Search

Abstract Background Contemporary HIV care may reduce frailty in older adults living with HIV (OALWH). Objective of the study was to estimate prevalence of frailty at the age of 50 and 75 years, and build a model to quantify the burden of frailty in the year 2030. Methods This study included OALWH attending Modena HIV Metabolic Clinic between 2009 and 2015. Patients are referred from more than 120 HIV clinics well distributed across Italy, therefore being country representative. Our model forecasts the new entries on yearly basis up to 2030. Changes in frailty over a one-year period using a 37-variable frailty index (FI) and death rates were modelled using a validated mathematical algorithm with parameters adjusted to best represent the changes observed at the clinic. In this study, we assessed the number of frailest individuals (defined with a FI > 0.4) at the age of 50 and at the age 75 by calendar year. Results In the period 2015–2030 we model that frailest OALWH at age 50 will decrease from 26 to 7%, and at the age of 75 years will increase from 43 to 52%. This implies a shift of the frailty prevalence at an older age. Conclusion We have presented projections of how the burden of frailty in older adults, living with HIV will change. We project fewer people aged 50+ with severe frailty, most of whom will be older than now. These results suggest a compression of age-related frailty.

Abstract Background The reported prevalence of cognitive impairment (CI) varies widely in cohorts of people living with HIV (PLWH); this may partly be due to the use of different diagnostic criteria. Agreement between diagnostic criteria of CI, the optimal definition to use, and associations with patient-reported cognitive symptoms have not been fully investigated. Methods Two hundred ninety PLWH aged >50 years and 97 matched negative controls completed a detailed assessment of cognitive function and three questions regarding cognitive symptoms. Age- and education-adjusted test scores (T-scores) determined if subjects met the following definitions of CI: Frascati, global deficit score (GDS) and the multivariate normative comparison (MNC) method. Results PLWH were more likely than controls to meet each definition of CI (ORs were 2.17, 3.12 and 3.64 for Frascati, GDS and MNC, respectively). Agreement of MNC with Frascati and GDS was moderate (Cohen’s k = 0.42 and 0.48, respectively), whereas that between Frascati and GDS was good (k = 0.74). A significant association was found between all the three criteria and reporting of memory loss but not with attention and reasoning problems. The 41 (14 %) PLWH meeting all the three criteria had the lowest median global T-score (36.9) and highest rate of symptom reporting (42 %). Conclusions Different CI criteria show fair diagnostic agreement, likely reflecting their ability to exclude CI in the same group of individuals. Given the lower overall cognitive performance and higher rates of symptom reporting in those meeting all three criteria of CI, further work assessing this as a definition of CI in PLWH is justified.