Search

BackgroundThe COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial).DesignACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]).Setting94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants).ParticipantsAdults hospitalized with COVID-19.InterventionSOC.Measurements28-day mortality and recovery.ResultsAlthough outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages.LimitationUnmeasured confounding.ConclusionChanges in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

BackgroundBaricitinib and dexamethasone have randomised trials supporting their use for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. We assessed the combination of baricitinib plus remdesivir versus dexamethasone plus remdesivir in preventing progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19.MethodsIn this randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial, patients were enrolled at 67 trial sites in the USA (60 sites), South Korea (two sites), Mexico (two sites), Singapore (two sites), and Japan (one site). Hospitalised adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen administered by low-flow (≤15 L/min), high-flow (>15 L/min), or non-invasive mechanical ventilation modalities who met the study eligibility criteria (male or non-pregnant female adults ≥18 years old with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either baricitinib, remdesivir, and placebo, or dexamethasone, remdesivir, and placebo using a permuted block design. Randomisation was stratified by study site and baseline ordinal score at enrolment. All patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (or matching oral placebo) for a maximum of 14 days or dexamethasone (or matching intravenous placebo) for a maximum of 10 days. The primary outcome was the difference in mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 between the two treatment groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the as-treated population, comprising all participants who received one dose of the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640168.FindingsBetween Dec 1, 2020, and April 13, 2021, 1047 patients were assessed for eligibility. 1010 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 516 (51%) to baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo and 494 (49%) to dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo. The mean age of the patients was 58·3 years (SD 14·0) and 590 (58%) of 1010 patients were male. 588 (58%) of 1010 patients were White, 188 (19%) were Black, 70 (7%) were Asian, and 18 (2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. 347 (34%) of 1010 patients were Hispanic or Latino. Mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 was similar between the study groups (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 87·0% [95% CI 83·7 to 89·6] in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 87·6% [84·2 to 90·3] in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group; risk difference 0·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 4·8]; p=0·91). The odds ratio for improved status in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group compared with the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group was 1·01 (95% CI 0·80 to 1·27). At least one adverse event occurred in 149 (30%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 179 (37%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·5% [1·6 to 13·3]; p=0·014). 21 (4%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group had at least one treatment-related adverse event versus 49 (10%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 6·0% [2·8 to 9·3]; p=0·00041). Severe or life-threatening grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 143 (28%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 174 (36%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·7% [1·8 to 13·4]; p=0·012).InterpretationIn hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen by low-flow, high-flow, or non-invasive ventilation, baricitinib plus remdesivir and dexamethasone plus remdesivir resulted in similar mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29, but dexamethasone was associated with significantly more adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, and severe or life-threatening adverse events. A more individually tailored choice of immunomodulation now appears possible, where side-effect profile, ease of administration, cost, and patient comorbidities can all be considered.FundingNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Liver injury may persist in patients with HBV receiving antiviral therapy who have ongoing transcription and translation. We sought to assess ongoing HBV transcription by serum HBV RNA, translation by serum hepatitis B core related antigen (HBcrAg), and their associations with hepatic HBsAg and HBcAg staining in patients coinfected with HBV and HIV.This is a cross-sectional study of 110 adults coinfected with HBV and HIV who underwent clinical assessment and liver biopsy. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed for HBsAg and HBcAg. Viral biomarkers included quantitative HBsAg, HBV RNA, and HBcrAg.Participants' median age was 49 years (male, 93%; Black, 51%; HBeAg+, 65%), with suppressed HBV DNA (79%) and undetectable HIV RNA (77%) on dually active antiretroviral therapy. Overall, HBV RNA and HBcrAg were quantifiable in 81% and 83%, respectively (96% and 100% in HBeAg+, respectively). HBcAg staining was detected in 60% and HBsAg in 79%. Higher HBV RNA was associated with higher HBcAg and HBsAg IHC grades (both p 0.0001). The HBsAg membranous staining pattern was significantly associated with higher HBV-RNA and HBcrAg levels.HBcAg and HBsAg IHC staining persisted despite viral suppression, and IHC grades and staining patterns correlated with markers of transcription (HBV RNA) and translation (HBcrAg). These data indicate that apparent HBV suppression is associated with residual transcription and translation that could contribute to liver pathology. Additional antiviral strategies directed to HBV protein expression may be useful to ameliorate liver injury.

Background Clinical trials initiated during emerging infectious disease outbreaks must quickly enroll participants to identify treatments to reduce morbidity and mortality. This may be at odds with enrolling a representative study population especially when the population affected is undefined. Methods We evaluated the utility of CDC COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET), COVID-19 Case Surveillance System (CCSS), and 2020 U.S. Census data to determine demographic representation in the four stages of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT). We compared the cumulative proportion of participants by sex, race, ethnicity, and age enrolled at U.S. ACTT sites, with the respective 95% confidence intervals, to the reference data in forest plots. Results U.S. ACTT sites enrolled 3,509 adults hospitalized with COVID-19. When compared with COVID-NET, ACTT enrolled a similar or higher proportion of Hispanic or Latino and White participants depending on the stage, and a similar proportion of African American participants in all stages. In contrast, ACTT enrolled a higher proportion of these groups when compared with U.S. Census and CCSS. The proportion of participants ages 65 years was either similar or lower than COVID-NET and higher than CCSS and U.S. Census. The proportion of females enrolled in ACTT was lower than the proportion of females in the reference datasets. Conclusions While surveillance data of hospitalized cases may not be available early in an outbreak, it is a better comparator than U.S. Census data and surveillance of all cases, which may not reflect the population affected and at higher risk of severe disease.

Background Passive immunotherapy using hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) to SARS-CoV-2, derived from recovered donors, is a potential rapidly available, specific therapy for an outbreak infection such as SARS-CoV-2. Findings from randomised clinical trials of hIVIG for the treatment of COVID-19 are limited. Methods In this international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had been symptomatic for up to 12 days and did not have acute end-organ failure were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either hIVIG or an equivalent volume of saline as placebo, in addition to remdesivir, when not contraindicated, and other standard clinical care. Randomisation was stratified by site pharmacy; schedules were prepared using a mass-weighted urn design. Infusions were prepared and masked by trial pharmacists; all other investigators, research staff, and trial participants were masked to group allocation. Follow-up was for 28 days. The primary outcome was measured at day 7 by a seven-category ordinal endpoint that considered pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications and ranged from no limiting symptoms to death. Deaths and adverse events, including organ failure and serious infections, were used to define composite safety outcomes at days 7 and 28. Prespecified subgroup analyses were carried out for efficacy and safety outcomes by duration of symptoms, the presence of anti-spike neutralising antibodies, and other baseline factors. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, which included all randomly assigned participants who met eligibility criteria and received all or part of the assigned study product infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546581. Findings From Oct 8, 2020, to Feb 10, 2021, 593 participants (n=301 hIVIG, n=292 placebo) were enrolled at 63 sites in 11 countries; 579 patients were included in the mITT analysis. Compared with placebo, the hIVIG group did not have significantly greater odds of a more favourable outcome at day 7; the adjusted OR was 1·06 (95% CI 0·77–1·45; p=0·72). Infusions were well tolerated, although infusion reactions were more common in the hIVIG group (18·6% vs 9·5% for placebo; p=0·002). The percentage with the composite safety outcome at day 7 was similar for the hIVIG (24%) and placebo groups (25%; OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·66–1·46; p=0·91). The ORs for the day 7 ordinal outcome did not vary for subgroups considered, but there was evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect for the day 7 composite safety outcome: risk was greater for hIVIG compared with placebo for patients who were antibody positive (OR 2·21, 95% CI 1·14–4·29); for patients who were antibody negative, the OR was 0·51 (0·29–0·90; pinteraction=0·001). Interpretation When administered with standard of care including remdesivir, SARS-CoV-2 hIVIG did not demonstrate efficacy among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. The safety of hIVIG might vary by the presence of endogenous neutralising antibodies at entry. Funding US National Institutes of Health.

