Hospital Admission Factors Independently Affecting the Risk of Mortality of COVID-19 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is a disease characterized by high in-hospital mortality, which seems to be dependent on many predisposing factors. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical symptoms, abnormalities in the results of laboratory tests, and coexisting chronic diseases that independently affected the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the records of patients with COVID-19 who were hospitalized from 6 March 2020 to 30 November 2021. RESULTS: Out of the entire group of 2138 patients who were analyzed, 12.82% died during hospitalization. In-hospital mortality was independently associated with older age (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.20-1.97); lower arterial blood oxygen saturation (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99); the presence of a neoplasm (OR 4.45, 95% CI 2.01-9.62), a stomach ulcer (OR 3.35, 95% CI 0.94-11.31), and dementia (OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.36-8.26); a higher score on the SOFA scale (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.52-1.99); higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.12); higher N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT pro BNP) (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11); and lower total bilirubin in blood concentration (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: We found that low oxygen saturation, old age, and the coexistence of cancer, gastric ulcers, and dementia syndrome were variables that independently increased mortality during hospitalization due to COVID-19. Moreover, we found that decreased platelet count and bilirubin concentration and increased levels of LDH and NT-proBNP were laboratory test results that independently indicated a higher risk of mortality. We also confirmed the usefulness of the SOFA scale in predicting treatment results. The ability to identify mortality risk factors on admission to hospital will facilitate both adjusting the intensity of treatment and the monitoring of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Risk factors for antiretroviral therapy (ART) discontinuation in a large multinational trial of early ART initiators.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate potential causes of higher risk of treatment interruptions within the multicountry Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment (START) trial in 2015. METHODS: We defined baseline as the date of starting antiretroviral therapy (ART) and a treatment interruption as discontinuing ART for at least 2 weeks. Participants were stratified by randomization arm and followed from baseline to earliest end date of the initial phase of START, death, date of consent withdrawn or date of first treatment interruption. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for factors that may predict treatment interruptions in each arm. RESULTS: Of the 3438 participants who started ART, 2286 were in the immediate arm and 1152 in the deferred arm. 12.9% of people in the immediate arm and 10.5% of people in the deferred arm experienced at least one treatment interruption by 3 years after starting ART. In adjusted analyses, age [hazard ratio for 35-50 years: 0.75 (95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.97) and >50 years: 0.53 (0.33-0.80) vs. <35 years], education status [hazard ratio for postgraduate education vs. less than high-school education (0.23 (0.10-0.50))] and region [hazard ratio for United States vs. Europe/Israel (3.16 (2.09-4.77))] were significantly associated with treatment interruptions in the immediate arm. In the deferred arm, age and education status were significantly associated with treatment interruptions. CONCLUSION: Within START, we identified younger age and lower educational attainment as potential causes of ART interruption. There is a need to strengthen adherence advice and wider social support in younger people and those of lower education status.

Dual therapy based on raltegravir and boosted protease inhibitors - the experience of Polish centers.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to present the experience of Polish centers regarding dual therapy based on the integrase inhibitor raltegravir (RAL) and ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) for treating treatment-naïve and -experienced HIV-infected patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The paper concerns a retrospective multicenter study. The medical databases of six main Polish HIV centers from January 2009 to December 2014 were analyzed for the use of combined antiretroviral treatment consisting of RAL + PI/r. This study included 126 HIV-infected patients receiving RAL + PI/r therapy, of whom 17 patients were treatment-naive and 109 patients were treatment-experienced. RESULTS: In treatment-experienced patients, the most common reasons for the introduction of a RAL + PI/r regimen were virologic failure and impaired renal function (45 of 109 patients). In the treatment-naïve group kidney disease was the cause of the RAL + PI/r regimen in 3 of 17 participants. In treatment-experienced patients, 80% of individuals still were on RAL + PI/r treatment after 12 months, 65% after 24 months and 53% of subjects after 60 months. In both groups, the simplification of the antiretroviral regimen was the most common reason for discontinuation of RAL + PI/r based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In antiretroviral-experienced patients the dual therapy based on RAL + PI/s is safe and effective. In antiretroviral-naïve patients the RAL + PI/r regimen is rarely used in Poland.

Meeting the WHO 90% target: antiretroviral treatment efficacy in Poland is associated with baseline clinical patient characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: Modern combined antiretroviral therapies (cART) allow to effectively suppress HIV-1 viral load, with the 90% virologic success rate, meeting the WHO target in most clinical settings. The aim of this study was to analyse antiretroviral treatment efficacy in Poland and to identify variables associated with virologic suppression. M: ethods Cross-sectional data on 5152 (56.92% of the countrywide treated at the time-point of analysis) patients on cART for more than six months with at least one HIV-RNA measurement in 2016 were collected from 14 Polish centres. Patients' characteristics and treatment type-based outcomes were analysed for the virologic suppression thresholds of <50 and <200 HIV-RNA copies/ml. CART was categorized into two nucleos(t)ide (2NRTI) plus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase (NNRTI) inhibitors, 2NRTI plus protease (PI) inhibitor, 2NRTI plus integrase (InI) inhibitor, nucleos(t)ide sparing PI/r+InI and three drug class regimens. For statistics Chi-square and U-Mann Whitney tests and adjusted multivariate logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: Virologic suppression rates of <50 copies/mL were observed in 4672 (90.68%) and <200 copies/mL in 4934 (95.77%) individuals. In univariate analyses, for the suppression threshold <50 copies/mL higher efficacy was noted for 2NRTI+NNRTI-based combinations (94.73%) compared to 2NRTI+PI (89.93%), 2NRTI+InI (90.61%), nucleos(t)ide sparing PI/r+InI (82.02%) and three drug class regimens (74.49%) (p < 0.0001), with less pronounced but significant differences for the threshold of 200 copies/mL [2NRTI+NNRTI-97.61%, 2NRTI+PI-95.27%, 2NRTI+InI-96.61%, PI/r+InI- 95.51% and 86.22% for three drug class cART) (p < 0.0001). However, in multivariate model, virologic efficacy for viral load <50 copies/mL was similar across treatment groups with significant influence by history of AIDS [OR:1.48 (95%CI:1.01-2.17) if AIDS diagnosed, p = 0.046], viral load < 5 log copies/mL at care entry [OR:1.47 (95%CI:1.08-2.01), p = 0.016], baseline lymphocyte CD4 count ≥200 cells/µL [OR:1.72 (95%CI:1.04-2.78), p = 0.034] and negative HCV serology [OR:1.97 (95%CI:1.29-2.94), p = 0.002]. For viral load threshold <200 copies/mL higher likelihood of virologic success was only associated with baseline lymphocyte CD4 count ≥200 cells/µL [OR:2.08 (95%CI:1.01-4.35), p = 0.049] and negative HCV status [OR:2.84 (95%CI:1.52-5.26), p = 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Proportion of virologically suppressed patients is in line with WHO treatment target confirming successful application of antiretroviral treatment strategy in Poland. Virological suppression rates depend on baseline patient characteristics, which should guide individualized antiretroviral tre0atment decisions.

Efficacy and safety of nucleoside-sparing regimen based on raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir in HIV-1-infected treatment-experienced patients.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of dual therapy containing raltegravir (RAL) and ritonavir boosted darunavir (DRV/r) in HIV-1-infected treatment-experienced patients. METHOD: Retrospective analysis of 81 HIV-1-infected treatment-experienced patients (56 male and 25 female, 5 Polish centers) who switched to RAL/DRV/r. RESULTS: The main reasons for the introduction of dual therapy were renal dysfunction (16/81 patients-19.8%) and virologic failure on previous regimens (15/81 patients-18.5%). At 48 weeks the treatment was continued in 58/81 (71.6% of patients). In three patients the therapy was discontinued because of virologic failure. However, no mutations to DRV or integrase inhibitors (InI) were detected. At 48 weeks of treatment CD4+ lymphocyte count increased statistically significantly (median 121 cells/µL) P < 0.005. The main reasons for the discontinuation of therapy were treatment simplification (11/23-47.8% patients), adverse events (7/23 patients 30.4%), virologic failure (3/23 patients 13.0%). All patients who switched to RAL/DRV/r therapy because of prior renal impairment were maintained on the treatment for 48 weeks. In this group, before the introduction of dual therapy eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate) <60 mL/min/1.72 m2 was reported in nine patients and after 48 weeks in four patients (56.3% vs 25%) (P > 0.05). We found a statistically significant decrease in the prevalence of proteinuria or eGFR <60 mL/min/1.72 m2 (93.8% vs 37.5%; P = 0.004 before and after the introduction of dual therapy, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dual therapy was effective and safe for the vast majority of antiretroviral-experienced subjects. Such therapy can be recommended especially for patients with renal impairment or NRTIs intolerance.

Factors associated with the first antiretroviral therapy modification in older HIV-1 positive patients.

