Latent tuberculosis infection screening and treatment in HIV: insights from evaluation of UK practice

Latent TB infection (LTBI) screening and treatment in HIV-positive individuals in the UK is advocated by the British HIV Association (BHIVA) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), although each recommends differing strategies. We undertook an evaluation of UK practice, relating the responses to the local HIV/TB disease burden. 162 of 188 (86%) UK geographical areas responded; only 93/162 (57.4%) offer LTBI testing with considerable heterogeneity in practice, and no difference in HIV/TB burden between areas offering testing and those who do not. Only 33/93 (35.5%) and 6/93 (6.5%) reported full compliance with BHIVA and NICE guidance respectively. A uniform national guideline is required

Latent tuberculosis screening and treatment in HIV: highly acceptable in a prospective cohort study

Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) are at increased risk of re-activation of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Although UK and international guidelines identify this group as a priority for LTBI screening and treatment, data on attitudes of PLWH to this policy recommendation are lacking. / Methods: A five-point, Likert-style questionnaire was administered to PLWH to assess views and intentions towards accepting LTBI screening and treatment. Subsequent interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) testing was offered, and chemoprophylaxis if required. Influencing demographic and psychological associations with planned, and actual, testing and treatment uptake were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. / Results: 444 out of 716 (62%) patients responded. 417 out of 437 (95.4%) expressed intention to accept LTBI testing. The only significant association was the perceived importance of testing to the individual (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 8.98, 95% CI 2.55-31.67). 390 out of 393 (99.2%) accepted appropriate IGRA screening; 41 out of 390 (10.5%) were positive. 397 out of 431 (92.1%) expressed intention to accept chemoprophylaxis, associated with perceived importance of treatment (aOR 3.52, 95% CI 1.46-8.51), a desire to have treatment for LTBI (aOR 1.77, 95% CI 0.99-3.15) and confidence in taking treatment (aOR 3.77, 95% CI 1.84-7.72). Of those offered chemoprophylaxis, 36 out of 37 (97.3%) accepted and 34 out of 36 (94.4%) completed treatment. There were no correlates with actual screening acceptance. / Conclusions: LTBI is common amongst PLWH, highlighting the importance of robust screening and treatment programmes. This study shows that screening and treatment for LTBI is highly acceptable to PLWH and provides strong, objective evidence for policy-makers developing guidelines in this cohort

Risk of vaccine preventable diseases in UK migrants: A serosurvey and concordance analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) such as measles and rubella cause significant morbidity and mortality globally every year. The World Health Organization (WHO), reported vaccine coverage for both measles and rubella to be 71 % in 2019, indicating an immunity gap. Migrants in the EU/EEA may be at high risk of VPDs due to under-immunisation and poor living conditions. However, there are limited data on VPD seroprotection rates amongst migrants living in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: We conducted an exploratory cross-sectional serosurvey amongst a sample of adult migrants living in Leicester, UK to: (a) determine seroprotection rates for measles, varicella zoster, and rubella in this group; (b) identify risk factors associated with seronegativity and, (c) understand if self-reported vaccine or diseases history is an effective measure of seroprotection. Participants gave a blood sample and completed a questionnaire asking basic demographic details and vaccine and disease history for the three VPDs. We summarised the data using median and interquartile range (IQR) for non-parametric continuous variables and count and percentage for categorical variables. We used logistic regression to establish predictors of seroprotection against these diseases. We examined the reliability of self-reported vaccination/disease history for prediction of seroprotection through a concordance analysis. RESULTS: 149 migrants were included in the analysis. Seroprotection rates were: varicella zoster 98 %, rubella 92.6 % and measles 89.3 %. Increasing age was associated with seroprotection (OR 1.07 95 % CI 1.01-1.13 for each year increase in age). Migrants from Africa and the Middle East (aOR 15.16 95 % CI 1.31 - 175.06) and South/East Asia and Pacific regions (aOR 15.43 95 %CI 2.38 - 100.00) are significantly more likely to be seroprotected against measles as compared to migrants from Europe and Central Asia. The proportions of migrants unsure about their vaccination and disease history combined were 53.0 % for measles; 57.7 % for rubella; 43.0 % for varicella. There was no agreement between self-reported vaccination/disease history and serostatus. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest lower levels of seroprotection against measles in migrants living in Leicester, UK, with younger migrants and those from Europe and Central Asia more likely to lack seroprotection. A high proportion of surveyed migrants were unaware of their vaccination/disease history and self-reported vaccine/disease was a poor predictor of seroprotection against VPDs which is important for clinical decision-making regarding catch-up vaccination in this population. Our results, although derived from a small sample, suggest that there may be gaps in seroimmunity for certain VPDs in particular migrant populations. These findings should inform future qualitative studies investigating barriers to vaccine uptake in migrants and population-level seroprevalence studies aimed at determining individualised risk profiles based on demographic and migration factors

