RESUMEN
Background: Human immunodeficiency virus drug resistance (HIVDR) can negatively impact the effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy (ART). We aimed to estimate the prevalence of pretreatment HIVDR (PDR) among ART initiators and the prevalence of viral load (VL) suppression and acquired HIVDR among individuals receiving ART for 12 ± 3 months (ADR12) and ≥48 months (ADR48) in El Salvador. Methods: Nationally representative cross-sectional PDR, ADR12 and ADR48 surveys were conducted among adults with HIV from October 2018 to August 2019, following World Health Organization-recommended methods. Demographic and clinic data and blood specimens were collected. Results: Two hundred sixty participants were enrolled in the PDR survey, 230 in ADR12 and 425 in ADR48. Twenty-seven percent (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.1%-39.9%) of ART initiators had PDR to efavirenz or nevirapine. The prevalence of VL suppression was 88.8% (95% CI, 83.1%-92.8%) in ADR12 and 80.5% (95% CI, 76.6%-84.0%) in ADR48 surveys. Among people with HIV receiving a first-line nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based ART regimens and with unsuppressed VL, the prevalence of ADR to efavirenz or nevirapine was 72.0% (95% CI, 32.3%-93.3%) and 95.0% (68.5%-99.4%) in the ADR12 and ADR28 surveys, respectively. ADR12 to boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) or integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) was not observed. ADR48 was 1.3% (95% CI, 0.2%-9.6%) and 2.1% (0.3%-13.7%), respectively. Conclusions: Programmatic improvements in ART delivery are urgently needed in El Salvador to address the high levels of resistance to efavirenz or nevirapine among ART initiators and the low VL suppression prevalence among individuals on treatment.
RESUMEN
Objetivo: Caracecterizar morfológica e inmunohitoquimicamente el carcinoma apocrino mamamario. Materiales y métodos: Este estudio toma 24 casos diagnosticados como carcinomas apocrinos o con rasgos apocrinos, clasificándolos como puros y mixtos, reconociendo la presencia de componentes in situ asociados, para evaluar la expresión inmunohistoquími- ca del receptor de andrógenos (AR), receptor de estrógenos (ER), receptor de progesterona (PR), gross cistyc disease proteína (GCDFP-15), BCL2, KI67 y ERB-2 tanto en las áreas infiltrantes como intraepiteliales, estudiando adicionalmente la amplificación génica del ERB-2 en el cromosoma 17 por métodos de FISH. Resultados: Los tumores clasificados como puros correspondieron a 11 casos que expresan la siguiente positividad inmunohistoquímica en las áreas infiltrativas: AR (100%), ER (18%), PR (18%), GCDFP (63%), BCL2 (54%), KI67 (28%) y ERB-2(28%) con una positividad de GCDFP-15(100%) en la áreas in situ. Los tumores mixtos correspondientes a 13 casos mostraron la siguiente positividad inmunohistoquímica: AR (58%), ER (46%), PR (46%), GCDFP-15 (50%), BCL2 (33%), KI67 (58%) y ERB-2(16%), con una positividad de GCDFP-15 (100%) en las áreas in situ. Las áreas in situ expresan GCDFP-15 en todos los casos con una reducción de la expresión en las zonas de infiltración del mismo al 63 y 50% en los tumores puros y mixtos, respectivamente. Conclusiones: Los carcinomas mamarios apocrinos puros deben ser distinguidos de los mixtos mediante un examen morfológico detallado y por su perfil inmunohistoquímico (AR+, ER-, PR-/GCDFP+, BCL2+/-, KI67-, ERB2/-)...
Objetive: To recognize the morphologic and inmunohistochemical aspects of cases of apocrine mamary carcinomas. Matherials and methods: Twenty four cases of apocrine mamary carcinomas and ductal mamary carcinomas with apocrine diferetiation (mix apocine carcinomas) were studied morphologically and inmunohistochemiclly detected androgen receptor (AR), progesterone receptor (PR), gross cystic disease protein-15(GCDFP-15), BCL2, KI67 and CERB-2 in infiltrative and in situ areas of the same tumor and adicionally demonstrated the gene amplificacion of ERB-2 in the 17 cromosome by FISH analysis. Results: Eleven cases of pure apocrine carcinomas were encountered, inmunohistochemically positivity was as follows: AR (100%), ER (18%), PR (18%), GCDFP(63%)BCL2 (54%), KI67 (28%), and ERB-2(28%) with positivity of GCDFP-15(100%) over in situ areas; the rest 13 cases of mix apocrine carcinomas expresed positivity as follows: AR (58%), ER (46% ), PR (46% ), GCDFP-15 (50%), BCL-2 (33%), KI67 (58%) and ERB-2 (16%). In situ areas expresed of GCDFP-15 in all cases (100%) with a reduccion of the expression in the infiltrating areas of the same case to 63% and 50% of pure and mix tumors respectivilly. Conclution: Pure apocrine carcinoma most be distinguied of the mix apocrine forms of ductal and lobular carcinomas by a gently morfologic analysis of the tumor and the following combination would allow for and immunohistochemical identification: AR+, ER-, PR...
