Gender-Based Violence is a Never to be Forgotten Social Determinant of Health: A Narrative Literature Review

Gender-based violence (GBV) has been internationally recognized as a serious and pervasive phenomenon affecting women’s lives and health. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that about 30% of women have experienced worldwide some form of violence. GBV (in addition to clearly visible immediate effects) induces long-term effects, including an increased incidence of many noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes or cancer. In the last few years, it has also been demonstrated that the signs of violence interfere with genome plasticity and gene expression through epigenetic mechanisms. The underestimation of the problem does not allow us to put in place preventive health mechanisms that could cushion the damage (prevent post-traumatic stress disorders—PTSDs—and the evaluation of epigenetic changes) to avoid the onset of the diseases. Appropriate interventions could reduce many of these long-term health effects while failure to intervene could be a significant source of health inequalities. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available evidence on the relationship between GBV, its long-term effects on health, and as victims’ living conditions, and socioeconomic position of determining both

PROGETTO E-PROs: COSTRUZIONE DI UNA PIATTAFORMA DIGITALE PER LA GESTIONE DI STRUMENTI CENTRATI SUL PAZIENTE NELLA PRATICA CLINICA (The E-PROs Project: creation of a digital platform to manage patient-oriented tools in clinical practice).

The need to use PROs in both research and clinical practice is now widely shared. The PROs (Patient-Reported Outcomes) allow a complete and more reliable assessment of the health status of a patient through information provided by the patient himself and not detectable through clinical examinations. In clinical practice, PROs can play a central role in improving the management of chronic or disabling conditions. The application of PROs in clinical practice, however, seems to be complex, given the need to guarantee the patient adequate levels of comfort to correctly use the PROs tools (questionnaires). The E-PROs Project is a pilot study aiming to fill these gaps through the digital technology. A web platform was therefore created. By using common devices (smartphones, tablets, PC) in total privacy, patients were able to complete the "ISS-HIV-Symptoms-Scale", a PROs tool selected to test the website platform

Validation of a self-reported HIV symptoms list: the ISS-HIV symptoms scale.

Background: To describe the development and the psychometric properties of the Istituto Superiore di Sanità-HIV symptoms scale (lSS-HIV symptoms scale). Methods: The ISS-HIV symptom scale was developed by an Italian working team including researchers, physicians and people living with HIV. The development process went through the following steps: (1) review of HIV/AIDS literature; (2) focus group; (3) pre-test analysis; (4) scale validation. Results: The 22 symptoms of HIV-ISS symptoms scale were clustered in five factors: pain/general discomfort (7 items); depression/anxiety (4 items); emotional reaction/psychological distress (5 items); gastrointestinal discomfort (4 items); sexual discomfort (2 items). The internal consistence reliability was for all factors within the minimum accepted standard of 0.70. Conclusions: The results of this study provide a preliminary evidence of the reliability and validity of the ISS-HIV symptoms scale. In the new era where HIV infection has been transformed into a chronic diseases and patients are experiencing a complex range of symptoms, the ISS-HIV symptoms scale may represent an useful tool for a comprehensive symptom assessment with the advantage of being easy to fill out by patients and potentially attractive to physicians mainly because it is easy to understand and requires short time to interpret the results

Response to raltegravir-based salvage therapy in HIV-infected patients with hepatitis C virus or hepatitis B virus coinfection

Objectives To define the impact of coinfection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) on viroimmunological response to raltegravir-based salvage regimens that also include new HIV inhibitors such as maraviroc, darunavir and etravirine. Methods We used data from a national observational study of patients starting raltegravir-based regimens to compare virological suppression and CD4 cell change from baseline in patients with and without concomitant HBV or HCV infection. Results Overall, 275 patients (107 coinfected and 168 non-coinfected) were evaluated. Coinfected patients were more commonly former intravenous drug users and had a longer history of HIV infection and higher baseline aminotransferase levels. Both HIV-RNA and CD4 response were similar in the two groups. Mean time to first HIV-RNA copy number &lt;50 copies/mL was 4.1 months (95% CI 3.5–4.6) in non-coinfected patients and 3.9 months (95% CI 3.3–4.5) in coinfected patients (hazard ratio 1.039, 95% CI 0.761–1.418, P = 0.766, log-rank test). The risk of developing new grade 3–4 hepatic adverse events was significantly higher in coinfected patients (hazard ratio 1.779, 95% CI 1.123–2.817, P = 0.009). The two groups of coinfected and non-coinfected patients had similar rates of interruption of any baseline drug (hazard ratio 1.075, 95% CI 0.649–1.781, P = 0.776) and of raltegravir (hazard ratio 1.520, 95% CI 0.671–3.447, P = 0.311). Few AIDS-defining events and deaths occurred. Conclusions Viroimmunological response to regimens based on raltegravir and other recent anti-HIV inhibitors is not negatively affected by coinfection with HBV or HCV. Liver toxicity, either pre-existing or new, is more common in coinfected patients, but with no increased risk of treatment interruption.</br

