Evaluation of the impact of immediate versus WHO recommendations-guided antiretroviral therapy initiation on HIV incidence: the ANRS 12249 TasP (Treatment as Prevention) trial in Hlabisa sub-district, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) suppresses HIV viral load in all body compartments and so limits the risk of HIV transmission. It has been suggested that ART not only contributes to preventing transmission at individual but potentially also at population level. This trial aims to evaluate the effect of ART initiated immediately after identification/diagnosis of HIV-infected individuals, regardless of CD4 count, on HIV incidence in the surrounding population. The primary outcome of the overall trial will be HIV incidence over two years. Secondary outcomes will include i) socio-behavioural outcomes (acceptability of repeat HIV counselling and testing, treatment acceptance and linkage to care, sexual partnerships and quality of life); ii) clinical outcomes (mortality and morbidity, retention into care, adherence to ART, virologic failure and acquired HIV drug resistance), iii) cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The first phase will specifically focus on the trial's secondary outcomes.Methods/design: A cluster-randomised trial in 34 (2 × 17) clusters within a rural area of northern KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa), covering a total population of 34,000 inhabitants aged 16 years and above, of whom an estimated 27,200 would be HIV-uninfected at start of the trial. The first phase of the trial will include ten (2 × 5) clusters. Consecutive rounds of home-based HIV testing will be carried out. HIV-infected participants will be followed in dedicated trial clinics: in intervention clusters, they will be offered immediate ART initiation regardless of CD4 count and clinical stage; in control clusters they will be offered ART according to national treatment eligibility guidelines (CD4 <350 cells/μL, World Health Organisation stage 3 or 4 disease or multidrug-resistant/extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis). Following proof of acceptability and feasibility from the first phase, the trial will be rolled out to further clusters.Discussion: We aim to provide proof-of-principle evidence regarding the effectiveness of Treatment-as-Prevention in reducing HIV incidence at the population level. Data collected from the participants at home and in the clinics will inform understanding of socio-behavioural, economic and clinical impacts of the intervention as well as feasibility and generalizability. © 2013 Iwuji et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Dolutegravir for first-line antiretroviral therapy in low-income and middle-income countries: uncertainties and opportunities for implementation and research.

CAPRISA, 2018.Abstract available in pdf

HIV-1 drug resistance in people on dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy:a collaborative cohort analysis

BACKGROUND The widespread use of the integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) dolutegravir in first-line and second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) might facilitate emerging resistance. The DTG RESIST study combined data from HIV cohorts to examine patterns of drug resistance mutations (DRMs) and identify risk factors for dolutegravir resistance. METHODS We included cohorts with INSTI resistance data from two collaborations (ART Cohort Collaboration, International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS in Southern Africa), and the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort. Eight cohorts from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, South Africa, and the UK contributed data on individuals who were viraemic on dolutegravir-based ART and underwent genotypic resistance testing. Individuals with unknown dolutegravir initiation date were excluded. Resistance levels were categorised using the Stanford algorithm. We identified risk factors for resistance using mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models. FINDINGS We included 599 people with genotypic resistance testing on dolutegravir-based ART between May 22, 2013, and Dec 20, 2021. Most had HIV-1 subtype B (n=351, 59%), a third had been exposed to first-generation INSTIs (n=193, 32%), 70 (12%) were on dolutegravir dual therapy, and 18 (3%) were on dolutegravir monotherapy. INSTI DRMs were detected in 86 (14%) individuals; 20 (3%) had more than one mutation. Most (n=563, 94%) were susceptible to dolutegravir, seven (1%) had potential low, six (1%) low, 17 (3%) intermediate, and six (1%) high-level dolutegravir resistance. The risk of dolutegravir resistance was higher on dolutegravir monotherapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 34·1, 95% CI 9·93-117) and dolutegravir plus lamivudine dual therapy (aOR 9·21, 2·20-38·6) compared with combination ART, and in the presence of potential low or low (aOR 5·23, 1·32-20·7) or intermediate or high-level (aOR 13·4, 4·55-39·7) nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) resistance. INTERPRETATION Among people with viraemia on dolutegravir-based ART, INSTI DRMs and dolutegravir resistance were rare. NRTI resistance substantially increased the risk of dolutegravir resistance, which is of concern, notably in resource-limited settings. Monitoring is important to prevent resistance at the individual and population level and ensure the long-term sustainability of ART. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health, Swiss National Science Foundation

