The roles of the general practitioner and sexual health centre in HIV testing: comparative insights and impact on HIV incidence rates in the Rotterdam area, the Netherlands - a cross-sectional population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Access to HIV testing is crucial for detection, linkage to treatment, and prevention. In less urbanised areas, reliance on general practitioners (GPs) for HIV testing is probable, as sexual health centres (SHC) are mostly located within urbanised areas. Limited insight into individuals undergoing HIV testing stems from sparse standard registration of demographics at GPs. This cross-sectional study aims (1) to assess and compare HIV testing at the GP and SHC, and (2) to assess population- and provider-specific HIV incidence. METHODS: Individual HIV testing data of GPs and SHC were linked to population register data (aged ≥ 15 years, Rotterdam area, 2015-2019). We reported the proportion HIV tested, and compared GP and SHC testing rates with negative binomial generalised additive models. Data on new HIV diagnoses (2015-2019) from the Dutch HIV Monitoring Foundation relative to the population were used to assess HIV incidence. RESULTS: The overall proportion HIV tested was 1.14% for all residents, ranging from 0.41% for ≥ 40-year-olds to 4.70% for Antilleans. The GP testing rate was generally higher than the SHC testing rate with an overall rate ratio (RR) of 1.61 (95% CI: 1.56-1.65), but not for 15-24-year-olds (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74-0.88). Large differences in HIV testing rate (1.36 to 39.47 per 1,000 residents) and GP-SHC ratio (RR: 0.23 to 7.24) by geographical area were observed. The GPs' contribution in HIV testing was greater for GP in areas further away from the SHC. In general, population groups that are relatively often tested are also the groups with most diagnoses and highest incidence (e.g., men who have sex with men, non-western). The overall incidence was 10.55 per 100,000 residents, varying from 3.09 for heterosexual men/women to 24.04 for 25-29-year-olds. CONCLUSIONS: GPs have a pivotal role in HIV testing in less urbanised areas further away from the SHC, and among some population groups. A relatively high incidence often follows relatively high testing rates. Opportunities to improve HIV testing have been found for migrants, lower-educated individuals, in areas less urbanised areas and further away from GP/SHC. Strategies include additional targeted testing, via for example SHC branch locations and outreach activities.

COVID-19 epidemiology and performance of the WHO clinical algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 in people with HIV from Ukraine.

BACKGROUND: The two main objectives were to evaluate the COVID-19 point prevalence and the test performance of the WHO case definition to diagnose COVID-19 clinically in people with HIV in West Ukraine. METHODS: Multicenter cross-sectional study in Lviv, Ukraine, from October 2020-November 2021. COVID-19 unvaccinated people with HIV were included regardless of COVID-19 symptoms at routine clinical visits and had standardized medical, quality of life (EQ(5D)) and SARS-CoV-2 serology assessments. Reported symptoms indicating potential COVID-19 events at inclusion or between March 2020 and inclusion were classified by the WHO case definition as suspected, probable or confirmed. A clinical COVID-19 case was defined as being SARS-CoV-2 seropositive with at least a suspected COVID-19 according to the WHO case definition. The primary endpoints were the clinical COVID-19 prevalence and the test characteristics of the WHO case definition with SARS-CoV-2 serology as reference. (Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT04711954). RESULTS: The 971 included people with HIV were median 40 years, 38.8% women, 44.8% had prior AIDS, and 55.6% had comorbidities. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 40.1% (95%CI:37.0-43.1) and 20.5% (95%CI:18.0-23.1) had clinical COVID-19 median 4 months (IQR:2-7) before inclusion. Clinical COVID-19 occurred less frequently in people with HIV with tuberculosis history, injecting drug use, CD4+ T-cells <200/mL and unemployment. The quality of life was not impacted after COVID-19. An at least probable COVID-19 classification by the WHO case definition had 44.1% sensitivity (95%CI:38.7-49.7), 85.2% specificity (95%CI:81.5-88.4), 66.6% positive predictive value (95%CI:59.8-73.0) and 69.5% negative predictive value (95%CI:65.5-73.3) to diagnose COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 unvaccinated people with HIV from Ukraine had a significant COVID-19 rate and using the WHO case definition had insufficient diagnostic accuracy to diagnose these cases. The lower burden in vulnerable people with HIV was unexpected but might reflect a shielding effect.

Systematic Review: Strategies for Improving HIV Testing and Detection Rates in European Hospitals.

