Abstract Large public-health training events may result in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing during trainings for the Uganda Population-based HIV Impact Assessment identified 28 of 475 (5.9%) individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among attendees; most (89.3%) were asymptomatic. Until COVID-19 vaccine is readily available for staff and participants, effective COVID-19 mitigation measures, along with SARS-CoV-2 testing, are recommended for in-person trainings, particularly when trainees will have subsequent contact with survey participants.
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends viral load testing as the preferred method for monitoring the clinical response of patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection to antiretroviral therapy (ART) (1). Viral load monitoring of patients on ART helps ensure early diagnosis and confirmation of ART failure and enables clinicians to take an appropriate course of action for patient management. When viral suppression is achieved and maintained, HIV transmission is substantially decreased, as is HIV-associated morbidity and mortality (2). CDC and other U.S. government agencies and international partners are supporting multiple countries in sub-Saharan Africa to provide viral load testing of persons with HIV who are on ART. This report examines current capacity for viral load testing based on equipment provided by manufacturers and progress with viral load monitoring of patients on ART in seven sub-Saharan countries (Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda) during January 2015-June 2016. By June 2016, based on the target numbers for viral load testing set by each country, adequate equipment capacity existed in all but one country. During 2015, two countries tested >85% of patients on ART (Namibia [91%] and South Africa [87%]); four countries tested <25% of patients on ART. In 2015, viral suppression was >80% among those patients who received a viral load test in all countries except Côte d'Ivoire. Sustained country commitment and a coordinated global effort is needed to reach the goal for viral load monitoring of all persons with HIV on ART.
During population-based HIV impact assessments (PHIAs), some participants who self-reported testing HIV-positive (PSRP) tested negative in one or more subsequent survey HIV tests. These unexpected discrepancies between their self-reported results and the survey results draw into question the validity of either the self-reported status or the test results. We analyzed PSRP with negative test results aged 15–59 years old using data collected from 2015 to 2021 in 13 countries, assessing prevalence, self-report status, survey HIV status, viral load, rapid tests and confirmatory tests, and answers to follow-up questions (such as years on treatment). Across these surveys, 19,026 participants were PSRP, and 256 (1.3%) of these were concluded to be HIV-negative after additional survey-based testing and review. PSRP determined to be HIV-negative trended higher in countries with a higher HIV prevalence, but their number was small enough that accepting self-reported HIV-positive status without testing would not have significantly affected the prevalence estimates for HIV or viral load suppression. Additionally, using more detailed information for Uganda, we examined 107 PSRP with any negative test results and found no significant correlation with years on treatment or age. Using these details, we examined support for the possible reasons for these discrepancies beyond misdiagnosis and false reporting. These findings suggest that those conducting surveys would benefit from a nuanced understanding of HIV testing among PSRP to conduct surveys ethically and produce high-quality results.
Cross-resistance after first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure is expected to impair activity of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in second-line therapy for patients with HIV, but evidence for the effect of cross-resistance on virological outcomes is limited. We aimed to assess the association between the activity, predicted by resistance testing, of the NRTIs used in second-line therapy and treatment outcomes for patients infected with HIV.We did an observational analysis of additional data from a published open-label, randomised trial of second-line ART (EARNEST) in sub-Saharan Africa. 1277 adults or adolescents infected with HIV in whom first-line ART had failed (assessed by WHO criteria with virological confirmation) were randomly assigned to a boosted protease inhibitor (standardised to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir) with two to three NRTIs (clinician-selected, without resistance testing); or with raltegravir; or alone as protease inhibitor monotherapy (discontinued after week 96). We tested genotypic resistance on stored baseline samples in patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group and calculated the predicted activity of prescribed second-line NRTIs. We measured viral load in stored samples for all patients obtained every 12-16 weeks. This trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com (number ISRCTN 37737787) and ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00988039).Baseline genotypes were available in 391 (92%) of 426 patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group. 176 (89%) of 198 patients prescribed a protease inhibitor with no predicted-active NRTIs had viral suppression (viral load <400 copies per mL) at week 144, compared with 312 (81%) of 383 patients in the protease inhibitor and raltegravir group at week 144 (p=0·02) and 233 (61%) of 280 patients in the protease inhibitor monotherapy group at week 96 (p<0·0001). Compared with results with no active NRTIs, 95 (85%) of 112 patients with one predicted-active NRTI had viral suppression (p=0·3) and 20 (77%) of 26 patients with two or three active NRTIs had viral suppression (p=0·08). Over all follow-up, greater predicted NRTI activity was associated with worse viral load suppression (global p=0·0004).Genotypic resistance testing might not accurately predict NRTI activity in protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. Our results do not support the introduction of routine resistance testing in ART programmes in low-income settings for the purpose of selecting second-line NRTIs.European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, UK Medical Research Council, Institito de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, WHO, Merck.
Limited viral load (VL) testing in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment programs in low-income countries often delays detection of treatment failure. The impact of remaining on failing protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimens is unclear.We retrospectively tested VL in 2164 stored plasma samples from 386 patients randomized to receive lopinavir monotherapy (after initial raltegravir induction) in the Europe-Africa Research Network for Evaluation of Second-line Therapy (EARNEST) trial. Protease genotypic resistance testing was performed when VL >1000 copies/mL. We assessed evolution of PI resistance mutations from virological failure (confirmed VL >1000 copies/mL) until PI monotherapy discontinuation and examined associations using mixed-effects models.Median post-failure follow-up (in 118 patients) was 68 (interquartile range, 48-88) weeks. At failure, 20% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir. At 40-48 weeks post-failure, 68% and 51% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir and atazanavir; 17% had intermediate-level resistance (none high) to darunavir. Common PI mutations were M46I, I54V, and V82A. On average, 1.7 (95% confidence interval 1.5-2.0) PI mutations developed per year; increasing after the first mutation; decreasing with subsequent mutations (P < .0001). VL changes were modest, mainly driven by nonadherence (P = .006) and PI mutation development (P = .0002); I47A was associated with a larger increase in VL than other mutations (P = .05).Most patients develop intermediate/high-level lopinavir resistance within 1 year of ongoing viral replication on monotherapy but retain susceptibility to darunavir. Viral load increased slowly after failure, driven by non-adherence and PI mutation development.NCT00988039.
Millions of HIV-infected people worldwide receive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in programmes using WHO-recommended standardised regimens. Recent WHO guidelines recommend a boosted protease inhibitor plus raltegravir as an alternative second-line combination. We assessed whether this treatment option offers any advantage over the standard protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) second-line combination after 144 weeks of follow-up in typical programme settings.
One component of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) goal to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic by 2030, is that 95% of all persons receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) achieve viral suppression.
Background In 2019, WHO recommended dolutegravir (DTG) as a backbone for first- and second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens for people living with HIV (PLHIV). According to the 2018 Uganda’s HIV treatment guidelines, patients with viral non-suppression (≥1,000 copies/mL) should receive intensive adherence counseling (IAC) with repeat viral load (VL) within 6 months. This analysis focused on the prevalence and factors associated with viral suppression following IAC among PLHIV on DTG-based regimens (DBRs) with an initial episode of viral non-suppression (VNS) in Uganda. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis for PLHIV on DBRs with an initial episode of VNS (≥1,000 copies/mL) in Uganda during October 2019–September 2020 who had a follow up VL test result during September 2020–July 2021. Data were abstracted from the Central Public Health Laboratory (CPHL) database, including patient demographics and VL results. Viral non-suppression (VNS) was defined as a VL test result of ≥1,000 copies/mL. We characterized PLHIV on DBRs and used logistic regression models to determine factors associated with VL suppression after an initial episode of VNS. Results A total of 564 PLHIV on DBRs with an initial episode of VNS were followed up and 43 were excluded due to missing data. Of the 521, 220 (42.2%) were children (<15 years) and 231 (44.3%) were female. Median age was 28 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 12–43 years), and median duration on DBRs was 12 months (IQR: 6–15 months). Overall, 80.8% (421/521) PLHIV had a suppressed viral load at first follow up testing (children = 74.5% [164/220]; adults = 85.4% [257/301]). Children with initial VL results ≥5,000 copies/mL were less likely to achieve viral suppression at follow up testing compared to those with <5,000 copies/mL (AOR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.20–0.71; p = 0.002). Conclusions In a programmatic setting, most adults and children suppressed following an initial episode of VNS on DBRs. High rates of suppression after VNS suggest adherence challenges, rather than drug resistance. Continuation of DBRs should be considered before regimen switch.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='translate(288.889 -214.211)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='translate(108 342.749)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='translate(469.189 342.749)'/%3e%3c/svg%3e)
