Posts filed under ‘HIV/SIDA’

Strategies used by gay male HIV serodiscordant couples to reduce the risk of HIV transmission from anal intercourse in three countries

Journal of the International AIDS Society March 2019

Introduction

There are few data about the range of strategies used to prevent sexual HIV transmission within gay male serodiscordant couples. We examined HIV prevention strategies used by such couples and compared differences between countries.

Methods

Opposites Attract was a cohort study of male serodiscordant couples in Australia, Brazil and Thailand, from May 2014 (Australia) or May 2016 (Brazil/Thailand) to December 2016. At visits, HIV‐positive partners had viral load (VL) tested; HIV‐negative partners reported sexual behaviour and perceptions of their HIV‐positive partner’s VL results. Within‐couple acts of condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) were categorized by strategy: condom‐protected, biomedically protected (undetectable VL and/or pre‐exposure prophylaxis [PrEP]), or not protected by either (HIV‐negative partners engaging in insertive CLAI, receptive CLAI with withdrawal, or receptive CLAI with ejaculation).

Results

A total of 343 couples were included in this analysis (153 in Australia, 93 in Brazil and 97 in Thailand). Three‐quarters of HIV‐positive partners were consistently virally suppressed (<200 copies/mL) during follow‐up, and HIV‐negative partners had correct perceptions of their partner’s VL result for 76.5% of tests. One‐third of HIV‐negative partners used daily PrEP during follow‐up. Over follow‐up, 73.8% of couples had CLAI. HIV‐negative partners reported 31,532 acts of anal intercourse with their HIV‐positive partner. Of these, 46.7% were protected by condoms, 48.6% by a biomedical strategy and 4.7% of acts were not protected by these strategies. Australian couples had fewer condom‐protected acts and a higher proportion of biomedically protected acts than Brazilian and Thai couples. Of the 1473 CLAI acts where the perceived VL was detectable/unknown and were not protected by PrEP (4.7% of all acts), two‐thirds (n = 983) were when the HIV‐negative partner was insertive (strategic positioning). Of the 490 acts when the HIV‐negative partner was receptive, 261 involved withdrawal and 280 involved ejaculation. Thus, <1% of acts were in the highest risk category of receptive CLAI with ejaculation.

Conclusions

Couples used condoms, PrEP or perceived undetectable VL for prevention in the majority of anal intercourse acts. Only a very small proportion of events were not protected by these strategies. Variation between countries may reflect differences in access to HIV treatment, education, knowledge and attitudes.

FULL TEXT

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jia2.25277

PDF

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jia2.25277

Advertisements

May 14, 2019 at 8:37 am

Risk of HIV transmission through condomless sex in serodifferent gay couples with the HIV-positive partner taking suppressive antiretroviral therapy (PARTNER): final results of a multicentre, prospective, observational study.

LANCET May 2, 2019

Background

The level of evidence for HIV transmission risk through condomless sex in serodifferent gay couples with the HIV-positive partner taking virally suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART) is limited compared with the evidence available for transmission risk in heterosexual couples. The aim of the second phase of the PARTNER study (PARTNER2) was to provide precise estimates of transmission risk in gay serodifferent partnerships.

Methods

The PARTNER study was a prospective observational study done at 75 sites in 14 European countries. The first phase of the study (PARTNER1; Sept 15, 2010, to May 31, 2014) recruited and followed up both heterosexual and gay serodifferent couples (HIV-positive partner taking suppressive ART) who reported condomless sex, whereas the PARTNER2 extension (to April 30, 2018) recruited and followed up gay couples only. At study visits, data collection included sexual behaviour questionnaires, HIV testing (HIV-negative partner), and HIV-1 viral load testing (HIV-positive partner). If a seroconversion occurred in the HIV-negative partner, anonymised phylogenetic analysis was done to compare HIV-1 pol and env sequences in both partners to identify linked transmissions. Couple-years of follow-up were eligible for inclusion if condomless sex was reported, use of pre-exposure prophylaxis or post-exposure prophylaxis was not reported by the HIV-negative partner, and the HIV-positive partner was virally suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <200 copies per mL) at the most recent visit (within the past year). Incidence rate of HIV transmission was calculated as the number of phylogenetically linked HIV infections that occurred during eligible couple-years of follow-up divided by eligible couple-years of follow-up. Two-sided 95% CIs for the incidence rate of transmission were calculated using exact Poisson methods.