Background Texas has one of the highest rates of uninsured populations in the US (Fig1). We hypothesized that those without insurance were more likely to be hospitalized for COVID-19 but were at higher risk for severe disease and mortality due to uncontrolled medical illness prior to hospitalization. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized in 81 hospitals in Dallas- Ft. Worth (DFW) area. All inpatients and outpatients with COVID-19 from 3/1/2020 to 4/1/2021 were included to examine risk for hospitalization. Subset analysis included those hospitalized with COVID-19. Data presented is comparison between Medicaid and uninsured population as they were similar in age distribution (Fig 2). Results 198, 174 COVID-19 unique individuals were identified; 7.5% had Medicaid and 25.1% were uninsured. Among Medicaid, 29.6% were hospitalized vs. 25.8% of Medicaid vs. uninsured (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.26 (1.20, 1.33). Among the 71,778 (∼36%) hospitalized for COVID-19, comparing Medicaid vs. uninsured: 44.9 vs. 56.3% had ICU care; 51.4% vs. 80.2% had pneumonia, 41.1% vs. 67.5% had respiratory failure with higher odds of developing these outcomes in uninsured (see Table 1). Median duration of hospital stay was longer in uninsured than Medicaid ( see Table 2a) and mortality in the hospital was 7.4% vs. 7.9% among Medicaid vs. uninsured (p< 0.0001). Thirty-day readmission rates were lower for Medicaid vs. uninsured (Table 3). In the year prior to the COVID-19 hospitalizations, use of health care among the uninsured was lower compared to Medicaid patients for outpatient, inpatient, and ER visits (p< 0.0001 for all comparisons; see Table 2b). Conclusion Uninsured in North Texas had lower odds of hospitalization vs. Medicaid patients, likely due to younger age, but once hospitalized had higher risk for COVID pneumonia, ICU care, and respiratory failure. Median number of days was higher among uninsured but in-hospital mortality was higher among Medicaid population. Prior contact with healthcare system was lower among uninsured and 30-day readmissions were also lower, suggesting barriers accessing health care. Poorer outcomes among uninsured once hospitalized may be due to untreated co-morbidities (Fig 3). Expansion of Medicaid has the potential of ameliorating these disparities. Figure 3Conclusion graphic Disclosures Mamta K. Jain, MD, MPH, Gilead Sciences: Grant/Research Support|GSK/ViiV: Grant/Research Support|Janssen: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Regeneron: Grant/Research Support Mae Thamer, PhD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support Kavita Bhavan, MD, MPH, Gilead: Grant/Research Support.

Immune cell state alterations rewire HIV-1 gene expression, thereby influencing viral latency and reactivation, but the mechanisms are still unfolding. Here, using a screen approach on CD4+ T cell models of HIV-1 latency, we revealed Small Molecule Reactivators (SMOREs) with unique chemistries altering the CD4+ T cell state and consequently promoting latent HIV-1 transcription and reactivation through an unprecedented mechanism of action. SMOREs triggered rapid oxidative stress and activated a redox-responsive program composed of cell-signaling kinases (MEK-ERK axis) and atypical transcription factor (AP-1 and HIF-1α) cooperativity. SMOREs induced an unusual AP-1 phosphorylation signature to promote AP-1/HIF-1α binding to the latent HIV-1 proviral genome for its activation. Consistently, latent HIV-1 reactivation was compromised with pharmacologic inhibition of oxidative stress sensing or of cell-signaling kinases, and transcription factor’s loss of expression, thus functionally linking the host redox-responsive program to viral transcriptional rewiring. Notably, SMOREs induced the redox program in primary CD4+ T cells and reactivated latent HIV-1 in aviremic patient samples alone and in combination with known latency-reversing agents, thus providing physiological relevance. Our findings suggest that manipulation of redox-sensitive pathways could be exploited to alter the course of HIV-1 latency, thus rendering host cells responsive to help achieve a sterilizing cure.

BackgroundAn in-silico screen was performed to identify FDA approved drugs that inhibit SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro), followed by in vitro viral replication assays, and in vivo pharmacokinetic studies in mice. These studies identified atovaquone as a promising candidate for inhibiting viral replication.MethodsA 2-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Enrolled patients were randomized 2:1 to atovaquone 1500 mg BID versus matched placebo. Patients received standard of care treatment including remdesivir, dexamethasone, or convalescent plasma as deemed necessary by the treating team. Saliva was collected at baseline and twice per day for up to 10 days for RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 viral load measurement by quantitative reverse-transcriptase PCR. The primary outcome was the between group difference in log-transformed viral load (copies/mL) using a generalized linear mixed-effect models of repeated measures from all samples.ResultsOf the 61 patients enrolled; 41 received atovaquone and 19 received placebo. Overall, the population was predominately male (63%) and Hispanic (70%), with a mean age of 51 years, enrolled a mean of 5 days from symptom onset. The log10 viral load was 5.25 copies/mL vs. 4.79 copies/mL at baseline in the atovaquone vs. placebo group. Change in viral load did not differ over time between the atovaquone plus standard of care arm versus the placebo plus standard of care arm. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies of atovaquone plasma concentration demonstrated a wide variation in atovaquone levels, with an inverse correlation between BMI and atovaquone levels, (Rho -0.45, p=0.02). In post hoc analysis, an inverse correlation was observed between atovaquone levels and viral load (Rho -0.54, p= 0.005).ConclusionIn this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, atovaquone did not demonstrate evidence of enhanced SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance compared with placebo. However, based on the observed inverse correlation between atovaquone levels and viral load, additional PK-guided studies may be warranted to examine the antiviral effect of atovaquone in COVID-19 patients.clincialtrials.gov (NCT04456153).

BACKGROUND: Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multinational, multicenter trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90. RESULTS: An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR

Background: Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. Design: Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge. Setting: 114 centers in 10 countries. Participants: Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms. Measurements: Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively. Results: Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity. Limitations: Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available. Conclusion: Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients.

While we have the tools to achieve this goal, the persistent barriers to healthcare services experienced by too many individuals will need to be addressed to make significant progress and improve the health and quality of life of all people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The necessary structural changes require actions by federal, state, and local policymakers and range from ensuring universal access to healthcare services to optimizing care delivery to ensuring a robust and diverse infectious diseases and HIV workforce. In this article, we outlines 10 key principles for policy reforms that, if advanced, would make ending the HIV epidemic in the United States possible and could have much more far-reaching effects in improving the health of our nation.

