Accuracy and Efficiency of Machine Learning-Assisted Risk-of-Bias Assessments in "Real-World" Systematic Reviews : A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Automation is a proposed solution for the increasing difficulty of maintaining up-to-date, high-quality health evidence. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of semiautomated data synthesis, such as risk-of-bias (RoB) assessments, is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether RobotReviewer-assisted RoB assessments are noninferior in accuracy and efficiency to assessments conducted with human effort only. DESIGN: Two-group, parallel, noninferiority, randomized trial. (Monash Research Office Project 11256). SETTING: Health-focused systematic reviews using Covidence. PARTICIPANTS: Systematic reviewers, who had not previously used RobotReviewer, completing Cochrane RoB assessments between February 2018 and May 2020. INTERVENTION: In the intervention group, reviewers received an RoB form prepopulated by RobotReviewer; in the comparison group, reviewers received a blank form. Studies were assigned in a 1:1 ratio via simple randomization to receive RobotReviewer assistance for either Reviewer 1 or Reviewer 2. Participants were blinded to study allocation before starting work on each RoB form. MEASUREMENTS: Co-primary outcomes were the accuracy of individual reviewer RoB assessments and the person-time required to complete individual assessments. Domain-level RoB accuracy was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Of the 15 recruited review teams, 7 completed the trial (145 included studies). Integration of RobotReviewer resulted in noninferior overall RoB assessment accuracy (risk difference, -0.014 [95% CI, -0.093 to 0.065]; intervention group: 88.8% accurate assessments; control group: 90.2% accurate assessments). Data were inconclusive for the person-time outcome (RobotReviewer saved 1.40 minutes [CI, -5.20 to 2.41 minutes]). LIMITATION: Variability in user behavior and a limited number of assessable reviews led to an imprecise estimate of the time outcome. CONCLUSION: In health-related systematic reviews, RoB assessments conducted with RobotReviewer assistance are noninferior in accuracy to those conducted without RobotReviewer assistance. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: University College London and Monash University.

Living evidence and adaptive policy: perfect partners?

BACKGROUND: While there has been widespread global acceptance of the importance of evidence-informed policy, many opportunities to inform health policy with research are missed, often because of a mismatch between when and where reliable evidence is needed, and when and where it is available. 'Living evidence' is an approach where systematic evidence syntheses (e.g. living reviews, living guidelines, living policy briefs, etc.) are continually updated to incorporate new relevant evidence as it becomes available. Living evidence approaches have the potential to overcome a major barrier to evidence-informed policy, making up-to-date systematic summaries of policy-relevant research available at any time that policy-makers need them. These approaches are likely to be particularly beneficial given increasing calls for policy that is responsive, and rapidly adaptive to changes in the policy context. We describe the opportunities presented by living evidence for evidence-informed policy-making and highlight areas for further exploration. DISCUSSION: There are several elements of living approaches to evidence synthesis that might support increased and improved use of evidence to inform policy. Reviews are explicitly prioritised to be 'living' by partnerships between policy-makers and researchers based on relevance to decision-making, as well as uncertainty of existing evidence, and likelihood that new evidence will arise. The ongoing nature of the work means evidence synthesis teams can be dynamic and engage with policy-makers in a variety of ways over time; and synthesis topics, questions and methods can be adapted as policy interests or contextual factors shift. Policy-makers can sign-up to be notified when relevant new evidence is found, and can be confident that living syntheses are up-to-date and contain all research whenever they access them. The always up-to-date nature of living evidence syntheses means producers can rapidly demonstrate availability of relevant, reliable evidence when it is needed, addressing a frequently cited barrier to evidence-informed policymaking. CONCLUSIONS: While there are challenges to be overcome, living evidence provides opportunities to enable policy-makers to access up-to-date evidence whenever they need it and also enable researchers to respond to the issues of the day with up-to-date research; and update policy-makers on changes in the evidence base as they arise. It also provides an opportunity to build flexible partnerships between researchers and policy-makers to ensure that evidence syntheses reflect the changing needs of policy-makers.

