Time Between Viral Loads for People With HIV During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients experienced significant care disruptions, including lab monitoring. We investigated changes in the time between viral load (VL) checks for people with HIV associated with the pandemic. Methods: This was an observational analysis of VLs of people with HIV in routine care at a large subspecialty clinic. At pandemic onset, the clinic temporarily closed its onsite laboratory. The exposure was time period (time-varying): pre-pandemic (January 1st 2019-March 15th, 2020);pandemic lab-closed (March 16th-July 12th, 2020);and pandemic lab-open (July 13th-December 31st, 2020). We estimated time from an index VL to a subsequent VL, stratified by whether the index VL was suppressed (<= 200 copies/mL). We also calculated cumulative incidence of a non-suppressed VL following a suppressed index VL, and of re-suppression following a loss of viral suppression. Results: Compared to pre-pandemic, hazard ratios for next VL check were: 0.34 (95% CI: 0.30, 0.37, lab-closed) and 0.73 (CI: 0.68, 0.78, lab-open) for suppressed patients;0.56 (CI: 0.42, 0.79, lab-closed) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.10, lab-open) for non-suppressed patients. The 12-month cumulative incidence of loss of suppression was the same in the pandemic lab-open (4%) and pre-pandemic period (4%). The hazard of re-suppression following loss of suppression was lower during the pandemic lab-open versus the pre-pandemic period (hazard ratio: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.92). Conclusions: Early pandemic restrictions and lab closure significantly delayed VL monitoring. Once the lab re-opened, non-suppressed patients resumed normal monitoring. Suppressed patients still had a delay, but no significant loss of suppression.

COVID-19 and the HIV CARE CONTINUUM in C3PNO COHORTS

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the normal delivery of HIV care, altered social support networks, and caused economic insecurity. People with HIV (PWH) are vulnerable to such disruptions, particularly if they have a history of substance use. We describe engagement in care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) for PWH during the pandemic. Methods: From May 2020 to February 2021, 773 PWH enrolled in 6 existing cohorts completed 1495 surveys about substance use and engagement in HIV care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We described the prevalence and correlates of having missed a visit with an HIV provider in the past month and having missed a dose of ART in the past week. Results: Thirteen percent of people missed an HIV visit in the past month. Missing a visit was associated with unstable housing, food insecurity, anxiety, low resiliency, disruptions to mental health care, and substance use including cigarette smoking, hazardous alcohol use, cocaine, and cannabis use. Nineteen percent of people reported missing at least one dose of ART in the week prior to their survey. Missing a dose of ART was associated with being a man, low resiliency, disruptions to mental health care, cigarette smoking, hazardous alcohol use, cocaine, and cannabis use, and experiencing disruptions to substance use treatment. Conclusion: Social determinants of health, substance use, and disruptions to mental health and substance use treatment were associated with poorer engagement in HIV care. Close attention to continuity of care during times of social disruption is especially critical for PWH.

Time between Viral Loads for Suppressed and Non-Suppressed People with HIV during the COVID-19 Pandemic Compared to Pre-Pandemic

Background. During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients at the John G. Bartlett Specialty practice experienced disruptions in viral load (VL) monitoring due to 1) conversion to telemedicine visits and 2) closure of the onsite lab from March 16-July 13, 2021. We described the impact of the pandemic on VL monitoring. Methods. We measured time from all index VLs collected during 3 periods: January 1, 2019 to March 15, 2020 (pre-pandemic);March 16 to July 12, 2020 (pandemic, closed onsite lab);and July 13 to December 31, 2020 (pandemic, open onsite lab) until a subsequent VL, 1 year after the index VL, or administrative censoring on December 31, 2020, whichever came first. We classified follow-up time according to these periods (treating period as a time-varying variable). We report hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) from a Cox proportional hazards model comparing the hazard of a VL during the pandemic periods to the pre-pandemic period, stratified by whether the index VL was suppressed (≤200 copies/mL). We tested for interactions between patient characteristics (age, sex at birth, race, ethnicity, and recent substance use) and period, to investigate differential effects of the pandemic on delayed VL. Results. After 7,760 suppressed VL measurements, median times to subsequent VL during the pre-pandemic, pandemic (closed lab) and pandemic (open lab) periods, were 4.6 (HR=1.0), 8.9 (HR=0.34, CI:0.30, 0.37), and 5.8 (HR=0.73, CI:0.68,0.78) months respectively. After 1,025 non-suppressed VL measurements, median times to subsequent VL were 2.0 (HR=1.0), 3.9 (HR=0.57, CI:0.42,0.79), and 2.1 (HR=0.92, CI:0.76,1.10) months respectively. Time to subsequent VL after an index suppressed VL was less affected by the pandemic for patients who are white;had private insurance;or had no recent cocaine or heroin use. The effect of the pandemic on time to subsequent VL after a non-suppressed index VL did not significantly differ across patient characteristics. Conclusion. Onsite lab closure disrupted VL collection for all groups. Once the onsite lab opened, the pandemic period was still associated with a delay among suppressed patients, but not non-suppressed patients. Further studies are needed to investigate if these delays are associated with lapses in viral suppression.