Patient navigation interventions can improve health outcomes in underserved, low-income, and racial and ethnic minority groups, who often experience health disparities. We examined the effectiveness of patient navigation to improve linkage to hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment receipt in a socioeconomically disadvantaged, racially diverse patient population.We performed a pre-post analysis evaluating the effectiveness of a patient navigation program among baby boomers who tested positive for HCV in a safety-net health system. The usual care group (June 2013 to May 2015) and patient navigation group (January 2016 to December 2017) were balanced using a stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting approach. We used logistic regression analyses to evaluate associations between patient navigation and linkage to care for HCV treatment evaluation, treatment initiation, and sustained virologic response.Among 1353 patients (62% black, 61% uninsured, 16% homeless), 769 were in the usual care group, and 584 were in the patient navigation group. The patient navigation group had significantly higher odds of linkage to care (odds ratio [OR], 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-4.8) and treatment initiation (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.3-4.2) within 6 months. The patient navigation group continued to have increased linkage to care (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.7-4.3) and treatment initiation (OR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7-3.0) at 12 months. However, there was no significant difference in sustained virologic response between the groups (86.9% vs 86.1%; P = .78).Patient navigation was associated with significantly increased linkage to care and treatment initiation among patients with HCV infection. Patient navigation programs can be used to promote HCV elimination among traditionally difficult-to-reach patient populations.

Half of the people living with HIV (PLWH) with hepatitis C virus (HCV) remain untreated for HCV. We examined predictors of HCV linkage to care among PLWH and the impact of HIV lost to care.We conducted a retrospective review of PLWH/HCV from our HIV clinics between 2014 and 2017, and examined predictors of HCV linkage to care. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate the probability of HIV retention and HCV linkage over time.Of 615 PLWH/HCV, 34% linked to HCV care and 21% were cured. Higher odds of linkage to HCV care were among blacks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.59, 5.47), prior injection drug users (IDUs; aOR: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.39, 6.01), Medicare (aOR: 3.09, 95% CI: 1.56, 6.11), and cirrhotics (aOR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.52, 5.14). Reduced odds for linkage were in active IDU (aOR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.45) and those seen by an advanced practice provider (aOR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30, 0.92). The main reason for failure to link to HCV care was lost to HIV care. At 3 years, the overall probability of being retained in HIV care was 53%; among those who had an HCV evaluation visit, it was 75% vs. 41% with no HCV evaluation visit. Accounting for loss to follow-up, PLWH/HCV had a 65% probability of having an HCV evaluation at 3 years.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19.METHODS: In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978.FINDINGS: Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50-72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74-1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67-1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74-1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68-1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91-1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88-1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90.INTERPRETATION: Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Speed.

BACKGROUND: Tixagevimab-cilgavimab is a neutralising monoclonal antibody combination hypothesised to improve outcomes for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. We aimed to compare tixagevimab-cilgavimab versus placebo, in patients receiving remdesivir and other standard care.METHODS: In a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, adults with symptoms for up to 12 days and hospitalised for COVID-19 at 81 sites in the USA, Europe, Uganda, and Singapore were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous tixagevimab 300 mg-cilgavimab 300 mg or placebo, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care. Patients were excluded if they had acute organ failure including receipt of invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, vasopressor therapy, mechanical circulatory support, or new renal replacement therapy. The study drug was prepared by an unmasked pharmacist; study participants, site study staff, investigators, and clinical providers were masked to study assignment. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery up to day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home after hospital discharge, with co-primary analyses for the full cohort and for participants who were neutralising antibody-negative at baseline. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as participants who received a complete or partial infusion of tixagevimab-cilgavimab or placebo. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978 and the participant follow-up is ongoing.FINDINGS: From Feb 10 to Sept 30, 2021, 1455 patients were randomly assigned and 1417 in the primary modified intention-to-treat population were infused with tixagevimab-cilgavimab (n=710) or placebo (n=707). The estimated cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 89% for tixagevimab-cilgavimab and 86% for placebo group participants at day 90 in the full cohort (recovery rate ratio [RRR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·97-1·20]; p=0·21). Results were similar in the seronegative subgroup (RRR 1·14 [0·97-1·34]; p=0·13). Mortality was lower in the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group (61 [9%]) versus placebo group (86 [12%]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·032). The composite safety outcome occurred in 178 (25%) tixagevimab-cilgavimab and 212 (30%) placebo group participants (HR 0·83 [0·68-1·01]; p=0·059). Serious adverse events occurred in 34 (5%) participants in the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group and 38 (5%) in the placebo group.INTERPRETATION: Among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 receiving remdesivir and other standard care, tixagevimab-cilgavimab did not improve the primary outcome of time to sustained recovery but was safe and mortality was lower.FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Operation Warp Speed.

INTRODUCTION To evaluate the impact of chronic hepatitis B virus infection (CHB) treatment on risk of cirrhosis, liver-related outcomes, and death among a diverse CHB cohort with a large proportion of African Americans. METHODS Adults with noncirrhotic CHB without human immunodeficiency virus from 2010 to 2018 were retrospectively evaluated across 4 US safety-net health systems. CHB was identified with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/Tenth Revision diagnosis coding and confirmatory laboratory data. Propensity-score matching, Kaplan-Meier methods, and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate impact of CHB treatment on risk of cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), death, and composite of cirrhosis, HCC, or death. RESULTS Among 4,064 CHB patients (51.9% female, 42.0% age

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment can significantly reduce the risk of liver-related mortality; however, many patients remain unaware of their infection in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of inreach, with and without mailed outreach, to increase HCV screening and follow-up in a large, difficult-to-reach patient population. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial from August 2018 to May 2019 in a large safety-net health system. Patients born between 1945 and 1965 were randomly assigned (1:1) to inreach with an electronic health record reminder to providers (n = 6,195) or inreach plus mailed HCV screening outreach (n = 6,191) to complete HCV antibody screening. Outreach also included processes to promote HCV RNA testing among those with a positive HCV antibody and linkage to care among those with positive HCV RNA. The primary outcome was completion of HCV antibody testing within 3 months of randomization (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03706742). RESULTS: We included 12,386 eligible patients (median age 60 years; 46.5% Hispanic, 33.0% Black, and 16.0% White). In intent-to-treat analyses, HCV screening completion was significantly higher among inreach-plus-outreach patients than inreach-alone patients at 3 months (14.6% vs 7.4%, P < 0.001) and 6 months (17.4% vs 9.8%, P < 0.001) after randomization. Among those who completed HCV screening within 6 months, a higher proportion of inreach-plus-outreach patients with positive antibody results completed RNA testing within 3 months than inreach-alone patients (81.1% vs 57.1%, respectively, P = 0.02); however, linkage to care within 3 months of HCV infection confirmation did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (48.1% vs 75.0%, respectively, P = 0.24). DISCUSSION: Among difficult-to-reach patients, a combination of inreach and mailed outreach significantly increased HCV screening compared with inreach alone. However, HCV screening completion in both arms remained low, highlighting a need for more intensive interventions.