Care for adults with COVID-19: living guidelines from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce was established in March 2020 to maintain up-to-date recommendations for the treatment of people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The original guideline (April 2020) has been continuously updated and expanded from nine to 176 recommendations, facilitated by the rapid identification, appraisal, and analysis of clinical trial findings and subsequent review by expert panels. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: In this article, we describe the recommendations for treating non-pregnant adults with COVID-19, as current on 1 August 2022 (version 61.0). The Taskforce has made specific recommendations for adults with severe/critical or mild disease, including definitions of disease severity, recommendations for therapy, COVID-19 prophylaxis, respiratory support, and supportive care. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE: The Taskforce currently recommends eight drug treatments for people with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen (inhaled corticosteroids, casirivimab/imdevimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, regdanvimab, remdesivir, sotrovimab, tixagevimab/cilgavimab) and six for those who require supplemental oxygen (systemic corticosteroids, remdesivir, tocilizumab, sarilumab, baricitinib, casirivimab/imdevimab). Based on evidence of their achieving no or only limited benefit, ten drug treatments or treatment combinations are not recommended; an additional 42 drug treatments should only be used in the context of randomised trials. Additional recommendations include support for the use of continuous positive airway pressure, prone positioning, and endotracheal intubation in patients whose condition is deteriorating, and prophylactic anticoagulation for preventing venous thromboembolism. The latest updates and full recommendations are available at www.covid19evidence.net.au.

Care of older people and people requiring palliative care with COVID-19: guidance from the Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.

INTRODUCTION: Older people living with frailty and/or cognitive impairment who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience higher rates of critical illness. There are also people who become critically ill with COVID-19 for whom a decision is made to take a palliative approach to their care. The need for clinical guidance in these two populations resulted in the formation of the Care of Older People and Palliative Care Panel of the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce in June 2020. This specialist panel consists of nursing, medical, pharmacy and allied health experts in geriatrics and palliative care from across Australia. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: The panel was tasked with developing two clinical flow charts for the management of people with COVID-19 who are i) older and living with frailty and/or cognitive impairment, and ii) receiving palliative care for COVID-19 or other underlying illnesses. The flow charts focus on goals of care, communication, medication management, escalation of care, active disease-directed care, and managing symptoms such as delirium, anxiety, agitation, breathlessness or cough. The Taskforce also developed living guideline recommendations for the care of adults with COVID-19, including a commentary to discuss special considerations when caring for older people and those requiring palliative care. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE: The practice points in the flow charts emphasise quality clinical care, with a focus on addressing the most important challenges when caring for older individuals and people with COVID-19 requiring palliative care. The adult recommendations contain additional considerations for the care of older people and those requiring palliative care.

The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce: pregnancy and perinatal guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnant women are at higher risk of severe illness from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than non-pregnant women of a similar age. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, it was clear that evidenced-based guidance was needed, and that it would need to be updated rapidly. The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce provided a resource to guide care for people with COVID-19, including during pregnancy. Care for pregnant and breastfeeding women and their babies was included as a priority when the Taskforce was set up, with a Pregnancy and Perinatal Care Panel convened to guide clinical practice. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: As of May 2022, the Taskforce has made seven specific recommendations on care for pregnant women and those who have recently given birth. This includes supporting usual practices for the mode of birth, umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, and using antenatal corticosteroids and magnesium sulfate as clinically indicated. There are 11 recommendations for COVID-19-specific treatments, including conditional recommendations for using remdesivir, tocilizumab and sotrovimab. Finally, there are recommendations not to use several disease-modifying treatments for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. The recommendations are continually updated to reflect new evidence, and the most up-to-date guidance is available online (https://covid19evidence.net.au). CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT RESULTING FROM THE GUIDELINES: The National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce has been a critical component of the infrastructure to support Australian maternity care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Taskforce has shown that a rapid living guidelines approach is feasible and acceptable.

Perspectives of patients, family members, health professionals and the public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has seen a global surge in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and stress. AIMS: This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients with COVID-19, their family, health professionals, and the general public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. METHODS: A secondary thematic analysis was conducted using data from the COVID-19 COS project. We extracted data on the perceived causes and impact of COVID-19 on mental health from an international survey and seven online consensus workshops. RESULTS: We identified four themes (with subthemes in parenthesis): anxiety amidst uncertainty (always on high alert, ebb and flow of recovery); anguish of a threatened future (intense frustration of a changed normality, facing loss of livelihood, trauma of ventilation, a troubling prognosis, confronting death); bearing responsibility for transmission (fear of spreading COVID-19 in public; overwhelming guilt of infecting a loved one); and suffering in isolation (severe solitude of quarantine, sick and alone, separation exacerbating grief). CONCLUSION: We found that the unpredictability of COVID-19, the fear of long-term health consequences, burden of guilt, and suffering in isolation profoundly impacted mental health. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to manage the psychological consequences arising from this pandemic.

