Search

BackgroundCryptococcal disease remains one of the main causes of death in HIV-positive people who have low cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) cell counts. Currently, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends screening HIV-positive people with low CD4 counts for cryptococcal antigenaemia (CrAg), and treating those who are CrAg-positive. This Cochrane Review examined the effects of an approach where those with low CD4 counts received regular prophylactic antifungals, such as fluconazole.ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of antifungal drugs for the primary prevention of cryptococcal disease in adults and children who are HIV-positive.Search methodsWe searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE PubMed, Embase OVID, CINAHL EBSCOHost, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings for the International AIDS Society (IAS) and Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), and reference lists of relevant articles up to 31 August 2017.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials of adults and children, who are HIV-positive with low CD4 counts, without a current or prior diagnosis of cryptococcal disease that compared any antifungal drug taken as primary prophylaxis to placebo or standard care.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted and analysed data. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We summarized all outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we pooled data in meta-analyses. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsNine trials, enrolling 5426 participants, met the inclusion criteria of this review. Six trials administered fluconazole, while three trials administered itraconazole.Antifungal prophylaxis may make little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.43; 6 trials, 3220 participants; low-certainty evidence). For cryptococcal specific outcomes, prophylaxis probably reduces the risk of developing cryptococcal disease (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.49; 7 trials, 5000 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces deaths due to cryptococcal disease (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; 5 trials, 3813 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fluconazole prophylaxis may make no clear difference to the risk of developing clinically resistant Candida disease (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.56; 3 trials, 1198 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, there may be an increased detection of fluconazole-resistant Candida isolates from surveillance cultures (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.55; 3 trials, 539 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antifungal prophylaxis was generally well-tolerated with probably no clear difference in the risk of discontinuation of antifungal prophylaxis compared with placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.13; 4 trials, 2317 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antifungal prophylaxis may also make no difference to the risk of having any adverse event (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; 4 trials, 2317 participants; low-certainty evidence), or a serious adverse event (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.41; 4 trials, 888 participants; low-certainty evidence) when compared to placebo or standard care.Authors' conclusionsAntifungal prophylaxis reduced the risk of developing and dying from cryptococcal disease. Therefore, where CrAG screening is not available, antifungal prophylaxis may be used in patients with low CD4 counts at diagnosis and who are at risk of developing cryptococcal disease.

BackgroundKaposi sarcoma (KS) remains the second most frequently diagnosed HIV-related malignancy (HRM) worldwide and most common HRM in sub-Saharan Africa where HIV is most prevalent and human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8), the precipitating agent for the development of KS, is endemic. The majority of KS patients would likely benefit from systemic chemotherapy in addition to the initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART). However, as paediatric staging and treatment criteria are not readily available, there are no uniform treatment criteria.ObjectivesTo describe the efficacy and effectiveness of current treatment options for HIV-associated KS in ART-treated paediatric populations.Search methodsWe used standard Cochrane methods to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies of HIV-infected infants and children

BackgroundYellow fever (YF) is an acute viral haemorrhagic disease prevalent in tropical Africa and Latin America. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that there are 200,000 cases of YF and 30,000 deaths worldwide annually. Treatment for YF is supportive, but a live attenuated virus vaccine is effective for preventing infection. WHO recommends immunisation for all individuals > 9 months living in countries or areas at risk. However, the United States Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) advises that YF vaccine is contraindicated in individuals with HIV. Given the large populations of HIV-infected individuals living in tropical areas where YF is endemic, YF vaccine may be an important intervention for preventing YF in immunocompromised populations.ObjectivesTo assess the risk and benefits of YF immunisation for people infected with HIV.Search methodsWe used standard Cochrane methods to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials and cohort studies of individuals with HIV infection who received YF vaccine (17DD or 17D-204).Data collection and analysisTwo authors screened abstracts of references identified by electronic or bibliographic searches according to inclusion and exclusion criteria as detailed in the protocol. We identified 199 references and examined 19 in detail for study eligibility. Data were abstracted independently using a standardised abstraction form.Main resultsThree cohort studies were included in the review. They examined 484 patients with HIV infection who received YF immunisation. Patients with HIV infection developed significantly lower concentrations of neutralising antibodies in the first year post immunisation compared to uninfected patients, though decay patterns were similar for recipients regardless of HIV infection. No study patient with HIV infection suffered serious adverse events as a result of YF vaccination.Authors' conclusionsYF vaccination can produce protective levels of neutralising antibodies in HIV patients. Immunogenicity of YF vaccine is slightly less in HIV-infected patients compared to HIV-uninfected patients. No serious adverse events related to YF vaccine were observed in HIV-infected study participants. At time of immunisation, higher CD4 cell counts and lower HIV RNA levels in patients with HIV infection seem to be key determinants for development of protective titres of neutralising antibodies. The quality of the evidence for all outcomes was low to very low. YF vaccine may potentially be used safely in HIV-infected patients, although our conclusions are limited by small numbers of patients who have been reported. To assure maximum effectiveness YF vaccine should be given to HIV-infected patients after HIV replication has been suppressed.

BackgroundAntiretroviral drugs have been shown to reduce risk of mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and are also widely used for post-exposure prophylaxis for parenteral and sexual exposures. Sexual transmission may be lower in couples in which one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not and the infected partner is on antiretroviral therapy (ART).ObjectivesTo determine if ART use in an HIV-infected member of an HIV-discordant couple is associated with lower risk of HIV transmission to the uninfected partner compared to untreated discordant couples.Search methodsWe used standard Cochrane methods to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCT), cohort studies and case-control studies of HIV-discordant couples in which the HIV-infected member of the couple was being treated or not treated with ART DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Abstracts of all trials identified by electronic or bibliographic scanning were examined independently by two authors. We initially identified 3,833 references and examined 87 in detail for study eligibility. Data were abstracted independently using a standardised abstraction form.Main resultsOne RCT and nine observational studies were included in the review. These ten studies identified 2,112 episodes of HIV transmission, 1,016 among treated couples and 1,096 among untreated couples. The rate ratio for the single randomised controlled trial was 0.04 [95% CI 0.00, 0.27]. All index partners in this study had CD4 cell counts at baseline of 350-550 cells/µL. Similarly, the summary rate ratio for the nine observational studies was 0.58 [95% CI 0.35, 0.96], with substantial heterogeneity (I(2)=64%). After excluding two studies with inadequate person-time data, we estimated a summary rate ratio of 0.36 [95% CI 0.17, 0.75] with substantial heterogeneity (I(2)=62%). We also performed subgroup analyses among the observational studies to see if the effect of ART on prevention of HIV differed by the index partner's CD4 cell count. Among couples in which the infected partner had ≥350 CD4 cells/µL, we estimated a rate ratio of 0.12 [95% CI 0.01, 1.99]. In this subgroup, there were 247 transmissions in untreated couples and 30 in treated couples.Authors' conclusionsART is a potent intervention for prevention of HIV in discordant couples in which the index partner has ≤550 CD4 cells/µL. A recent multicentre RCT confirms the suspected benefit seen in earlier observational studies and reported in more recent ones. Questions remain about durability of protection, the balance of benefits and adverse events associated with earlier therapy, long-term adherence and transmission of ART-resistant strains to partners. Resource limitations and implementation challenges must also be addressed.Counselling, support, and follow up, as well as mutual disclosure, may have a role in supporting adherence, so programmes should be designed with these components. In addition to ART provision, the operational aspects of delivering such programmes must be considered.