The HIV Care Cascade Measured Over Time and by Age, Sex, and Race in a Large National Integrated Care System.

HIV care cascades can evaluate programmatic success over time. However, methodologies for estimating cascade stages vary, and few have evaluated differences by demographic subgroups. We examined cascade performance over time and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity in Kaiser Permanente, providing HIV care in eight US states and Washington, DC. We created cascades for HIV+ members' age ≥13 for 2010-2012. We measured "linkage" (a visit/CD4 within 90 days of being diagnosed for new patients; ≥1 medical visit/year if established); "retention" (≥2 medical visits ≥60 days apart); filled ART (filled ≥3 months of combination ART); and viral suppression (HIV RNA <200 copies/mL last measured in year). The cascades were stratified by calendar year, sex, age, and race/ethnicity. We found men had statistically (p < 0.05) higher percent linkage, filled ART, and viral suppression for 2010 and 2011 but not for 2012. Women had significantly greater retention for all years. Annually, older age was associated (p < 0.05) with retention, filled ART, and viral suppression but not linkage. Latinos had greater (p < 0.05) retention than whites or blacks in all years, with similar retention comparing blacks and whites. Filled ART and viral suppression was increased (p < 0.05) for whites compared with all racial/ethnic groups in all years. Cascade methodology requiring success at upstream stages before measuring success at later stages (i.e., "dependent" methodology) underreported performance by up to 20% compared with evaluating each stage separately ("independent"). Thus, care results improved over time, but significant differences exist by patient demographics. Specifically, retention efforts should be targeted toward younger patients and blacks; women, blacks, and Latinos require greater ART prescribing.

Effects of depression and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor use on adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy and on clinical outcomes in HIV-infected patients.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of depression on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) adherence and clinical measures and investigate if selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) improve these measures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: In 2 large health maintenance organizations, we measured the effects of depression (with and without SSRI use) on adherence and changes in viral and immunologic control among HIV-infected patients starting a new HAART regimen. HAART adherence, HIV RNA levels, and changes in CD4 T-cell counts through 12 months were measured. RESULTS: A total of 3359 patients were evaluated; 42% had a depression diagnosis, and 15% used SSRIs during HAART. Depression without SSRI use was associated with significantly decreased odds of achieving > or =90% adherence to HAART (odds ratio [OR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70 to 0.98; P = 0.03). Depression was associated with significantly lower odds of an HIV RNA level <500 copies/mL (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.95; P = 0.02). Depressed patients compliant with SSRI medication (>80% adherence to SSRI) had HAART adherence and viral control statistically similar to nondepressed HIV-infected patients taking HAART. Comparing depressed with nondepressed HIV-infected patients, CD4 T-cell responses were statistically similar; among depressed patients, those compliant with SSRI had statistically greater increases in CD4 cell responses. CONCLUSIONS: Depression significantly worsens HAART adherence and HIV viral control. Compliant SSRI use is associated with improved HIV adherence and laboratory parameters.

Efficacy and safety of ritonavir-boosted and unboosted atazanavir among antiretroviral-naïve patients.

PURPOSE: Evaluate responses and safety of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir ("boosted atazanavir") compared to unboosted atazanavir among antiretroviral-naïve patients in the clinical managed care setting. METHOD: Observational cohort analysis of atazanavir use (comparing ritonavir-boosted to non-boosted) at Kaiser Permanente and Group Health Cooperative from 2003 to 2006. Antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating atazanavir were followed through 52 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: 443 patients were prescribed atazanavir (69 non-boosted; 15.5%). Boosted and non-boosted atazanavir groups were similar with respect to gender and age. Boosted atazanavir use was associated with greater odds achieving HIV RNA <400 c/mL (odds ratio [OR] = 3.24, p = .008), greater decrease in HIV RNA (-0.37 log10/mL, p = .03), greater increase in CD4 T-cell count (+59 cells/microL, p = .01), and greater increase in total bilirubin (+1.21 mg/dL as opposed to +0.56 mg/dL, p .001). There were no statistically significant differences for glucose, liver transaminases, total cholesterol, or LDL cholesterol elevations. There were greater odds of maximal viral control when atazanavir was combined with tenofovir or zidovudine in combination with lamivudine (or emtricitabine). CONCLUSIONS: Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir is associated with greater virologic control and immune response through 52 weeks compared to non-boosted atazanavir, without greater risk of adverse events except elevated bilirubin. Thus, ritonavir-boosted atazanavir is the preferred method of prescribing atazanavir.