Search

Background: Differentiated service delivery (DSD) programs for people living with HIV (PWH) limit eligibility to patients established on antiretroviral therapy (ART), yet uncertainty exists regarding the duration on ART necessary for newly-diagnosed PWH to be considered established. We aimed to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of entry into DSD at six months after ART initiation for newly-diagnosed PWH. Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial in three health facilities in Rwanda. Participants were randomized to: (1) entry into DSD at six months after ART initiation after one suppressed viral load (DSD-1VL); (2) entry into DSD at six months after ART initiation after two consecutive suppressed viral loads (DSD-2VL); (3) treatment as usual (TAU). We examined feasibility by examining the proportion of participants assigned to intervention arms who entered DSD, assessed acceptability through patient surveys and by examining instances when clinical staff overrode the study assignment, and evaluated preliminary effectiveness by comparing study arms with respect to 12-month viral suppression. Results: Among 90 participants, 31 were randomized to DSD-1VL, 31 to DSD-2VL, and 28 to TAU. Among 62 participants randomized to DSD-1VL or DSD-2VL, 37 (60%) entered DSD at 6 months while 21 (34%) did not enter DSD because they were not virally suppressed. Patient-level acceptability was high for both clinical (mean score: 3.8 out of 5) and non-clinical (mean score: 4.1) elements of care and did not differ significantly across study arms. Viral suppression at 12 months was 81%, 81% and 68% in DSD-1VL, DSD-2VL, and TAU, respectively (p = 0.41). Conclusions: The majority of participants randomized to intervention arms entered DSD and had similar rates of viral suppression compared to TAU. Results suggest that early DSD at six months after ART initiation is feasible for newly-diagnosed PWH, and support current WHO guidelines on DSD. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04567693; first registered on September 28, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Dolutegravir is being rolled out globally as part of preferred antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens, including among treatment-experienced patients. The role of viral load (VL) testing before switching patients already on ART to a dolutegravir-containing regimen is less clear in real-world settings. Methods We included patients from the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS consortium who switched from a nevirapine- or efavirenz-containing regimen to one with dolutegravir. We used multivariable cause-specific hazards regression to estimate the association of the most recent VL test in the 12 months before switching with subsequent outcomes. Results We included 36 393 patients at 37 sites in 5 countries (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda) who switched to dolutegravir from July 2017 through February 2020, with a median follow-up of approximately 11 months. Compared with those who switched with a VL <200 copies/mL, patients without a recent VL test or with a preswitch VL ≥1000 copies/mL had significantly increased hazards of an incident VL ≥1000 copies/mL (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99–4.19 and aHR, 6.60; 95% CI, 4.36–9.99, respectively) and pulmonary tuberculosis or a World Health Organization clinical stage 4 event (aHR, 4.78; 95% CI, 2.77–8.24 and aHR, 13.97; 95% CI, 6.62–29.50, respectively). Conclusions A VL test before switching to dolutegravir may help identify patients who need additional clinical monitoring and/or adherence support. Further surveillance of patients who switched to dolutegravir with an unknown or unsuppressed VL is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Dolutegravir is being scaled up globally as part of antiretroviral therapy (ART), but for people with HIV and tuberculosis co‐infection, its use is complicated by a drug–drug interaction with rifampicin requiring an additional daily dose of dolutegravir. This represents a disadvantage over efavirenz, which does not have a major drug–drug interaction with rifampicin. We sought to describe HIV clinic practices for prescribing concomitant dolutegravir and rifampicin, and characterize virologic outcomes among patients with tuberculosis co‐infection receiving dolutegravir or efavirenz. Methods: Within the four sub‐Saharan Africa regions of the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS consortium, we conducted a site survey (2021) and a cohort study (2015–2021). The cohort study used routine clinical data and included patients newly initiating or already receiving dolutegravir or efavirenz at the time of tuberculosis diagnosis. Patients were followed from tuberculosis diagnosis until viral suppression (<1000 copies/ml), a competing event (switching ART regimen; loss to program/death) or administrative censoring at 12 months. Results: In the survey, 86 of 90 (96%) HIV clinics in 18 countries reported prescribing dolutegravir to patients who were receiving rifampicin as part of tuberculosis treatment, with 77 (90%) reporting that they use twice‐daily dosing of dolutegravir, of which 74 (96%) reported having 50 mg tablets available to accommodate twice‐daily dosing. The cohort study included 3563 patients in 11 countries, with 67% newly or recently initiating ART. Among patients receiving dolutegravir (n = 465), the cumulative incidence of viral suppression was 58.