Findings

Between Sept 15, 2010, and July 31, 2017, 972 gay couples were enrolled, of which 782 provided 1593 eligible couple-years of follow-up with a median follow-up of 2·0 years (IQR 1·1–3·5). At baseline, median age for HIV-positive partners was 40 years (IQR 33–46) and couples reported condomless sex for a median of 1·0 years (IQR 0·4–2·9). During eligible couple-years of follow-up, couples reported condomless anal sex a total of 76 088 times. 288 (37%) of 777 HIV-negative men reported condomless sex with other partners. 15 new HIV infections occurred during eligible couple-years of follow-up, but none were phylogenetically linked within-couple transmissions, resulting in an HIV transmission rate of zero (upper 95% CI 0·23 per 100 couple-years of follow-up).

Interpretation

Our results provide a similar level of evidence on viral suppression and HIV transmission risk for gay men to that previously generated for heterosexual couples and suggest that the risk of HIV transmission in gay couples through condomless sex when HIV viral load is suppressed is effectively zero. Our findings support the message of the U=U (undetectable equals untransmittable) campaign, and the benefits of early testing and treatment for HIV.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

FULL TEXT

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)30418-0/fulltext

May 6, 2019 at 7:16 am

BHIVA-BASHH Guidelines on the use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) 2018. 79 pag.

HIV Med. Marcj 2019 V.20  Suppl 2  P. s2-s80

FULL TEXT

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hiv.12718

PDF

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hiv.12718

March 28, 2019 at 3:34 pm

Disminución del nivel de conciencia, fiebre y disnea en una paciente infectada con HIV.

Revista Argentina de Microbiologia 2014 V.46 N.3 P.271-272

Carta al Editor

Shock séptico con meningitis debido a la bacteriemia por Klebsiella pneumoniae y falla multiorgánica en el contexto de un síndrome de hiperinfección por Strongyloides stercoralis,

PDF

https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2130/213032482015.pdf

March 24, 2019 at 5:31 pm

Infección por Strongyloides stercoralis: estudio epidemiológico, clínico, diagnóstico y terapéutico en 30 pacientes

Revista Chilena de Infectologia Junio 2011 V.28 N.3

Marcelo Corti, María F. Villafañe, Norberto Trione, Daniel Risso, Juan Carlos Abuín y Omar Palmieri

Hospital de Enfermedades Infecciosas Francisco J. Muñiz, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Antecedentes

Strongyloides stercoralis, parásito endémico de áreas tropicales y subtropicales del planeta, en sujetos inmunodeprimidos puede cursar con formas graves y aun mortales como el síndrome de hiperinfestación y la enfermedad diseminada.

Métodos

Análisis retrospectivo de las características epidemiológicas, manifestaciones clínicas, co-infección por virus de inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH), hallazgos microbiológicos y evolución de 30 pacientes con estrongiloidiasis, atendidos en el Hospital de Enfermedades Infecciosas F. J. Muñiz de Buenos Aires, entre enero 2004 y diciembre 2008.

Resultados

Se incluyeron en la evaluación 20 hombres y 10 mujeres con una mediana de edad de 33 años. Co-infección por VIH hubo en 21 pacientes (70%); la mediana de linfocitos T CD4+ en ellos al momento del diagnóstico de la parasitosis fue de 50 céls/mm3 (rango 7 a 355), (media de 56 céls/mm3). En los pacientes seronegativos para VIH, se comprobaron las siguientes co-morbilidades: tuberculosis (n: 3) y un caso de cada una de las siguientes afecciones: alcoholismo crónico, diabetes mellitus, reacción lepromatosa bajo corticotera-pia, y psoriasis en tratamiento inmunosupresor. Hubo dos pacientes sin aparentes enfermedades de base. Diecisiete pacientes presentaron enfermedad intestinal crónica con diarrea (57%), era asintomática y fue sospechada por la eosinofilia periférica (n: 7, 23%) y se clasificó como síndrome de hiperinfestación (n: 6, 20%) diagnosticado por la identificación de larvas en la materia fecal y secreciones broncopulmonares. Diecisiete pacientes (57%) presentaron eosinofilia periférica. El diagnóstico se efectuó por la visualización directa de las larvas en muestras de heces en fresco mediante la técnica de concentración de Baer-man (n: 20); por el examen copro-parasitológico seriado (n: 2) y por ambos métodos (n: 1); en líquido duodenal y materia fecal (n: 1) y por la identificación de larvas en materia fecal y secreciones respiratorias (n: 6). Letalidad global: 20% (6/30). Los pacientes con eosinofilia tuvieron una menor letalidad que aquellos sin esta respuesta (p < 0,001). No hubo correlación estadística entre la edad y la supervivencia. Sí fue significativa la correlación entre el recuento de CD4 y la letalidad, incluyendo 18 de los 21 pacientes seropositivos para VIH (p: 0,03). Finalmente, la correlación seropositividad para VIH y letalidad también fue significativa. Veintidós pacientes respondieron a la terapia antiparasitaria con ivermectina y evolucionaron favorablemente.

