Cardiovascular Events in an Inner-City HIV Clinic and Relationship to Abacavir Versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate-Containing Antiretroviral Regimens.

Following cardiovascular events (CVE) among people living with HIV (PLWH) is essential. Abacavir (ABC)'s impact on CVE challenges clinicians. We characterized CVE at our HIV clinic associated with ABC versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). This was a retrospective study of PLWH who started combination antiretroviral therapy with no prior CVE. Patients were evaluated as antiretroviral naive or antiretroviral experienced. Regimens included the following: always-ABC, always-TDF, first-ABC-switched-to-TDF, and first-TDF-switched-to-ABC regimens. Frequencies, rates, and Poisson regression were used to analyze CVE (cardiovascular/cerebrovascular) and were stratified with an a priori cutoff of before or after January 1, 2009. 1,440/2,852 patients were antiretroviral naive; 658 on always-ABC regimens, 1,186 on always-TDF regimens, 737 first-ABC-switched-to-TDF regimens, and 271 first-TDF-switched-to-ABC regimens. Seventy seven CVE occurred overall [16 naive vs. 61 experienced (p < .0001)]. Sixty events were cardiovascular and 17 cerebrovascular (p < .0001). Sixty-nine CVE occurred before 2009 and eight after (p < .0001). There were 5.65 CVE-per-1,000-years [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.23-9.87] in the always-ABC, 1.95 CVE-per-1,000-years (95% CI 1.08-3.51) in the always-TDF, 2.01 CVE-per-1,000-years (95% CI 1.14-3.56) in the ABC-switched-to-TDF, and 1.82 CVE-per-1,000-years (95% CI 0.77-4.30) in TDF-switched-to-ABC (p <.01). Multivariable Poisson regression incidence rate ratios (IRRs) revealed that being on ABC-only (IRR 2.89; 95% CI 2.13-3.94), age (IRR 1.06 per year; 95% CI 1.04-1.07), and smoking (IRR for current 2.81; 95% CI 1.97-3.99; IRR for former 2.49; 95% CI 1.72-3.61) increased risk of CVE. Thus, in our clinic, CVE rates were increased in those on ABC and adds to the body of literature suggesting concern.

Alcohol consumption, substance use, and depression in relation to HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) nonadherence among gay, bisexual, and other men-who-have-sex-with-men.

BACKGROUND: Although HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) substantially diminishes the likelihood of HIV acquisition, poor adherence can decrease the HIV-protective benefits of PrEP. The present investigation sought to identify the extent to which alcohol consumption, substance use, and depression were linked to PrEP nonadherence among gay, bisexual, and other men-who-have-sex-with-men (gbMSM). METHODS: gbMSM (age ≥ 18, prescribed PrEP for ≥3 months) were recruited from two clinics in Toronto, Canada for an e-survey assessing demographics; PrEP nonadherence (4-day PrEP-focused ACTG assessment); hazardous and harmful alcohol use (AUDIT scores of 8-15 and 16+, respectively); moderate/high risk substance use (NIDA M-ASSIST scores > 4); depression (CESD-10 scores ≥10); and other PrEP-relevant factors. The primary outcome, PrEP nonadherence, entailed missing one or more PrEP doses over the past 4 days. A linear-by-linear test of association assessed whether increasing severity of alcohol use (i.e., based on AUDIT categories) was linked to a greater occurrence of PrEP nonadherence. Univariate logistic regression was employed to determine factors associated with PrEP nonadherence, and factors demonstrating univariate associations at the p < .10 significance level were included in a multivariate logistic regression model. Additive and interactive effects involving key significant factors were assessed through logistic regression to evaluate potential syndemic-focused associations. RESULTS: A total of 141 gbMSM (Mean age = 37.9, white = 63.1%) completed the e-survey. Hazardous/harmful drinking (31.9%), moderate/high risk substance use (43.3%), and depression (23.7%) were common; and one in five participants (19.9%) reported PrEP nonadherence. Increasing alcohol use level was significantly associated with a greater likelihood of nonadherence (i.e., 15.6, 25.0, and 44.4% of low-risk, hazardous, and harmful drinkers reported nonadherence, respectively (χ2(1) = 4.79, p = .029)). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that harmful alcohol use (AOR = 6.72, 95%CI = 1.49-30.33, p = .013) and moderate/high risk cocaine use (AOR = 3.11, 95%CI = 1.01-9.59, p = .049) independently predicted nonadherence. Furthermore, an additive association emerged, wherein the likelihood of PrEP nonadherence was highest among those who were hazardous/harmful drinkers and moderate/high risk cocaine users (OR = 2.25, 95%CI = 1.19-4.25, p = .013). Depression was not associated with nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need to integrate alcohol- and substance-focused initiatives into PrEP care for gbMSM. Such initiatives, in turn, may help improve PrEP adherence and reduce the potential for HIV acquisition among this group.

Time to Viremia for Patients Taking their First Antiretroviral Regimen and the Subsequent Resistance Profiles.