A New Method for Estimating the Incidence of Infectious Diseases.

Ambitious World Health Organization targets for disease elimination require monitoring of epidemics using routine health data in settings of decreasing and low incidence. We evaluated 2 methods commonly applied to routine testing results to estimate incidence rates that assume a uniform probability of infection between consecutive negative and positive tests based on 1) the midpoint of this interval and 2) a randomly selected point in this interval. We compared these with an approximation of the Poisson binomial distribution, which assigns partial incidence to time periods based on the uniform probability of occurrence in these intervals. We assessed bias, variance, and convergence of estimates using simulations of Weibull-distributed failure times with systematically varied baseline incidence and varying trend. We considered results for quarterly, half-yearly, and yearly incidence estimation frequencies. We applied the methods to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) incidence in HIV-negative patients from the Treatment With Antiretrovirals and Their Impact on Positive and Negative Men (TAIPAN) Study, an Australian study of HIV incidence in men who have sex with men, between 2012 and 2018. The Poisson binomial method had reduced bias and variance at low levels of incidence and for increased estimation frequency, with increased consistency of estimation. Application of methods to real-world assessment of HIV incidence found decreased variance in Poisson binomial model estimates, with observed incidence declining to levels where simulation results had indicated bias in midpoint and random-point methods.

Core Outcome Measures for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Respiratory Failure, Multiorgan Failure, Shortness of Breath, and Recovery.

OBJECTIVES: Respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, recovery, and mortality have been identified as critically important core outcomes by more than 9300 patients, health professionals, and the public from 111 countries in the global coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set initiative. The aim of this project was to establish the core outcome measures for these domains for trials in coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Three online consensus workshops were convened to establish outcome measures for the four core domains of respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery. SETTING: International. PATIENTS: About 130 participants (patients, public, and health professionals) from 17 countries attended the three workshops. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respiratory failure, assessed by the need for respiratory support based on the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale, was considered pragmatic, objective, and with broad applicability to various clinical scenarios. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was recommended for multiple organ failure, because it was routinely used in trials and clinical care, well validated, and feasible. The Modified Medical Research Council measure for shortness of breath, with minor adaptations (recall period of 24 hr to capture daily fluctuations and inclusion of activities to ensure relevance and to capture the extreme severity of shortness of breath in people with coronavirus disease 2019), was regarded as fit for purpose for this indication. The recovery measure was developed de novo and defined as the absence of symptoms, resumption of usual daily activities, and return to the previous state of health prior to the illness, using a 5-point Likert scale, and was endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set recommended core outcome measures have content validity and are considered the most feasible and acceptable among existing measures. Implementation of the core outcome measures in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 will ensure consistency and relevance of the evidence to inform decision-making and care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

International Survey to Establish Prioritized Outcomes for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: There are over 4,000 trials conducted in people with coronavirus disease 2019. However, the variability of outcomes and the omission of patient-centered outcomes may diminish the impact of these trials on decision-making. The aim of this study was to generate a consensus-based, prioritized list of outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 trials. DESIGN: In an online survey conducted in English, Chinese, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish languages, adults with coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, health professionals, and the general public rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9, critical importance) and completed a Best-Worst Scale to estimate relative importance. Participant comments were analyzed thematically. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public, and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, and researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 9,289 participants from 111 countries (776 people with coronavirus disease 2019 or family members, 4,882 health professionals, and 3,631 members of the public) completed the survey. The four outcomes of highest priority for all three groups were: mortality, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and organ failure. Lung function, lung scarring, sepsis, shortness of breath, and oxygen level in the blood were common to the top 10 outcomes across all three groups (mean > 7.5, median ≥ 8, and > 70% of respondents rated the outcome as critically important). Patients/family members rated fatigue, anxiety, chest pain, muscle pain, gastrointestinal problems, and cardiovascular disease higher than health professionals. Four themes underpinned prioritization: fear of life-threatening, debilitating, and permanent consequences; addressing knowledge gaps; enabling preparedness and planning; and tolerable or infrequent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Life-threatening respiratory and other organ outcomes were consistently highly prioritized by all stakeholder groups. Patients/family members gave higher priority to many patient-reported outcomes compared with health professionals.