Strategic treatment optimization for HCV (STOPHCV1): a randomised controlled trial of ultrashort duration therapy for chronic hepatitis C [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]

Background: The world health organization (WHO) has identified the need for a better understanding of which patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) can be cured with ultrashort course HCV therapy. Methods: A total of 202 individuals with chronic HCV were randomised to fixed-duration shortened therapy (8 weeks) vs variable duration ultrashort strategies (VUS1/2). Participants not cured following first-line treatment were retreated with 12 weeks’ sofosbuvir/ledipasvir/ribavirin. The primary outcome was sustained virological response 12 weeks (SVR12) after first-line treatment and retreatment. Participants were factorially randomised to receive ribavirin with first-line treatment. Results: All evaluable participants achieved SVR12 overall (197/197, 100% [95% CI 98-100]) demonstrating non-inferiority between fixedduration and variable-duration strategies (difference 0% [95% CI - 3.8%, +3.7%], 4% pre-specified non-inferiority margin). First-line SVR12 was 91% [86%-97%] (92/101) for fixed-duration vs 48% [39%-57%] (47/98) for variable-duration, but was significantly higher for VUS2 (72% [56%-87%] (23/32)) than VUS1 (36% [25%-48%] (24/66)). Overall, first-line SVR12 was 72% [65%-78%] (70/101) without ribavirin and 68% [61%-76%] (69/98) with ribavirin (p=0.48). At treatment failure, the emergence of viral resistance was lower with ribavirin (12% [2%-30%] (3/26)) than without (38% [21%-58%] (11/29), p=0.01). Conclusions: Unsuccessful first-line short-course therapy did not compromise retreatment with sofosbuvir/ledipasvir/ribavirin (100% SVR12). SVR12 rates were significantly increased when ultrashort treatment varied between 4-7 weeks rather than 4-6 weeks. Ribavirin significantly reduced resistance emergence in those failing first-line therapy. ISRCTN Registration: 37915093 (11/04/2016)

Variable short duration treatment versus standard treatment, with and without adjunctive ribavirin, for chronic hepatitis C: the STOP-HCV-1 non-inferiority, factorial RCT

