Time to Switch to Second-line Antiretroviral Therapy in Children With Human Immunodeficiency Virus in Europe and Thailand.

Background: Data on durability of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in children with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are limited. We assessed time to switch to second-line therapy in 16 European countries and Thailand. Methods: Children aged <18 years initiating combination ART (≥2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs] plus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor [NNRTI] or boosted protease inhibitor [PI]) were included. Switch to second-line was defined as (i) change across drug class (PI to NNRTI or vice versa) or within PI class plus change of ≥1 NRTI; (ii) change from single to dual PI; or (iii) addition of a new drug class. Cumulative incidence of switch was calculated with death and loss to follow-up as competing risks. Results: Of 3668 children included, median age at ART initiation was 6.1 (interquartile range (IQR), 1.7-10.5) years. Initial regimens were 32% PI based, 34% nevirapine (NVP) based, and 33% efavirenz based. Median duration of follow-up was 5.4 (IQR, 2.9-8.3) years. Cumulative incidence of switch at 5 years was 21% (95% confidence interval, 20%-23%), with significant regional variations. Median time to switch was 30 (IQR, 16-58) months; two-thirds of switches were related to treatment failure. In multivariable analysis, older age, severe immunosuppression and higher viral load (VL) at ART start, and NVP-based initial regimens were associated with increased risk of switch. Conclusions: One in 5 children switched to a second-line regimen by 5 years of ART, with two-thirds failure related. Advanced HIV, older age, and NVP-based regimens were associated with increased risk of switch

Immunisation practices in centres caring for children with perinatally acquired HIV: A call for harmonisation

Current national immunisation schedules differ between countries in terms of vaccine formulation, timing of vaccinations and immunisation programme funding and co-ordination. As a result, some HIV infected paediatric population may be left susceptible to vaccine preventable infections. Vaccines used in healthy population should be subjected to high quality ethical research and be explicitly validated for use in children with special vaccination needs such as those infected with HIV. This survey was completed to assess current vaccination practices and attitudes toward vaccination among pediatricians who care for vertically HIV infected children. An online questionnaire was completed by 46 experts in paediatric HIV-infection from the Paediatric European Network for Treatment of AIDS (PENTA). Data were collected between November 2013 and March 2014. 46units looking after 2465 patients completed the questionnaire. The majority of units (67%) reported that common childhood immunisation were administered by the family doctor or local health services rather than in the HIV specialist centre. Vaccination histories were mostly incomplete and difficult to obtain for 40% of the studied population. Concerns were reported regarding the use of live attenuated vaccines, such as varicella and rotavirus, and these were less frequently recommended (61% and 28% of the units respectively). Monitoring of vaccine responses was employed in a minority of centres (41%). A range of different assays were used resulting in diverse units of measurement and proposed correlates of protection. Vaccination practices for perinatally HIV-infected children vary a great deal between countries. Efforts should be made to improve communication and documentation of vaccinations in healthcare settings and to harmonise recommendations relating to additional vaccines for HIV infected children and the use of laboratory assays to guide immunisation. This will ultimately improve coverage and vaccine induced immunity in this vulnerable patient grou

Immunisation practices in centres caring for children with perinatally acquired HIV: A call for harmonisation

Background Current national immunisation schedules differ between countries in terms of vaccine formulation, timing of vaccinations and immunisation programme funding and co-ordination. As a result, some HIV infected paediatric population may be left susceptible to vaccine preventable infections. Vaccines used in healthy population should be subjected to high quality ethical research and be explicitly validated for use in children with special vaccination needs such as those infected with HIV. This survey was completed to assess current vaccination practices and attitudes toward vaccination among pediatricians who care for vertically HIV infected children. Methods An online questionnaire was completed by 46 experts in paediatric HIV-infection from the Paediatric European Network for Treatment of AIDS (PENTA). Data were collected between November 2013 and March 2014. Results 46 units looking after 2465 patients completed the questionnaire. The majority of units (67%) reported that common childhood immunisation were administered by the family doctor or local health services rather than in the HIV specialist centre. Vaccination histories were mostly incomplete and difficult to obtain for 40% of the studied population. Concerns were reported regarding the use of live attenuated vaccines, such as varicella and rotavirus, and these were less frequently recommended (61% and 28% of the units respectively). Monitoring of vaccine responses was employed in a minority of centres (41%). A range of different assays were used resulting in diverse units of measurement and proposed correlates of protection. Conclusion Vaccination practices for perinatally HIV-infected children vary a great deal between countries. Efforts should be made to improve communication and documentation of vaccinations in healthcare settings and to harmonise recommendations relating to additional vaccines for HIV infected children and the use of laboratory assays to guide immunisation. This will ultimately improve coverage and vaccine induced immunity in this vulnerable patient group.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Paediatric COVID-19 mortality: a database analysis of the impact of health resource disparity

