Correlates of spinal deforming index (SDI) in HIV-positive patients naive and on treatment

Methods HIV-infected subjects naive or on stable HAART were included. Vertebral deformities were identified using SDI (according to semiquantitative method by Genant), calculated by summing the deformity grades of all vertebrae (T4 to L4); pathological deformities are defined as follow: grade 1 between 20–25%, grade 2 between 26–40%, and grade 3 > >40%. According to WHO criteria, osteopenia and osteoporosis were diagnosed in patients having spine BMD calculated as -1 << T-score << -2.5 and T-score ≤≤2.5, respectively. The correlation between SDI and spine BMD was evaluated by univariate and multivariate linear regression. [Other variables considered: gender, age, current CD4 count, CD4 nadir, BMI, lipid parameters, alcohol intake, smoking habit, physical activity, family history for bone fracture, months of ARV exposure, and co-infection with hepatitis viruses; only the variables with p <<0.2 in univariate analyses were included in the final model.

Reasons why HIV-positive women do not want to have a child: the questionnaire-based DIDI study

Given that the majority of HIV‐positive women are of reproductive age, it is necessary to understand the interaction between HIV and family planning, especially as antiretroviral medications allow to live longer, healthier lives. Aim of this analysis form the DIDI study was to assess prevalence of motherhood desire in current years and to identify variables associated pregnancy decision‐making in HIV‐infected women. DIDI is an Italian, 16‐center, questionnaire‐based survey performed in 585 HIV‐positive women between Nov. 2010 and Feb. 2011. The items covered in the self‐administered questionnaire included: socio‐demographic characteristics, sexual and gynecological health, motherhood desire, strategies adopted to become pregnant, reasons for not wanting a child, partnership, HIV disclosure, physical and mental health, ART adherence, drug use. For the present analysis only women aged<45 years and engaged in a partnership were included. Absence of motherhood desire was defined by a negative answer at the question whether the women at present would like to have a child. 178 women were included: mean age 39 (IQR, 33–42), HIV transmission heterosexual 75%, IVDU 11%, heterosexual/IVDU 2.5%, not known 7.5%; mean CD4 and HIV‐RNA were 552/mmc (+252) and 3.85 c/ml (+4.7), respectively. Absence of motherhood desire was found in 61% of women; 50% of women declared that HIV negatively affected motherhood desire, and 22% declared a decrease in desire after start of ART. The probability of vertical transmission was estimated higher than 50% by 19% of women, even when adopting all preventive measures. Not wanting a child was associated with: fear of vertical transmission (p<0.001), fear of not being able to raise the child (p<0.001), decline in motherhood desire after HIV (p=0.007), unstable partnership (p=0.02). At multivariable analysis, variables found to be significantly associated with negative pregnancy decision‐making were: fear of vertical transmission (AOR 3.75; 95%CI 1.18–11.89), economic restrictions (AOR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10–0.76 In conclusion, absent motherhood desire in HIV‐positive women with child‐bearing potential is frequent and essential information on vertical HIV transmission is lacking. HIV‐positive women of childbearing age may benefit from counseling interventions sensitive to factors that influence infected women's pregnancy decisions

Re-valuation of annual cytology using HPV self-sampling to upgrade prevention (REACH UP): A feasibility study in women living with HIV in the UK

Introduction: Current UK guidelines for cervical cancer screening are based on the assumption that most women living with HIV (WLWH) are also high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive. We aimed to provide data on prevalence of HR-HPV in WLWH in the UK and to assess feasibility and acceptability of HR-HPV self-sampling in this group. // Methods: Women living with HIV attending six HIV services in London/south of England, with no history of cervical cancer, were enrolled. Participants self-collected a vaginal swab for the detection of HR-HPV, completed a survey about sexual/gynaecological history, attitudes towards annual screening and perception of HR-HPV self-sampling, and were asked to have their annual cervical smear. // Results: In all, 67 women were included: 86.5% were of black ethnicity, the median (range) age was 47 (24–60) years, median CD4 T-cell count was 683 cells/µL [interquartile range (IQR): 527–910], and 95.4% had viral load ≤ 50 copies/mL. All performed the vaginal swab. Eighteen (27%) had no cervical smear results; none of these women attended HIV services where this was routinely offered. No cervical samples were positive for HR-HPV. Three-quarters (75.8%) of participants reported adherence to annual screening, with only one woman (1.5%) attending irregularly. On visual analogue scales (from 0 to 100), median (IQR) acceptability and necessity of smear tests were 100 (75–100) and 100 (85–100), respectively. // Conclusions: Our results suggest that the prevalence of HR-HPV in WLWH in the UK may be low. Self-sampling seems to be acceptable, suggesting, if validated, its potential role in supporting less frequent smear testing and improving screening uptake in WLW

A Novel Vaccine Strategy Employing Serologically Different Chimpanzee Adenoviral Vectors for the Prevention of HIV-1 and HCV Coinfection

