Search

Background: Depression is a risk factor for worse outcomes in persons living with HIV/AIDS and has a prevalence more than three times as high as in the general population. Despite this, there are few randomized studies of antidepressants in HIV-infected Africans. Methods: We enrolled 460 HIV-infected Africans with cryptococcal meningitis into a randomized clinical trial of adjunctive sertraline vs placebo (2015-2017). We defined depression using depression using a Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) score of >15, and severe depression as >26 at one and three months after meningitis diagnosis and initiation of treatment.We evaluated the relationship between sertraline and depression, as well as associations with persistent depression, at three months. Results: At one- and three-months post meningitis diagnosis, 62% (108/174) and 44% (74/169) of all subjects had depression (CES>15), respectively. At three months, sertraline-treated subjects had consistent risk for depression as placebo-treated subjects but were significantly less likely to have severe depression (CES>26) (OR 0.335; 95%CI, 0.130-0.865). Of those with depression at one month, sertraline-treated subjects were less likely than placebo-treated subjects to be depressed at three months (p=0.05). Sertraline was the only factor we found significant in predicting persistent depression at three months among those who had depression at one month. Conclusions: Depression is highly prevalent in HIV-infected persons who have survived cryptococcal meningitis. We found that sertraline is associated with a modest reduction in depression in those with depression at baseline and a significant decrease in severe depression.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculous meningitis (TBM) has a high fatality rate, with inadequate diagnostic tests being a major contributor. The rollout of Xpert MTB/Rif and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) have improved time-to-diagnosis with sensitivities similar to culture, yet test availability and sensitivity are inadequate. The TB lipoarabinomannan lateral flow assay (AlereLAM) offers ease of use, but its low sensitivity in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) limits clinical utility for TBM. The Fujifilm SILVAMP TB LAM (FujiLAM) assay has excellent sensitivity in urine, but performance on cerebrospinal fluid is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study at Kiruddu National Referral Hospital in Kampala, Uganda, enrolling patients suspected to have TBM. CSF was tested using AlereLAM, Xpert Ultra, culture, and FujiLAM. Results were compared with 2 reference standards: probable and definite TBM or definite TBM alone by the uniform TBM case definition. RESULTS: Of 101 patients enrolled (95/101 HIV-positive), 34 had definite TBM and 24 had probable TBM. FujiLAM sensitivity on CSF was 52% (30/58) for definite or probable TBM compared with 55% (32/58) for Xpert Ultra. AlereLAM had lower sensitivity than FujiLAM in the subgroup of patients tested with both assays (14% [4/28] vs 50% [14/28]; P < .01). FujiLAM specificity was 98% (42/43) for patients without probable or definite TBM. CONCLUSIONS: FujiLAM showed higher sensitivity than AlereLAM, with sensitivity potentially approaching that of Xpert Ultra. FujiLAM could improve time-to-treatment-initiation, especially in settings where the more technical Xpert Ultra system might not be feasible. Large confirmatory studies are needed.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with SARS-CoV-2, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, COVID-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine loading dose then 400 mg once or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable COVID-19–compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole-blood concentrations. Results We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of whom 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of COVID-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events/person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events/person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events/person-year with placebo. For once-weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was .72 (95% CI, .44–1.16; P = .18) and for twice-weekly was .74 (95% CI, .46–1.19; P = .22) compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82–120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159–258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed COVID-19–compatible illness (154 ng/mL) versus participants without COVID-19 (133 ng/mL; P = .08). Conclusions Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or COVID-19–compatible illness among healthcare workers. Clinical Trials Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04328467.

