Out and About in Medicine: GW Out For Health

The time is right to devise and implement a more coordinated approach to LGBT patient care and health professional training within the Washington, DC metropolitan area and beyond. The following George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences (GWSMHS) and Hospital (GWUH) LGBT Health Initiative proposal highlights possible strategies for addressing this need through a more centralized fashion. The seven focus areas proposed for the GW LGBT Health Initiative include: 1) Climate/Visibility; 2) Health Education; 3) Policy/Advocacy; 4) Community Outreach; 5) Research; 6) Patient Care; and 7) HIV/AIDS. A key stakeholder that is helping to realize this vision of a comprehensive, coordinated GW LGBT Health Initiative is the student organization GW Out for Health (GWOFH). Led by an executive board of medical students and a faculty advisor, GWOFH has been working to improve the climate for LGBT and ally professional health students and visibility of LGBT health issues on campus through grass roots efforts. GWOFH has approached these goals by emulating aspects of successful student organizations, namely Student National Medical Association, as well as reaching out and building relationships with LGBT resources in the community. Altogether, members of the group will provide critical perspectives on the initial needs assessment and gap analysis of LGBT health at GWSMHS and GWUH necessary to developing a strategic plan for the GW LGBT Health Initiative. In the past year, GWOFH has achieved concrete steps towards improving the climate and visibility of LGBT health issues by building up their organizational infrastructure and membership, which is evidenced by the three-fold growth in membership and creation of a private campus Listserv. To provide social support for LGBT and ally medical students, GWOFH hosted a welcome potluck for GWSMHS students and a social mixer with the LGBT student organizations at Georgetown and Howard medical schools. To improve the visibility of LGBT health issues on campus, GWOFH launched a successful Lunchtime Lecture Series on current research and best practices for reducing LGBT health disparities. GWOFH’s accomplishments have set a solid foundation for providing professional and social support for incoming LGBT and ally professional health students. Furthermore, GWOFH’s reputable presence on campus will be leveraged to help support the proposed GW LGBT Health Initiative in the coming year by providing an advisory role on the development of an initial needs assessment and gap analysis, especially in the areas of climate and visibility, health education, political advocacy, and patient care

Clinical Public Health Integration in Medical School Curriculum: Transitioning Medical Student Training from Medical Problems to Health Solutions

The current chronic disease burden, growing health disparities, and evolution of our healthcare system require that medical students be equipped with basic public health education to effectively manage patients, navigate the healthcare system, and advocate for health(1,2,3,4,5,6). The Institute of Medicine and the AAMC emphasize the need for physicians to be trained in public health(1,8). The inaugural year of the revised curriculum at The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences (GW SMHS) represented a first step at the institution to integrate clinical public health into medical education. As part of this process, the Clinical Public Health (CLiPH) Working Group, a student formed curriculum advisory board, was created to give real time feedback and assess the Public Health & Health Policy theme curriculum in the first year at GW SMHS. The project objectives were: 1.) To review and evaluate the effectiveness of the public health theme curriculum in the first year of the revised curriculum, including first year medical students’ perceptions and knowledge of the public health theme. 2.) To develop a proposal to maximize opportunities and achieve better integration of the public health theme into the curriculum. The group aims toward clinical public health integration across the four year medical degree curriculum and better collaboration with the GW Milken School of Public Health (SPH) to create an expanded scope of practice within public health for practicing physicians. Over the summer, the working group engaged with multiple stakeholders to forward the clinical public health agenda at GW SMHS. To conduct the curriculum assessment, the students developed a template and the group reviewed over fifty sessions, in the Public Health & Health Policy Theme, Clinical Skills and Reasoning Course (CSR), and intersession activities. Outside research was done to supplement resources to recommend and improve integration of the clinical public health material into the revised preclinical curriculum. Recommended revisions and developments were sent to faculty stakeholders as resources for the revision process of the curriculum. Future work to revise the curriculum should include study of the evolution of students’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs surrounding clinical public health and the impact it has on their development as a physician. To better inform the development of the curriculum and how best to engage students with clinical public health, major stakeholders, such as health departments, community stakeholders, public health experts, and most importantly students should continue to be a part of the dialogue

A controlled trial of two nucleoside analogues plus indinavir in persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection and CD4 cell counts of 200 per cubic millimeter or less

Background: The efficacy and safety of adding a protease inhibitor to two nucleoside analogues to treat human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection are not clear. We compared treatment with the protease inhibitor indinavir in addition to zidovudine and lamivudine with treatment with the two nucleosides alone in HIV-infected adults previously treated with zidovudine. Methods: A total of 1156 patients not previously treated with lamivudine or protease inhibitors were stratified according to CD4 cell count (50 or fewer vs. 51 to 200 cells per cubic millimeter) and randomly assigned to one of two daily regimens: 600 mg of zidovudine and 300 mg of lamivudine, or that regimen with 2400 mg of indinavir. Stavudine could be substituted for zidovudine. The primary end point was the time to the development of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or death. Results: The proportion of patients whose disease progressed to AIDS or death was lower with indinavir, zidovudine (or stavudine), and lamivudine (6 percent) than with zidovudine (or stavudine) and lamivudine alone (11 percent; estimated hazard ratio, 0.50; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.76; P�0.001). Mortality in the two groups was 1.4 percent and 3.1 percent, respectively (estimated hazard ratio, 0.43; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.99; P=0.04). The effects of treatment were similar in both CD4 cell strata. The responses of CD4 cells and plasma HIV-1 RNA paralleled the clinical results. Conclusions: Treatment with indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine as compared with zidovudine and lamivudine alone significantly slows the progression of HIV-1 disease in patients with 200 CD4 cells or fewer per cubic millimeter and prior exposure to zidovudine. (N Engl J Med 1997;337:725-33.

