Search

IntroductionThe WHO clinical guidelines for HIV/AIDS are widely used in resource limited settings to represent the gold standard of CD4 counts for antiviral therapy initiation. The utility of the WHO-defined stage 1 and 2 clinical factors used in WHO HIV/AIDS clinical staging in predicting low CD4 cell count has not been established in Uganda. Although the WHO staging has shown low sensitivity for predicting CD4

Unlabelled: In contrast to resource-rich countries, most HIV-infected patients in resource-limited countries receive treatment without virological monitoring. There are few long-term data, in this setting, on rates of viral suppression or switch to second-line antiretroviral therapy. The DART trial compared clinically driven monitoring (CDM) versus routine laboratory (CD4/haematology/biochemistry) and clinical monitoring (LCM) in HIV-infected adults initiating therapy. There was no virological monitoring in either study group during follow-up, but viral load was measured in Ugandan participants at trial closure. Two thousand three hundred and seventeen (2317) participants from this country initiated antiretroviral therapy with zidovudine/lamivudine plus tenofovir (n = 1717), abacavir (n = 300), or nevirapine (n = 300). Of 1896 (81.8%) participants who were alive and in follow-up at trial closure (median 5.1 years after therapy initiation), 1507 (79.5%) were on first-line and 389 (20.5%) on second-line antiretroviral therapy. The overall switch rate after the first year was 5.6 per 100 person-years; the rate was substantially higher in participants with low baseline CD4 counts (<50 cells/mm3). Among 1207 (80.1%) first-line participants with viral load measured, HIV RNA was <400 copies/ml in 963 (79.8%), 400-999 copies/ml in 37 (3.1%), 1,000-9,999 copies/ml in 110 (9.1%), and ≥10,000 copies/ml in 97 (8.0%). The proportion with HIV RNA <400 copies/ml was slightly lower (difference 7.1%, 95% CI 2.5 to 11.5%) in CDM (76.3%) than in LCM (83.4%). Among 252 (64.8%) second-line participants with viral load measured (median 2.3 years after switch), HIV RNA was <400 copies/ml in 226 (89.7%), with no difference between monitoring strategies. Low switch rates and high, sustained levels of viral suppression are achievable without viral load or CD4 count monitoring in the context of high-quality clinical care., Trial Registration: ISRCTN13968779.

Background: In low-income countries, viral load (VL) monitoring of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is rarely available in the public sector for HIV-infected adults or children. Using clinical failure alone to identify first-line ART failure and trigger regimen switch may result in unnecessary use of costly second-line therapy. Our objective was to identify CD4 threshold values to confirm clinically-determined ART failure when VL is unavailable., Methods: 3316 HIV-infected Ugandan/Zimbabwean adults were randomised to first-line ART with Clinically-Driven (CDM, CD4s measured but blinded) or routine Laboratory and Clinical Monitoring (LCM, 12-weekly CD4s) in the DART trial. CD4 at switch and ART failure criteria (new/recurrent WHO 4, single/multiple WHO 3 event; LCM: CD4<100 cells/mm(3)) were reviewed in 361 LCM, 314 CDM participants who switched over median 5 years follow-up. Retrospective VLs were available in 368 (55%) participants., Results: Overall, 265/361 (73%) LCM participants failed with CD4<100 cells/mm(3); only 7 (2%) switched with CD4≥250 cells/mm(3), four switches triggered by WHO events. Without CD4 monitoring, 207/314 (66%) CDM participants failed with WHO 4 events, and 77(25%)/30(10%) with single/multiple WHO 3 events. Failure/switching with single WHO 3 events was more likely with CD4≥250 cells/mm(3) (28/77; 36%) (p = 0.0002). CD4 monitoring reduced switching with viral suppression: 23/187 (12%) LCM versus 49/181 (27%) CDM had VL<400 copies/ml at failure/switch (p<0.0001). Amongst CDM participants with CD4<250 cells/mm(3) only 11/133 (8%) had VL<400 copies/ml, compared with 38/48 (79%) with CD4≥250 cells/mm(3) (p<0.0001)., Conclusion: Multiple, but not single, WHO 3 events predicted first-line ART failure. A CD4 threshold 'tiebreaker' of ≥250 cells/mm(3) for clinically-monitored patients failing first-line could identify ∼80% with VL<400 copies/ml, who are unlikely to benefit from second-line. Targeting CD4s to single WHO stage 3 'clinical failures' would particularly avoid premature, costly switch to second-line ART.

Background: Despite funding constraints for treatment programmes in Africa, the costs and economic consequences of routine laboratory monitoring for efficacy and toxicity of antiretroviral therapy (ART) have rarely been evaluated., Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted in the DART trial (ISRCTN13968779). Adults in Uganda/Zimbabwe starting ART were randomised to clinically-driven monitoring (CDM) or laboratory and clinical monitoring (LCM); individual patient data on healthcare resource utilisation and outcomes were valued with primary economic costs and utilities. Total costs of first/second-line ART, routine 12-weekly CD4 and biochemistry/haematology tests, additional diagnostic investigations, clinic visits, concomitant medications and hospitalisations were considered from the public healthcare sector perspective. A Markov model was used to extrapolate costs and benefits 20 years beyond the trial., Results: 3316 (1660LCM;1656CDM) symptomatic, immunosuppressed ART-naive adults (median (IQR) age 37 (32,42); CD4 86 (31,139) cells/mm(3)) were followed for median 4.9 years. LCM had a mean 0.112 year (41 days) survival benefit at an additional mean cost of $765 [95%CI:685,845], translating into an adjusted incremental cost of $7386 [3277,dominated] per life-year gained and $7793 [4442,39179] per quality-adjusted life year gained. Routine toxicity tests were prominent cost-drivers and had no benefit. With 12-weekly CD4 monitoring from year 2 on ART, low-cost second-line ART, but without toxicity monitoring, CD4 test costs need to fall below $3.78 to become cost-effective (<3xper-capita GDP, following WHO benchmarks). CD4 monitoring at current costs as undertaken in DART was not cost-effective in the long-term., Conclusions: There is no rationale for routine toxicity monitoring, which did not affect outcomes and was costly. Even though beneficial, there is little justification for routine 12-weekly CD4 monitoring of ART at current test costs in low-income African countries. CD4 monitoring, restricted to the second year on ART onwards, could be cost-effective with lower cost second-line therapy and development of a cheaper, ideally point-of-care, CD4 test.

Background: The impact of flat-line funding in the global scale up of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-infected patients in Africa has not yet been well described., Methods: We evaluated ART-eligible patients and patients starting ART at a prototypical scale up ART clinic in Mbarara, Uganda between April 1, 2009 and May 14, 2010 where four stakeholders sponsor treatment - two PEPFAR implementing organizations, the Ugandan Ministry of Health - Global Fund (MOH-GF) and a private foundation named the Family Treatment Fund (FTF). We assessed temporal trends in the number of eligible patients, the number starting ART and tabulated the distribution of the stakeholders supporting ART initiation by month and quartile of time during this interval. We used survival analyses to assess changes in the rate of ART initiation over calendar time., Findings: A total of 1309 patients who were eligible for ART made visits over the 14 month period of the study and of these 819 started ART. The median number of ART eligible patients each month was 88 (IQR: 74 to 115). By quartile of calendar time, PEPFAR and MOH sponsored 290, 192, 180, and 49 ART initiations whereas the FTF started 1, 2, 1 and 104 patients respectively. By May of 2010 (the last calendar month of observation) FTF sponsored 88% of all ART initiations. Becoming eligible for ART in the 3(rd) (HR = 0.58, 95% 0.45-0.74) and 4(th) quartiles (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.36-0.65) was associated with delay in ART initiation compared to the first quartile in multivariable analyses., Interpretation: During a period of flat line funding from multinational donors for ART programs, reductions in the number of ART initiations by public programs (i.e., PEPFAR and MOH-GF) and delays in ART initiation became apparent at the a large prototypical scale-up ART clinic in Uganda.

Background: Short cycle treatment interruption could reduce toxicity and drug costs and contribute to further expansion of antiretroviral therapy (ART) programs., Methods: A 72 week, non-inferiority trial enrolled one hundred forty six HIV positive persons receiving ART (CD4+ cell count > or =125 cells/mm(3) and HIV RNA plasma levels <50 copies/ml) in one of three arms: continuous, 7 days on/7 days off and 5 days on/2 days off treatment. Primary endpoint was ART treatment failure determined by plasma HIV RNA level, CD4+ cell count decrease, death attributed to study participation, or opportunistic infection., Results: Following enrollment of 32 participants, the 7 days on/7 days off arm was closed because of a failure rate of 31%. Six of 52 (11.5%) participants in the 5 days on/2 days off arm failed. Five had virologic failure and one participant had immunologic failure. Eleven of 51 (21.6%) participants in the continuous treatment arm failed. Nine had virologic failure with 1 death (lactic acidosis) and 1 clinical failure (extra-pulmonary TB). The upper 97.5% confidence boundary for the difference between the percent of non-failures in the 5 days on/2 days off arm (88.5% non-failure) compared to continuous treatment (78.4% non failure) was 4.8% which is well within the preset non-inferiority margin of 15%. No significant difference was found in time to failure in the 2 study arms (p = 0.39)., Conclusions: Short cycle 5 days on/2 days off intermittent ART was at least as effective as continuous therapy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00339456.