Background: High cure rates with licensed durations of therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus suggest that many patients are overtreated. New strategies in individuals who find it challenging to adhere to standard treatment courses could significantly contribute to the elimination agenda. Objectives: To compare cure rates using variable ultrashort first-line treatment stratified by baseline viral load followed by retreatment, with a fixed 8-week first-line treatment with retreatment with or without adjunctive ribavirin. Design: An open-label, multicentre, factorial randomised controlled trial. Randomisation: Randomisation was computer generated, with patients allocated in a 1 : 1 ratio using a factorial design to each of biomarker-stratified variable ultrashort strategy or fixed duration and adjunctive ribavirin (or not), using a minimisation algorithm with a probabilistic element. Setting: NHS. Participants: A total of 202 adults (aged ≥ 18 years) infected with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1a/1b or 4 for ≥ 6 months, with a detectable plasma hepatitis C viral load and no significant fibrosis [FibroScan® (Echosens, Paris, France) score F0–F1 or biopsy-proven minimal fibrosis], a hepatitis C virus viral load  24 weeks on anti-human immunodeficiency virus drugs. Interventions: Fixed-duration 8-week first-line therapy compared with variable ultrashort first-line therapy, initially for 4–6 weeks (continuous scale) stratified by screening viral load (variable ultrashort strategy 1, mean 32 days of treatment) and then, subsequently, for 4–7 weeks (variable ultrashort strategy 2 mean 39 days of duration), predominantly with ombitasvir, paritaprevir, ritonavir (Viekirax®; AbbVie, Chicago, IL, USA), and dasabuvir (Exviera®; AbbVie, Chicago, IL, USA) or ritonavir. All patients in whom first-line treatment was unsuccessful were immediately retreated with 12 weeks’ sofosbuvir, ledipasvir (Harvoni®, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Foster City, CA, USA) and ribavirin. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome was overall sustained virological response (persistently undetectable) 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). Results: A total of 202 patients were analysed. All patients in whom the primary outcome was evaluable achieved SVR12 overall [100% (197/197), 95% confidence interval 86% to 100%], demonstrating non-inferiority between fixed- and variable-duration strategies (difference 0%, 95% confidence interval –3.8% to 3.7%, prespecified non-inferiority margin 4%). A SVR12 following first-line treatment was achieved in 91% (92/101; 95% confidence interval 86% to 97%) of participants randomised to the fixed-duration strategy and by 48% (47/98; 95% confidence interval 39% to 57%) allocated to the variable-duration strategy. However, the proportion achieving SVR12 was significantly higher among those allocated to variable ultrashort strategy 2 [72% (23/32), 95% confidence interval 56% to 87%] than among those allocated to variable ultrashort strategy 1 [36% (24/66), 95% confidence interval 25% to 48%]. Overall, a SVR12 following first-line treatment was achieved by 72% (70/101) (95% confidence interval 65% to 78%) of patients treated with ribavirin and by 68% (69/98) (95% confidence interval 61% to 76%) of those not treated with ribavirin. A SVR12 with variable ultrashort strategies 1 and 2 was 52% (25/48) (95% confidence interval 38% to 65%) with ribavirin, compared with 44% (22/50) (95% confidence interval 31% to 56) without. However, at treatment failure, the emergence of viral resistance was lower with ribavirin [12% (3/26), 95% confidence interval 2% to 30%] than without [38% (11/29), 95% confidence interval 21% to 58%; p = 0.01]. All 10 individuals who became undetectable at day 3 of treatment achieved first-line SVR12 regardless of treatment duration. Five participants in the variable-duration arm and five in the fixed-duration arm experienced serious adverse events (p = 0.69), as did five participants receiving ribavirin and five participants receiving no ribavirin. Conclusions: SVR12 rates were significantly higher when ultrashort treatment varied between 4 and 7 weeks, rather than between 4 and 6 weeks. We found no evidence of ribavirin significantly affecting first-line SVR12, with unsuccessful first-line short-course therapy also not compromising subsequent retreatment with sofosbuvir, ledipasvir and ribavirin

Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19

BACKGROUND Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been proposed as treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) on the basis of in vitro activity and data from uncontrolled studies and small, randomized trials. METHODS In this randomized, controlled, open-label platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned 1561 patients to receive hydroxychloroquine and 3155 to receive usual care. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. RESULTS The enrollment of patients in the hydroxychloroquine group was closed on June 5, 2020, after an interim analysis determined that there was a lack of efficacy. Death within 28 days occurred in 421 patients (27.0%) in the hydroxychloroquine group and in 790 (25.0%) in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.23; P=0.15). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients. The results suggest that patients in the hydroxychloroquine group were less likely to be discharged from the hospital alive within 28 days than those in the usual-care group (59.6% vs. 62.9%; rate ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.98). Among the patients who were not undergoing mechanical ventilation at baseline, those in the hydroxychloroquine group had a higher frequency of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (30.7% vs. 26.9%; risk ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27). There was a small numerical excess of cardiac deaths (0.4 percentage points) but no difference in the incidence of new major cardiac arrhythmia among the patients who received hydroxychloroquine. CONCLUSIONS Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19, those who received hydroxychloroquine did not have a lower incidence of death at 28 days than those who received usual care. (Funded by UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ISRCTN number, ISRCTN50189673; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936.

