Declaration of interests KNA serves on the scientific advisory board of TrioHealth, Inc.. MJG has served as an ad hoc member of Canadian HIV Advisory Boards of Merck, Gilead and ViiV. RDM has previously consulted for Medscape. MJS has received grants from Gilead and, formerly, Merck. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

No abstract

The PROgress study assessed the value and feasibility of implementing web-based patient-reported outcomes assessments (PROs) within routine HIV care at two North American outpatient clinics. People with HIV (PWH) completed PROs on a tablet computer in clinic before their routine care visit. Data collection included PROs from 1632 unique PWH, 596 chart reviews, 200 patient questionnaires, and 16 provider/staff questionnaires. During an initial setup phase involving 200 patients, PRO results were not delivered to providers; for all subsequent patients, providers received PRO results before the consultation. Chart review demonstrated that delivery of PRO results to providers improved patient-provider communication and increased the number of complex health and behavioral issues identified, recorded, and acted on, including suicidal ideation (88% with vs 38% without PRO feedback) and anxiety (54% with vs 24% without PRO feedback). In post-visit questionnaires, PWH (82%) and providers (82%) indicated that the PRO added value to the visit.

Abstract Background People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) have a markedly elevated anal cancer risk, largely due to loss of immunoregulatory control of oncogenic human papillomavirus infection. To better understand anal cancer development and prevention, we determined whether recent, past, cumulative, or nadir/peak CD4+ T-cell count (CD4) and/or HIV-1 RNA level (HIV RNA) best predict anal cancer risk. Methods We studied 102 777 PLWH during 1996–2014 from 21 cohorts participating in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design. Using demographics-adjusted, cohort-stratified Cox models, we assessed associations between anal cancer risk and various time-updated CD4 and HIV RNA measures, including cumulative and nadir/peak measures during prespecified moving time windows. We compared models using the Akaike information criterion. Results Cumulative and nadir/peak CD4 or HIV RNA measures from approximately 8.5 to 4.5 years in the past were generally better predictors for anal cancer risk than their corresponding more recent measures. However, the best model included CD4 nadir (ie, the lowest CD4) from approximately 8.5 years to 6 months in the past (hazard ratio [HR] for <50 vs ≥500 cells/µL, 13.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5–51.0) and proportion of time CD4 <200 cells/µL from approximately 8.5 to 4.5 years in the past (a cumulative measure; HR for 100% vs 0%, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.5–6.6). Conclusions Our results are consistent with anal cancer promotion by severe, prolonged HIV-induced immunosuppression. Nadir and cumulative CD4 may represent useful markers for identifying PLWH at higher anal cancer risk.

No abstract