Recommendations on data sharing in HIV drug resistance research

• Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) drug resistance has implications for antiretroviral treatment strategies and for containing the HIV pandemic because the development of HIV drug resistance leads to the requirement for antiretroviral drugs that may be less effective, less well-tolerated, and more expensive than those used in first-line regimens.  • HIV drug resistance studies are designed to determine which HIV mutations are selected by antiretroviral drugs and, in turn, how these mutations affect antiretroviral drug susceptibility and response to future antiretroviral treatment regimens.  • Such studies collectively form a vital knowledge base essential for monitoring global HIV drug resistance trends, interpreting HIV genotypic tests, and updating HIV treatment guidelines.  • Although HIV drug resistance data are collected in many studies, such data are often not publicly shared, prompting the need to recommend best practices to encourage and standardize HIV drug resistance data sharing.  • In contrast to other viruses, sharing HIV sequences from phylogenetic studies of transmission dynamics requires additional precautions as HIV transmission is criminalized in many countries and regions.  • Our recommendations are designed to ensure that the data that contribute to HIV drug resistance knowledge will be available without undue hardship to those publishing HIV drug resistance studies and without risk to people living with HIV

Moderate-to-high levels of pretreatment HIV drug resistance in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa.

CAPRISA, 2019.Abstract available in PDF

Temporal trends of population viral suppression in the context of Universal Test and Treat: the ANRS 12249 TasP trial in rural South Africa

Introduction: The universal test-and-treat (UTT) strategy aims to maximize population viral suppression (PVS), that is, the proportion of all people living with HIV (PLHIV) on antiretroviral treatment (ART) and virally suppressed, with the goal of reducing HIV transmission at the population level. This article explores the extent to which temporal changes in PVS explain the observed lack of association between universal treatment and cumulative HIV incidence seen in the ANRS 12249 TasP trial conducted in rural South Africa. Methods: The TasP cluster-randomized trial (2012 to 2016) implemented six-monthly repeat home-based HIV counselling and testing (RHBCT) and referral of PLHIV to local HIV clinics in 2 9 11 clusters opened sequentially. ART was initiated according to national guidelines in control clusters and regardless of CD4 count in intervention clusters. We measured residency status, HIV status, and HIV care status for each participant on a daily basis. PVS was computed per cluster among all resident PLHIV (≥16, including those not in care) at cluster opening and daily thereafter. We used a mixed linear model to explore time patterns in PVS, adjusting for sociodemographic changes at the cluster level. Results: 8563 PLHIV were followed. During the course of the trial, PVS increased significantly in both arms (23.5% to 46.2% in intervention, +22.8, p < 0.001; 26.0% to 44.6% in control, +18.6, p < 0.001). That increase was similar in both arms (p = 0.514). In the final adjusted model, PVS increase was most associated with increased RHBCT and the implementation of local trial clinics (measured by time since cluster opening). Contextual changes (measured by calendar time) also contributed slightly. The effect of universal ART (trial arm) was positive but limited. Conclusions: PVS was improved significantly but similarly in both trial arms, explaining partly the null effect observed in terms of cumulative HIV incidence between arms. The PVS gains due to changes in ART-initiation guidelines alone are relatively small compared to gains obtained by strategies to maximize testing and linkage to care. The achievement of the 90-90-90 targets will not be met if the operational and implementational challenges limiting access to care and treatment, often context-specific, are not properly addressed. Clinical trial number: NCT01509508 (clinicalTrials.gov)/DOH-27-0512-3974 (South African National Clinical Trials Register)

High dose oral rifampicin to improve survival from adult tuberculous meningitis: A randomised placebo-controlled double-blinded phase III trial (the HARVEST study)

