Amanda Mocroft and colleagues investigate risk factors and health outcomes associated with diagnosis at a late stage of infection in individuals across Europe. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

BACKGROUND No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of mild-illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to determine whether early treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) would be more efficacious than no-treatment for outpatients with mild Covid-19. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial in Catalonia (Spain) between March 17, and May 26, 2020. Eligible Covid-19 cases were non-hospitalized adult patients with recently confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and less than five days of symptoms. Patients were assigned to receive HCQ (800 mg on day 1, followed by 400 mg once daily for 6 days) or no antiviral treatment (not-placebo controlled). Study outcomes were the reduction of viral RNA load in nasopharyngeal swabs up to 7 days after treatment start, patient disease progression using the WHO scale up to 28 days, and time to complete resolution of symptoms. Adverse events were assessed up to 28 days. RESULTS A total of 293 patients were eligible for intention-to-treat analysis: 157 in the control arm and 136 in the intervention arm. The mean age was 41.6 years (SD 12.6), mean viral load at baseline was 7.90 (SD 1.82) Log10 copies/mL, and median time from symptom onset to randomization was 3 days. No significant differences were found in the mean reduction of viral load at day 3 (-1.41 vs. -1.41 Log10 copies/mL in the control and intervention arm, respectively; difference 0.01 [95% CI -0.28;0.29]) or at day 7 (-3.37 vs. -3.44; d –0.07 [-0.44;0.29]). This treatment regimen did not reduce risk of hospitalization (7.1%, control vs. 5.9%, intervention; RR 0.75 [0.32;1.77]) nor shortened the time to complete resolution of symptoms (12 days, control vs. 10 days, intervention; p = 0.38). No relevant treatment-related AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS In patients with mild Covid-19, no benefit was observed with HCQ beyond the usual care.

Background Current strategies for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are limited to nonpharmacologic interventions. Hydroxychloroquine has been proposed as a postexposure therapy to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), but definitive evidence is lacking. Methods We conducted an open-label, cluster-randomized trial involving asymptomatic contacts of patients with polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR)–confirmed Covid-19 in Catalonia, Spain. We randomly assigned clusters of contacts to the hydroxychloroquine group (which received the drug at a dose of 800 mg once, followed by 400 mg daily for 6 days) or to the usual-care group (which received no specific therapy). The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 within 14 days. The secondary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined by symptoms compatible with Covid-19 or a positive PCR test regardless of symptoms. Adverse events were assessed for up to 28 days. Results The analysis included 2314 healthy contacts of 672 index case patients with Covid-19 who were identified between March 17 and April 28, 2020. A total of 1116 contacts were randomly assigned to receive hydroxychloroquine and 1198 to receive usual care. Results were similar in the hydroxychloroquine and usual-care groups with respect to the incidence of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 (5.7% and 6.2%, respectively; risk ratio, 0.86 [95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 1.42]). In addition, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with a lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission than usual care (18.7% and 17.8%, respectively). The incidence of adverse events was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group than in the usual-care group (56.1% vs. 5.9%), but no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions Postexposure therapy with hydroxychloroquine did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic Covid-19 in healthy persons exposed to a PCR-positive case patient. (Funded by the crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono and others; BCN-PEP-CoV2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04304053 .)

No abstract

Background We examined specific causes of mortality in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)–infected patients who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Europe and North America from 1996 through 2006, and we quantified associations of prognostic factors with cause-specific mortality. Methods We retrospectively classified all deaths among 39,272 patients enrolled in 13 HIV-1 cohorts (154,667 person years of follow-up) into the categories specified in the Cause of Death (CoDe) project protocol. Results In 1597 (85%) of 1876 deaths, a definitive cause of death could be assigned. Among these, 792 deaths (49.5%) were AIDS related, followed by non-AIDS malignancies (189; 11.8%), non-AIDS infections (131; 8.2%), violence- and/or drug-related causes (124; 7.7%), liver disease (113; 7.0%), and cardiovascular disease (103; 6.5%). Rates of AIDS-related death (hazard ratio [HR] per 100 cell decrease, 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34–1.53) and death from renal failure (HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.18–2.55) were strongly inversely related to CD4 count at initiation of ART, whereas rates of death attributable to AIDS (HR for viral load >5 vs ≤5 log copies/mL, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12–1.53), infection (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.25–2.73), cardiovascular (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.05–2.27), and respiratory causes (HR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.30–10.09) were higher in patients with baseline viral load >5 log copies/mL than in other patients. Rates of each cause of death were higher in patients with presumed transmission via injection drug use than in other patients, with marked increases in rates of liver-related (HR for injection drug use vs non–injection drug use, 6.06; 95% CI, 4.03–9.09) and respiratory tract–related (HR, 4.94; 95% CI, 1.96–12.45) mortality. The proportion of deaths classified as AIDS related decreased with increasing duration of ART. Conclusions Important contributors to non-AIDS mortality in treated HIV-1–infected individuals must be addressed if decreases in mortality rates are to continue.

