10 research outputs found

    Where are we with pre-exposure prophylaxis use in Central and Eastern Europe? Data from the Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group

    No full text
    Skrzat-Klapaczynska, Agata/0000-0002-6367-5633WOS: 000575056000001PubMed: 33021049Objectives Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV infection is an important intervention for control of the HIV epidemic. the incidence of HIV infection is increasing in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Therefore, we investigated the change in PrEP use in CEE over time. Methods the Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group was initiated in February 2016 to compare standards of care for HIV and viral hepatitis infections in CEE. Data on access to PrEP were collected from 23 countries through online surveys in May-June 2017 (76 respondents) and in November 2018-May 2019 (28 respondents). Results About 34.2% of respondents stated that tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) was licensed for use in their country in 2017, and 66.7% that it was licensed for use in 2018 (P = 0.02). PrEP was recommended in national guidelines in 39.5% of responses in 2017 and 40.7% in 2018 (P = 0.378). About 70.7% of respondents were aware of "informal" PrEP use in 2017, while 66.6% were aware of this in 2018 (P = 0.698). in 2018, there were 53 centres offering PreP (the highest numbers in Poland and Romania), whereas six countries had no centres offering PreP. the estimated number of HIV-negative people on PreP in the region was 4500 in 2018. Generic TDF/FTC costs (in Euros) ranged from euro10 (Romania) to euro256.92 (Slovakia), while brand TDF/FTC costs ranged from euro60 (Albania) to euro853 (Finland). Conclusions Although the process of licensing TDF/FTC use for PrEP has improved, this is not yet reflected in the guidelines, nor has there been a reduction in the "informal" use of PrEP. PrEP remains a rarely used preventive method in CEE countries.Research Development Foundation of the Hospital for Infectious DiseasesThe study was sponsored by the Research Development Foundation of the Hospital for Infectious Diseases via an unrestricted research grant

    Viral hepatitis in HIV-positive patients - testing, prophylaxis and treatment in Central and Eastern Europe

    No full text
    Skrzat-Klapaczynska, Agata/0000-0002-6367-5633; Gokengin, Ayse/0000-0003-0704-2302;WOS: 000494690300616[No abstract available

    Transmission of HIV drug resistance and the predicted effect on current first-line regimens in Europe

    Get PDF
    Numerous studies have shown that baseline drug resistance patterns may influence the outcome of antiretroviral therapy. Therefore, guidelines recommend drug resistance testing to guide the choice of initial regimen. In addition to optimizing individual patient management, these baseline resistance data enable transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to be surveyed for public health purposes. The SPREAD program systematically collects data to gain insight into TDR occurring in Europe since 2001. Demographic, clinical, and virological data from 4140 antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals from 26 countries who were newly diagnosed between 2008 and 2010 were analyzed. Evidence of TDR was defined using the WHO list for surveillance of drug resistance mutations. Prevalence of TDR was assessed over time by comparing the results to SPREAD data from 2002 to 2007. Baseline susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs was predicted using the Stanford HIVdb program version 7.0. The overall prevalence of TDR did not change significantly over time and was 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.2%-9.5%) in 2008-2010. The most frequent indicators of TDR were nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations (4.5%), followed by nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations (2.9%) and protease inhibitor mutations (2.0%). Baseline mutations were most predictive of reduced susceptibility to initial NNRTI-based regimens: 4.5% and 6.5% of patient isolates were predicted to have resistance to regimens containing efavirenz or rilpivirine, respectively, independent of current NRTI backbones. Although TDR was highest for NRTIs, the impact of baseline drug resistance patterns on susceptibility was largest for NNRTIs. The prevalence of TDR assessed by epidemiological surveys does not clearly indicate to what degree susceptibility to different drug classes is affected

    HIV care in Central and Eastern Europe: How close are we to the target?

    No full text
    PubMed ID: 29550449Objectives: The aim of this survey was to describe the current status of HIV care in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and to investigate how close the region is to achieving the UNAIDS 2020 target of 90–90–90. Methods: In 2014, data were collected from 24 Central and Eastern European countries using a 38-item questionnaire. Results: All countries reported mandatory screening of blood and organ donors for HIV. Other groups subjected to targeted screening included people who inject drugs (PWID) (15/24, 62.5%), men who have sex with men (MSM) (14/24, 58.3%), and sex workers (12/24, 50.0%). Only 14 of the 24 countries (58.3%) screened pregnant women. The percentages of late presentation and advanced disease were 40.3% (range 14–80%) and 25.4% (range 9–50%), respectively. There was no difference between countries categorized by income or by region in terms of the percentages of persons presenting late or with advanced disease. The availability of newer antiretroviral drugs (rilpivirine, etravirine, darunavir, maraviroc, raltegravir, dolutegravir) tended to be significantly better with a higher country income status. Ten countries reported initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) regardless of CD4+ T cell count (41.7%), five countries (20.8%) used the threshold of <500 cells/µl, and nine countries (37.5%) used the threshold of <350 cells/µl. Initiation of ART regardless of the CD4+ T cell count was significantly more common among high-income countries than among upper-middle-income and lower-middle-income countries (100% vs. 27.3% and 0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Drugs were provided free of charge in all countries and mostly provided by governments. There were significant discrepancies between countries regarding the follow-up of people living with HIV. Conclusions: There are major disparities in the provision of HIV care among sub-regions in Europe, which should be addressed. More attention in terms of funding, knowledge and experience sharing, and capacity building is required for the resource-limited settings of Central and Eastern Europe. The exact needs should be defined and services scaled up in order to achieve a standard level of care and provide an adequate and sustainable response to the HIV epidemic in this region. © 2018 The AuthorsGilead SciencesThe authors would like to thank Mike Youle and Ben Collins for encouraging them to develop this survey. This study was supported by an unconditional grant from the AIDS and STI Society-Turkey and Gilead Sciences. Appendix A -

    Transmission of HIV drug resistance and the predicted effect on current first-line regimens in Europe

    Get PDF
    Background. Numerous studies have shown that baseline drug resistance patterns may influence the outcome of antiretroviral therapy. Therefore, guidelines recommend drug resistance testing to guide the choice of initial regimen. In addition to optimizing individual patient management, these baseline resistance data enable transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to be surveyed for public health purposes. The SPREAD program systematically collects data to gain insight into TDR occurring in Europe since 2001. Methods. Demographic, clinical, and virological data from 4140 antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals from 26 countries who were newly diagnosed between 2008 and 2010 were analyzed. Evidence of TDR was defined using the WHO list for surveillance of drug resistance mutations. Prevalence of TDR was assessed over time by comparing the results to SPREAD data from 2002 to 2007. Baseline susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs was predicted using the Stanford HIVdb program version 7.0. Results. The overall prevalence of TDR did not change significantly over time and was 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.2%-9.5%) in 2008-2010. The most frequent indicators of TDR were nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations (4.5%), followed by nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations (2.9%) and protease inhibitor mutations (2.0%). Baseline mutations were most predictive of reduced susceptibility to initial NNRTI-based regimens: 4.5% and 6.5% of patient isolates were predicted to have resistance to regimens containing efavirenz or rilpivirine, respectively, independent of current NRTI backbones. Conclusions. Although TDR was highest for NRTIs, the impact of baseline drug resistance patterns on susceptibility was largest for NNRTIs. The prevalence of TDR assessed by epidemiological surveys does not clearly indicate to what degree susceptibility to different drug classes is affected
    corecore