Search

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, patients experienced significant care disruptions, including lab monitoring. We investigated changes in the time between viral load (VL) checks for people with HIV associated with the pandemic.MethodsThis was an observational analysis of VLs of people with HIV in routine care at a large subspecialty clinic. At pandemic onset, the clinic temporarily closed its onsite laboratory. The exposure was time period (time-varying): pre-pandemic (January 1st 2019-March 15th, 2020); pandemic lab-closed (March 16th-July 12th, 2020); and pandemic lab-open (July 13th-December 31st, 2020). We estimated time from an index VL to a subsequent VL, stratified by whether the index VL was suppressed (≤200 copies/mL). We also calculated cumulative incidence of a non-suppressed VL following a suppressed index VL, and of re-suppression following a loss of viral suppression.ResultsCompared to pre-pandemic, hazard ratios for next VL check were: 0.34 (95% CI: 0.30, 0.37, lab-closed) and 0.73 (CI: 0.68, 0.78, lab-open) for suppressed patients; 0.56 (CI: 0.42, 0.79, lab-closed) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.10, lab-open) for non-suppressed patients. The 12-month cumulative incidence of loss of suppression was the same in the pandemic lab-open (4%) and pre-pandemic period (4%). The hazard of re-suppression following loss of suppression was lower during the pandemic lab-open versus the pre-pandemic period (hazard ratio: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.92).ConclusionsEarly pandemic restrictions and lab closure significantly delayed VL monitoring. Once the lab re-opened, non-suppressed patients resumed normal monitoring. Suppressed patients still had a delay, but no significant loss of suppression.SummaryDuring the early COVID-19 pandemic, people with HIV experienced disruptions in viral load monitoring due to lab closure and pandemic restrictions. Loosening restrictions resolved delays for non-suppressed, but not suppressed patients. Delays did not significantly increase proportion of non-suppressed patients.

OBJECTIVE: To describe retention in HIV care based on various definitions of retention in the modern treatment era. DESIGN: A cohort study of people enrolled in care at 7 mostly urban HIV clinics across the United States, 2010-2018. METHODS: We estimated retention based on missed visits, kept visits, kept encounters (clinical visits, CD4 counts, and viral loads), and HIV labs. We contrasted risk factors for retention by different definitions and estimated odds ratios for of viral suppression and hazard ratios for mortality in 2 years immediately following the year in which retention was defined (the study year). RESULTS: Across 108,171 person-years (N=21,481 people), in 71% of years people kept ≥75% of scheduled visits; in 78%, people kept ≥2 visits >90 days apart; in 74%, people had ≥2 HIV labs >90 days apart; and in 47%, people had no gaps >6 months in clinic visits. Missing >25% of scheduled visits despite attending ≥2 visits >90 days apart was associated with non-white non-Hispanic race/ethnicity, history of injection drug use, and prior AIDS diagnosis. In contrast, attending ≥75% of scheduled visits while not attending ≥2 visits >90 days apart was associated with male sex, white race, no injection drug use history, and no prior AIDS diagnosis. Subsequent viral non-suppression was more strongly associated with missed- than kept-visit measures of retention; 2-year mortality was only associated with failure to be retained by missed-visit measures. DISCUSSION: Missed and kept-visit definitions of retention capture different constructs. Missed-visit measures are more strongly associated with poor HIV outcomes.