Pharmacokinetics and Tolerability of Oseltamivir Combined with Probenecid▿ †

Oseltamivir is an inhibitor of influenza virus neuraminidase, which is approved for use for the treatment and prophylaxis of influenza A and B virus infections. In the event of an influenza pandemic, oseltamivir supplies may be limited; thus, alternative dosing strategies for oseltamivir prophylaxis should be explored. Healthy volunteers were randomized to a three-arm, open-label study and given 75 mg oral oseltamivir every 24 h (group 1), 75 mg oseltamivir every 48 h (q48h) combined with 500 mg probenecid four times a day (group 2), or 75 mg oseltamivir q48h combined with 500 mg probenecid twice a day (group 3) for 15 days. Pharmacokinetic data, obtained by noncompartmental methods, and safety data are reported. Forty-eight subjects completed the pharmacokinetic analysis. The study drugs were generally well tolerated, except for one case of reversible grade 4 thrombocytopenia in a subject in group 2. The calculated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean ratios between groups 2 and 3 and group 1 were outside the bioequivalence criteria boundary (0.80 to 1.25) at 0.63 to 0.89 for group 2 versus group 1 and 0.57 to 0.90 for group 3 versus group 1. The steady-state apparent oral clearance of oseltamivir carboxylate was significantly less in groups 2 (7.4 liters/h; 90% CI, 6.08 to 8.71) and 3 (7.19 liters/h; 90% CI, 6.41 to 7.98) than in group 1 (9.75 liters/h; 90% CI, 6.91 to 12.60) (P < 0.05 for both comparisons by analysis of variance). The (arithmetic) mean concentration at 48 h for group 2 was not significantly different from the mean concentration at 24 h for group 1 (42 ± 76 and 81 ± 54 ng/ml, respectively; P = 0.194), but the mean concentration at 48 h for group 3 was significantly less than the mean concentration at 24 h for group 1 (23 ± 26 and 81 ± 54 ng/ml, respectively; P = 0.012). Alternate-day dosing of oseltamivir plus dosing with probenecid four times daily achieved trough oseltamivir carboxylate concentrations adequate for neuraminidase inhibition in vitro, and this combination should be studied further

A Controlled Trial of Two Nucleoside Analogues plus Indinavir in Persons with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection and CD4 Cell Counts of 200 per Cubic Millimeter or Less

Progress in the field of antiretroviral therapy for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection has brought the end of the zidovudine-monotherapy era, 1 – 3 an improved understanding of the pathogenesis of HIV-1 disease, 4 – 9 demonstrations of the prognostic importance of plasma HIV-1 RNA quantification, 10 – 17 and the availability of increasingly potent therapeutic agents. Much of this progress is linked to the introduction of the HIV-protease inhibitors, drugs that inhibit the processing of Gag and Gag–Pol polyprotein precursors and thus prevent the maturation of virions. 18 – 20 Trials of HIV-protease inhibitors have shown beneficial effects on CD4 cell counts and plasma HIV-1 . . 

Guidelines for preventing opportunistic infections among HIV-infected persons - 2002

In 1995, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed guidelines for preventing opportunistic infections (OIs) among persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); these guidelines were updated in 1997 and 1999. This fourth edition of the guidelines, made available on the Internet in 2001, is intended for clinicians and other health-care providers who care for HIV-infected persons. The goal of these guidelines is to provide evidence-based guidelines for preventing OIs among HIV-infected adults and adolescents, including pregnant women, and HIV-exposed or infected children. Nineteen OIs, or groups of OIs, are addressed, and recommendations are included for preventing exposure to opportunistic pathogens, preventing first episodes of disease by chemoprophylaxis or vaccination (primary prophylaxis), and preventing disease recurrence (secondary prophylaxis). Major changes since the last edition of the guidelines include 1) updated recommendations for discontinuing primary and secondary OI prophylaxis among persons whose CD4+ T lymphocyte counts have increased in response to antiretroviral therapy; 2) emphasis on screening all HIV-infected persons for infection with hepatitis C virus; 3) new information regarding transmission of human herpesvirus 8 infection; 4) new information regarding drug interactions, chiefly related to rifamycins and antiretroviral drugs; and 5) revised recommendations for immunizing HIV-infected adults and adolescents and HIV-exposed or infected children.Link_to_subscribed_fulltex