IntroductionPoint-of-care testing for CD4 cell count is considered a promising way of reducing the time to eligibility assessment for antiretroviral therapy (ART) and of increasing retention in care prior to treatment initiation. In this review, we assess the available evidence on the patient and programme impact of point-of-care CD4 testing.MethodsWe searched nine databases and two conference sites (up until 26 October 2013) for studies reporting patient and programme outcomes following the introduction of point-of-care CD4 testing. Where appropriate, results were pooled using random-effects methods.ResultsFifteen studies, mainly from sub-Saharan Africa, were included for review, providing evidence for adults, adolescents, children and pregnant women. Compared to conventional laboratory-based testing, point-of-care CD4 testing increased the likelihood of having CD4 measured [odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 3.5–4.9, n=2] and receiving a CD4 result (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5–5.6, n=6). Time to being tested was significantly reduced, by a median of nine days; time from CD4 testing to receiving the result was reduced by as much as 17 days. Evidence for increased treatment initiation was mixed.DiscussionThe results of this review suggest that point-of-care CD4 testing can increase retention in care prior to starting treatment and can also reduce time to eligibility assessment, which may result in more eligible patients being initiated on ART.

Background Few robust longitudinal data on long-term COVID-19 symptoms are available. We evaluated symptom onset, severity and recovery across the full spectrum of disease severity, up to one year after illness onset. Methods The RECoVERED Study is a prospective cohort study based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Participants aged≥18 years were enrolled following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis via the local Public Health Service and from hospitals. Standardised symptom questionnaires were completed at enrolment, one week and month later, and monthly thereafter. Clinical severity was defined according to WHO criteria. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare time from illness onset to symptom recovery, by clinical severity. We examined determinants of time to recovery using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Results Between 11 May 2020 and 1 May 2021, 342 COVID-19 patients (192[56%] male) were enrolled, of whom 99/342(29%) had mild, 145/342(42%) moderate, 56/342(16%) severe and 42/342(12%) critical disease. The proportion of participants who reported at least one persistent symptom at 12 weeks after illness onset was greater in those with severe/critical disease (86.7%[95%CI=76.5-92.7%]) compared to those with mild or moderate disease (30.7%[95%CI=21.1-40.9%] and 63.8%[95%CI=54.8-71.5%]). At twelve months after illness onset, two-fifths of participants (40.7%[95%CI=34.2-47.1]) continued to report ≥1 symptom. Recovery was slower in female compared to male participants (aHR 0.65[95%CI=0.47-0.92]) and those with a BMI≥30kg/m 2 compared to BMI<25kg/m 2 (HR 0.62[95%CI=0.39-0.97]). Conclusions COVID-19 symptoms persisted for one year after illness onset, even in some individuals with mild disease. Female sex and obesity were the most important determinants of speed of recovery from symptoms.

Background Emerging and future SARS-CoV-2 variants may jeopardize the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns. Therefore, it is important to know how the different vaccines perform against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants. Methods and findings In a prospective cohort of 165 SARS-CoV-2 naive health care workers in the Netherlands, vaccinated with either one of four vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222 or Ad26.COV2.S), we performed a head-to-head comparison of the ability of sera to recognize and neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs; Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron). Repeated serum sampling was performed 5 times during a year (from January 2021 till January 2022), including before and after booster vaccination with BNT162b2. Four weeks after completing the initial vaccination series, SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralizing antibody titers were highest in recipients of mRNA-1273, followed by recipients of BNT162b2 (geometric mean titers (GMT) of 358 [95% CI 231–556] and 214 [95% CI 153–299], respectively; p<0.05), and substantially lower in those vaccinated with the adenovirus vector-based vaccines AZD1222 and Ad26.COV2.S (GMT of 18 [95% CI 11–30] and 14 [95% CI 8–25] IU/ml, respectively; p<0.001). VOCs neutralization was reduced in all vaccine groups, with the greatest reduction in neutralization GMT observed against the Omicron variant (fold change 0.03 [95% CI 0.02–0.04], p<0.001). The booster BNT162b2 vaccination increased neutralizing antibody titers for all groups with substantial improvement against the VOCs including the Omicron variant. We used linear regression and linear mixed model analysis. All results were adjusted for possible confounding of age and sex. Study limitations include the lack of cellular immunity data. Conclusions Overall, this study shows that the mRNA vaccines appear superior to adenovirus vector-based vaccines in inducing neutralizing antibodies against VOCs four weeks after initial vaccination and after booster vaccination, which implies the use of mRNA vaccines for both initial and booster vaccination.