Search

Introduction: While a large proportion of people with HIV (PWH) have experienced SARS‐CoV‐2 infections, there is uncertainty about the role of HIV disease severity on COVID‐19 outcomes, especially in lower‐income settings. We studied the association of mortality with characteristics of HIV severity and management, and vaccination, among adult PWH. Methods: We analysed observational cohort data on all PWH aged ≥15 years experiencing a diagnosed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection (until March 2022), who accessed public sector healthcare in the Western Cape province of South Africa. Logistic regression was used to study the association of mortality with evidence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) collection, time since first HIV evidence, CD4 cell count, viral load (among those with evidence of ART collection) and COVID‐19 vaccination, adjusting for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, admission pressure, location and time period. Results: Mortality occurred in 5.7% (95% CI: 5.3,6.0) of 17,831 first‐diagnosed infections. Higher mortality was associated with lower recent CD4, no evidence of ART collection, high or unknown recent viral load and recent first HIV evidence, differentially by age. Vaccination was protective. The burden of comorbidities was high, and tuberculosis (especially more recent episodes of tuberculosis), chronic kidney disease, diabetes and hypertension were associated with higher mortality, more strongly in younger adults. Conclusions: Mortality was strongly associated with suboptimal HIV control, and the prevalence of these risk factors increased in later COVID‐19 waves. It remains a public health priority to ensure PWH are on suppressive ART and vaccinated, and manage any disruptions in care that occurred during the pandemic. The diagnosis and management of comorbidities, including for tuberculosis, should be optimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is still a paucity of evidence on the outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH) and those co-infected with tuberculosis (TB), particularly in areas where these conditions are common. We describe the clinical features, laboratory findings and outcome of hospitalised PWH and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-uninfected COVID-19 patients as well as those co-infected with tuberculosis (TB).Methods: We conducted a multicentre cohort study across three hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa. All adults requiring hospitalisation with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from March to July 2020 were analysed.Results: PWH comprised 270 (19%) of 1434 admissions. There were 47 patients with active tuberculosis (3.3%), of whom 29 (62%) were PWH. Three-hundred and seventy-three patients (26%) died. The mortality in PWH (n = 71, 26%) and HIV-uninfected patients (n = 296, 25%) was comparable. In patients with TB, PWH had a higher mortality than HIV-uninfected patients (n = 11, 38% vs n = 3, 20%; p = 0.001). In multivariable survival analysis a higher risk of death was associated with older age (Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) 1.03 95%CI 1.02-1.03, p < 0.001), male sex (AHR1.38 (95%CI 1.12-1.72, p = 0.003) and being "overweight or obese" (AHR 1.30 95%CI 1.03-1.61 p = 0.024). HIV (AHR 1.28 95%CI 0.95-1.72, p 0.11) and active TB (AHR 1.50 95%CI 0.84-2.67, p = 0.17) were not independently associated with increased risk of COVID-19 death. Risk factors for inpatient mortality in PWH included CD4 cell count < 200 cells/mm3, higher admission oxygen requirements, absolute white cell counts, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios, C-reactive protein, and creatinine levels.Conclusion: In a population with high prevalence of HIV and TB, being overweight/obese was associated with increased risk of mortality in COVID-19 hospital admissions, emphasising the need for public health interventions in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to compare COVID‐19 outcomes in the Omicron‐driven fourth wave with prior waves in the Western Cape, assess the contribution of undiagnosed prior infection to differences in outcomes in a context of high seroprevalence due to prior infection and determine whether protection against severe disease conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination was maintained. METHODS: In this cohort study, we included public sector patients aged ≥20 years with a laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 diagnosis between 14 November and 11 December 2021 (wave four) and equivalent prior wave periods. We compared the risk between waves of the following outcomes using Cox regression: death, severe hospitalisation or death and any hospitalisation or death (all ≤14 days after diagnosis) adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, geography, vaccination and prior infection. RESULTS: We included 5144 patients from wave four and 11,609 from prior waves. The risk of all outcomes was lower in wave four compared to the Delta‐driven wave three (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for death 0.27 [0.19; 0.38]. Risk reduction was lower when adjusting for vaccination and prior diagnosed infection (aHR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.29; 0.59) and reduced further when accounting for unascertained prior infections (aHR: 0.72). Vaccine protection was maintained in wave four (aHR for outcome of death: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.10; 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In the Omicron‐driven wave, severe COVID‐19 outcomes were reduced mostly due to protection conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination, but intrinsically reduced virulence may account for a modest reduction in risk of severe hospitalisation or death compared to the Delta‐driven wave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The COVID-19 pandemic has helped challenge the usual way of doing research. • A prolonged on-site presence at the early stage of projects is critical. • Research should rely on a capacity-building strategy to provide local skills. • Funding should be proportionate to the cost of resources and gaps in each low middle income countries setting. This article summarizes the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, on an international project to tackle antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The research leadership and process, the access to data, and stakeholders were deeply disrupted by the national and international response to the pandemic, including the interruption of healthcare delivery, lockdowns, and quarantines. The key principles to deliver the research through the pandemic were mainly the high degree of interdisciplinary engagement with integrated teams, and equitable partnership across sites with capacity building and leadership training. The level of preexisting collaboration and partnership were also keys to sustaining connections and involvements throughout the pandemic. The pandemic offered opportunities for realigning research priorities. Flexibility in funding timelines and projects inputs are required to accommodate variance introduced by external factors. The current models for research collaboration and funding need to be critically evaluated and redesigned to retain the innovation that was shown to be successful through this pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]