No abstract

PurposeThe objectives of the International epidemiology databases to evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) are to (i) evaluate the delivery of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) in children, adolescents and adults in sub-Saharan Africa, (ii) to describe ART regimen effectiveness, durability and tolerability, (iii) to examine HIV-related comorbidities and coinfections and (iv) to examine the pregnancy-related and HIV-related outcomes of women on ART and their infants exposed to HIV or ART in utero or via breast milk.ParticipantsIeDEA is organised in four regions (Central, East, Southern and West Africa), with 240 treatment and care sites, six data centres at African, European and US universities, and almost 1.4 million children, adolescents and adult people living with HIV (PLWHIV) enrolled.Findings to dateThe data include socio-demographic characteristics, clinical outcomes, opportunistic events, treatment regimens, clinic visits and laboratory measurements. They have been used to analyse outcomes in PLWHIV-1 or PLWHIV-2 who initiate ART, including determinants of mortality, of switching to second-line and third-line ART, drug resistance, loss to follow-up and the immunological and virological response to different ART regimens. Programme-level estimates of mortality have been corrected for loss to follow-up. We examined the impact of coinfection with hepatitis B and C, and the epidemiology of different cancers and of (multidrug resistant) tuberculosis, renal disease and of mental illness. The adoption of ‘Treat All’, making ART available to all PLWHIV regardless of CD4+ cell count or clinical stage was another important research topic.Future plansIeDEA has formulated several research priorities for the ‘Treat All’ era in sub-Saharan Africa. It recently obtained funding to set up sentinel sites where additional data are prospectively collected on cardiometabolic risks factors as well as mental health and liver diseases, and is planning to create a drug resistance database.

We modeled global time trends in median CD4 cell counts at combination antiretroviral therapy initiation in human immunodeficiency virus–infected adults. These counts have increased in all country income groups since 2002 but generally remained below 350/μL in 2015.

IntroductionHIV care and treatment programmes worldwide are transforming as they push to deliver universal access to essential prevention, care and treatment services to persons living with HIV and their communities. The characteristics and capacity of these HIV programmes affect patient outcomes and quality of care. Despite the importance of ensuring optimal outcomes, few studies have addressed the capacity of HIV programmes to deliver comprehensive care. We sought to describe such capacity in HIV programmes in seven regions worldwide.MethodsStaff from 128 sites in 41 countries participating in the International epidemiologic Databases to Evaluate AIDS completed a site survey from 2009 to 2010, including sites in the Asia-Pacific region (n=20), Latin America and the Caribbean (n=7), North America (n=7), Central Africa (n=12), East Africa (n=51), Southern Africa (n=16) and West Africa (n=15). We computed a measure of the comprehensiveness of care based on seven World Health Organization-recommended essential HIV services.ResultsMost sites reported serving urban (61%; region range (rr): 33–100%) and both adult and paediatric populations (77%; rr: 29–96%). Only 45% of HIV clinics that reported treating children had paediatricians on staff. As for the seven essential services, survey respondents reported that CD4+ cell count testing was available to all but one site, while tuberculosis (TB) screening and community outreach services were available in 80 and 72%, respectively. The remaining four essential services – nutritional support (82%), combination antiretroviral therapy adherence support (88%), prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) (94%) and other prevention and clinical management services (97%) – were uniformly available. Approximately half (46%) of sites reported offering all seven services. Newer sites and sites in settings with low rankings on the UN Human Development Index (HDI), especially those in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief focus countries, tended to offer a more comprehensive array of essential services. HIV care programme characteristics and comprehensiveness varied according to the number of years the site had been in operation and the HDI of the site setting, with more recently established clinics in low-HDI settings reporting a more comprehensive array of available services. Survey respondents frequently identified contact tracing of patients, patient outreach, nutritional counselling, onsite viral load testing, universal TB screening and the provision of isoniazid preventive therapy as unavailable services.ConclusionsThis study serves as a baseline for on-going monitoring of the evolution of care delivery over time and lays the groundwork for evaluating HIV treatment outcomes in relation to site capacity for comprehensive care.

IntroductionIntegration of services to screen and manage mental health and substance use disorders (MSDs) into HIV care settings has been identified as a promising strategy to improve mental health and HIV treatment outcomes among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Data on the extent to which HIV treatment sites in LMICs screen and manage MSDs are limited. The objective of this study was to assess practices for screening and treatment of MSDs at HIV clinics in LMICs participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium.MethodsWe surveyed a stratified random sample of 95 HIV clinics in 29 LMICs in the Caribbean, Central and South America, Asia‐Pacific and sub‐Saharan Africa. The survey captured information onsite characteristics and screening and treatment practices for depression, post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance use disorders (SUDs) and other mental health disorders.ResultsMost sites (n = 76, 80%) were in urban areas. Mental health screening varied by disorder: 57% of sites surveyed screened for depression, 19% for PTSD, 55% for SUDs and 29% for other mental health disorders. Depression, PTSD, SUDs and other mental health disorders were reported as managed on site (having services provided at the HIV clinic or same health facility) at 70%, 51%, 41% and 47% of sites respectively. Combined availability of screening and on‐site management of depression, PTSD, and SUDs, and other mental health disorders was reported by 42%, 14%, 26% and 19% of sites, respectively. On‐site management of depression and PTSD was reported significantly less often in rural as compared to urban settings (depression: 33% and 78% respectively; PTSD: 24% and 58% respectively). Screening for depression and SUDs was least commonly reported by HIV programmes that treated only children as compared to HIV programmes that treated only adults or treated both adults and children.ConclusionsSignificant gaps exist in the management of MSDs in HIV care settings in LMICs, particularly in rural settings. Identification and evaluation of optimal implementation strategies to scale and sustain integrated MSDs and HIV care is needed.

Observational studies of health conditions and outcomes often combine clinical care data from many sites without explicitly assessing the accuracy and completeness of these data. In order to improve the quality of data in an international multi-site observational cohort of HIV-infected patients, the authors conducted on-site, Good Clinical Practice-based audits of the clinical care datasets submitted by participating HIV clinics. Discrepancies between data submitted for research and data in the clinical records were categorized using the audit codes published by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer. Five of seven sites had error rates >10% in key study variables, notably laboratory data, weight measurements, and antiretroviral medications. All sites had significant discrepancies in medication start and stop dates. Clinical care data, particularly antiretroviral regimens and associated dates, are prone to substantial error. Verifying data against source documents through audits will improve the quality of databases and research and can be a technique for retraining staff responsible for clinical data collection. The authors recommend that all participants in observational cohorts use data audits to assess and improve the quality of data and to guide future data collection and abstraction efforts at the point of care.

Introduction Since 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that all people living with HIV (PLHIV) initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART), irrespective of CD4+ count or clinical stage. National adoption of universal treatment has accelerated since WHO's 2015 “Treat All” recommendation; however, little is known about the translation of this guidance into practice. This study aimed to assess the status of Treat All implementation across regions, countries, and levels of the health care delivery system. Methods Between June and December 2017, 201/221 (91%) adult HIV treatment sites that participate in the global IeDEA research consortium completed a survey on capacity and practices related to HIV care. Located in 41 countries across seven geographic regions, sites provided information on the status and timing of site‐level introduction of Treat All, as well as site‐level practices related to ART initiation. Results Almost all sites (93%) reported that they had begun implementing Treat All, and there were no statistically significant differences in site‐level Treat All introduction by health facility type, urban/rural location, sector (public/private) or country income level. The median time between national policy adoption and site‐level introduction was one month. In countries where Treat All was not yet adopted in national guidelines, 69% of sites reported initiating all patients on ART, regardless of clinical criteria, and these sites had been implementing Treat All for a median period of seven months at the time of the survey. The majority of sites (77%) reported typically initiating patients on ART within 14 days of confirming diagnosis, with 60% to 62% of sites implementing Treat All in East, Southern and West Africa reporting same‐day ART initiation for most patients. Conclusions By mid‐ to late‐2017, the Treat All strategy was the standard of care at almost all IeDEA sites, including rural, primary‐level health facilities in low‐resource settings. While further assessments of site‐level capacity to provide high‐quality HIV care under Treat All and to support sustained viral suppression after ART initiation are needed, the widespread introduction of Treat All at the service delivery level is a critical step towards global targets for ending the HIV epidemic as a public health threat.

IMPORTANCEAndrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been theorized to decrease the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with prostate cancer owing to a potential decrease in the tissuebased expression of the SARS-CoV-2 coreceptor transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2). OBJECTIVE To examine whether ADT is associated with a decreased rate of 30-day mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed patient data recorded in the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry between March 17, 2020, and February 11, 2021. The consortium maintains a centralized multi-institution registry of patients with a current or past diagnosis of cancer who developed COVID-19. Data were collected and managed using REDCap software hosted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Initially, 1228patients aged 18 years or older with prostate cancer listed as their primary malignant neoplasm were included; 122 patients with a second malignant neoplasm, insufficient follow-up, or low-quality data were excluded. Propensity matching was performed using the nearest-neighbor method with a 1:3 ratio of treated units to control units, adjusted for age, body mass index, race and ethnicity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score, smoking status, comorbidities (cardiovascular, pulmonary, kidney disease, and diabetes), cancer status, baseline steroid use, COVID-19 treatment, and presence of metastatic disease. EXPOSURES Androgen deprivation therapy use was defined as prior bilateral orchiectomy or pharmacologic ADT administered within the prior 3 months of presentation with COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis for patients receiving ADT compared with patients not receiving ADT after propensity matching. RESULTSAfter exclusions, 1106 patients with prostate cancer (before propensity score matching: median age, 73 years [IQR, 65-79 years]; 561 (51%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White) were included for analysis. Of these patients, 477 were included for propensity score matching (169 who received ADT and 308 who did not receive ADT). After propensity matching, there was no significant difference in the primary end point of the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.42-1.42).