Response to raltegravir-based salvage therapy in HIV-infected patients with hepatitis C virus or hepatitis B virus coinfection

none22OBJECTIVES: To define the impact of coinfection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) on viroimmunological response to raltegravir-based salvage regimens that also include new HIV inhibitors such as maraviroc, darunavir and etravirine. METHODS: We used data from a national observational study of patients starting raltegravir-based regimens to compare virological suppression and CD4 cell change from baseline in patients with and without concomitant HBV or HCV infection. RESULTS: Overall, 275 patients (107 coinfected and 168 non-coinfected) were evaluated. Coinfected patients were more commonly former intravenous drug users and had a longer history of HIV infection and higher baseline aminotransferase levels. Both HIV-RNA and CD4 response were similar in the two groups. Mean time to first HIV-RNA copy number <50 copies/mL was 4.1 months (95% CI 3.5-4.6) in non-coinfected patients and 3.9 months (95% CI 3.3-4.5) in coinfected patients (hazard ratio 1.039, 95% CI 0.761-1.418, P = 0.766, log-rank test). The risk of developing new grade 3-4 hepatic adverse events was significantly higher in coinfected patients (hazard ratio 1.779, 95% CI 1.123-2.817, P = 0.009). The two groups of coinfected and non-coinfected patients had similar rates of interruption of any baseline drug (hazard ratio 1.075, 95% CI 0.649-1.781, P = 0.776) and of raltegravir (hazard ratio 1.520, 95% CI 0.671-3.447, P = 0.311). Few AIDS-defining events and deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Viroimmunological response to regimens based on raltegravir and other recent anti-HIV inhibitors is not negatively affected by coinfection with HBV or HCV. Liver toxicity, either pre-existing or new, is more common in coinfected patients, but with no increased risk of treatment interruption.openWeimer LE; Fragola V; Floridia M; Guaraldi G; Ladisa N; Francisci D; Bellagamba R; Degli Antoni A; Parruti G; Giacometti A; Manconi PE; Vivarelli A; D'Ettorre G; Mura MS; Cicalini S; Preziosi R; Sighinolfi L; Verucchi G; Libertone R; Tavio M; Sarmati L; Bucciardini R on behalf of the ISS-NIA Study GroupWeimer LE; Fragola V; Floridia M; Guaraldi G; Ladisa N; Francisci D; Bellagamba R; Degli Antoni A; Parruti G; Giacometti A; Manconi PE; Vivarelli A; D'Ettorre G; Mura MS; Cicalini S; Preziosi R; Sighinolfi L; Verucchi G; Libertone R; Tavio M; Sarmati L; Bucciardini R on behalf of the ISS-NIA Study Grou

Addressing health inequalities in Europe: key messages from the Joint Action Health Equity Europe (JAHEE)

Abstract Health inequalities within and between Member States of the European Union are widely recognized as a public health problem as they determine a significant share of potentially avoidable mortality and morbidity. After years of growing awareness and increasing action taken, a large gap still exists across Europe in terms of policy responses and governance. With the aim to contribute to achieve greater equity in health outcomes, in 2018 a new Joint Action, JAHEE, (Joint Action Health Equity Europe) was funded by the third EU Health Programme, with the main goal of strengthening cooperation between participating countries and of implementing concrete actions to reduce health inequalities. The partnership led by Italy counted 24 countries, conducting actions in five policy domains: monitoring, governance, healthy living environments, health systems and migration, following a three-step implementation approach. Firstly, specific Policy Frameworks for Action (PFA) collecting the available evidence on what practice should be done in each domain were developed. Second, different Country Assessments (CAs) were completed to check the country’s adherence to the recommended practice in each domain. The gap between the expected policy response (PFA) and the present policy response (CA) guided the choice of concrete actions to be implemented in JAHEE, many of which are continuing even after the end of JA. Final recommendations based on the best results achieved during JAHEE were elaborated and agreed jointly with the representatives of the involved Ministries of Health. The JAHEE initiative represented an important opportunity for the participating countries to work jointly, and the results show that almost all have increased their level of action and strengthened their capacities to address health inequalities

J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr

Background: There are few data comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomized trials of initial antiretroviral therapy. We present results from a substudy of the NEAT001/ ANRS143 trial. Methods: The randomized trial compared first-line DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily plus RAL 400 mg twice daily and DRV/r plus TDF/ FTC 245/200 mg once daily. Changes in PROs were assessed with 3 questionnaires: EuroQoL 5 domains (EQ-5D), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, and HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire. Major depressive disorder (MDD) was defined as CES-D $16. General estimating equations were used to model change over 96 weeks in PROs from baseline. Results: Of the 805 participants, 797 (99$ 0.05 for all domains over follow-up). There was no significant difference between groups on CES-D [difference of 20.1 (95% CI: 21.3 to 1.1); P = 0.9], or MDD during follow-up, adjusted for baseline MDD (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.18; P = 0.9). RAL + DRV/r group had lower level of convenience (P = 0.03) and fitted less well into patients' lifestyle (P = 0.007) than the TDF/FTC + DRV/r regimen, and was associated with lower treatment satisfaction [median score: 53 RAL + DRV/r vs 55 TDF/FTC + DRV/r (P = 0.001)]. Conclusion: PROs improved after starting antiretroviral therapy, with no statistically significant difference between groups. The lower satisfaction with RAL + DRV/r may be explained by twicedaily administration