Core Outcomes Set for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The outcomes reported in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 are extremely heterogeneous and of uncertain patient relevance, limiting their applicability for clinical decision-making. The aim of this workshop was to establish a core outcomes set for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Four international online multistakeholder consensus workshops were convened to discuss proposed core outcomes for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, informed by a survey involving 9,289 respondents from 111 countries. The transcripts were analyzed thematically. The workshop recommendations were used to finalize the core outcomes set. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: Six themes were identified. "Responding to the critical and acute health crisis" reflected the immediate focus on saving lives and preventing life-threatening complications that underpinned the high prioritization of mortality, respiratory failure, and multiple organ failure. "Capturing different settings of care" highlighted the need to minimize the burden on hospitals and to acknowledge outcomes in community settings. "Encompassing the full trajectory and severity of disease" was addressing longer term impacts and the full spectrum of illness (e.g. shortness of breath and recovery). "Distinguishing overlap, correlation and collinearity" meant recognizing that symptoms such as shortness of breath had distinct value and minimizing overlap (e.g. lung function and pneumonia were on the continuum toward respiratory failure). "Recognizing adverse events" refers to the potential harms of new and evolving interventions. "Being cognizant of family and psychosocial wellbeing" reflected the pervasive impacts of coronavirus disease 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery are critically important outcomes to be consistently reported in coronavirus disease 2019 trials.

Clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19: Living recommendations from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.

To date, 18 living recommendations for the clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 have been issued by the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. This includes recommendations on mode of birth, delayed umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, antenatal corticosteroids, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, disease-modifying treatments (including dexamethasone, remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and advanced respiratory support interventions (prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Through continuous evidence surveillance, these living recommendations are updated in near real-time to ensure clinicians in Australia have reliable, evidence-based guidelines for clinical decision-making. Please visit https://covid19evidence.net.au/ for the latest recommendation updates.

Performance of a Novel Low-Cost, Instrument-Free Plasma Separation Device for HIV Viral Load Quantification and Determination of Treatment Failure in People Living with HIV in Malaysia: a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

HIV viral load (VL) testing is the recommended method for monitoring the response of people living with HIV and receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART). The availability of standard plasma VL testing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and access to this testing, are limited by the need to use fresh plasma. Good specimen collection methods for HIV VL testing that are applicable to resource-constrained settings are needed. We assessed the diagnostic performance of the filtered dried plasma spot (FDPS), created using the newly developed, instrument-free VLPlasma device, in identifying treatment failure at a VL threshold of 1,000 copies/ml in fresh plasma. Performance was compared with that of the conventional dried blood spot (DBS). Venous blood samples from 201 people living with HIV and attending an infectious disease clinic in Malaysia were collected, and HIV VL was quantified using fresh plasma (the reference standard), FDPS, and DBS specimens. VL testing was done using the Roche Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan v2.0 assay. At a threshold of 1,000 copies/ml, the diagnostic performance of the FDPS was superior (sensitivity, 100% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 89.1 to 100%]; specificity, 100% [95% CI, 97.8 to 100%]) to that of the DBS (sensitivity, 100% [95% CI, 89.4 to 100%]; specificity, 36.8% [95% CI, 29.4 to 44.7%]) (P < 0.001). A stronger correlation was observed between the FDPS VL and the plasma VL (r = 0.94; P < 0.001) than between the DBS VL and the plasma VL (r = 0.85; P < 0.001). The mean difference in VL measures between the FDPS and plasma (plasma VL minus FDPS VL) was 0.127 log10 copies/ml (standard deviation [SD], 0.32), in contrast to -0.95 log10 copies/ml (SD, 0.84) between the DBS and plasma. HIV VL measurement using the FDPS outperformed that with the DBS in identifying treatment failure at a threshold of 1,000 copies/ml and compared well with the quantification of VL in plasma. The FDPS can be an attractive alternative to fresh plasma for improving access to HIV VL monitoring among people living with HIV on ART in LMICs.