Visit completion during the telemedicine transition in early months of the pandemic

Background: Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence on telemedicine use in people with HIV was limited. In response to the pandemic, telemedicine was widely adopted. On March 16th, 2020, the John G. Bartlett Specialty Practice converted from exclusively in-person visits to mostly telemedicine visits. We studied the impact of this transition on visit completion. Methods: We conducted separate analyses of patients in the Johns Hopkins HIV Clinical Cohort scheduled for visits in the 14 weeks before and in the 14 weeks after the transition. For each 14-week period, we calculated the percentage of people who completed at least one visit. We calculated odds ratios (OR) for having completed ≥1 visit, associated with demographic and clinical factors in each period. Results: Pre-transition and post-transition characteristics of the study sample were: 1,580 vs 1,598 patients, 61% vs. 63% male, 80% vs. 78% black, 56 vs. 57 median age, 92% vs. 92% viral suppression, and 25% vs. 24% people with a history of injection drug use (IDU) by chart review. Pre-transition, 79% of patients completed ≥1 visit. Post-transition, 1,315 patients (82%) were scheduled for telemedicine visits and 283 were scheduled for in-person visits. Visit completion in the post-transition period was 84%, overall. Visit completion for telemedicine visits was 98%. Telemedicine visits were conducted 70% by phone, 30% by video. A History of IDU was associated with lower odds of visit completion, pre-transition OR=0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI):0.64,1.11], post-transition OR=0.74 [CI:0.55,0.99]. Substance use in recent years was associated with lower odds of visit completion post-transition: heroin use OR=0.39 [CI:0.24,0.62] and cocaine use OR=0.57 [CI:0.37,0.86]. OR for visit completion associated with tobacco use pre-transition was 0.64 [CI:0.50,0.82] and post-transition was 0.86 [CI:0.66,1.14]. Age 60+ was associated with higher odds of visit completion pre-transition (OR=1.67 [CI:1.16,2.41]) but not posttransition (OR=0.87 [CI:0.57,1.35]). Conclusion: Moving to telemedicine visits during the pandemic provided access to services, with a higher proportion of patients completing ≥1 visit, but many patients were only able to complete a telemedicine visit by phone. The impact of expanding access to telemedicine on probability of visit completion and possibly differential access by subsets of the population should be explored more once data for longer time periods are available, as should the long-term impact on other clinical outcomes.

[Spatial and temporal distribution and predictive value of chest CT scoring in patients with COVID-19].