Background The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on paediatric populations varied between high-income countries (HICs) versus low-income to middle-income countries (LMICs). We sought to investigate differences in paediatric clinical outcomes and identify factors contributing to disparity between countries.Methods The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 database was queried to include children under 19 years of age admitted to hospital from January 2020 to April 2021 with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Univariate and multivariable analysis of contributing factors for mortality were assessed by country group (HICs vs LMICs) as defined by the World Bank criteria.Results A total of 12 860 children (3819 from 21 HICs and 9041 from 15 LMICs) participated in this study. Of these, 8961 were laboratory-confirmed and 3899 suspected COVID-19 cases. About 52% of LMICs children were black, and more than 40% were infants and adolescent. Overall in-hospital mortality rate (95% CI) was 3.3% [=(3.0% to 3.6%), higher in LMICs than HICs (4.0% (3.6% to 4.4%) and 1.7% (1.3% to 2.1%), respectively). There were significant differences between country income groups in intervention profile, with higher use of antibiotics, antivirals, corticosteroids, prone positioning, high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation in HICs. Out of the 439 mechanically ventilated children, mortality occurred in 106 (24.1%) subjects, which was higher in LMICs than HICs (89 (43.6%) vs 17 (7.2%) respectively). Pre-existing infectious comorbidities (tuberculosis and HIV) and some complications (bacterial pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and myocarditis) were significantly higher in LMICs compared with HICs. On multivariable analysis, LMIC as country income group was associated with increased risk of mortality (adjusted HR 4.73 (3.16 to 7.10)).Conclusion Mortality and morbidities were higher in LMICs than HICs, and it may be attributable to differences in patient demographics, complications and access to supportive and treatment modalities

Implementation of Recommendations on the Use of Corticosteroids in Severe COVID-19

Importance: Research diversity and representativeness are paramount in building trust, generating valid biomedical knowledge, and possibly in implementing clinical guidelines. Objectives: To compare variations over time and across World Health Organization (WHO) geographic regions of corticosteroid use for treatment of severe COVID-19; secondary objectives were to evaluate the association between the timing of publication of the RECOVERY (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial (June 2020) and the WHO guidelines for corticosteroids (September 2020) and the temporal trends observed in corticosteroid use by region and to describe the geographic distribution of the recruitment in clinical trials that informed the WHO recommendation. Design, setting, and participants: This prospective cohort study of 434 851 patients was conducted between January 31, 2020, and September 2, 2022, in 63 countries worldwide. The data were collected under the auspices of the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC)-WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol for Severe Emerging Infections. Analyses were restricted to patients hospitalized for severe COVID-19 (a subset of the ISARIC data set). Exposure: Corticosteroid use as reported to the ISARIC-WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol for Severe Emerging Infections. Main outcomes and measures: Number and percentage of patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 who received corticosteroids by time period and by WHO geographic region. Results: Among 434 851 patients with confirmed severe or critical COVID-19 for whom receipt of corticosteroids could be ascertained (median [IQR] age, 61.0 [48.0-74.0] years; 53.0% male), 174 307 (40.1%) received corticosteroids during the study period. Of the participants in clinical trials that informed the guideline, 91.6% were recruited from the United Kingdom. In all regions, corticosteroid use for severe COVID-19 increased, but this increase corresponded to the timing of the RECOVERY trial (time-interruption coefficient 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9-1.2]) and WHO guideline (time-interruption coefficient 1.9 [95% CI, 1.7-2.0]) publications only in Europe. At the end of the study period, corticosteroid use for treatment of severe COVID-19 was highest in the Americas (5421 of 6095 [88.9%]; 95% CI, 87.7-90.2) and lowest in Africa (31 588 of 185 191 [17.1%]; 95% CI, 16.8-17.3). Conclusions and relevance: The results of this cohort study showed that implementation of the guidelines for use of corticosteroids in the treatment of severe COVID-19 varied geographically. Uptake of corticosteroid treatment was lower in regions with limited clinical trial involvement. Improving research diversity and representativeness may facilitate timely knowledge uptake and guideline implementation

Characteristics and outcomes of an international cohort of 600 000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background: We describe demographic features, treatments and clinical outcomes in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 cohort, one of the world's largest international, standardized data sets concerning hospitalized patients. Methods: The data set analysed includes COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January 2020 and January 2022 in 52 countries. We investigated how symptoms on admission, co-morbidities, risk factors and treatments varied by age, sex and other characteristics. We used Cox regression models to investigate associations between demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities and other factors with risk of death, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Results: Data were available for 689 572 patients with laboratory-confirmed (91.1%) or clinically diagnosed (8.9%) SARS-CoV-2 infection from 52 countries. Age [adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years 1.49 (95% CI 1.48, 1.49)] and male sex [1.23 (1.21, 1.24)] were associated with a higher risk of death. Rates of admission to an ICU and use of IMV increased with age up to age 60&nbsp;years then dropped. Symptoms, co-morbidities and treatments varied by age and had varied associations with clinical outcomes. The case-fatality ratio varied by country partly due to differences in the clinical characteristics of recruited patients and was on average 21.5%. Conclusions: Age was the strongest determinant of risk of death, with a ∼30-fold difference between the oldest and youngest groups; each of the co-morbidities included was associated with up to an almost 2-fold increase in risk. Smoking and obesity were also associated with a higher risk of death.&nbsp;The size of our international database and the standardized data collection method make this study a comprehensive international description of COVID-19 clinical features. Our findings may inform strategies that involve prioritization of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have a higher risk of death

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc