Delayed diagnosis of tuberculosis in persons living with HIV in Eastern Europe: associated factors and effect on mortality-a multicentre prospective cohort study

Background: Early diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) is important to reduce transmission, morbidity and mortality in people living with HIV (PLWH). Methods: PLWH with a diagnosis of TB were enrolled from HIV and TB clinics in Eastern Europe and followed until 24 months. Delayed diagnosis was defined as duration of TB symptoms (cough, weight-loss or fever) for ≥ 1 month before TB diagnosis. Risk factors for delayed TB diagnosis were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. The effect of delayed diagnosis on mortality was assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox models. Findings: 480/740 patients (64.9%; 95% CI 61.3-68.3%) experienced a delayed diagnosis. Age ≥ 50 years (vs. < 50 years, aOR = 2.51; 1.18-5.32; p = 0.016), injecting drug use (IDU) (vs. non-IDU aOR = 1.66; 1.21-2.29; p = 0.002), being ART naïve (aOR = 1.77; 1.24-2.54; p = 0.002), disseminated TB (vs. pulmonary TB, aOR = 1.56, 1.10-2.19, p = 0.012), and presenting with weight loss (vs. no weight loss, aOR = 1.63; 1.18-2.24; p = 0.003) were associated with delayed diagnosis. PLWH with a delayed diagnosis were at 36% increased risk of death (hazard ratio = 1.36; 1.04-1.77; p = 0.023, adjusted hazard ratio 1.27; 0.95-1.70; p = 0.103). Conclusion: Nearly two thirds of PLWH with TB in Eastern Europe had a delayed TB diagnosis, in particular those of older age, people who inject drugs, ART naïve, with disseminated disease, and presenting with weight loss. Patients with delayed TB diagnosis were subsequently at higher risk of death in unadjusted analysis. There is a need for optimisation of the current TB diagnostic cascade and HIV care in PLWH in Eastern Europe

Differences in response to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients being treated for tuberculosis in Eastern Europe, Western Europe and Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens are preferred for treatment of adult HIV-positive patients co-infected with tuberculosis (HIV/TB). Few studies have compared outcomes among HIV/TB patients treated with efavirenz or non-efavirenz containing regimens. METHODS: HIV-positive patients aged ≥16 years with a diagnosis of tuberculosis recruited to the TB:HIV study between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2013 in 19 countries in Eastern Europe (EE), Western Europe (WE), and Latin America (LA) who received ART concomitantly with TB treatment were included. Patients either received efavirenz-containing ART starting between 15 days prior to, during, or within 90 days after starting tuberculosis treatment, (efavirenz group), or other ART regimens (non-efavirenz group). Patients who started ART more than 90 days after initiation of TB treatment, or who experienced ART interruption of more than 15 days during TB treatment were excluded. We describe rates and factors associated with death, virological suppression, and loss to follow up at 12 months using univariate, multivariate Cox, and marginal structural models to compare the two groups of patients. RESULTS: Of 965 patients (647 receiving efavirenz-containing ART, and 318 a non-efavirenz regimen) 50% were from EE, 28% from WE, and 22% from LA. Among those not receiving efavirenz-containing ART, regimens mainly contained a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (57%), or raltegravir (22%). At 12 months 1.4% of patients in WE had died, compared to 20% in EE: rates of virological suppression ranged from 21% in EE to 61% in WE. After adjusting for potential confounders, rates of death (adjusted Hazard Ratio; aHR, 95%CI: 1.13, 0.72-1.78), virological suppression (aHR, 95%CI: 0.97, 0.76-1.22), and loss to follow up (aHR, 95%CI: 1.17, 0.81-1.67), were similar in patients treated with efavirenz and non-efavirenz containing ART regimens. CONCLUSION: In this large, prospective cohort, the response to ART varied significantly across geographical regions, whereas the ART regimen (efavirenz or non-efavirenz containing) did not impact on the proportion of patients who were virologically-suppressed, lost to follow up or dead at 12 months

Management of MDR-TB in HIV co-infected patients in Eastern Europe: Results from the TB: HIV study

Objectives: Mortality among HIV patients with tuberculosis (TB) remains high in Eastern Europe (EE), but details of TB and HIV management remain scarce. Methods: In this prospective study, we describe the TB treatment regimens of patients with multi-drug resistant (MDR) TB and use of antiretroviral therapy (ART). Results: A total of 105 HIV-positive patients had MDR-TB (including 33 with extensive drug resistance) and 130 pan-susceptible TB. Adequate initial TB treatment was provided for 8% of patients with MDR-TB compared with 80% of those with pan-susceptible TB. By twelve months, an estimated 57.3% (95%CI 41.5-74.1) of MDR-TB patients had started adequate treatment. While 67% received ART, HIV-RNA suppression was demonstrated in only 23%. Conclusions: Our results show that internationally recommended MDR-TB treatment regimens were infrequently used and that ART use and viral suppression was well below the target of 90%, reflecting the challenging patient population and the environment in which health care is provided. Urgent improvement of management of patients with TB/HIV in EE, in particular for those with MDR-TB, is needed and includes widespread access to rapid TB diagnostics, better access to and use of second-line TB drugs, timely ART initiation with viral load monitoring, and integration of TB/HIV care

Major Challenges in clinical management of TB/HIV coinfected patients in Eastern Europe compared with Western Europe and Latin America

Objectives: rates of TB/HIV coinfection and multi-drug resistant (MDR)-TB are increasing in Eastern Europe (EE). We aimed to study clinical characteristics, factors associated with MDR-TB and predicted activity of empiric anti-TB treatment at time of TB diagnosis among TB/HIV coinfected patients in EE, Western Europe (WE) and Latin America (LA). Design and methods: between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2013, 1413 TB/HIV patients (62 clinics in 19 countries in EE, WE, Southern Europe (SE), and LA) were enrolled. Results: significant differences were observed between EE (N = 844), WE (N = 152), SE (N = 164), and LA (N = 253) in the proportion of patients with a definite TB diagnosis (47%, 71%, 72% and 40%, p<0.0001), MDR-TB (40%, 5%, 3% and 15%, p<0.0001), and use of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) (17%, 40%, 44% and 35%, p<0.0001). Injecting drug use (adjusted OR (aOR) = 2.03 (95% CI 1.00-4.09), prior anti-TB treatment (3.42 (1.88-6.22)), and living in EE (7.19 (3.28-15.78)) were associated with MDR-TB. Among 585 patients with drug susceptibility test (DST) results, the empiric (i.e. without knowledge of the DST results) anti-TB treatment included ≥3 active drugs in 66% of participants in EE compared with 90-96% in other regions (p<0.0001). Conclusions: in EE, TB/HIV patients were less likely to receive a definite TB diagnosis, more likely to house MDR-TB and commonly received empiric anti-TB treatment with reduced activity. Improved management of TB/HIV patients in EE requires better access to TB diagnostics including DSTs, empiric anti-TB therapy directed at both susceptible and MDR-TB, and more widespread use of cART

Major differences in organization and availability of health care and medicines for HIV/TB coinfected patients across Europe

Objectives: The aim of the study was to investigate the organization and delivery of HIV and tuberculosis (TB) health care and to analyse potential differences between treatment centres in Eastern (EE) and Western Europe (WE). Methods: Thirty‐eight European HIV and TB treatment centres participating in the TB:HIV study within EuroCoord completed a survey on health care management for coinfected patients in 2013 (EE: 17 respondents; WE:21; 76% of all TB:HIV centres). Descriptive statistics were obtained for regional comparisons. The reported data on health care strategies were compared with actual clinical practice at patient level via data derived from the TB:HIV study. Results: Respondent centres in EE comprised: Belarus (n = 3), Estonia (1), Georgia (1), Latvia (1), Lithuania (1), Poland (4), Romania (1), the Russian Federation (4) and Ukraine (1); those in WE comprised: Belgium (1), Denmark (1), France (1), Italy (7), Spain (2), Switzerland (1) and UK (8). Compared with WE, treatment of HIV and TB in EE are less often located at the same site (47% in EE versus 100% in WE; P < 0.001) and less often provided by the same doctors (41% versus 90%, respectively; P = 0.002), whereas regular screening of HIV‐infected patients for TB (80% versus 40%, respectively; P = 0.037) and directly observed treatment (88% versus 20%, respectively; P < 0.001) were more common in EE. The reported availability of rifabutin and second‐ and third‐line anti‐TB drugs was lower, and opioid substitution therapy (OST) was available at fewer centres in EE compared with WE (53% versus 100%, respectively; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Major differences exist between EE and WE in relation to the organization and delivery of health care for HIV/TB‐coinfected patients and the availability of anti‐TB drugs and OST. Significant discrepancies between reported and actual clinical practices were found in EE

Hyperimmune immunoglobulin for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (ITAC): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3, randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Passive immunotherapy using hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) to SARS-CoV-2, derived from recovered donors, is a potential rapidly available, specific therapy for an outbreak infection such as SARS-CoV-2. Findings from randomised clinical trials of hIVIG for the treatment of COVID-19 are limited. METHODS: In this international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had been symptomatic for up to 12 days and did not have acute end-organ failure were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either hIVIG or an equivalent volume of saline as placebo, in addition to remdesivir, when not contraindicated, and other standard clinical care. Randomisation was stratified by site pharmacy; schedules were prepared using a mass-weighted urn design. Infusions were prepared and masked by trial pharmacists; all other investigators, research staff, and trial participants were masked to group allocation. Follow-up was for 28 days. The primary outcome was measured at day 7 by a seven-category ordinal endpoint that considered pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications and ranged from no limiting symptoms to death. Deaths and adverse events, including organ failure and serious infections, were used to define composite safety outcomes at days 7 and 28. Prespecified subgroup analyses were carried out for efficacy and safety outcomes by duration of symptoms, the presence of anti-spike neutralising antibodies, and other baseline factors. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, which included all randomly assigned participants who met eligibility criteria and received all or part of the assigned study product infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546581. FINDINGS: From Oct 8, 2020, to Feb 10, 2021, 593 participants (n=301 hIVIG, n=292 placebo) were enrolled at 63 sites in 11 countries; 579 patients were included in the mITT analysis. Compared with placebo, the hIVIG group did not have significantly greater odds of a more favourable outcome at day 7; the adjusted OR was 1·06 (95% CI 0·77–1·45; p=0·72). Infusions were well tolerated, although infusion reactions were more common in the hIVIG group (18·6% vs 9·5% for placebo; p=0·002). The percentage with the composite safety outcome at day 7 was similar for the hIVIG (24%) and placebo groups (25%; OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·66–1·46; p=0·91). The ORs for the day 7 ordinal outcome did not vary for subgroups considered, but there was evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect for the day 7 composite safety outcome: risk was greater for hIVIG compared with placebo for patients who were antibody positive (OR 2·21, 95% CI 1·14–4·29); for patients who were antibody negative, the OR was 0·51 (0·29–0·90; pinteraction=0·001). INTERPRETATION: When administered with standard of care including remdesivir, SARS-CoV-2 hIVIG did not demonstrate efficacy among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. The safety of hIVIG might vary by the presence of endogenous neutralising antibodies at entry. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health