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.3–63.3%), switching ART regimen was 4.1% (95% CI: 2.6–6.2%) and loss to program/death was 23.4% (95% CI: 19.7–27.4%). Patients receiving dolutegravir had improved viral suppression compared with patients receiving efavirenz who had a tuberculosis diagnosis before site dolutegravir availability (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [aSHR]: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.28–1.68) and after site dolutegravir availability (aSHR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08–1.51). Conclusions: At a programmatic level, dolutegravir was being widely prescribed in sub‐Saharan Africa for people with HIV and tuberculosis co‐infection with a dose adjustment for the drug–drug interaction with rifampicin. Despite this more complex regimen, our cohort study revealed that dolutegravir did not negatively impact viral suppression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: HIV treatment guidelines recommend that all people living with HIV (PLWH) initiate antiretroviral therapy (ART) as soon as possible after diagnosis (Treat All). As Treat All is more widely implemented, an increasing proportion of PLWH are likely to initiate ART when they are asymptomatic, and they may view the relative benefits and risks of ART differently than those initiating at more advanced disease stages. To date, patient perspectives of initiating care under Treat All in sub-Saharan Africa have not been well described. Methods: From September 2018 to March 2019, we conducted individual, semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 37 patients receiving HIV care in two health centers in Kigali, Rwanda. Data were analyzed using a mixed deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach to describe perceived barriers to, facilitators of and acceptability of initiating and adhering to ART rapidly under Treat All. Results: Of 37 participants, 27 were women and the median age was 31 years. Participants described feeling traumatized and overwhelmed by their HIV diagnosis, resulting in difficulty accepting their HIV status. Most were prescribed ART soon after diagnosis, yet fear of lifelong medication and severe side effects in the immediate period after initiating ART led to challenges adhering to therapy. Moreover, because many PLWH initiated ART while healthy, taking medications and attending appointments were visible signals of HIV status and highly stigmatizing. Nonetheless, many participants expressed enthusiasm for Treat All as a program that improved health as well as health equity. Conclusion: For newly-diagnosed PLWH in Rwanda, initiating ART rapidly under Treat All presents logistical and emotional challenges despite the perceived benefits. Our findings suggest that optimizing early engagement in HIV care under Treat All requires early and ongoing intervention to reduce trauma and stigma, and promote both individual and community benefits of ART. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We examined the trend in prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) cervical infection among Rwandan women living with HIV (WLWH) over 12 years. Methods Prevalence of cervical hrHPV DNA was measured in 3 studies at 3 different time periods in 3 different groups of WLWH using 3 different but comparable hrHPV tests: a MY09/MY11 PCR test in 2005 (RWISA; n = 497), careHPV in 2009–2010 (HPV Demonstration; n = 1242), and Xpert HPV test in 2016–2018 (U54; n = 4734). Prevalences were adjusted for age and CD4 cell count. Results HrHPV prevalence decreased over time from 42.5% to 32.2% to 26.5% (P  < .001). CD4 cell counts improved over time (P trend <.001) so that the percentage of WLWH with CD4 counts of ≥500 cells/μL increased from 7.7% in 2005 to 42.2% in 2009–2010 and 61.1% in 2016–2018. Thus, after adjustment for differences in CD4 counts and age, hrHPV prevalences were more similar over time: 32.6% for RWISA, 30.6% for HPV Demonstration, and 27.1% for U54 (P  = .007). Conclusions Prevalence of hrHPV among WLWH has decreased over the past decade, most likely the result of improved immune reconstitution due to better HIV care and management in Rwanda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Nearly all countries in sub‐Saharan Africa have adopted policies to provide antiretroviral therapy (ART) to all persons living with HIV (Treat All), though HIV care outcomes of these programmes are not well‐described. We estimated changes in ART initiation and retention in care following Treat All implementation in Rwanda in July 2016. Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis of adults enrolling in HIV care at ten Rwandan health centres from July 2014 to September 2017. Using segmented linear regression, we assessed changes in levels and trends of 30‐day ART initiation and six‐month retention in care before and after Treat All implementation. We compared modelled outcomes with counterfactual estimates calculated by extrapolating baseline trends. Modified Poisson regression models identified predictors of outcomes among patients enrolling after Treat All implementation. Results: Among 2885 patients, 1803 (62.5%) enrolled in care before and 1082 (37.5%) after Treat All implementation. Immediately after Treat All implementation, there was a 31.3 percentage point increase in the predicted probability of 30‐day ART initiation (95% CI 15.5, 47.2), with a subsequent increase of 1.1 percentage points per month (95% CI 0.1, 2.1). At the end of the study period, 30‐day ART initiation was 47.8 percentage points (95% CI 8.1, 87.8) above what would have been expected under the pre‐Treat All trend. For six‐month retention, neither the immediate change nor monthly trend after Treat All were statistically significant. While 30‐day ART initiation and six‐month retention were less likely among patients 15 to 24 versus >24 years, the predicted probability of both outcomes increased significantly for younger patients in each month after Treat All implementation. Conclusions: Implementation of Treat All in Rwanda was associated with a substantial increase in timely ART initiation without negatively impacting care retention. These early findings support Treat All as a strategy to help achieve global HIV targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]