Incidence of hypertension in people with HIV who are treated with integrase inhibitors versus other antiretroviral regimens in the RESPOND cohort consortium

OBJECTIVE To compare the incidence of hypertension in people living with HIV receiving integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) or boosted protease inhibitors (PIs) in the RESPOND consortium of HIV cohorts. METHODS Eligible people with HIV were aged ≥18 years who initiated a new three-drug ART regimen for the first time (baseline), did not have hypertension, and had at least two follow-up blood pressure (BP) measurements. Hypertension was defined as two consecutive systolic BP measurements ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg or initiation of antihypertensives. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to determine adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) of hypertension, overall and in those who were ART naïve or experienced at baseline. RESULTS Overall, 4606 people living with HIV were eligible (INSTIs 3164, NNRTIs 807, PIs 635). The median baseline systolic BP, diastolic BP, and age were 120 (interquartile range [IQR] 113-130) mmHg, 78 (70-82) mmHg, and 43 (34-50) years, respectively. Over 8380.4 person-years (median follow-up 1.5 [IQR 1.0-2.7] years), 1058 (23.0%) participants developed hypertension (incidence rate 126.2/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 118.9-134.1). Participants receiving INSTIs had a higher incidence of hypertension than those receiving NNRTIs (aIRR 1.76; 95% CI 1.47-2.11), whereas the incidence was no different in those receiving PIs (aIRR 1.07; 95% CI 0.89-1.29). The results were similar when the analysis was stratified by ART status at baseline. CONCLUSION Although unmeasured confounding and channelling bias cannot be excluded, INSTIs were associated with a higher incidence of hypertension than were NNRTIs, but rates were similar to those of PIs overall, in ART-naïve and ART-experienced participants within RESPOND

Impact of a mobile phone-based interactive voice response software on tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Uganda (CFL-TB): a protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the last decade, tuberculosis (TB) treatment success has not surpassed 90%, the global target. The impact of mobile health interventions (MHIs) on TB treatment outcomes is unknown, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). MHIs, including interactive voice response technology (IVRT), may enhance adherence and retention in the care of patients with tuberculosis and improve TB treatment outcomes. This study seeks to determine the impact of IVRT-based MHI on TB treatment success (treatment completion and cure rates) in patients with TB receiving care at five public health facilities in Uganda. METHODS: We used a theory-based and human-centered design (HCD) to adapt an already piloted software to design "Call for life-TB" (CFL-TB), an MHI that utilizes IVRT to deliver adherence and appointment reminders and allows remote symptom reporting. This open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT), with nested qualitative and economic evaluation studies, will determine the impact of CFL-TB on TB treatment success in patients with drug-susceptible TB in Uganda. Participants (n = 274) at the five study sites will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to either control (standard of care) or intervention (adherence and appointment reminders, and health tips) arms. Multivariable regression models will be used to compare treatment success, adherence to treatment and clinic appointments, and treatment completion at 6 months post-enrolment. Additionally, we will determine the cost-effectiveness, acceptability, and perceptions of stakeholders. The study received national ethical approval and was conducted in accordance with the international ethical guidelines. DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate interactive voice response technology in the context of resource-limited settings with a high burden of TB and high illiteracy rates. The software to be evaluated was developed using HCD and the intervention was based on the IMB model. The software is tailored to the local context and is interoperable with the MHI ecosystem. The HCD approach ensures higher usability of the MHI by integrating human factors in the prototype development. This research will contribute towards the understanding of the implementation and impact of the MHI on TB treatment outcomes and the health system, especially in LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04709159 . Registered on January 14, 2021

Incidence of hypertension in people with HIV who are treated with integrase inhibitors versus other antiretroviral regimens in the RESPOND cohort consortium.

OBJECTIVE To compare the incidence of hypertension in people living with HIV receiving integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) or boosted protease inhibitors (PIs) in the RESPOND consortium of HIV cohorts. METHODS Eligible people with HIV were aged ≥18 years who initiated a new three-drug ART regimen for the first time (baseline), did not have hypertension, and had at least two follow-up blood pressure (BP) measurements. Hypertension was defined as two consecutive systolic BP measurements ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg or initiation of antihypertensives. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to determine adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) of hypertension, overall and in those who were ART naïve or experienced at baseline. RESULTS Overall, 4606 people living with HIV were eligible (INSTIs 3164, NNRTIs 807, PIs 635). The median baseline systolic BP, diastolic BP, and age were 120 (interquartile range [IQR] 113-130) mmHg, 78 (70-82) mmHg, and 43 (34-50) years, respectively. Over 8380.4 person-years (median follow-up 1.5 [IQR 1.0-2.7] years), 1058 (23.0%) participants developed hypertension (incidence rate 126.2/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 118.9-134.1). Participants receiving INSTIs had a higher incidence of hypertension than those receiving NNRTIs (aIRR 1.76; 95% CI 1.47-2.11), whereas the incidence was no different in those receiving PIs (aIRR 1.07; 95% CI 0.89-1.29). The results were similar when the analysis was stratified by ART status at baseline. CONCLUSION Although unmeasured confounding and channelling bias cannot be excluded, INSTIs were associated with a higher incidence of hypertension than were NNRTIs, but rates were similar to those of PIs overall, in ART-naïve and ART-experienced participants within RESPOND