There is no known effective oral therapy for early COVID-19. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated effects of oral hydroxychloroquine on symptoms and disease severity in adult outpatients with early COVID-19., Background: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04308668) Setting: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces). Participants: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset. Intervention: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo. Measures: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days. Results: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, −0.27 points [95% CI, −0.61 to 0.07 points]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non–COVID-19–related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29). Limitations: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages. Conclusion: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19. Primary Funding Source: Private donors., Visual Abstract. Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19 There is no known effective oral therapy for early COVID-19. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated effects of oral hydroxychloroquine on symptoms and disease severity in adult outpatients with early COVID-19. Visual Abstract. Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19 There is no known effective oral therapy for early COVID-19. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated effects of oral hydroxychloroquine on symptoms and disease severity in adult outpatients with early COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Central nervous system (CNS) infections remain a major public health problem in Sub-Saharan Africa, causing 15%-25% of AIDS-related deaths. With widespread availability of antiretroviral therapy (ART) and the introduction of improved diagnostics, the epidemiology of infectious meningitis is evolving. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled adults presenting with HIV-associated meningitis in Kampala and Mbarara, Uganda, from March 2015 to September 2017. Participants had a structured, stepwise diagnostic algorithm performed of blood cryptococcal antigen (CrAg), CSF CrAg, Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculous (TB) meningitis (TBM), Biofire multiplex polymerase chain reaction, and traditional microscopy and cultures. RESULTS: We screened 842 consecutive adults with HIV presenting with suspected meningitis: 57% men, median age 35 years, median CD4 26 cells/mcL, and 55% presented on ART. Overall, 60.5% (509/842) were diagnosed with first-episode cryptococcal meningitis and 7.4% (62/842) with second episode. Definite/probable TB meningitis was the primary diagnosis in 6.9% (58/842); 5.3% (n = 45) had microbiologically confirmed (definite) TB meningitis. An additional 7.8% (66/842) did not meet the diagnostic threshold for definite/probable TBM but received empiric TBM therapy. Bacterial and viral meningitis were diagnosed in 1.3% (11/842) and 0.7% (6/842), respectively. The adoption of a cost-effective stepwise diagnostic algorithm allowed 79% (661/842) to have a confirmed microbiological diagnosis at an average cost of $44 per person. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread ART availability, Cryptococcus remains the leading cause of HIV-associated meningitis. The second most common etiology was TB meningitis, treated in 14.7% overall. The increased proportion of microbiologically confirmed TBM cases reflects the impact of new improved molecular diagnostics.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with cryptococcal antigenemia are at high risk of developing cryptococcal meningitis if untreated. The progression and timing from asymptomatic infection to cryptococcal meningitis is unclear. We describe a subpopulation of individuals with neurologic symptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia but negative cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) studies. METHODS: We evaluated 1201 human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive individuals hospitalized with suspected meningitis in Kampala and Mbarara, Uganda. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of participants with neurologic-symptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia and negative CSF cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) were compared to participants with confirmed CSF CrAg+ cryptococcal meningitis. Additional CSF testing included microscopy, fungal culture, bacterial culture, tuberculosis culture, multiplex FilmArray polymerase chain reaction (PCR; Biofire), and Xpert MTB/Rif. RESULTS: We found 56% (671/1201) of participants had confirmed CSF CrAg+ cryptococcal meningitis and 4% (54/1201) had neurologic symptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia with negative CSF CrAg. Of those with negative CSF CrAg, 9% (5/54) had Cryptococcus isolated on CSF culture (n = 3) or PCR (n = 2) and 11% (6/54) had confirmed tuberculous meningitis. CSF CrAg-negative patients had lower proportions with CSF pleocytosis (16% vs 26% with ≥5 white cells/μL) and CSF opening pressure >200 mmH2O (16% vs 71%) compared with CSF CrAg-positive patients. No cases of bacterial or viral meningitis were detected by CSF PCR or culture. In-hospital mortality was similar between symptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia (32%) and cryptococcal meningitis (31%; P = .91). CONCLUSIONS: Cryptococcal antigenemia with meningitis symptoms was the third most common meningitis etiology. We postulate this is early cryptococcal meningoencephalitis. Fluconazole monotherapy was suboptimal despite Cryptococcus-negative CSF. Further studies are warranted to understand the clinical course and optimal management of this distinct entity. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01802385.

BACKGROUND: WHO recommends Xpert MTB/RIF as initial diagnostic testing for tuberculous meningitis. However, diagnosis remains difficult, with Xpert sensitivity of about 50-70% and culture sensitivity of about 60%. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the new Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) for tuberculous meningitis. METHODS: We prospectively obtained diagnostic cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens during screening for a trial on the treatment of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis in Mbarara, Uganda. HIV-infected adults with suspected meningitis (eg, headache, nuchal rigidity, altered mental status) were screened consecutively at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital. We centrifuged CSF, resuspended the pellet in 2 mL of CSF, and tested 0·5 mL with mycobacteria growth indicator tube culture, 1 mL with Xpert, and cryopreserved 0·5 mL, later tested with Xpert Ultra. We assessed diagnostic performance against uniform clinical case definition or a composite reference standard of any positive CSF tuberculous test. FINDINGS: From Feb 27, 2015, to Nov 7, 2016, we prospectively evaluated 129 HIV-infected adults with suspected meningitis for tuberculosis. 23 participants were classified as probable or definite tuberculous meningitis by uniform case definition, excluding Xpert Ultra results. Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 70% (95% CI 47-87; 16 of 23 cases) for probable or definite tuberculous meningitis compared with 43% (23-66; 10/23) for Xpert and 43% (23-66; 10/23) for culture. With composite standard, we detected tuberculous meningitis in 22 (17%) of 129 participants. Xpert Ultra had 95% sensitivity (95% CI 77-99; 21 of 22 cases) for tuberculous meningitis, which was higher than either Xpert (45% [24-68]; 10/22; p=0·0010) or culture (45% [24-68]; 10/22; p=0·0034). Of 21 participants positive by Xpert Ultra, 13 were positive by culture, Xpert, or both, and eight were only positive by Xpert Ultra. Of those eight, three were categorised as probable tuberculous meningitis, three as possible tuberculous meningitis, and two as not tuberculous meningitis. Testing 6 mL or more of CSF was associated with more frequent detection of tuberculosis than with less than 6 mL (26% vs 7%; p=0·014). INTERPRETATION: Xpert Ultra detected significantly more tuberculous meningitis than did either Xpert or culture. WHO now recommends the use of Xpert Ultra as the initial diagnostic test for suspected tuberculous meningitis. FUNDING: National Institute of Neurologic Diseases and Stroke, Fogarty International Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, UK Medical Research Council/DfID/Wellcome Trust Global Health Trials, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.