‘If I am on ART, my new-born baby should be put on treatment immediately’: Exploring the acceptability, and appropriateness of Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual assay for early infant diagnosis of HIV in Malawi

Early infant diagnosis of HIV (EID-HIV) is key to reducing paediatric HIV mortality. Traditional approaches for diagnosing HIV in exposed infants are usually unable to optimally contribute to EID. Point-of-care testing such as Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual assay-1 (XPertHIV) are available and could improve EID-HIV in resource constrained and high HIV burden contexts. We investigated the acceptability and perceived appropriateness of XpertHIV for EID-HIV in Mulanje Hospital, Malawi. Qualitative cross-sectional study using semi-structured interviews (SSI) among caregivers and health care workers at Mulanje District Hospital. The qualitative study was nested within a larger diagnostic study that evaluated the performance of XpertHIV using whole-blood-sample in a resource limited and high burden setting. A total of 65 SSIs were conducted among caregivers (n = 60) and health care providers (n = 5). Data were coded using deductive and inductive approaches while thematic approach was used to analyse data. Point-of-care XPertHIV was perceived to be acceptable among caregivers and health care providers. Caregivers’ motivations for accepting XPertHIV HIV-testing for their infants included perceived risk of HIV emanating from child’s exposure and validation of caregiver’s own HIV sero-status. Although concerns about pain of testing and blood sample volumes taken from an infant remained amplified, overall, both caregivers and health care providers felt XpertHIV was appropriate because of its quick result turn-around-time which decreased anxiety and stress, the prospect of early treatment initiation and reduction in hospital visits and related costs. Implementation of XpertHIV has a great potential to improve EID-HIV in Malawi because of its quick turn-around-time and associated benefits including overcoming access-related barriers. Scaled implementation of this diagnostic technology require a robust community engagement strategy for managing caregivers and community myths and misconceptions towards the amount of blood sample collected from infants

TB research requires strong protections, innovation, and increased funding in response to COVID-19

International audienc

Cost-effectiveness of short, oral treatment regimens for rifampicin resistant tuberculosis

Current options for treating tuberculosis (TB) that is resistant to rifampicin (RR-TB) are few, and regimens are often long and poorly tolerated. Following recent evidence from the TB-PRACTECAL trial countries are considering programmatic uptake of 6-month, all-oral treatment regimens. We used a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) with and without moxifloxacin (BPaLM) or clofazimine (BPaLC) compared with the current mix of long and short standard of care (SOC) regimens to treat RR-TB from the provider perspective in India, Georgia, Philippines, and South Africa. We estimated total costs (2019 USD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. Costs and DALYs were discounted at 3% in the base case. Parameter uncertainty was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We found that all three regimens would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with the current programmatic mix of long and short SOC regimens in all four countries. BPaL was the most cost-saving regimen in all countries, saving $112-$1,173 per person. BPaLM was the preferred regimen at a willingness to pay per DALY of 0.5 GDP per capita in all settings. Our findings indicate BPaL-based regimens are likely to be cost-saving and more effective than the current standard of care in a range of settings. Countries should consider programmatic uptake of BPaL-based regimens

Principles for designing future regimens for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis

Fewer than 20% of patients with multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis are receiving treatment and there is an urgent need to scale up treatment programmes. One of the biggest barriers to scale-up is the treatment regimen, which is lengthy, complex, ineffective, poorly tolerated and expensive. For the first time in over 50 years, new drugs have been developed specifically to treat tuberculosis, with bedaquiline and potentially delamanid expected to be available soon for treatment of MDR cases. However, if the new drugs are merely added to the current treatment regimen, the new regimen will be at least as lengthy, cumbersome and toxic as the existing one. There is an urgent need for strategy and evidence on how to maximize the potential of the new drugs to improve outcomes and shorten treatment. We devised eight key principles for designing future treatment regimens to ensure that, once they are proven safe in clinical trials, they will be clinically effective and programmatically practicable. Regimens should contain at least one new class of drug; be broadly applicable for use against MDR and extensively drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex strains; contain three to five effective drugs, each from a different drug class; be delivered orally; have a simple dosing schedule; have a good side-effect profile that allows limited monitoring; last a maximum of 6 months; and have minimal interaction with antiretrovirals. Following these principles will maximize the potential of new compounds and help to overcome the clinical and programmatic disadvantages and scale-up constraints that plague the current regimen

Mixed method joint display to illustrate how quantitative and qualitative data were integrated.

Abbreviations: C, Complementarity; D, Divergence; E, Expansion; NHS, National Health Service; QQD, Quantitizing Qualitative Data. Three themes: 1. Lived experiences, 2. Health seeking and decision making 3. Experiences of hospital.</p

PPEDiC survey.

(DOCX)</p

GRAMMS checklist.

(DOCX)</p

Demographic characteristics of all study participants.

Demographic characteristics of all study participants.</p