Objective: To explore a modified CT scoring system, its feasibility for disease severity evaluation and its predictive value in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Methods: This study was a multi-center retrospective cohort study. Patients confirmed with COVID-19 were recruited in three medical centers located in Beijing, Wuhan and Nanchang from January 27, 2020 to March 8, 2020. Demographics, clinical data, and CT images were collected. CT were analyzed by two emergency physicians of more than ten years' work experience independently through a modified scoring system. Final score was determined by average score from the two reviewers if consensus was not reached. The lung was divided into 6 zones (upper, middle, and lower on both sides) by the level of trachea carina and the level of lower pulmonary veins. The target lesion types included ground-glass opacity (GGO), consolidation, overall lung involvement, and crazy-paving pattern. Bronchiectasis, cavity, pleural effusion, etc., were not included in CT reading and analysis because of low incidence. The reviewers evaluated the extent of the targeted patterns (GGO, consolidation) and overall affected lung parenchyma for each zone, using Likert scale, ranging from 0-4 (0=absent; 1=1%-25%; 2=26%-50%; 3=51%-75%; 4=76%-100%). Thus, GGO score, consolidation score, and overall lung involvement score were sum of 6 zones ranging from 0-24. For crazy-paving pattern, it was only coded as absent or present (0 or 1) for each zone and therefore ranging from 0-6. Results: A total of 197 patients from 3 medical centers and 522 CT scans entered final analysis. The median age of the patients was 64 years, and 54.8% were male. There were 76(38.8%) patients had hypertension and 30(15.3%) patients had diabetes mellitus. There were 75 of the patients classified as moderate cases, as well as 95 severe cases and 27 critical cases. As initial symptom, dry cough occurred in 170 patients, 134 patients had fever, and 125 patients had dyspnea. Reparatory rate, oxygen saturation, lymphocyte count and CURB 65 score on admission day varied among patients with different disease severity scale. There were 50 of the patients suffered from deterioration during hospital stay. The median time consumed for each CT by clinicians was 86.5 seconds. Cronbach's alpha for GGO, consolidation, crazy-paving pattern, and overall lung involvement between two clinicians were 0.809, 0.712, 0.678, and 0.906, respectively, showing good or excellent inter-rater correlation. There were 193 (98.0%) patients had GGO, 147 (74.6%) had consolidation, and 126(64.0%) had crazy-paving pattern throughout clinical course. Bilateral lung involvement was observed in 183(92.9%) patients. Median time of interval for CT scan in our study was 7 days so that the whole clinical course was divided into stages by week for further analysis. From the second week on, the CT scores of various types of lesions in severe or critically patients were higher than those of moderate cases. After the fifth week, the course of disease entered the recovery period. The CT score of the upper lung zones was lower than that of other zones in moderate and severe cases. Similar distribution was not observed in critical patients. For moderate cases, the ground glass opacity score at the second week had predictive value for the escalation of the severity classification during hospitalization. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.849, the best cut-off value was 5 points, with sensitivity of 84.2% and specificity of 75.0%. Conclusions: It is feasible for clinicians to use the modified semi-quantitative CT scoring system to evaluate patients with COVID-19. Severe/critical patients had higher scores for ground glass opacity, consolidation, crazy-paving pattern, and overall lung involvement than moderate cases. The ground glass opacity score in the second week had an optimal predictive value for escalation of disease severity during hospitalization in moderate patients on admission. The frequency of CT scan should be reduced after entering the recovery stage.

[Analysis of the correlation between lymphocyte subsets and severity of corona virus disease 19]

OBJECTIVE: To understand the differences in lymphocyte subsets in patients with different clinical classifications of corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19). METHODS: Eighty-one patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to the isolation ward under the responsibility of three medical aid teams in the Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, from February 8, 2020 to March 28, 2020, were selected to collect clinical data. According to the relevant diagnostic criteria, the disease status of the patients was classified into moderate cases (n=35), severe cases (n=39) and critical cases (n=7) when lymphocyte subset testing was performed. Their blood routine tests, lymphocyte subsets and other indicators were tested to compare whether there were differences in each indicator between the patients of different clinical classification groups. RESULTS: The differences in the absolute count of total lymphocytes, T-lymphocytes, CD4(+)T-lymphocytes, CD8(+)T-lymphocytes and natural killer (NK) cells among the three groups of patients were all statistically significant (P < 0.05), and the critical cases were significantly lower than the moderate and severe cases in the above indicators, and the indicators showed a decreasing trend with the severity of the disease. In 22 patients, the six indicators of the absolute count of T-lymphocytes, B-lymphocytes, CD4(+)T-lymphocytes, CD8(+)T-lymphocytes and NK cells, CD4(+)/CD8(+) ratio were all within the normal reference range in the first test, and 59 patients had abnormalities of the above indicators, with the absolute count of NK cells and CD8(+) T lymphocytes decreasing most frequently (61%, 56%). The patients with the absolute count of NK cells and CD8(+) T lymphocytes below the normal reference range were one group, and the remaining abnormal patients were the other group. There were more critical cases in the former group (moderate : severe : critical cases were 4 : 8 : 7 vs. 19 : 21 : 0, respectively, P=0.001), and all the deaths were in this group (6 cases vs. 0 case, P=0.001). The absolute B lymphocyte count was below the normal reference range in 15 patients, and the remaining 64 cases were within the normal range. The ratio of moderate, severe and critical cases in the reduced group was 4 : 7 : 4, and the ratio of critical cases was more in normal group which was 30 : 31 : 3, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P=0.043). CONCLUSION: The more critical the clinical subtype of patients with COVID-19, the lower the absolute count of each subset of lymphocytes.