Background The role of children in household transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains uncertain. Here, we describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of children with COVID-19 in Catalonia (Spain) and investigate the dynamics of household transmission. Methods Prospective, observational, multicenter study performed during summer and school periods (1 July-31 October, 2020), in which epidemiological and clinical features, and viral transmission dynamics were analyzed in COVID-19 patients <16 years. A pediatric index case was established when a child was the first individual infected within a household. Secondary cases were defined when another household member tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 before the child. The secondary attack rate (SAR) was calculated, and logistic regression was used to assess associations between transmission risk factors and SARS-CoV-2 infections. Results The study included 1040 COVID-19 patients <16 years. Almost half (47.2%) were asymptomatic, 10.8% had comorbidities, and 2.6% required hospitalization. No deaths were reported. Viral transmission was common among household members (62.3%). More than 70% (756/1040) of pediatric cases were secondary to an adult, whereas 7.7% (80/1040) were index cases. The SAR was significantly lower in households with COVID-19 pediatric index cases during the school period relative to summer (p=0.02), and when compared to adults (p=0.006). No individual or environmental risk factors associated with the SAR were identified. Conclusions Children are unlikely to cause household COVID-19 clusters or be major drivers of the pandemic even if attending school. Interventions aimed at children are expected to have a small impact on reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Background Most clinical guidelines recommend that AIDS-free, HIV-infected persons with CD4 cell counts below 0.350 × 109 cells/L initiate combined antiretroviral therapy (cART), but the optimal CD4 cell count at which cART should be initiated remains a matter of debate. Objective To identify the optimal CD4 cell count at which cART should be initiated. Design Prospective observational data from the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration and dynamic marginal structural models were used to compare cART initiation strategies for CD4 thresholds between 0.200 and 0.500 × 109 cells/L. Setting HIV clinics in Europe and the Veterans Health Administration system in the United States. Patients 20 971 HIV-infected, therapy-naive persons with baseline CD4 cell counts at or above 0.500 × 109 cells/L and no previous AIDS-defining illnesses, of whom 8392 had a CD4 cell count that decreased into the range of 0.200 to 0.499 × 109 cells/L and were included in the analysis. Measurements Hazard ratios and survival proportions for all-cause mortality and a combined end point of AIDS-defining illness or death. Results Compared with initiating cART at the CD4 cell count threshold of 0.500 × 109 cells/L, the mortality hazard ratio was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.22) for the 0.350 threshold and 1.20 (CI, 0.97 to 1.48) for the 0.200 threshold. The corresponding hazard ratios were 1.38 (CI, 1.23 to 1.56) and 1.90 (CI, 1.67 to 2.15), respectively, for the combined end point of AIDS-defining illness or death. Limitations CD4 cell count at cART initiation was not randomized. Residual confounding may exist. Conclusion Initiation of cART at a threshold CD4 count of 0.500 × 109 cells/L increases AIDS-free survival. However, mortality did not vary substantially with the use of CD4 thresholds between 0.300 and 0.500 ×109 cells/L. Primary Funding Source National Institutes of Health.

Objectives To describe the CD4 cell count at the start of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in low-income (LIC), lower middle-income (LMIC), upper middle-income (UMIC) and high-income (HIC) countries. Methods Patients aged ≥16 years starting cART in a clinic participating in a multi-cohort collaboration spanning six continents (International epidemiological Databases to Evaluate AIDS and ART Cohort Collaboration) were eligible. Multi-level linear regression models were adjusted for age, gender and calendar year; missing CD4 counts were imputed. Findings 379,865 patients from nine LIC, four LMIC, four UMIC and six HIC were included. In LIC the median CD4 cell count at cART initiation increased by 83% from 80 to 145 cells/μl between 2002 and 2009. Corresponding increases in LMIC, UMIC and HIC were from 87 to 155 cells/μl (76% increase), 88 to 135 cells/μl (53%) and 209 to 274 cells/μl (31%). In 2009, compared to LIC, median counts were 13 cells/μl (95% CI -56 to +30) lower in LMIC, 22 cells/μl (-62 to +18) lower in UMIC and 112 /μl (+75 to +149) higher in HIC. They were 23 cells/μl (95% CI +18 to +28) higher in women than men. Median counts were 88 cells/μl (95% CI +35 to +141) higher in countries with an estimated national cART coverage >80%, compared to countries with <40% coverage. Conclusions Median CD4 cell counts at start of cART increased 2000-2009 but remained below 200 cells/μl in LIC and MIC and below 300 cells/μl in HIC. Earlier start of cART will require substantial efforts and resources globally.