Practitioner Review: School refusal: developments in conceptualisation and treatment since 2000.

BACKGROUND: A generation has passed since the literature on the conceptualisation, assessment and treatment of school refusal was reviewed in this journal (Elliott, ). In the light of considerable gaps in the literature, identified at that time, and growing international interest, the current paper sought to identify progress subsequently made this century. METHODS: We open with discussion of continuing conceptual uncertainty as to whether school refusal should incorporate both truancy and absenteeism marked by anxiety and distress. We then consider progress in treatment, and conclude by examining prognosis and subsequent adult functioning. In selecting intervention studies for review, our primary focus has been upon RCTS, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. RESULTS: The literature review indicates that, since the turn of the century, there has been little substantial advance in knowledge that can guide practitioners. Many of the issues raised in the 1999 paper, in particular, conceptual confusion over this heterogeneous condition, a dearth of rigorous RCT designs, limited knowledge of underlying mechanisms and uncertainty as to the long-term effects of specific forms of intervention, are little clearer than before. CONCLUSIONS: While several sound publications are available to guide intervention for school refusal, there is a continuing need for rigorous studies that can provide evidence to support individualised and tailored responses to an incapacitating problem with many causes and manifestations. While a multisystemic response to intervention approach is considered attractive, the practicalities of operating this across disparate professional borders are likely to present a long-term challenge.

Recruiting people with HIV to an online self-management support randomised controlled trial: barriers and facilitators.

Background Recruitment of people to randomised trials of online interventions presents particular challenges and opportunities. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with the recruitment of people with HIV (PWHIV) and their doctors to the HealthMap trial, a cluster randomised trial of an online self-management program. METHODS: Recruitment involved a three-step process. Study sites were recruited, followed by doctors caring for PWHIV at study sites and finally PWHIV. Data were collected from study sites, doctors and patient participants. Factors associated with site enrolment and patient participant recruitment were investigated using regression models. RESULTS: Thirteen study sites, 63 doctor participants and 728 patient participants were recruited to the study. Doctors having a prior relationship with the study investigators (odds ratio (OR) 13.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0, 58.7; P = 0.001) was positively associated with becoming a HealthMap site. Most patient participants successfully recruited to HealthMap (80%) had heard about the study from their HIV doctor. Patient enrolment was associated with the number of people with HIV receiving care at the site (ß coefficient 0.10; 95% CI 0.04, 0.16; P = 0.004), but not with employing a clinic or research nurse to help recruit patients (ß coefficient 55.9; 95% CI -2.55, 114.25; P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Despite substantial investment in online promotion, a previous relationship with doctors was important for doctor recruitment, and doctors themselves were the most important source of patient recruitment to the HealthMap trial. Clinic-based recruitment strategies remain a critical component of trial recruitment, despite expanding opportunities to engage with online communities.

The systematic development of a complex intervention: HealthMap, an online self-management support program for people with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Despite persistent calls for HIV care to adopt a chronic care approach, few HIV treatment services have been able to establish service arrangements that prioritise self-management. To prevent cardiovascular and other chronic disease outcomes, the HealthMap program aims to enhance routine HIV care with opportunities for self-management support. This paper outlines the systematic process that was used to design and develop the HealthMap program, prior to its evaluation in a cluster-randomised trial. METHODS: Program development, planning and evaluation was informed by the PRECEDE-PROCOEDE Model and an Intervention Mapping approach and involved four steps: (1) a multifaceted needs assessment; (2) the identification of intervention priorities; (3) exploration and identification of the antecedents and reinforcing factors required to initiate and sustain desired change of risk behaviours; and finally (4) the development of intervention goals, strategies and methods and integrating them into a comprehensive description of the intervention components. RESULTS: The logic model incorporated the program's guiding principles, program elements, hypothesised causal processes, and intended program outcomes. Grounding the development of HealthMap on a clear conceptual base, informed by the research literature and stakeholder's perspectives, has ensured that the HealthMap program is targeted, relevant, provides transparency, and enables effective program evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a systematic process for intervention development facilitated the development of an intervention that is patient centred, accessible, and focuses on the key determinants of health-related outcomes for people with HIV in Australia. The techniques used here may offer a useful methodology for those involved in the development and implementation of complex interventions.