Validity of the Common Cold Questionnaire (CCQ) in Asthma Exacerbations

Background: The common cold questionnaire (CCQ) is used to discriminate those with and without a viral infection. Its usefulness in people with acute asthma is unknown. Our aim was to asess the ability of the CCQ to detect viral infection and to monitor recovery during a viral induced asthma exacerbation and confirmed by virological testing. Methodology/Principal Findings: We studied subjects (≥7 yrs) admitted to hospital with acute asthma and diagnosed as positive (n=63), or negative to viral infection (n=27) according to molecular and virological testing from respiratory samples. CCQ asthma history and asthma control questionaire were completed and repeated 4-6 weeks later. Sensitivity specificity, and response to change of the CCQ were assessed by receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis and effect size calculation respectively. The CCQ did not discriminate between viral and non-viral infection for subjects with asthma (sensitivity = 76.2%; specificity = 29.6%). ROC analysis could not differentiate between positive or negative virus in subjects with asthma. The CCQ had a large responce to change following recovery (effect size = 1.01). 39% of subjects recovering from viral exacerbation remained positive to virological testing at follow-up despite improvement in clinical symptoms. The CCQ reflected clinical improvement in these subjects, thus providing additional information to complement virological testing. Conclusions/Significance: The CCQ is a useful instrument for monitorong response to viral infection in people with asthma. Reliable differentiation between viral and non-viral asthma exacerbations was not achieved with the CCQ and requires specific virological testing. When combined with virological testing, the CCQ should be a useful outcome measure for evaluating therapies in viral-induced asthma

Severe community-acquired adenovirus pneumonia in an immunocompetent 44-year-old woman: a case report and review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>This case report describes a rare condition: community-acquired adenovirus pneumonia in an immunocompetent adult. The diagnosis was achieved by using a multiplex real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay and highlights the usefulness of these novel molecular diagnostic techniques in patients hospitalized with acute respiratory illness. We also performed a literature search for previously published cases and present a summary of the clinical, laboratory and radiological features of this condition.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 44-year-old immunocompetent Caucasian woman was admitted to our hospital with an acute febrile respiratory illness associated with a rash. Her blood tests were non-specifically abnormal, and tests for bacterial pathogens were negative. Her condition rapidly deteriorated while she was in our hospital and required mechanical ventilation and inotropic support. A multiplex real-time RT-PCR assay performed on respiratory specimens to detect respiratory viruses was negative for influenza but positive for adenovirus DNA. The patient recovered on supportive treatment, and antibiotics were stopped after 5 days.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Community-acquired adenovirus pneumonia in immunocompetent adult civilians presents as a non-specific acute febrile respiratory illness followed by the abrupt onset of respiratory failure, often requiring mechanical ventilation. Its laboratory and radiological features are typical of viral infections but also are non-specific. Novel multiplex real-time RT-PCR testing for respiratory viruses enabled us to rapidly make the diagnosis in this case. The new technology could be used more widely in patients with acute respiratory illness and has potential utility for rationalization of the use of antibiotics and improving infection control measures.</p

CMV quantitative PCR in the diagnosis of CMV disease in patients with HIV-infection – a retrospective autopsy based study

Background Patients with advanced HIV infection at the time of diagnosis and patients not responding to antiretroviral therapy are at risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. Earlier studies of patients with HIV infection have demonstrated that the diagnosis is often first made post-mortem. In recent years new molecular biological tests have become available for diagnosis of CMV disease. Although clinical evaluation of tests for diagnosis of CMV disease in HIV-infected individuals is suboptimal without autopsy, no results from such studies have been published. The aim of this study was to explore the diagnostic utility of CMV quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in plasma from HIV and CMV seropositive patients who died during the period 1991–2002 and in whom autopsy was performed. Methods Autopsy was performed in all cases, as part of routine evaluation of HIV-infected cases followed at Ullevaal University Hospital. Of 125 patients included, 53 had CMV disease, 37 of whom were first diagnosed at autopsy. CMV disease was diagnosed either by ophthalmoscopic findings typical of CMV retinitis, biopsy or autopsy. One or two plasma samples taken prior to the first diagnosis of CMV disease (alive or at autopsy) or death without CMV disease were analysed by CMV quantitative PCR. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for different CMV viral load cut-offs and according to detection of viraemia in one versus two samples. Results Twenty-seven of 53 patients with CMV disease (51%) and 10 of 72 patients without CMV disease (14%) had detectable viraemia in at least one sample. Sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the test, maximised with a cut-off at the test's limit of detection of CMV viraemia (400 copies/mL), were 47% and 70%, respectively. With cut-off at 10 000 copies/mL, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were 100%. With a requirement for CMV viraemia in two samples, specificity and PPV were 100% in patients with CMV viraemia above the limit of detection. Conclusion Our results indicate that quantitative CMV PCR is best used to rule in, rather than to rule out CMV disease in HIV-infected individuals at high risk