BACKGROUND: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, bamlanivimab, a SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, given in combination with remdesivir, did not improve outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on an early futility assessment.OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the a priori hypothesis that bamlanivimab has greater benefit in patients without detectable levels of endogenous neutralizing antibody (nAb) at study entry than in those with antibodies, especially if viral levels are high.DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978).SETTING: Multicenter trial.PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 without end-organ failure.INTERVENTION: Bamlanivimab (7000 mg) or placebo.MEASUREMENTS: Antibody, antigen, and viral RNA levels were centrally measured on stored specimens collected at baseline. Patients were followed for 90 days for sustained recovery (defined as discharge to home and remaining home for 14 consecutive days) and a composite safety outcome (death, serious adverse events, organ failure, or serious infections).RESULTS: Among 314 participants (163 receiving bamlanivimab and 151 placebo), the median time to sustained recovery was 19 days and did not differ between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.22]; sHR > 1 favors bamlanivimab). At entry, 50% evidenced production of anti-spike nAbs; 50% had SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid plasma antigen levels of at least 1000 ng/L. Among those without and with nAbs at study entry, the sHRs were 1.24 (CI, 0.90 to 1.70) and 0.74 (CI, 0.54 to 1.00), respectively (nominal P for interaction = 0.018). The sHR (bamlanivimab vs. placebo) was also more than 1 for those with plasma antigen or nasal viral RNA levels above median level at entry and was greatest for those without antibodies and with elevated levels of antigen (sHR, 1.48 [CI, 0.99 to 2.23]) or viral RNA (sHR, 1.89 [CI, 1.23 to 2.91]). Hazard ratios for the composite safety outcome (LIMITATION: Subgroup analysis of a trial prematurely stopped because of futility; small sample size; multiple subgroups analyzed.CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab may differ depending on whether an endogenous nAb response has been mounted. The limited sample size of the study does not allow firm conclusions based on these findings, and further independent trials are required that assess other types of passive immune therapies in the same patient setting.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The protection provided by natural versus hybrid immunity from COVID-19 is unclear. We reflect on the challenges from trying to conduct a randomized post-SARS-CoV-2 infection vaccination trial study with rapidly evolving scientific data, vaccination guidelines, varying international policies, difficulties with vaccine availability, vaccine hesitancy, and a constantly evolving virus.

Understanding the correlates of depression in HIV patients can help identify groups whose members are at increased risk for depression. We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study among racially diverse, indigent patients living with HIV (PLWH) who were obtaining care in an urban safety-net hospital system and had completed a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) in 2014 or 2015. We collected demographics, HIV risk factors, HIV viral loads, CD4 counts, missed visits, and emergency department (ED) visits. Data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Illness Symptoms Screener (SAMISS) were abstracted. Missing data on substance use and CD4 cell counts were imputed to examine the odds of depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) by multivariable analysis for a complete case and sensitivity analysis. Stratified analysis by HIV viral suppression (VS) was used to determine the odds of depression among subgroups. Of the 5126 HIV patients (70.8% male,56.3% Black, 44.6% MSM, 6.0% IDU), 1271 (24.8%) experienced depression (PHQ ≥ 10). In a multivariable logistic model female gender, White race, injection drug use (IDU) or men who have sex with men (MSM) as an HIV risk factor, making ≥1 ED visit, having missed any HIV visit, having AIDS, and having a positive drug screen by SAMISS increased the odds for depression. Those who had achieved HIV VS or received efavirenz had lower odds of depression. Even among those with AIDS, those failing to achieve VS were at increased odds for depression, whereas those achieving VS were not. Moderate to severe depression is prevalent among PLWH. Among those with AIDS, HIV VS modifies the odds of depression.

Background Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and fatty liver disease (FLD) are common in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Correlates of FLD and its relationship with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were examined longitudinally in HIV-HBV coinfection. Methods From 28/4/2014–7/11/2018, 114 HIV-HBV adults had liver biopsy and were followed for a median of 3 years (ancillary study of Hepatitis B Research Network). Steatohepatitis was based on presence of steatosis, ballooning, and perisinusoidal fibrosis. FLD was defined as ≥5% steatosis and/or steatohepatitis. Results Median age was 49 years, 93% were male, 51% black, 93% had HIV RNA Conclusions About 30% with HIV-HBV coinfection had FLD including 10% with steatohepatitis. FLD was associated with non-black race, metabolic risks, an atherogenic lipid profile, and elevated ALT over time. Thus, identification of FLD and management of adverse metabolic profiles are critically important in HIV-HBV coinfection. Clinical Trial Registration. NCT 01924455.

Background People with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH) face increased risks for heart failure and adverse heart failure outcomes. Myocardial steatosis predisposes to diastolic dysfunction, a heart failure precursor. We aimed to characterize myocardial steatosis and associated potential risk factors among a subset of the Randomized Trial to Prevent Vascular Events in HIV (REPRIEVE) participants. Methods Eighty-two PWH without known heart failure successfully underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance spectroscopy, yielding data on intramyocardial triglyceride (IMTG) content (a continuous marker for myocardial steatosis extent). Logistic regression models were applied to investigate associations between select clinical characteristics and odds of increased or markedly increased IMTG content. Results Median (Q1, Q3) IMTG content was 0.59% (0.28%, 1.15%). IMTG content was increased (> 0.5%) among 52% and markedly increased (> 1.5%) among 22% of participants. Parameters associated with increased IMTG content included age (P = .013), body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2 (P = .055), history of intravenous drug use (IVDU) (P = .033), and nadir CD4 count Conclusions A substantial proportion of antiretroviral therapy–treated PWH exhibited myocardial steatosis. Age, BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, low nadir CD4 count, and history of IVDU emerged as possible risk factors for myocardial steatosis in this group. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02344290; NCT03238755.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) increases the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Despite higher prevalence of HCV in persons born 1945–1965 (baby boomer), screening has not been widely adopted. Both primary care providers (PCPs) and associate care providers (ACPs) need to be educated about the rationale and methods to screen for HCV. In five Federally Qualified Health Centers serving low-income Hispanic communities, PCPs and ACPs attended a 50-min training lecture about HCV epidemiology, screening methods, and evaluation. Using a 12-item questionnaire, knowledge and attitudes were compared for PCPs and ACPs at baseline (pre-test) and following training (post-test). A higher proportion of PCPs correctly answered 3 of 6 knowledge questions on both pre-test and post-test but ACPs’ showed more improvement in knowledge (all P

Persons living with HIV (PLWH) with substance use disorders (SUD) remain a population difficult to engage in HIV care. Project HOPE (Hospital Visits as an Opportunity for Prevention and Engagement), a randomized controlled trial testing patient navigation with/without contingency management for PLWH with SUD, aimed to address this disparity. PLWH with SUD who were out of care were recruited from 11 hospitals across the United States from 2012 to 2014. Baseline socioeconomic factors, medical mistrust scores, and perceived discrimination surveys were collected at enrollment and evaluated for effects on linkage to care at the 6-month follow-up assessment. Linkage to care (attending an outpatient visit for HIV care), early linkage to care (attending first visit within 30 days of enrollment), and engagement in care (two HIV visits within the 6-month period) were determined by medical record abstraction, supplemented by self-report. Among 801 participants enrolled in the study (mean age 45 years, 33% women, and 73% African American), those who did not complete high school and with severe food insecurity had lower odds of being linked to care at 6 months. Those with high levels of medical mistrust, recent drug use, and who did not complete high school had lower odds of early linkage to care. Early linkage was associated with higher odds of engagement at 6 months and was mitigated by both patient navigator interventions (all p