BACKGROUND: The resistance profiles for patients on first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens after viremia have not been well studied in community clinic settings in the modern treatment era. OBJECTIVE: To determine time to viremia and the ART resistance profiles of viremic patients. METHODS: HIV-positive patients aged ≥16 years initiating a three-drug regimen were retrospectively identified from 01/01/06 to 12/31/12. The regimens were a backbone of two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and a third agent: a protease inhibitor (PI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), or an integrase inhibitor (II). Time to viremia was compared using a proportional hazards model, adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Resistance profiles were described in those with baseline and follow-up genotypes. RESULTS: For 653 patients, distribution of third-agent use and viremia was: 244 (37%) on PIs with 80 viremia, 364 (56%) on NNRTIs with 84 viremia, and 45 (7%) on II with 11 viremia. Only for NNRTIs, time to viremia was longer than PIs (p = 0.04) for patients with a CD4 count ≥200 cells/mm(3). Of the 175 with viremia, 143 (82%) had baseline and 37 (21%) had follow-up genotype. Upon viremia, emerging ART resistance was rare. One new NNRTI (Y181C) mutation was identified and three patients taking PI-based regimens developed NRTI mutations (M184 V, M184I, and T215Y). CONCLUSIONS: Time to viremia for NNRTIs was longer than PIs. With viremia, ART resistance rarely developed without PI or II mutations, but with a few NRTI mutations in those taking PI-based regimens, and NNRTI mutations in those taking NNRTI-based regimens.

Time to virologic failure for patients taking their first antiretroviral regimen and the subsequent resistance profiles.

INTRODUCTION: The resistance profiles of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens after virologic failure have yet to be studied in a clinic setting in the modern treatment era. Time to virologic failure among three standard first-line regimens and the resistance profiles of these failures were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All HIV-positive persons aged 16 and over starting a three-drug first-line ART regimen were retrospectively identified at a Toronto community clinic (1 January 2006-1 January 2013). The regimens included a backbone of two NRTIs and a third agent; a PI, an NNRTI, or an II. Patients must have been on treatment for at least 14 days and have at least one VL test within 6 months after starting treatment. The primary outcome was virologic failure defined as either: no suppression by 6 months, or after suppression, two consecutive, detectable VL200 copies/mL at least 14 days apart or one VL>200 copies/mL. Time to failure was compared using a proportional hazards model adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Resistance profiles of NRTIs and third agents are described in patients with virologic failure who had both baseline and virologic failure genotypes. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty patients (93% male) were included with a mean age of 38.9 and a median follow-up period of 35.3 (32.2-39.3) months. Distribution of third agent use was: PI 37.3% (n=246), NNRTI 55.9% (n=369) and II 6.8% (n=45). Virologic failures occurred in 81/246 (33%) with PI, 87/369 (24%) with NNRTI and 11/45 (24%) with II. Compare to PIs, time to failure was longer with NNRTIs (p=0.0013) and similar for IIs (p=0.1562). No evidence that failure with NNRTIs was different from IIs (p=0.9139). Of the 660 patients, 567 (86%) had a baseline genotype. Of the 567 patients, 179 had virological failure. Of the 179, 145(81%) had a baseline genotype and only 37 (21%) had both a baseline and follow-up genotype. Upon failure, emerging ART resistance was rare. No new PI or II mutations were identified and one new NNRTI (Y181C) mutation was identified. Three patients taking PI-based regimens developed NRTI mutations (M184V, M184I, T215Y). CONCLUSIONS: Time to virologic failure was significantly greater in the NNRTI group compared to the PI group. If failure did occur, ART resistance rarely developed with no PI mutations but a few NRTI mutations in those taking PI-based regimens, and NNRTI mutations in those taking NNRTI-based regimen.

Recognizing cognitive and psychiatric changes in the post-highly active antiretroviral therapy era.

Amid numerous complications that plague the health and quality of life of people living with HIV, neurocognitive and psychiatric illnesses pose unique challenges. While there remains uncertainty with respect to the pathophysiology surrounding these disorders, their adverse implications are increasingly recognized. Left undetected, they have the potential to significantly impact patient well being, adherence to antiretroviral treatment and overall health outcomes. As such, early identification of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) and psychiatric illnesses will be paramount in the proactive management of affected patients. The present review focuses on strategies to ensure optimal screening and detection of HAND, depression and substance abuse in routine practice. For each topic, currently available screening methods are discussed. These include identification of risk factors, recognition of relevant symptomatology and an update on validated screening tools that can be efficiently implemented in the clinical setting. Specifically addressed in the present review are the International HIV Dementia Scale, a novel screening equation and algorithm for HAND, as well as brief, validated, verbal questionnaires for detection of depression and substance abuse. Adequate understanding and usage of these screening mechanisms can ensure effective use of resources by distinguishing patients who require referral for more extensive diagnostic procedures from those who likely do not.

Parmi les multiples complications qui compromettent la santé et la qualité de vie des personnes qui vivent avec le VIH, les maladies neurocognitives et psychiatriques comportent des défis uniques. Il reste de l'incertitude quant à la physiopathologie de ces troubles, mais leurs conséquences négatives sont de plus en plus établies. Non décelées, elles peuvent nuire considérablement au bien-être du patient, à sa compliance à l'antivirothérapie et à son issue de santé globale. C'est pourquoi il est capital de dépister rapidement les troubles neurocognitifs associés au VIH (TNAV) et les maladies psychiatriques dans la prise en charge proactive des patients atteints. La présente analyse porte sur des stratégies pour garantir le dépistage et la détection optimales des TNAV, de la dépression et de la consommation abusive d'alcool et de drogues dans la pratique habituelle. Pour chaque sujet, les méthodes de dépistage existantes sont exposées,soitladéterminationdesfacteursderisqueetdelasymptomatologie pertinente ainsi qu'une mise à jour des outils de dépistage validés qui peuvent être mis en œuvre avec efficacité en milieu clinique. L'échelle de démence du VIH, un nouvel outil et algorithme de dépistage des TNAV et de brefs questionnaires verbaux validés pour déceler la dépression et la consommation excessive d'alcool et de drogues. Si on comprend et qu'on utilise bien ces mécanismes de dépistage, on peut s'assurer d'une utilisation efficace des ressources en séparant les patients qui ont besoin d'être aiguillés vers des interventions diagnostiques plus poussées de ceux qui n'en ont probablement pas besoin.