BACKGROUND: Rates of first antiretroviral therapy (cART) modifications are high in most observational studies. The age-related differences in treatment duration and characteristics of first cART modifications remain underinvestigated. With increasing proportion of older patients in HIV population it is important to better understand age-related treatment effects. METHODS: Patients were included into this analysis, if being cART naïve at the first visit at the clinic. Follow-up time was measured from the first visit date until first cART modification or 28 February 2013. First cART modification was defined as any change in the third drug component i.e. protease inhibitor (PI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), integrase inhibitor or fusion inhibitor. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify factors related to first cART modification in three age groups: <30, 30-50 and >50. RESULTS: In total 2027 patients with 14,965 person-years of follow-up (PYFU) were included. The oldest group included 136 patients with 1901, middle group 1202 with 8416 PYFU and youngest group consisted of 689 patients with 4648 PYFU. Median follow-up time was 5.8 (IQR 3.4-9.4) years, median time on first cART was 4.4 (IQR 2.1-8.5) years. 72.4 % of patients started PI-based and 26.1 % NNRTI-based regimen. In total 1268 (62.5 %) patients had cART modification (non-adherence 30.8 %, toxicity 29.6 %). Durability of first cART was the best in patients over 50 y.o. (log-rank test, p = 0.001). Factors associated with discontinuation in this group were late presentation (HR 0.45, [95 % CI 0.23-0.90], p = 0.02) and PI use (HR 2.17, [95 % CI 1.18-4.0], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of first cART modifications or discontinuation were comparable in all groups; however older patients were significantly longer on first cART regimen.

Efficacy and safety of lersivirine (UK-453,061) versus efavirenz in antiretroviral treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients: week 48 primary analysis results from an ongoing, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase IIb trial.

OBJECTIVE: A 96-week clinical study was planned to estimate the antiviral activity and safety of lersivirine in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: This ongoing international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, Phase IIb exploratory study evaluates the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of lersivirine or 1 of efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive lersivirine (500 or 750 mg once daily) or efavirenz (600 mg once daily), each administered with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (300 mg/200 mg, once daily). The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter (missing/discontinuation = failure) at week 48. RESULTS: For the 193 patients in the study, baseline mean plasma HIV-1 RNA was 4.7 log10 copies per milliliter, and median CD4 cell count was 312 cells per cubic millimeter. At week 48, the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter was 78.5% (51/65), 78.5% (51/65), and 85.7% (54/63) in the lersivirine 500 mg, 750 mg, and efavirenz groups, respectively. CD4 cell count changes from baseline were similar across groups. Virologic failure occurred in 7 patients (11%) in each of the lersivirine groups and 3 patients (5%) in the efavirenz group. The pattern of lersivirine resistance was distinct from other nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Overall incidences of all-causality treatment-related or grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) or AE-related discontinuations were lower with lersivirine than with efavirenz, and serious AEs occurred at similar rates across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both lersivirine doses showed broadly comparable efficacy to efavirenz over 48 weeks in treatment-naive patients, with different AE profiles from efavirenz.

Safety and Efficacy in HIV-1-Infected Patients Treated with Ritonavir-Boosted Saquinavir Mesylate.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of ritonavir-boosted saquinavir 1000/100 mg twice daily administered as a 500 mg film-coated tablet in HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: In this open-label, observational, 24-week survey conducted in 8 European countries, eligible HIV-infected participants had been prescribed saquinavir/ritonavir in combination with other nonprotease inhibitor (PI) antiretroviral agents as part of their HIV treatment regimen. The safety (grade 3 or 4 adverse events [AEs]), tolerability (by an investigator-reported subjective rating system), and efficacy (the percentage of participants with <50 and <400 copies/mL HIV RNA and change from baseline in mean CD4+ cell count) were analyzed for the overall study population and 7 subpopulations. RESULTS: The enrolled population included 2122 participants with 1908 completing the study; 44 (2.1%) withdrew prematurely because of AEs, including 7 nontreatment-related deaths. There were 33 grade 3 or 4 AEs in 29 (1.4%) participants; 7 AEs in 7 (0.3%) participants were considered treatment-related. Tolerability was reported to be "very good" or "good" in 42% and 25% of participants, respectively. From baseline to week 24, the proportion of participants with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL increased from 31.2% to 47.6% and the proportion with <400 copies/mL increased from 42.5% to 61.4%; the mean CD4+ cell count increased by 75 cells/microL. In the subpopulation analysis, the greatest efficacy benefits occurred in participants who were treatment-naïve and in those not having received prior PI therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the saquinavir 500 mg film-coated tablet resulted in few grade 3 or 4 AEs and was well tolerated and effective in a broad population of patients.

Pharmacokinetic monitoring of HIV-1 protease inhibitors in the antiretroviral therapy.