Achieving practice change can be challenging when guidelines shift from a selective risk-based strategy to a broader population health strategy, as occurred for hepatitis C (HCV) screening (2012-2013). We aimed to evaluate patient and provider barriers that contributed to suboptimal HCV screening and linkage-to-care rates after implementation of an intervention to improve HCV screening and linkage-to-care processes in a large, public integrated healthcare system following the guidelines change. As part of a mixed-methods study, we collected data through patient surveys (n = 159), focus groups (n = 9) and structured observation of providers and staff (n = 9). We used these findings to then inform domains for the second phase, which consisted of semi-structured interviews with patients across the screening-treatment continuum (n = 24) and providers and staff at primary care and hepatology clinics (n = 21). We transcribed and thematically analysed interviews using an integrated inductive and deductive framework. We identified lack of clarity about treatment cost, treatment complications and likelihood of cure as ongoing patient-level barriers to screening and linkage to care. Provider-level barriers included scepticism about establishing HCV screening as a quality metric given competing clinical priorities, particularly for patients with multiple comorbidities. However, most felt positively about adding HCV as a quality metric to enhance HCV screening and linkage to care. Provider engagement yielded suggestions for process improvements that resulted in increased stakeholder buy-in and real-time enhancements to the HCV screening process intervention. Systematic data collection at baseline and during practice change implementation may facilitate adoption and adaptation to improve HCV screening guideline implementation. Findings identified several key opportunities and lessons to enhance the impact of practice change interventions to improve HCV screening and treatment delivery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although serological markers of disease severity improve after hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment, it is unclear if all patients experience sustained improvement. We aim to evaluate longitudinal changes in aspartate (AST), alanine (ALT) aminotransferase, platelet count (PLT), and fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) after HCV treatment. METHODS: All adult chronic HCV patients who received antiviral therapy from January 2011 to February 2017 at four large urban hospital systems were evaluated to assess changes in AST, ALT, PLT, and FIB-4 from pre-treatment to post-treatment annually up to 4 years after HCV therapy. Comparisons used Student's t-test and analysis of variance, and were stratified by sex, race, ethnicity, age, body mass index (BMI), and diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: Among 2691 patients (62.2% men, 76.9% aged 45–65 years, 56.5% white), all markers of disease severity demonstrated sustained improvements from pre-treatment to 4 years post-treatment (AST 53 U/L to 27.5 U/L, ALT 53 U/L to 29 U/L, PLT 168 × 10(3) to 176 × 10(3), FIB-4 2.51 to 1.68). However, Hispanics and patients with BMI >30 kg/m(2) experienced rebound increases in AST, ALT, and FIB-4 at 4 years post-treatment after experiencing initial improvements in these serological markers in the first-year post-treatment. Sustained improvements in PLT were observed in all groups, including Hispanics and patients with BMI >30 kg/m(2). CONCLUSION: HCV treatment in a large community-based cohort demonstrated sustained improvements in AST, ALT, PLT, and FIB-4. Rebound increases in AST, ALT, and FIB-4 observed in Hispanics and those with BMI >30 kg/m(2) may reflect persisting nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Hospital readmissions are common, costly, and potentially preventable, including among people with HIV (PWH). We present the results of an evaluation of a multicomponent intervention aimed at reducing 30-day readmissions among PWH.Demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical variables were collected from the electronic health records of PWH or those with cellulitis (control group) hospitalized at an urban safety-net hospital before and after (from September 2012 to December 2016) the implementation of a multidisciplinary HIV transitional care team. After October 2014, hospitalized PWH could receive a medical HIV consultation ± a transitional care nurse intervention. The primary outcome was readmission to any hospital within 30 days of discharge. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity score analyses were conducted to compare readmissions before and after intervention implementation in PWH and people with cellulitis.Overall, among PWH, 329 of the 2049 (16.1%) readmissions occurred before and 329 of the 2023 (16.3%) occurred after the transitional care team intervention. After including clinical and social predictors, the adjusted odds ratio of 30-day readmissions for postintervention for PWH was 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.99, P= 0.04), whereas little reduction was identified for those with cellulitis (adjusted odds ratio 0.91 (95% confidence interval: 0.81 to 1.02, P= 0.10). A dose-response effect was not observed for receipt of different HIV intervention components.A multicomponent intervention reduced the adjusted risk of 30-day readmissions in PWH, although no dose-response effect was detected. Additional efforts are needed to reduce overall hospitalizations and readmissions among PWH including increasing HIV prevention, early diagnosis and engagement in care, and expanding the availability and spectrum of transitional care services.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is a common component of antiretroviral therapy in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-HIV co-infected adults but few studies have evaluated worsening renal function and bone turnover, known effects of TDF.Adults from eight North American sites were enrolled in this cohort study. Research assessments were conducted at entry and every 24 weeks for ≤192 weeks. Bone markers were tested at baseline, week 96 and week 192 from stored serum. We evaluated changes in markers of renal function and bone turnover over time and potential contributing factors.A total of 115 patients were prospectively followed; median age 49 years, 91% male and 52% non-Hispanic Black. Duration of HIV was 20.5 years. TDF use ranged from 80% to 92% throughout follow-up. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (ml/min/1.73mIn this HBV-HIV cohort with high prevalence of TDF use, several biomarkers of renal function and bone turnover indicated worsening status over approximately 4 years, highlighting the importance of clinical awareness in co-infected adults.

BackgroundSince its emergence in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions, such as coughing, and care activities, such as aerosol-generating procedures, likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of the personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. The purpose of the current study was to develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsThe Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists, with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.ResultsThe IDSA guideline panel agreed on 8 recommendations, including 2 updated recommendations and 1 new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included.ConclusionsUsing a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for 8 specific questions on the use of PPE by HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

The contribution of the novel biomarkers, hepatitis B virus (HBV) RNA and HBV core-related antigen (HBcrAg), to characterization of HBV-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection is unclear. We evaluated the longitudinal dynamics of HBV RNA and HBcrAg and their association with classical HBV serum biomarkers and liver histology and viral staining.HBV-HIV co-infected adults from 8 North American centers entered a National Institutes of Health-funded prospective cohort study. Demographic, clinical, serological, and virological data were collected at entry and every 24 to 48 weeks for up to 192 weeks. Participants with HBV RNA and HBcrAg measured ≥2 times (N = 95) were evaluated; 56 had paired liver biopsies obtained at study entry and end of follow-up.Participants had a median age of 50 years; 97% were on combination anti-viral therapy. In hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)+ participants, there were significant declines in HBV RNA and HBcrAg over 192 weeks that tracked with declines in HBeAg, hepatitis B surface antigen, HBV DNA, and hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAg) hepatocyte staining grade (all P.05). In HBeAg- participants, there were not significant declines in HBV RNA (P = .49) and HBcrAg (P = .63), despite modest reductions in hepatitis B surface antigen (P.01) and HBV DNA (P = .03). HBV serum biomarkers were not significantly related to change in hepatic activity index, Ishak fibrosis score, or hepatocyte HBcAg loss (all P.05).In HBV-HIV coinfected adults on suppressive dually active antiviral therapy, the use of novel HBV markers reveals continued improvement in suppression of HBV transcription and translation over time. The lack of further improvement in HBV serum biomarkers among HBeAg- patients suggests limits to the benefit of combination anti-viral therapy and provide rationale for additional agents with distinct mechanisms of action.