PDF

https://scielo.conicyt.cl/pdf/rci/v28n3/art03.pdf

March 24, 2019 at 5:28 pm

2017-10 European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS). European guidelines for clinical management and treatment of HIV-1-infected adults in Europe 102 pag

Welcome to the EACS Guidelines!

These Guidelines were developed by the European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS), a not-for-profit organisation, whose mission is to promote excellence in standards of care, research and education in HIV infection and related co-infections, and to actively engage in the formulation of public health policy, with the aim of reducing HIV disease burden across Europe.

The EACS Guidelines were first published in 2005, and are currently available in print, online, and as a free App for both iOS and Android devices. The Guidelines are translated to a number of different languages, and are formally revised at least annually for the electronic version and biennially for the printed version. The electronic version can, however, be updated at any given moment if the panels consider it necessary.

The aim of the EACS Guidelines is to provide easily accessible and comprehensive recommendations to clinicians centrally involved in the care of HIV-positive persons.

The EACS Guidelines are covering a relatively large and diverse area geographically, with different national levels of access to care. As a natural consequence, the Guidelines aim to cover a relatively wide range of recommendations as opposed to the often more uniform national guidelines.

The Guidelines consist of five main sections, including a general overview table of all major issues in HIV infection, as well as detailed recommendations on antiretroviral treatment, diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of co-morbidities, co-infections and opportunistic diseases.

Each respective section of the Guidelines is managed by a panel of experienced European HIV experts, and additional experts, where needed. All recommendations are evidence-based whenever possible, and based on expert opinions in the rare instances where adequate evidence is unavailable. It was decided not to provide formal grades of evidence in the Guidelines. The panels make decisions by consensus or by vote when necessary. Yet, it was decided not to publish results of the votes or discrepancies if any.

A list of the main references used to produce the Guidelines is provided as a separate section. Please reference the EACS Guidelines as follows: EACS Guidelines version 9.0, October 2017. Video links to the EACS online course on Clinical Management of HIV are provided throughout the Guidelines, see Video links.

The diagnosis and management of HIV infection and related co-infections, opportunistic diseases and co-morbidities continue to require a multidisciplinary effort for which we hope the 2017 version of the EACS Guidelines will provide you with an easily accessible and updated overview.

All comments to the Guidelines are welcome and can be directed to guidelines@eacsociety.org

We wish to warmly thank all panellists, external experts, linguists, translators, the EACS Secretariat, the Sanford team and everyone else who helped to build up and to publish the EACS Guidelines for their dedicated work.

 

Enjoy!

Manuel Battegay and Lene Ryom – October 2017

PDF

http://www.eacsociety.org/files/guidelines_9.0-english.pdf

March 19, 2019 at 4:00 pm

Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Adults and Adolescents Living with HIV 332 pag – Department of Health and Human Services – OCTOBER 2018

What’s New in the Guidelines?

(Last updated October 25, 2018; last reviewed October 25, 2018)

Resistance Testing

New information has been added regarding the use of HIV-1 proviral DNA genotypic resistance tests to identify drug resistance mutations, especially in the setting of low-level viremia or when plasma HIV RNA is below the limit of detection. The section now includes a discussion on the benefits and limitations of these tests.

Co-Receptor Tropism Testing

For patients who have undetectable HIV RNA, the Panel now recommends using a proviral DNA tropism assay to assess co-receptor usage before maraviroc is initiated as part of a new regimen.

Dolutegravir and Association with Neural Tube Defects

Preliminary data from Botswana suggest that there is an increased risk of neural tube defects in infants born to women who were receiving dolutegravir (DTG) at the time of conception. In response to these preliminary data, several sections in the Adult and Adolescent Guidelines have been updated to provide guidance for clinicians who are considering the use of DTG or other integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in individuals who are pregnant, or in those of childbearing potential who plan to get pregnant or who are sexually active and not using effective contraception.

The sections that have been updated with this new information include:

  • What to Start
  • Virologic Failure
  • Optimizing Antiretroviral Therapy in the Setting of Viral Suppression (formerly Regimen Switching in the

Setting of   Virologic Suppression)

  • Acute and Recent (Early) HIV-1 Infection
  • Adolescents and Young Adults with HIV
  • Women with HIV

 

What to Start

The following changes have been made to the recommendations for initial antiretroviral (ARV) regimens:

  • Bictegravir/Tenofovir Alafenamide/Emtricitabine (BIC/TAF/FTC): BIC is a new INSTI that is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as part of a single-tablet regimen (STR) that also includes TAF and FTC. This regimen is now classified as a Recommended Initial Regimen for Most People with HIV.
  • Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine with Tenofovir Alafenamide or Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (EVG/c/FTC/TAF or EVG/c/FTC/TDF): These regimens have been moved to the category of Recommended Initial Regimens in Certain Clinical Situations. This change was made because these combinations include cobicistat, a pharmaco-enhancer that inhibits cytochrome P450 3A4 and increases the likelihood of drug-drug interactions. EVG also has a lower barrier to resistance than DTG and BIC.
  • Doravirine (DOR): DOR, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, was recently approved by the FDA and is available as a single-drug tablet and as part of an STR that also includes TDF and lamivudine (3TC). DOR/TDF/3TC and DOR plus TAF/FTC have been added to the category of Recommended Initial Regimens in Certain Clinical Situations.
  • Dolutegravir plus Lamivudine (DTG plus 3TC): This two-drug regimen is now one of the regimens to consider when abacavir, TAF, or TDF cannot be used or are not optimal.
  • A new table, Table 6b, has been added to provide guidance to clinicians who are considering the use of DTG or other INSTIs in those who are pregnant and in those of childbearing potential.
  • Several new tables (Tables 8a–8d) have been added to the sections for the individual drug classes. These tables compare the characteristics of the different drugs within the classes.
  • Updates have been made throughout the section with new safety and clinical trial data.

 

Virologic Failure

  • This section was updated to include newly reported data and new language on recently published clinical trial data for first- line ARV treatment failure.
  • The Panel notes that, in some persons with multidrug-resistant HIV, DTG may be the only treatment option, or one of few treatment options. Accordingly, the language on the use of DTG in those of childbearing potential has been updated. The section now emphasizes that clinicians and patients should discuss the risk of neural tube defects if pregnancy occurs while the patient is taking DTG, as well as the risk of persistent viremia in the patient and the risk of HIV transmission to the fetus if pregnancy occurs while the patient is not on effective ARV therapy. The decision of whether to initiate or continue DTG should be made after carefully considering these risks.
  • Ibalizumab (IBA), a CD4 post-attachment inhibitor, was recently approved for use in persons with multidrug-resistant HIV. A review of the results of a clinical trial on IBA use in this setting has been added to the section.

 

Optimizing Antiretroviral Therapy in the Setting of Viral Suppression

  • The title of this section has been changed from Regimen Switching in the Setting of Virologic Suppression to Optimizing Antiretroviral Therapy in the Setting of Viral Suppression to better reflect the rationale for regimen changes in this setting.

 

  • The Panel emphasizes the importance of reviewing all available resistance test results when constructing a new regimen.
  • The role of HIV-1 proviral DNA genotypic resistance testing in detecting archived drug resistance mutations in the setting of viral suppression is discussed.
  • The Panel recommends performing pregnancy testing for those of childbearing potential before a regimen switch and provides recommendations for INSTI use in these patients.
  • Clinical trial data on the use of several ARV combinations in switch studies are updated and discussed in this section.

 

Exposure-Response Relationship and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Section

  • This section has been removed from the guidelines.
  • The subsection regarding the role of therapeutic drug monitoring in managing drug-drug interactions has been moved to the Drug-Drug Interactions section of the guidelines.

 

Additional Updates

Various tables in the guidelines have been updated with new data, as well as information related to BIC and DOR.

 

  • Hepatitis C Virus/HIV Coinfection
  • Adverse Effects of Antiretroviral Agents
  • Monthly Average Prices of Commonly Used Antiretroviral Drugs
  • Drug-Drug Interactions
  • Appendix B Tables: Characteristics of Antiretroviral Drugs and Antiretroviral Dosing Recommendations in

Patients with   Renal and Hepatic Insufficiency

 

PDF

https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/lvguidelines/adultandadolescentgl.pdf

 

March 19, 2019 at 3:47 pm

Older Posts


Calendar

May 2019
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Posts by Month

Posts by Category