Background: Tuberculous meningitis (TBM), the most severe form of tuberculosis (TB), results in death or neurological disability in &gt;50%, despite World Health Organisation recommended therapy. Current TBM regimen dosages are based on data from pulmonary TB alone. Evidence from recent phase II pharmacokinetic studies suggests that high dose rifampicin (R) administered intravenously or orally enhances central nervous system penetration and may reduce TBM associated mortality. We hypothesize that, among persons with TBM, high dose oral rifampicin (35 mg/kg) for 8 weeks will improve survival compared to standard of care (10 mg/kg), without excess adverse events. Protocol: We will perform a parallel group, randomised, placebo-controlled, double blind, phase III multicentre clinical trial comparing high dose oral rifampicin to standard of care. The trial will be conducted across five clinical sites in Uganda, South Africa and Indonesia. Participants are HIV-positive or negative adults with clinically suspected TBM, who will be randomised (1:1) to one of two arms: 35 mg/kg oral rifampicin daily for 8 weeks (in combination with standard dose isoniazid [H], pyrazinamide [Z] and ethambutol [E]) or standard of care (oral HRZE, containing 10 mg/kg/day rifampicin). The primary end-point is 6-month survival. Secondary end points are: i) 12-month survival ii) functional and neurocognitive outcomes and iii) safety and tolerability. Tertiary outcomes are: i) pharmacokinetic outcomes and ii) cost-effectiveness of the intervention. We will enrol 500 participants over 2.5 years, with follow-up continuing until 12 months post-enrolment. Discussion: Our best TBM treatment still results in unacceptably high mortality and morbidity. Strong evidence supports the increased cerebrospinal fluid penetration of high dose rifampicin, however conclusive evidence regarding survival benefit is lacking. This study will answer the important question of whether high dose oral rifampicin conveys a survival benefit in TBM in HIV-positive and -negative individuals from Africa and Asia. Trial registration: ISRCTN15668391 (17/06/2019

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine in health-care workers in South Africa (the Sisonke study) : results from a single-arm, open-label, phase 3B, implementation study

DATA SHARING : Individual participant data will not be made available. Study protocol, statistical analysis plan, and analytical code will be available from the time of publication in response to any reasonable request to the corresponding author.BACKGROUND : We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a single dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) in health-care workers in South Africa during two waves of the South African COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS : In the single-arm, open-label, phase 3B implementation Sisonke study, health-care workers aged 18 years and older were invited for vaccination at one of 122 vaccination sites nationally. Participants received a single dose of 5 x 10¹⁰ viral particles of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. Vaccinated participants were linked with their person-level data from one of two national medical insurance schemes (scheme A and scheme B) and matched for COVID-19 risk with an unvaccinated member of the general population. The primary outcome was vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19, defined as COVID-19-related admission to hospital, hospitalisation requiring critical or intensive care, or death, in health-care workers compared with the general population, ascertained 28 days or more after vaccination or matching, up to data cutoff. This study is registered with the South African National Clinical Trial Registry, DOH-27-022021-6844, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04838795, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202102855526180, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS : Between Feb 17 and May 17, 2021, 477 102 health-care workers were enrolled and vaccinated, of whom 357 401 (74·9%) were female and 119 701 (25·1%) were male, with a median age of 42·0 years (33·0–51·0). 215 813 vaccinated individuals were matched with 215 813 unvaccinated individuals. As of data cutoff (July 17, 2021), vaccine effectiveness derived from the total matched cohort was 83% (95% CI 75–89) to prevent COVID-19-related deaths, 75% (69–82) to prevent COVID-19-related hospital admissions requiring critical or intensive care, and 67% (62–71) to prevent COVID-19-related hospitalisations. The vaccine effectiveness for all three outcomes were consistent across scheme A and scheme B. The vaccine effectiveness was maintained in older health-care workers and those with comorbidities including HIV infection. During the course of the study, the beta (B.1.351) and then the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns were dominant, and vaccine effectiveness remained consistent (for scheme A plus B vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission during beta wave was 62% [95% CI 42–76] and during delta wave was 67% [62–71], and vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death during beta wave was 86% [57–100] and during delta wave was 82% [74–89]). INTERPRETATION : The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine shows effectiveness against severe COVID-19 disease and COVID-19-related death after vaccination, and against both beta and delta variants, providing real-world evidence for its use globally.National Treasury of South Africa, the National Department of Health, Solidarity Response Fund NPC, The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, The Elma Vaccines and Immunization Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.http;//thelancet.comam2023Paediatrics and Child HealthSchool of Health Systems and Public Health (SHSPH

A year of genomic surveillance reveals how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic unfolded in Africa.

The progression of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in Africa has so far been heterogeneous, and the full impact is not yet well understood. In this study, we describe the genomic epidemiology using a dataset of 8746 genomes from 33 African countries and two overseas territories. We show that the epidemics in most countries were initiated by importations predominantly from Europe, which diminished after the early introduction of international travel restrictions. As the pandemic progressed, ongoing transmission in many countries and increasing mobility led to the emergence and spread within the continent of many variants of concern and interest, such as B.1.351, B.1.525, A.23.1, and C.1.1. Although distorted by low sampling numbers and blind spots, the findings highlight that Africa must not be left behind in the global pandemic response, otherwise it could become a source for new variants