Background Since its emergence in late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions like coughing and care activities like aerosol-generating procedures likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. Objective Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Methods IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Results The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations, including two updated recommendations and one new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included. Conclusions Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

Despite decreasing incidence of toxoplasmosis encephalitis(TE) among people living with HIV(PLWH) in the late antiretroviral era, U.S. safety-net hospitals still see significant numbers of admissions for TE. Little is known about this population, their healthcare utilization and long-term outcomes. We conducted an 8-year retrospective review of PLWH with TE at a safety-net hospital. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatments, readmissions, and outcomes were collected. We used chi-squared test to evaluate 6-month all-cause readmission and demographic/clinical characteristics. Of 38 patients identified, 79% and 40% had a new diagnosis of TE and HIV respectively. 59% had 6-month all-cause readmission. Social factors were associated with readmission (uninsured (p = 0.036), Spanish as primary language (p = 0.017), non-adherence (p = 0.030)) and not markers of clinical severity (ICU admission, steroid-use, concomitant infections, therapeutic adverse events). Despite high readmission rates, at follow-up, 60% had a complete response, 30% had a partial response. Improving TE outcomes requires focus on culturally competent, coordinated care.

Summary Background Functional impairment of interferon, a natural antiviral component of the immune system, is associated with the pathogenesis and severity of COVID-19. We aimed to compare the efficacy of interferon beta-1a in combination with remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Methods We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 63 hospitals across five countries (Japan, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA). Eligible patients were hospitalised adults (aged ≥18 years) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test, and who met one of the following criteria suggestive of lower respiratory tract infection: the presence of radiographic infiltrates on imaging, a peripheral oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less, or requiring supplemental oxygen. Patients were excluded if they had either an alanine aminotransferase or an aspartate aminotransferase concentration more than five times the upper limit of normal; had impaired renal function; were allergic to the study product; were pregnant or breast feeding; were already on mechanical ventilation; or were anticipating discharge from the hospital or transfer to another hospital within 72 h of enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous remdesivir as a 200 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by a 100 mg maintenance dose administered daily for up to 9 days and up to four doses of either 44 μg interferon beta-1a (interferon beta-1a group plus remdesivir group) or placebo (placebo plus remdesivir group) administered subcutaneously every other day. Randomisation was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrolment. Patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to interferon beta-1a and placebo treatment; remdesivir treatment was given to all patients without masking. The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as the first day that a patient attained a category 1, 2, or 3 score on the eight-category ordinal scale within 28 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all randomised patients who were classified according to actual clinical severity. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04492475 . Findings Between Aug 5, 2020, and Nov 11, 2020, 969 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (n=487) or to the placebo plus remdesivir group (n=482). The mean duration of symptoms before enrolment was 8·7 days (SD 4·4) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 8·5 days (SD 4·3) days in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Patients in both groups had a time to recovery of 5 days (95% CI not estimable) (rate ratio of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group vs placebo plus remdesivir 0·99 [95% CI 0·87–1·13]; p=0·88). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of mortality at 28 days was 5% (95% CI 3–7%) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 3% (2–6%) in the placebo plus remdesivir group (hazard ratio 1·33 [95% CI 0·69–2·55]; p=0·39). Patients who did not require high-flow oxygen at baseline were more likely to have at least one related adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (33 [7%] of 442 patients) than in the placebo plus remdesivir group (15 [3%] of 435). In patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline, 24 (69%) of 35 had an adverse event and 21 (60%) had a serious adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group compared with 13 (39%) of 33 who had an adverse event and eight (24%) who had a serious adverse event in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Interpretation Interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir was not superior to remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline had worse outcomes after treatment with interferon beta-1a compared with those given placebo. Funding The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (USA).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Histological and clinical outcomes in HBV-HIV coinfection in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) are poorly defined. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult patients co-infected with HBV-HIV from eight North American sites were enrolled in this National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded prospective observational study (n = 139). Demographic, clinical, serological, and virological data were collected at entry and every 24 weeks for ≤ 192 weeks. Paired liver biopsies were obtained at study entry and at ≥ 3 years of follow-up. Biopsies were assessed by a central pathology committee using the modified Ishak scoring system. Clinical outcome rate and changes in histology are reported. Among participants with follow-up data (n = 114), median age was 49 years, 91% were male, 51% were non-Hispanic Black, and 13% had at-risk alcohol use, with a median infection of 20 years. At entry, 95% were on anti-HBV cART. Median CD4 count was 562 cells/mm(3) and 93% had HIV < 400 copies/mL. HBeAg was positive in 61%, and HBV DNA was below the limit of quantification (< 20 IU/mL) in 61% and < 1,000 IU/mL in 80%. Clinical events were uncommon across follow-up: one hepatic decompensation, two HCC, no liver transplants, and one HBV-related deaths, with a composite endpoint rate of 0.61/100 person-years. Incident cirrhosis (n = 1), alanine aminotransferase flare (n = 2), and HBeAg loss (n = 13) rates were 0.40, 0.65, and 6.86 per 100 person-years, respectively. No participants had HBsAg loss. Paired biopsy (n = 62; median 3.6 years apart) revealed minimal improvement in Histologic Activity Index (median [interquartile range]: 3 [2–4] to 3 [1–3]; P = 0.02) and no significant change in fibrosis score (1 [1–2] to 1 [0–3]; P = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In a North American cohort of adults with HBV-HIV on cART with virological suppression, clinical outcomes and worsening histological disease were uncommon. (Hepatology 2021;74:1174–1189).

Background Direct-acting antivirals can cure hepatitis C virus (HCV). Persons with HCV/HIV and living with substance use are disadvantaged in benefiting from advances in HCV treatment. Methods In this randomized controlled trial, participants with HCV/HIV were randomized between February 2016 and January 2017 to either care facilitation or control. Twelve-month follow-up assessments were completed in January 2018. Care facilitation group participants received motivation and strengths-based case management addressing retrieval of HCV viral load results, engagement in HCV/HIV care, and medication adherence. Control group participants received referral to HCV evaluation and an offer of assistance in making care appointments. Primary outcome was number of steps achieved along a series of 8 clinical steps (eg, receiving HCV results, initiating treatment, sustained virologic response [SVR]) of the HCV/HIV care continuum over 12 months postrandomization. Results Three hundred eighty-one individuals were screened and 113 randomized. Median age was 51 years; 58.4% of participants were male and 72.6% were Black/African American. Median HIV-1 viral load was 27 209 copies/mL, with 69% having a detectable viral load. Mean number of steps completed was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group vs controls (2.44 vs 1.68 steps; χ 2 [1] = 7.36, P = .0067). Men in the intervention group completed a statistically significantly higher number of steps than controls. Eleven participants achieved SVR with no difference by treatment group. Conclusions The care facilitation intervention increased progress along the HCV/HIV care continuum, as observed for men and not women. Study findings also highlight continued challenges to achieve individual-patient SVR and population-level HCV elimination. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02641158., In this era of direct-acting antivirals that can cure hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in 1–3 months, a short-term care facilitation intervention for persons living with HIV and HCV who use drugs is efficacious in making meaningful advances toward HCV cure.