Background: Nearly 3 million people worldwide are coinfected with HIV and HCV. Affordable strategies for prevention are needed. We developed a novel vaccination regimen involving replication-defective and serologically distinct chimpanzee adenovirus (ChAd3, ChAd63) vector priming followed by modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) boosts, for simultaneous delivery of HCV non-structural (NSmut) and HIV-1 conserved (HIVconsv) region immunogens.Methods: We conducted a phase I trial in which 33 healthy volunteers were sequentially enrolled and vaccinated via the intramuscular route as follows: 9 received ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 1010 vp] and MVA-NSmut [2 × 108 pfu] at weeks 0 and 8, respectively; 8 received ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 1010 vp] and MVA.HIVconsv [2 × 108 pfu] at the same interval; 16 were co-primed with ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 1010 vp] and ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 1010 vp] followed at week 8 by MVA-NSmut and MVA.HIVconsv [both 1 × 108 pfu]. Immunogenicity was assessed using peptide pools in ex vivo ELISpot and intracellular cytokine assays. Vaccine-induced whole blood transcriptome changes were assessed by microarray analysis.Results: All vaccines were well tolerated and no vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. Co-administration of the prime-boost vaccine regimens induced high magnitude and broad T cell responses that were similar to those observed following immunization with either regimen alone. Median (interquartile range, IQR) peak responses to NSmut were 3,480 (2,728–4,464) and 3,405 (2,307–7,804) spot-forming cells (SFC)/106 PBMC for single and combined HCV vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.8). Median (IQR) peak responses to HIVconsv were 1,305 (1,095–4,967) and 1,005 (169–2,482) SFC/106 PBMC for single and combined HIV-1 vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.5). Responses were maintained above baseline to 34 weeks post-vaccination. Intracellular cytokine analysis indicated that the responding populations comprised polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Canonical pathway analysis showed that in the single and combined vaccination groups, pathways associated with antiviral and innate immune responses were enriched for upregulated interferon-stimulated genes 24 h after priming and boosting vaccinations.Conclusions: Serologically distinct adenoviral vectors encoding HCV and HIV-1 immunogens can be safely co-administered without reducing the immunogenicity of either vaccine. This provides a novel strategy for targeting these viruses simultaneously and for other pathogens that affect the same populations.Clinical trial registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT0236221

Evaluation of the prognostic value of impaired renal function on clinical progression in a large cohort of HIV-infected people seen for care in Italy

Whilst renal dysfunction, especially mild impairment (60 die;ve (Icona) Foundation Study collected between January 2000 and February 2014 with at least two creatinine values available. eGFR (CKD-epi) and renal dysfunction defined using a priori cut-offs of 60 (severely impaired) and 90 ml/min/1.73m2 (mildly impaired). Characteristics of patients were described after stratification in these groups and compared using chi-square test (categorical variables) or Kruskal Wallis test comparing median values. Follow-up accrued from baseline up to the date of the CCVD or AIDS related events or death or last available visit. Kaplan Meier curves were used to estimate the cumulative probability of occurrence of the events over time. Adjusted analysis was performed using a proportional hazards Cox regression model. We included 7,385 patients, observed for a median follow-up of 43 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 21-93 months). Over this time, 130 cerebro-cardiovascular events (including 11 deaths due to CCVD) and 311 AIDS-related events (including 45 deaths) were observed. The rate of CCVD events among patients with eGFR &gt;90, 60-89, &lt;60 ml/min, was 2.91 (95% CI 2.30-3.67), 4.63 (95% CI 3.51-6.11) and 11.9 (95% CI 6.19-22.85) per 1,000 PYFU respectively, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 4.14 (95%CI 2.07-8.29) for patients with eGFR &lt;60 ml/min and 1.58 (95%CI 1.10-2.27) for eGFR 60-89 compared to those with eGFR ≥90. Of note, these estimates are adjusted for traditional cardiovascular risk factors (e.g. smoking, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia). Incidence of AIDS-related events was 9.51 (95%CI 8.35-10.83), 6.04 (95%CI 4.74-7.71) and 25.0 (95% CI 15.96-39.22) per 1,000 PYFU, among patients with eGFR &gt;90, 60-89, &lt;60 ml/min, respectively, with an unadjusted HR of 2.49 (95%CI 1.56-3.97) for patients with eGFR &lt;60 ml/min and 0.68 (95%CI 0.52-0.90) for eGFR 60-89. The risk of AIDS events was significantly lower in mild renal dysfunction group even after adjustment for HIV-related characteristics. Our data confirm that impaired renal function is an important risk marker for CCVD events in the HIV-population; importantly, even those with mild renal impairment (90&lt;60)&gt

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

BackgroundA safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials.MethodsThis analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674.FindingsBetween April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation.InterpretationChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials.FundingUK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials