis. The CD4+ lymphocyte count and CD4+ percentage increased significantly from baseline to week 48 by a median of 48 cells/µL (-50 to 189) and 1.2% (-1.3% to 4.1%), respectively, P<0.001. Thirty-eight adverse events (AE) were detected in 32 patients. Of these, 25 had no clear association with treatment. Three patients interrupted therapy due to AE. We observed a decrease in all lipid parameters, P<0.001, and a slight improvement in the glomerular filtration rate, P<0.01. Therapy was considered to have failed in 18 patients owing to virological failure (5 [2.4%]), toxicity/poor tolerability (4 [2%]), clinical decision (3 [1.5%]), loss to follow-up (3 [1.5%]), death (1 [0.5%]), and no clinical data (2 [1%]). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirms that ABC/3TC+RPV is an effective, safe, and cost-effective option for the treatment of patients with virologically stable HIV-1 infection.

Topical cidofovir to treat high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV-infected patients: a pilot clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of 1% topical cidofovir cream for the treatment of anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs) in HIV-infected individuals. DESIGN: Single-arm, open-label, pilot clinical trial. METHODS: The study medication was applied intraanally three times per week for 4 weeks. Lesions were assessed with high-resolution anoscopy and biopsy at weeks 12 and 24. The primary endpoint was complete remission (CR) at week 12, defined as clinical and histological remission. We also evaluated partial remission defined as regression to low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. RESULTS: We included 17 HIV-infected patients with intraanal HSIL. Median (interquartile range) age was 36 years (28-41), median (interquartile range) CD4 cell count was 545 cells/µl (358-630), and viral load was less than 50  copies/ml in 93.7%. Two patients were lost to follow-up, one of them did not apply treatment. At 12 weeks, in the intention-to-treat population, 10 out of 16 patients [62.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 38.2-85.7%] had achieved CR. At 24 weeks, seven of the 10 patients (70%; 95% CI, 47-93%) remained in CR, but two out of 10 patients (20%; 95% CI, 0-40%) presented HSIL. One patient did not attend the visit at 24 weeks. Three patients with persistent HSIL at 12 weeks improved at 24 weeks (partial response in one and CR in two). The mean number of human papillomavirus genotypes decreased from 5.2 to 2.7 at 12 weeks (P = 0.002). Local adverse effects were frequent (81%), although there were no discontinuations because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: One percent topical cidofovir could be an appropriate alternative therapy in HIV-infected patients with anal HSIL. CLINICAL TRIAL: gov unique identifier: NCT01946009.