[Detection and evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid contamination in corona virus disease 19 ward surroundings and the surface of medical staff's protective equipment]

OBJECTIVE: To determine the environmental contamination degree of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wards, to offer gui-dance for the infection control and to improve safety practices for medical staff, by sampling and detecting SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid from the air of hospital wards, the high-frequency contact surfaces in the contaminated area and the surfaces of medical staff's protective equipment in a COVID-19 designated hospital in Wuhan, China. METHODS: From March 11 to March 19, 2020, we collected air samples from the clean area, the buffer room and the contaminated area respectively in the COVID-19 wards using a portable bioaerosol concentrator WA-15. And sterile premoistened swabs were used to sample the high-frequency contacted surfaces in the contaminated area and the surfaces of medical staff's protective equipment including outermost gloves, tracheotomy operator's positive pressure respiratory protective hood and isolation clothing. The SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid of the samples were detected by real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR. During the isolation medical observation period, those medical staff who worked in the COVID-19 wards were detected for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid with oropharyngeal swabs, IgM and IgG antibody in the sera, and chest CT scans to confirm the infection status of COVID-19. RESULTS: No SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was detected in the tested samples, including the 90 air samples from the COVID-19 wards including clean area, buffer room and contaminated area, the 38 high-frequency contact surfaces samples of the contaminated area and 16 surface samples of medical staff's protective equipment including outermost gloves and isolation clothing. Moreover, detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid by oropharyngeal swabs and IgM, IgG antibodies in the sera of all the health-care workers who participated in the treatment for COVID-19 were all negative. Besides, no chest CT scan images of medical staff exhibited COVID-19 lung presentations. CONCLUSION: Good ventilation conditions, strict disinfection of environmental facilities in hospital wards, guidance for correct habits in patients, and strict hand hygiene during medical staff are important to reduce the formation of viral aerosols, cut down the aerosol load, and avoid cross-infection in isolation wards. In the face of infectious diseases that were not fully mastered but ma-naged as class A, it is safe for medical personnel to be equipped at a high level.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in renal transplant recipients: A case report

The novel coronavirus is a newly discovered pathogen in late December 2019, and its source is currently unknown, which can lead to asymptomatic infection, new coronavirus pneumonia or serious complications, such as acute respiratory failure. Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new type of respiratory disease that is currently spreading all over the world and caused by this coronavirus. Its common symptoms are highly similar to those of other viruses, such as fever, cough and dyspnea. There is currently no vaccine or treatment for COVID-19. Everyone is susceptible to infection with this disease, and owing to the long-term use of immunosuppressants, the immunity of kidney transplant recipients is suppressed, and it is more likely to be infected with the disease. At present, its impact on kidney transplant recipients is unclear. This article reports the clinical features and therapeutic course of novel coronavirus infection in a patient after renal transplantation. A 37-year-old female patient who received a kidney transplant 6 months before was diagnosed with novel coronavirus pneumonia. The patient's symptoms (such as fever, chills, dry cough, muscle aches), laboratory tests (such as decreased white blood cell count, elevated liver enzymes and D-dimer, positive viral nucleic acid test), and chest CT (multiple left lower lung plaque ground glass shadow) were similar to those of non-transplanted novel coronavirus pneumonia patients. In terms of treatment, because the immunity of kidney transplant recipients has been suppressed for a long time, it is a very common strategy to suspend the use of immunosuppressive agents. Therefore, the patient immediately discontinued the immunosuppressive agent after admission, so that she could restore immunity against infection in a short time. At the same time, the use of glucocorticoids was also very important. Its immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory effects played a large role in the treatment process.In addition, prophylactic antibiotics was needed, and nephrotoxic drugs should be used with caution. Finally, following discounting the use of immunosuppressant and a low-dose glucocorticoid-based treatment regimen, COVID-19 in this renal transplant recipient was successfully cured. The cure of this case was of great significance, and this adjuvant nonspecific antiviral therapy could provide a template for the treatment of other such patients.