Combination therapy with protease inhibitors (PIs) is used for the treatment of patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). To achieve optimal drug concentrations for viral suppression and avoidance of drug toxicity, therapeutic drug monitoring of PIs levels has been considered essential. In this study an analytical procedure for simultaneous monitoring the plasma concentrations of a total four protease inhibitors: indinavir, lopinavir, nelfinavir and saquinavir was presented. The plasma samples were liquid/liquid extracted and subjected to high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis. The lopinavir and saquinavir in the patient plasma samples were monitored by ultraviolet detection at 215 nm. Extraction procedure using methyl tert-butyl ether and the mobile phase consisted from acetonitrile with phosphate buffer on a Symmetry C18 column were used to monitor these two compounds. Linearity of the method was obtained in the concentration range of 0.1 - 15.0 mg/mL for all four protease inhibitors. Under steady state conditions, the plasma concentrations of protein inhibitors in 23 patients were determined and area under the plasma concentration-time curve was estimated to maintain optimal viral suppression. We developed a simple and specific method for the simultaneous determination of lopinavir and saquinavir.

Switching from a toxicity-causing antiretroviral to enfuvirtide in patients with HIV: the SWITCH TOX study.

PURPOSE: Treatment-related toxicities frequently limit antiretroviral therapy for patients with HIV-1 infection. This study evaluated the changes in treatment-limiting toxicities when the primary toxicity-causing agent was replaced with enfuvirtide. METHOD: Adult patients with HIV-1 infection (N = 91) with antiretroviral treatment-limiting toxicities were enrolled in this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, 24-week study. Enfuvirtide 90 mg bid was administered instead of a single toxicity-causing component of the previous antiretroviral regimen. Changes in severity of antiretroviral toxicity, safety, tolerability, and maintenance of efficacy of the enfuvirtide regimen were evaluated at baseline and at 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Eighty-four percent of participants completed the study. Injection site reactions with enfuvirtide caused premature withdrawal in 5 participants (5%); a further 10 participants (11%) also withdrew early. Overall antiretroviral-related, treatment-limiting toxicities improved or resolved in 53% of participants switching to enfuvirtide, remained unchanged in 43%, and worsened in 3%. At Week 24, 66% of participants (60/91; intent-to-treat population) maintained or improved their viral load category and 73% of participants (66/91) maintained or improved their CD4 cell counts. CONCLUSION: Replacing a toxicity-causing antiretroviral with enfuvirtide may reduce toxicity without compromising the efficacy of different antiretroviral regimens.

[Post-exposure prophylaxis of HIV infection in out-patient clinic of hospital for infectious diseases in Warsaw in 2001-2002]. / Profilaktyka poekspozycyjna zakazenia hiv prowadzona w poradni profilaktyczno-leczniczej wojewódzkiego szpitala zakaznego w Warszawie w latach 2001-2002.

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) after exposure to potentially infectious material remains one of the most important elements of HIV prevention. In some cases it requires antiretroviral drugs administration, which might cause serious side effects. The following analysis was performed to identify adverse events of antiretroviral therapy in PEP as well as to evaluate patients adherence to consultations and tests schedule. Data were collected from standard forms filled in by physicians during consultation visits in 2001-2002. To identify HIV infection HIV Duo-quick test (BioMerieux, Vidas) was performed on the first visit, then after 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. Among 177 patients (pts) there were 79 exposures in health care workers (HCWs), 98 in non-HCWs. In 70 of HCWs exposure was by needle-stick injury (NSI), in 3 cases by other medical instrument. In non-HCWs 88 cases exposure was by NSI and in three cases by human's bite. Only one HIV test was performed in 25 cases (31,6%) in HCWs group vs 16 pts (16,3%) in non-HCWs group (p=0.016). Twelve HCWs (15,2%) and 9 non-HCWs did not come back for the test result (p=0,2). The mean time from exposure to initiating PEP was 6 hours 48 min in HCWs vs 7 hours 16 min in non-HCWs group (p=0,77). Except 2 cases of d4T+ddl in HCWs group all others were AZT+3TC (63 HCWs and 91 non-HCWs). Three drug regimen with PI as third drug (indinavir or nelfinavir) was used in 14 cases of HCWs and 7 non-HCWs. Side effects (SE) were observed in 25 HCWs (31,6%) vs 37 non-HCWs (37,8%) (p=0,467), leading to PEP discontinuation in 11 vs 4 respectively (p=0,0028). PEP was continued despite SE in 14 HCWs vs 33 non-HCWs (p=0,007). There was no post-exposure HIV infection. Adherence to consultations and tests schedule was better in non-HCWs. Although the risk of infection was potentially lower in that group pts showed up and tested more regularly, less pts did not collect the test result. Even though tolerability in terms of SE frequency was slightly better in HCWs group, non-HCWs were more willing to take ARV for four weeks even in presence of SE. More of non-HCWs followed full drug prophylaxis.