Background New therapies to achieve hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) clearance are under development. However, gaps in knowledge exist in understanding the incidence and predictors of HBsAg clearance in a racially diverse HIV population. Methods We examined the incidence and risk of HBsAg clearance in a retrospective cohort of people with HIV/hepatitis B virus (HBV). Included patients had sufficient data to establish chronic infection based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. We examined the incident rate for HBsAg loss and hazard rate ratios to evaluate predictors for HBsAg clearance in a multivariable model. Results Among 571 HIV/HBV patients, 87% were male, 61% were Black, 45% had AIDS, 48% were HBeAg positive, and the median follow-up was 88 months. Incident HBsAg clearance was 1.5 per 100 person-years. In the multivariate model, those with AIDS at baseline (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.37–4.32), Hispanics (aHR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.33–9.58), and those with injection drug use as an HIV risk factor (aHR, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.26–8.89) were more likely to lose HBsAg, whereas those who were HBeAg positive (aHR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19–0.63) were less likely to lose HBsAg. The median change in CD4 cell count during the observation period was 231 cells/mm3 in those with HBsAg loss vs 112 cells/mm3 in those with HBsAg persistence (P = .004). Conclusions HBsAg loss occurs in about 10% of those with chronic HBV infection. Being Hispanic, having AIDS at baseline, having an injection drug use history, and having HBeAg-negative status at baseline predicted the likelihood of HBsAg loss. Immune restoration may be a mechanism through which HBsAg loss occurs in HIV patients.

BACKGROUND The association between hypertension (HTN) and inflammatory biomarkers (interleukin-6 [IL-6] and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [hsCRP]) in HIV-positive persons with CD4+ count >500 cells/mm3 is unknown. METHODS We studied HTN in participants of the Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment (START) trial of immediate vs. deferred antiretroviral therapy (ART) in HIV-positive, ART naive adults with CD4+ count > 500 cells/mm3. HTN was defined as having a systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥140 mmHg, a diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg, or using BP-lowering therapy. Logistic and discrete Cox regression models were used to study the association between baseline biomarker levels with prevalent and incident HTN. RESULTS Among 4,249 participants with no history of cardiovascular disease, the median age was 36 years, 55% were nonwhite, and the prevalence of HTN at baseline was 18.9%. After adjustment for race, age, gender, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, smoking, HIV RNA and CD4+ levels, associations of IL-6 and hsCRP with HTN prevalence were not significant (OR per twofold higher:1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99, 1.20 for IL-6 and 1.05, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.10 for hsCRP). Overall incidence of HTN was 6.8 cases/100 person years. In similarly adjusted models, neither IL-6 (Hazard ratios [HR] per twofold higher IL-6 levels: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.08) nor hsCRP (HR per twofold higher hsCRP levels: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.02) were associated with risk of incident HTN. Associations did not differ by treatment group. Age, race, gender, and BMI were significantly associated with both the prevalence and incidence of HTN. CONCLUSIONS Traditional risk factors and not baseline levels of IL-6 or hsCRP were associated with the prevalence and incidence of HTN in START.

Background & Aims Advanced liver disease, which includes fibrosis and cirrhosis, has been reported to be more prevalent in Hispanics patients at the time of diagnosis of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection than non-Hispanic black or non-Hispanic white patients. We performed a propensity score-matched analysis to determine whether metabolic risk factors contribute to this disparity. Methods We collected data from persons with 748 HCV infection (22% Hispanic, 53% non-Hispanic black, and 26% non-Hispanic white; 23% with advanced liver disease), born from 1945 through 1965, diagnosed at 6 health care systems in Texas. Advanced liver disease was defined as a FIB-4 index score above 3.25. We examined the association between advanced liver disease and race or ethnicity, metabolic risk (based on diabetes mellitus and body mass index [BMI]) and heavy alcohol use in propensity score-matched analyses. Results In propensity-score matched models, among those who were obese (BMI ≥30) with a diagnosis of diabetes, the adjusted odds ratio of advanced liver disease for Hispanics vs non-Hispanic black was 7.89 (95% CI, 3.66–17.01) and adjusted odds ratio = 12.49 (95% CI, 3.24–48.18) for Hispanic vs non-Hispanic white patients (both P Conclusions HCV-infected Hispanics with obesity and diabetes have a far higher risk for advanced liver disease than other racial or ethnic groups. These findings highlight the need for HCV treatment and management of probable concurrent fatty liver disease. Even after we accounted for metabolic risk factors, Hispanics were still at higher risk for advanced liver disease, indicating the potential involvement of other factors such as genetic variants.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing in persons born from 1945 to 1965 has had limited adoption despite guidelines, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, who have a higher prevalence of disease burden. We examined the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve HCV screening in a large safety-net health system. We performed a multifaceted intervention that included provider and patient education, an electronic medical record-enabled best practice alert, and increased HCV treatment capacity. We characterized HCV screening completion before and after the intervention. To identify correlates of HCV screening, we performed logistic regression for the preintervention and postintervention groups and used a generalized linear mixed model for patients observed in both preintervention and postintervention time frames. Before the intervention, 10.1% of 48,755 eligible baby boomer patients were screened. After the intervention, 34.6% of the 34,093 eligible baby boomers were screened (P < 0.0001). Prior to the intervention, HCV screening was lower among older baby boomers and providers with large patient panels and higher in high-risk subgroups including those with signs of liver disease (e.g., elevated transaminases, thrombocytopenia), human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients, and homeless patients. Postintervention, we observed increased screening uptake in older baby boomers, providers with larger patient panel size, and patients with more than one prior primary care appointment. Conclusion: Our multifaceted intervention significantly increased HCV screening, particularly among older patients, those engaged in primary care, and providers with large patient panels.

BACKGROUND Under the Affordable Care Act, hospitals receive reduced reimbursements for excessive 30-day readmissions. However, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services does not consider social and behavioral variables in expected readmission rate calculations, which may unfairly penalize systems caring for socially disadvantaged patients, including patients with HIV. SETTING Randomized controlled trial of patient navigation with or without financial incentives in HIV-positive substance users recruited from the inpatient setting at 11 US hospitals. METHODS External validation of an existing 30-day readmission prediction model, using variables available in the electronic health record (EHR-only model), in a new multicenter cohort of HIV-positive substance users was assessed by C-statistic and Hosmer-Lemeshow testing. A second model evaluated sociobehavioral factors in improving the prediction model (EHR-plus model) using multivariable regression and C-statistic with cross-validation. RESULTS The mean age of the cohort was 44.1 years, and participants were predominantly males (67.4%), non-white (88.0%), and poor (62.8%

Neurons are highly polarized cells with distinct protein compositions in axonal and dendritic compartments. Cellular mechanisms controlling polarized protein sorting have been described for mature nervous system but little is known about the segregation in newly differentiated neurons. In a forward genetic screen for regulators of Drosophila brain circuit development, we identified mutations in SPT, an evolutionary conserved enzyme in sphingolipid biosynthesis. Here we show that reduced levels of sphingolipids in SPT mutants cause axonal morphology defects similar to loss of cell recognition molecule Dscam. Loss- and gain-of-function studies show that neuronal sphingolipids are critical to prevent aggregation of axonal and dendritic Dscam isoforms, thereby ensuring precise Dscam localization to support axon branch segregation. Furthermore, SPT mutations causing neurodegenerative HSAN-I disorder in humans also result in formation of stable Dscam aggregates and axonal branch phenotypes in Drosophila neurons, indicating a causal link between developmental protein sorting defects and neuronal dysfunction., Little is known about the initial segregation of axonal and dendritic proteins during the differentiation of newly generated neurons. Here authors use a forward genetic screen to identify the role of sphingolipids in regulating the sub-cellular distribution of Dscam for neuronal patterning in Drosophila Mushroom Bodies