Collaborative tuberculosis/HIV activities in the European Region.

We collected information on the current models of integration of TB and HIV services in the Region via a comprehensive survey among the TB and HIV National Focal Points, and identified challenges and opportunities

Tuberculosis Drug Susceptibility, Treatment, and Outcomes for Belarusian HIV-Positive Patients with Tuberculosis: Results from a National and International Laboratory

Background. To cure drug-resistant (DR) tuberculosis (TB), the antituberculous treatment should be guided by Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug-susceptibility testing (DST). In this study, we compared conventional DST performed in Minsk, Belarus, a TB DR high-burden country, with extensive geno- and phenotypic analyses performed at the WHO TB Supranational Reference Laboratory in Copenhagen, Denmark, for TB/HIV coinfected patients. Subsequently, DST results were related to treatment regimen and outcome. Methods. Thirty TB/HIV coinfected patients from Minsk were included and descriptive statistics applied. Results. Based on results from Minsk, 10 (33%) TB/HIV patients had drug-sensitive TB. Two (7%) had isoniazid monoresistant TB, 8 (27%) had multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB, 5 (17%) preextensive drug-resistant (preXDR) TB, and 5 (17%) had extensive drug-resistant (XDR) TB. For the first-line drugs rifampicin and isoniazid, there was DST agreement between Minsk and Copenhagen for 90% patients. For the second-line anti-TB drugs, discrepancies were more pronounced. For 14 (47%) patients, there were disagreements for at least one drug, and 4 (13%) patients were classified as having MDR-TB in Minsk but were classified as having preXDR-TB based on DST results in Copenhagen. Initially, all patients received standard anti-TB treatment with rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol. However, this was only suitable for 40% of the patients based on DST. On average, DR-TB patients were changed to 4 (IQR 3-5) active drugs after 1.5 months (IQR 1-2). After treatment adjustment, the treatment duration was 8 months (IQR 2-11). Four (22%) patients with DR-TB received treatment for >18 months. In total, sixteen (53%) patients died during 24 months of follow-up. Conclusions. We found high concordance for rifampicin and isoniazid DST between the Minsk and Copenhagen laboratories, whereas discrepancies for second-line drugs were more pronounced. For patients with DR-TB, treatment was often insufficient and relevant adjustments delayed. This example from Minsk, Belarus, underlines two crucial points in the management of DR-TB: the urgent need for implementation of rapid molecular DSTs and availability of second-line drugs in all DR-TB high-burden settings. Carefully designed individualized treatment regimens in accordance with DST patterns will likely improve patients’ outcome and reduce transmission with drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains

Benchmarking HIV health care: from individual patient care to health care evaluation. An example from the EuroSIDA study

Abstract Background State-of-the-art care involving the utilisation of multiple health care interventions is the basis for an optimal long-term clinical prognosis for HIV-patients. We evaluated health care for HIV patients based on four key indicators. Methods Four indicators of health care were assessed: Compliance with current guidelines on initiation of: 1) combination antiretroviral therapy (cART); 2) chemoprophylaxis; 3) frequency of laboratory monitoring; and 4) virological response to cART (proportion of patients with HIV-RNA 90% of time on cART). Results 7097 EuroSIDA patients were included from Northern (n = 923), Southern (n = 1059), West Central (n = 1290) East Central (n = 1366), Eastern (n = 1964) Europe, and Argentina (n = 495). Patients in Eastern Europe with a CD4 3 were less likely to initiate cART and Pneumocystis jiroveci-chemoprophylaxis compared to patients from all other regions, and less frequently had a laboratory assessment of their disease status. The proportion of patients with virological response was highest in Northern, 89% vs. 84%, 78%, 78%, 61%, 55% in West Central, Southern, East Central Europe, Argentina and Eastern Europe, respectively (p Conclusions This assessment of HIV health care utilization revealed pronounced regional differences in adherence to guidelines and can help to identify gaps and direct target interventions. It may serve as a tool for the assessment and benchmarking of the clinical management of HIV patients in any setting worldwide.</p