Supplementary Figures 1-7 and Supplementary Table 1

Purpose:Using standard-of-care CT images obtained from patients with a diagnosis of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we defined radiomics signatures predicting the sensitivity of tumors to nivolumab, docetaxel, and gefitinib.Experimental Design:Data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively across multicenter clinical trials [nivolumab, n = 92, CheckMate017 (NCT01642004), CheckMate063 (NCT01721759); docetaxel, n = 50, CheckMate017; gefitinib, n = 46, (NCT00588445)]. Patients were randomized to training or validation cohorts using either a 4:1 ratio (nivolumab: 72T:20V) or a 2:1 ratio (docetaxel: 32T:18V; gefitinib: 31T:15V) to ensure an adequate sample size in the validation set. Radiomics signatures were derived from quantitative analysis of early tumor changes from baseline to first on-treatment assessment. For each patient, 1,160 radiomics features were extracted from the largest measurable lung lesion. Tumors were classified as treatment sensitive or insensitive; reference standard was median progression-free survival (NCT01642004, NCT01721759) or surgery (NCT00588445). Machine learning was implemented to select up to four features to develop a radiomics signature in the training datasets and applied to each patient in the validation datasets to classify treatment sensitivity.Results:The radiomics signatures predicted treatment sensitivity in the validation dataset of each study group with AUC (95 confidence interval): nivolumab, 0.77 (0.55–1.00); docetaxel, 0.67 (0.37–0.96); and gefitinib, 0.82 (0.53–0.97). Using serial radiographic measurements, the magnitude of exponential increase in signature features deciphering tumor volume, invasion of tumor boundaries, or tumor spatial heterogeneity was associated with shorter overall survival.Conclusions:Radiomics signatures predicted tumor sensitivity to treatment in patients with NSCLC, offering an approach that could enhance clinical decision-making to continue systemic therapies and forecast overall survival.

Supplement

Supplemental Figure 1. Mc Nemar´s test cross tabulations comparing identified (positive)/non identified (negative) lesions of [68Ga]-DOTATATE to [18F]-FDG, [18F]-FDOPA, [18F]-FDA PET/CT, and CT/MRI.

Purpose: Patients with succinate dehydrogenase subunit B(SDHB) mutation–related pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma (PHEO/PGL) are at a higher risk for metastatic disease than other hereditary PHEOs/PGLs. Current therapeutic approaches are limited, but the best outcomes are based on the early and proper detection of as many lesions as possible. Because PHEOs/PGLs overexpress somatostatin receptor 2 (SSTR2), the goal of our study was to assess the clinical utility of [68Ga]-DOTA(0)-Tyr(3)-octreotate ([68Ga]-DOTATATE) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and to evaluate its diagnostic utility in comparison with the currently recommended functional imaging modalities [18F]-fluorodopamine ([18F]-FDA), [18F]-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine ([18F]-FDOPA), [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose ([18F]- FDG) PET/CT as well as CT/MRI.Experimental Design: [68Ga]-DOTATATE PET/CT was prospectively performed in 17 patients with SDHB-related metastatic PHEOs/PGLs. All patients also underwent [18F]-FDG PET/CT and CT/MRI, with 16 of the 17 patients also receiving [18F]-FDOPA and [18F]-FDA PET/CT scans. Detection rates of metastatic lesions were compared between all these functional imaging studies. A composite synthesis of all used functional and anatomical imaging studies served as the imaging comparator.Results: [68Ga]-DOTATATE PET/CT demonstrated a lesion-based detection rate of 98.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 96.5%–99.5%], [18F]-FDG, [18F]-FDOPA, [18F]-FDA PET/CT, and CT/MRI showed detection rates of 85.8% (CI, 81.3%–89.4%; P < 0.01), 61.4% (CI, 55.6%–66.9%; P < 0.01), 51.9% (CI, 46.1%–57.7%; P < 0.01), and 84.8% (CI, 80.0%–88.5%; P < 0.01), respectively.Conclusions: [68Ga]-DOTATATE PET/CT showed a significantly superior detection rate to all other functional and anatomical imaging modalities and may represent the preferred future imaging modality in the evaluation of SDHB-related metastatic PHEO/PGL. Clin Cancer Res; 21(17); 3888–95. ©2015 AACR.See related commentary by Hofman and Hicks, p. 3815

OBJECTIVES: Telemedicine became the primary mode of delivering care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe the impact of telemedicine on access to care for people with HIV (PWH) by comparing the proportion of PWH engaged in care prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an observational analysis of patients enrolled in the Johns Hopkins HIV Clinical Cohort, a single-center cohort of patients at an urban HIV subspecialty clinic affiliated with an academic center. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the clinic transitioned from in-person to mostly telemedicine visits. We compared patients receiving care in two time periods. The pre-pandemic period included 2,010 people with ≥1 visit scheduled between September 1(st) 2019 and March 15(th) 2020. The pandemic period included 1,929 people with ≥1 visit scheduled between March 16(th) 2020 and September 30(th) 2020. We determined the proportion of patients completing ≥1 of their scheduled visits during each period. RESULTS: Visit completion increased significantly from 88% pre-pandemic to 91% during the pandemic (p=0.008). Visit completion improved significantly for patients age 20–39 (82% to 92%, p