BACKGROUND: LY-CoV555, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody, has been associated with a decrease in viral load and the frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits among outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Data are needed on the effect of this antibody in patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19.METHODS: In this platform trial of therapeutic agents, we randomly assigned hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure in a 1:1 ratio to receive either LY-CoV555 or matching placebo. In addition, all the patients received high-quality supportive care as background therapy, including the antiviral drug remdesivir and, when indicated, supplemental oxygen and glucocorticoids. LY-CoV555 (at a dose of 7000 mg) or placebo was administered as a single intravenous infusion over a 1-hour period. The primary outcome was a sustained recovery during a 90-day period, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. An interim futility assessment was performed on the basis of a seven-category ordinal scale for pulmonary function on day 5.RESULTS: On October 26, 2020, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrollment for futility after 314 patients (163 in the LY-CoV555 group and 151 in the placebo group) had undergone randomization and infusion. The median interval since the onset of symptoms was 7 days (interquartile range, 5 to 9). At day 5, a total of 81 patients (50%) in the LY-CoV555 group and 81 (54%) in the placebo group were in one of the two most favorable categories of the pulmonary outcome. Across the seven categories, the odds ratio of being in a more favorable category in the LY-CoV555 group than in the placebo group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.29; P = 0.45). The percentage of patients with the primary safety outcome (a composite of death, serious adverse events, or clinical grade 3 or 4 adverse events through day 5) was similar in the LY-CoV555 group and the placebo group (19% and 14%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.10; P = 0.20). The rate ratio for a sustained recovery was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.47).CONCLUSIONS: Monoclonal antibody LY-CoV555, when coadministered with remdesivir, did not demonstrate efficacy among hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure. (Funded by Operation Warp Speed and others; TICO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501978.).

BACKGROUND Timely initiation of antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B virus (CHB) reduces risk of disease progression. We evaluate overall treatment rates and predictors of treatment among treatment-eligible safety-net CHB patients. METHODS We retrospectively evaluated adults with CHB from 2010 to 2018 across 4 large safety-net health systems in the United States. CHB was identified with ICD-9/10 diagnosis coding and confirmed with laboratory data. Treatment eligibility was determined using American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) guidelines. Comparison of CHB treatment rates among treatment-eligible patients were performed using χ testing, Kaplan Meier methods and log-rank testing. Adjusted multivariate Cox proportional hazards models evaluated independent predictors of receiving treatment among eligible patients. RESULTS Among 5157 CHB patients (54.7% male, 34.6% African American, 22.3% Asian), 46.8% were treatment-eligible during the study period. CHB treatment rates were 48.4% overall and 37.3% among CHB patients without human immunodeficiency virus. Significantly lower odds of treatment were observed in females versus males (odds ratio: 0.40, 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.49, P

This chapter reviews the evaluation and management of a patient with HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV) co-infection who has an acute rise in liver function tests (LFTs) after a change in his HIV regimen. Abnormal LFTs in a patient with HIV require a thorough workup, including review of medications, history, laboratory evaluation, and often an ultrasound. It describes the reasoning for being placed on active agents for both HIV and HBV. It recommends the use of a tenofovir-containing backbone in antiretroviral therapy (ART) and avoidance of lamivudine monotherapy. A change in ART that does not cover HBV could precipitate HBV rebound and a rise in LFTs.

BACKGROUND: Using data from a randomized trial, we evaluated the cost of HCV care facilitation that supports moving along the continuum of care for HIV/HCV co-infected individuals with substance use disorder. METHODS: Participants were HIV patients residing in the community, initially recruited from eight US hospital sites. They received HCV care facilitation (n=51) or treatment as usual (n=62) for up to six months. We used micro-costing methods to evaluate costs from the healthcare sector and patient perspectives in 2017 USD. We conducted sensitivity analyses varying care facilitator caseloads and examined offsetting savings using participant self-reported healthcare utilization. RESULTS: The average site start-up cost was $6,320 (site range: $4,320–$7,000), primarily consisting of training. The mean weekly cost per participant was $20 (site range: $4–$30) for care facilitation visits and contacts, $360 (site range: $130- $700) for supervision and client outreach, and $70 (site range: $20–$180) for overhead. In sensitivity analyses applying a weekly caseload of 10 participants per care facilitator (versus 1–6 observed in the trial), the total mean weekly care facilitation cost from the healthcare sector perspective decreased to $110. Weekly participant time and travel costs averaged $7. There were no significant differences in other healthcare service costs between participants in the intervention and control arms. CONCLUSION: Weekly HCV care facilitation costs were approximately $450 per participant, but approximately $110 at a real-world setting maximum caseload of 10 participants per week. No healthcare cost offsets were identified during the trial period, although future savings might result from successful HCV treatment.

Advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have made it possible for persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to live a near expected life span, without progressing to AIDS or transmitting HIV to sexual partners or infants. There is, therefore, increasing emphasis on maintaining health throughout the life span. To receive optimal medical care and achieve desired outcomes, persons with HIV must be consistently engaged in care and able to access uninterrupted treatment, including ART. Comprehensive evidence-based HIV primary care guidance is, therefore, more important than ever. Creating a patient-centered, stigma-free care environment is essential for care engagement. Barriers to care must be decreased at the societal, health system, clinic, and individual levels. As the population ages and noncommunicable diseases arise, providing comprehensive healthcare for persons with HIV becomes increasingly complex, including management of multiple comorbidities and the associated challenges of polypharmacy, while not neglecting HIV-related health concerns. Clinicians must address issues specific to persons of childbearing potential, including care during preconception and pregnancy, and to children, adolescents, and transgender and gender-diverse individuals. This guidance from an expert panel of the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America updates previous 2013 primary care guidelines.

BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly transmissible virus that can infect healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Specific care activities, in particular, aerosol-generating procedures, may have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 has created significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used to protect HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care are needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators.ObjectiveOur objective was to develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsThe Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included front-line clinicians, infectious diseases specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of preventive care, public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine, and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then, a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.ResultsThe IDSA guideline panel agreed on 8 recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations.ConclusionsUsing a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for 8 specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP who provide care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. Significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 remain, and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) increases the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Despite higher prevalence of HCV in persons born 1945-1965 (baby boomer), screening has not been widely adopted. Both primary care providers (PCPs) and associate care providers (ACPs) need to be educated about the rationale and methods to screen for HCV. In five Federally Qualified Health Centers serving low-income Hispanic communities, PCPs and ACPs attended a 50-min training lecture about HCV epidemiology, screening methods, and evaluation. Using a 12-item questionnaire, knowledge and attitudes were compared for PCPs and ACPs at baseline (pre-test) and following training (post-test). A higher proportion of PCPs correctly answered 3 of 6 knowledge questions on both pre-test and post-test but ACPs' showed more improvement in knowledge (all P 0.05). ACPs had more favorable attitudes about linking patients to care on pre- and post-tests than PCPs, and ACPs' attitudes improved on all 6 items versus 4 for PCPs. Both PCPs and ACPs improved knowledge and attitudes after training about HCV screening but ACPs had more favorable attitudes than PCPs. Engaging the entire primary care practice team in learning about HCV screening promotes knowledge and attitudes necessary for successful implementation.

Background There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of COVID-19. There is a need for frequently updated practice guidelines on their use, based on critical evaluation of rapidly emerging literature. Objective Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians and other health-care professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. Methods IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise. Process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Results The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 7 treatment recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other treatments undergoing evaluations. Conclusions The panel expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials, which would provide much needed evidence on the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19, given that we could not make a determination whether the benefits outweigh harms for most treatments.