Modeling the Effects of Vorinostat In Vivo Reveals both Transient and Delayed HIV Transcriptional Activation and Minimal Killing of Latently Infected Cells.

Recent efforts to cure human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) infection have focused on developing latency reversing agents as a first step to eradicate the latent reservoir. The histone deacetylase inhibitor, vorinostat, has been shown to activate HIV RNA transcription in CD4+ T-cells and alter host cell gene transcription in HIV-infected individuals on antiretroviral therapy. In order to understand how latently infected cells respond dynamically to vorinostat treatment and determine the impact of vorinostat on reservoir size in vivo, we have constructed viral dynamic models of latency that incorporate vorinostat treatment. We fitted these models to data collected from a recent clinical trial in which vorinostat was administered daily for 14 days to HIV-infected individuals on suppressive ART. The results show that HIV transcription is increased transiently during the first few hours or days of treatment and that there is a delay before a sustained increase of HIV transcription, whose duration varies among study participants and may depend on the long term impact of vorinostat on host gene expression. Parameter estimation suggests that in latently infected cells, HIV transcription induced by vorinostat occurs at lower levels than in productively infected cells. Furthermore, the estimated loss rate of transcriptionally induced cells remains close to baseline in most study participants, suggesting vorinostat treatment does not induce latently infected cell killing and thus reduce the latent reservoir in vivo.

An NK Cell Population Lacking FcRγ Is Expanded in Chronically Infected HIV Patients.

We previously demonstrated that NK cells from HIV-infected individuals have elevated expression of activation markers, spontaneously degranulate ex vivo, and decrease expression of a signal-transducing protein for NK-activating receptors, FcRγ. Importantly, these changes were maintained in virologically suppressed (VS) individuals receiving combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). In this study, we show that loss of FcRγ is caused by the expansion of a novel subset of FcRγ(-)CD56(dim) NK cells with an altered activation receptor repertoire and biological properties. In a cross-sectional study, FcRγ(-) NK cells as a proportion of total CD56(dim) NK cells increased in cART-naive viremic HIV-infected individuals (median [interquartile range] = 25.9 [12.6-56.1] compared with 3.80 [1.15-11.5] for HIV(-) controls, p < 0.0001) and in VS HIV-infected individuals (22.7 [13.1-56.2] compared with 3.80 [1.15-11.5], p = 0.0004), with no difference between cART-naive and VS patients (p = 0.93). FcRγ(-) NK cells expressed no NKp30 or NKp46. They showed greater Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity activity against rituximab-opsonized Raji cells and in a whole-blood assay measuring NK responses to overlapping HIV peptides, despite having reduced CD16 expression compared with conventional NK cells. Their prevalence correlated with CMV Ab titers in HIV(-) subjects but not in HIV(+) individuals, and with the inflammatory marker CXCL10 in both groups. The expansion of a subset of NK cells that lacks NKp30 and NKp46 to ∼90% of CD56(dim) NK cells in some VS HIV(+) individuals may influence NK-mediated immunosurveillance in patients receiving cART.

Progression paths in children's problem solving: The influence of dynamic testing, initial variability, and working memory.

The current study investigated developmental trajectories of analogical reasoning performance of 104 7- and 8-year-old children. We employed a microgenetic research method and multilevel analysis to examine the influence of several background variables and experimental treatment on the children's developmental trajectories. Our participants were divided into two treatment groups: repeated practice alone and repeated practice with training. Each child received an initial working memory assessment and was subsequently asked to solve figural analogies on each of several sessions. We examined children's analogical problem-solving behavior and their subsequent verbal accounts of their employed solving processes. We also investigated the influence of verbal and visual-spatial working memory capacity and initial variability in strategy use on analogical reasoning development. Results indicated that children in both treatment groups improved but that gains were greater for those who had received training. Training also reduced the influence of children's initial variability in the use of analogical strategies with the degree of improvement in reasoning largely unrelated to working memory capacity. Findings from this study demonstrate the value of a microgenetic research method and the use of multilevel analysis to examine inter- and intra-individual change in problem-solving processes.