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) expands the surgical options for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. This study evaluated for differences in survival stratified by type of IRE and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated by IRE (2012-2020) were retrospectively included. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared by type of IRE (in situ for local tumor control or IRE of potentially positive margins with resection) and by receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.Thirty-nine patients had IRE in situ, 61 had IRE for margin extension, and 19 received adjuvant chemotherapy. Most (97.00%) underwent induction chemotherapy. OS was 28.71 months (interquartile range [IQR] 19.17, 51.19) from diagnosis, with no difference by IRE type (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05 for margin extension [p = 0.85]) or adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 1.14 [p = 0.639]). RFS was 8.51 months (IQR 4.95, 20.17) with no difference by IRE type (HR 0.90 for margin extension [p = 0.694]) or adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.90 [p = 0.711]).These findings suggest that adjuvant therapy may have limited benefit for patients treated with induction chemotherapy followed by local control with IRE for unresectable pancreatic cancer. Further study of the duration and timing of systemic therapy is warranted to maximize benefit and limit toxicity.

Direct-acting antivirals (DAA) are highly effective against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among persons with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH). However, alcohol use post-DAA treatment poses a continued threat to the liver. Whether the focus on liver health alone during HCV treatment can impact alcohol consumption is unclear. Therefore, we examined the change in alcohol use among HCV-coinfected PWH who received DAA therapy by non-addiction medical providers.In our longitudinal clinical cohort study, we identified HCV-coinfected PWH who received interferon-free DAA therapy between January 2014 and June 2019 in the Centers for AIDS Research Network of Integrated Clinical Systems. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) was the alcohol screening instrument. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models to estimate the longitudinal change in alcohol use upon DAA therapy.Among 738 HCV-coinfected PWH, 339 (46 %) reported any alcohol use at the end of HCV treatment, including 113 (15 %) with high-risk use (i.e., AUDIT-C ≥3 for women, ≥4 for men). Concurrently, 280 (38 %) PWH noted active drug use, and 357 (48 %) were currently smoking. We observed no changes in the odds of any alcohol or high-risk alcohol use over time with DAA therapy. Findings were similar in the PWH subgroup with a history of alcohol use before DAA treatment.For PWH with HCV, alcohol use did not change following interferon-free DAA treatment by non-addiction medical providers. Thus, clinicians should consider integrating targeted alcohol use interventions into HCV care to motivate reduced alcohol consumption and safeguard future liver health.

BackgroundTelemedicine use for the care of people with HIV (PWH) was widely expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic. During 2021, as on-site care was re-introduced, care was delivered through a mixture of in-person and telemedicine. We studied how different patient populations used telemedicine in this hybrid-care environment.MethodsUsing observational data from patients enrolled in the Johns Hopkins HIV Clinical Cohort, we analyzed all in-person and telemedicine HIV primary care visits completed in an HIV clinic from January 1st, 2021 to December 30th, 2021. We used log-binomial regression models to investigate the association between patient characteristics and the probability of completing a telemedicine versus in-person visit. A secondary analysis of telemedicine visits investigated the probably of completing a video versus telephone visit.ResultsA total of 5,518 visits were completed by 1,884 patients; 4,282 (77.6%) visits were in-person, 800 (14.5%) by phone, and 436 (7.9%) by video. The relative risk (RR) of completing telemedicine vs. in-person visits was 0.65 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.47, 0.91) for patients age 65+ vs. age 20-39; 0.84 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.98) for males vs. females; 0.81 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.99) for Black vs. white patients; 0.62 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.79) for patients in the highest vs. lowest quartile of Area Deprivation Index; and 1.52 (95% CI: 1.26, 1.84) for patients >15 miles vs. ConclusionsIn the second year of the pandemic, overall in-person care was utilized more than telemedicine, and significant differences persist across subgroups in telemedicine uptake.