HIV positive and treated for cancer: The convergence of pressures "invisible" in HIV and "visible" in cancer.

OBJECTIVE: An increasing number of people living with HIV are living longer and experiencing a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer. Little is known of their experience and quality of care. This paper presents the findings of a study exploring experiences of cancer care, from the perspectives of both patients and healthcare professionals. METHODS: Thematic analysis of participant narratives provided in longitudinal, semi-structured interviews with 17 people, recruited from three London sites between 2015 and 2017. Focused ethnography comprising 27 hr of participant observation and seven semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals. RESULTS: Both HIV and cancer have a powerful, combined impact; in cancer, the impact is visible; in HIV, it is generally hidden. Patients and staff experienced particular challenges in the cancer setting. Patients felt responsible for their HIV management and described being excluded from clinical trials. Both staff and patients encountered difficulties around the management of information relating to HIV. CONCLUSION: This dual diagnosis has a profound and negative effect on patients' experiences and potential outcomes. Improvement depends on interventions that acknowledge the shared social narrative and impact of HIV-related stigma so that this burden is not carried by the patient alone.

Insights into the social context of living with a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer: a qualitative, thematic analysis of popular discourse in London newspapers.

As growing numbers of people living with HIV also develop cancer, a holistic understanding of their experiences is essential to the provision of patient centred care. Both conditions are linked to powerful beliefs in our society that may affect experiences. This study explored how HIV and cancer were represented in UK newspapers to gain insight into the social context of living with a dual diagnosis. We performed an initial content analysis of HIV articles and of cancer articles published in the free London newspapers, The Metro and The Evening Standard between 2012 and 2017, followed by qualitative thematic analysis and in-depth analysis of selected articles of exemplar cases. Both conditions were presented very differently. The underlying subtext was that cancer could happen to any of us. HIV was framed as a potentially dangerous, stigmatising phenomenon affecting "others". Popular discourse about HIV within news media remains largely negative and stigmatising. People living with a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer may choose to prioritise the sharing of the more socially acceptable condition, cancer, in order to access support. The negotiation of cancer healthcare services is likely to be adversely influenced by the social burden of HIV related stigma.

Exploring the views and experiences of HIV positive patients treated for cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to find out what is known about patients' experiences of a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer. We systematically searched the following databases; MEDLINE (Ovid Version); CINAHL Plus; PsycINFO and EMBASE from inception to June 2016 for studies that included patients with a dual diagnosis of cancer and HIV and focused on patient experiences. Studies with a focus on one illness rather than a dual diagnosis, those that focused on treatment strategies and medical management, epidemiology and pathology studies and comparison studies were all excluded. The full text of the included studies were reviewed. Information on location, sample size, study design and a narrative summary of findings were extracted using a standardised format. Studies were combined thematically. 1777 records were screened by title and abstract using the selection criteria described in the methods. Eight records were reviewed in depth in full text and seven selected as eligible. The selected studies suggest that a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer has a powerful impact on individuals' behaviour. The experience of stigma was a consistent factor in all patient accounts and the strategy of selective disclosure to access support reveals how patient agency can interplay with stigma. This is an area largely unexplored in the published literature; further research into patients' experiences of a dual diagnosis of HIV and cancer will provide relevant knowledge in order to tailor and improve services.

A randomized, controlled trial comparing ganciclovir to ganciclovir plus foscarnet (each at half dose) for preemptive therapy of cytomegalovirus infection in transplant recipients.

Forty-eight patients who provided 2 consecutive blood samples that tested positive for cytomegalovirus DNA by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were randomized to receive either full-dose ganciclovir (5 mg/kg intravenously [iv] twice daily) or half-dose ganciclovir (5 mg/kg iv once daily) plus half-dose foscarnet (90 mg/kg iv once daily) for 14 days. In the ganciclovir arm, 17 (71%) of 24 patients reached the primary end point of being CMV negative by PCR within 14 days of initiation of therapy, compared with 12 (50%) of 24 patients in the ganciclovir-plus-foscarnet arm (P = .12). Toxicity was greater in the combination-therapy arm. In patients who failed to reach the primary end point, baseline virus load was 0.77 log10 higher, the replication rate before therapy was faster (1.5 vs. 2.7 days), and the viral decay rate was slower (2.9 vs. 1.1 days) after therapy. Bivariable logistic regression models identified baseline virus load, bone-marrow transplantation, and doubling time and half-life of decay as the major factors affecting response to therapy within 14 days. This study did not support a synergistic effect of ganciclovir plus foscarnet in vivo.