Undiagnosed HIV infection is a prominent clinical issue throughout Europe that requires the continuous attention of all healthcare professionals and policymakers to prevent missed testing opportunities and late diagnosis. This systematic review aimed to evaluate interventions to increase HIV testing rates and case detection in European hospitals. Out of 4598 articles identified, 29 studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Most of the studies were conducted in single Western European capital cities, and only one study was from Eastern Europe. The main interventions investigated were test-all and indicator-condition-based testing strategies. Overall, the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV was well above 0.1%. The studied interventions increased the HIV testing rate and the case detection rate. The highest prevalence of undiagnosed HIV was found with the indicator-condition-driven testing strategy, whereas the test-all strategy had the most profound impact on the proportion of late diagnoses. Nevertheless, the HIV testing rates and case-finding varied considerably across studies. In conclusion, effective strategies to promote HIV testing in European hospitals are available, but relevant knowledge gaps regarding generalizability and sustainability remain. These gaps require the promotion of adherence to HIV testing guidelines, as well as additional larger studies representing all European regions.

Immunogenicity of a bivalent BA.1 COVID-19 booster vaccine in people with HIV in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the immunogenicity of a bivalent BA.1 COVID-19 booster vaccine in people with HIV (PWH). DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: PWH aged ≥45 years received Wuhan-BA.1 mRNA-1273.214 and those <45 years Wuhan-BA.1 BNT162b2. Participants were propensity score-matched 1 : 2 to people without HIV (non-PWH) by age, primary vaccine platform (mRNA-based or vector-based), number of prior COVID-19 boosters and SARS-CoV-2 infections, and spike (S1)-specific antibodies on the day of booster administration. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of ancestral S1-specific antibodies from day 0 to 28 in PWH compared to non-PWH. Secondary endpoints included humoral responses, T-cell responses and cytokine responses up to 180 days post-vaccination. RESULTS: Forty PWH received mRNA-1273.214 ( N  = 35) or BNT162b2 ( N  = 5) following mRNA-based ( N  = 29) or vector-based ( N  = 11) primary vaccination. PWH were predominantly male (87% vs. 26% of non-PWH) and median 57 years [interquartile range (IQR) 53-59]. Their median CD4 + T-cell count was 775 (IQR 511-965) and the plasma HIV-RNA load was <50 copies/ml in 39/40. The GMR of S1-specific antibodies by 28 days post-vaccination was comparable between PWH [4.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.24-6.19] and non-PWH (4.07, 95% CI 3.42-4.83). S1-specific antibody responses were comparable between PWH and non-PWH up to 180 days, and T-cell responses up to 90 days post-vaccination. Interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-2, and IL-4 cytokine concentrations increased 28 days post-vaccination in PWH. CONCLUSION: A bivalent BA.1 booster vaccine was immunogenic in well treated PWH, eliciting comparable humoral responses to non-PWH. However, T-cell responses waned faster after 90 days in PWH compared to non-PWH.

Dolutegravir/Lamivudine Is Noninferior to Continuing Dolutegravir- and Non-Dolutegravir-Based Triple-Drug Antiretroviral Therapy in Virologically Suppressed People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: DUALING Prospective Nationwide Matched Cohort Study.

Background: Confirming the efficacy of dolutegravir/lamivudine in clinical practice solidifies recommendations on its use. Methods: Prospective cohort study (DUALING) in 24 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment centers in the Netherlands. HIV RNA-suppressed cases were on triple-drug antiretroviral regimens without prior virological failure or resistance and started dolutegravir/lamivudine. Cases were 1:2 matched to controls on triple-drug antiretroviral regimens by the use of dolutegravir-based regimens, age, sex, transmission route, CD4+ T-cell nadir, and HIV RNA zenith. The primary endpoint was the treatment failure rate in cases versus controls at 1 year by intention-to-treat and on-treatment analyses with 5% noninferiority margin. Results: The 2040 participants were 680 cases and 1380 controls. Treatment failure in the 390 dolutegravir-based cases versus controls occurred in 8.72% and 12.50% (difference: -3.78% [95% confidence interval {CI}, -7.49% to .08%]) by intention-to-treat and 1.39% and 0.80% (difference: 0.59% [95% CI, -.80% to 1.98%]) by on-treatment analyses. The treatment failure risk in 290 non-dolutegravir-based cases was also noninferior to controls. Antiretroviral regimen modifications unrelated to virological failure explained the higher treatment failure rate by intention-to-treat. A shorter time on triple-drug antiretroviral therapy and being of non-Western origin was associated with treatment failure. Treatment failure, defined as 2 consecutive HIV RNA >50 copies/mL, occurred in 4 cases and 5 controls but without genotypic resistance detected. Viral blips occured comparable in cases and controls but cases gained more weight, especially when tenofovir-based regimens were discontinued. Conclusions: In routine care, dolutegravir/lamivudine was noninferior to continuing triple-drug antiretroviral regimens after 1 year, supporting the use of dolutegravir/lamivudine in clinical practice. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04707326.