Low-level HIV viremia is associated with low antiretroviral prescription refill rates and social deprivation.

Optimal management of patients experiencing persistent low-level viremia (LLV) remains challenging and poorly understood. This study aimed to assess the association between poor antiretroviral treatment (ARV) adherence and persistent LLV. ADHELOW is a sub-study of the ECHEC cohort comprising HIV-infected adults with virological failure (viral load>50 copies/mL). Patients were recruited in 2013-2015 from 4 French university hospitals. Those with LLV (i.e., ≥2 viral load measurements between 50 and 500 copies/mL) were selected and matched on age and sex to 3 controls with virological suppression. The adherence rate was estimated using pharmacy-delivered prescription refills over one year. Overall, 60 patients were included (15 LLV and 45 controls). Mean age was 50.20 years, M/F sex ratio was 14 and mean EPICES (social deprivation) score was 42.90. In univariable analyses, LLV patients had significantly lower adherence (<80%: 53.30% vs. 6.67%, p < 0.01) and were more likely to have an EPICES score >40.2 (60.00% vs. 24.44%, p < 0.01). In multivariable analysis, these two variables remained significantly associated with LLV (OR 31.49, CI 95% [4.54-218.70]) and OR 11.00 (CI 95% [1.87-218.70], respectively). Poor long-term treatment adherence, estimated by prescription refills, was strongly associated with LLV. This reinforces the message that adherence counseling should be the primary intervention to overcome LLV.

Immuno-virological and clinical impacts of treating cancer in patients living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Patients living with HIV (PLHIV) are increasingly being affected by cancer. However, data evaluating the long-term impact of cancer treatment on HIV course are sparse. METHODS: To determine whether anticancer treatments detrimentally impact HIV course, we conducted a retrospective cohort study in seven hospitals in France. Adult PLHIV treated for haematological or solid malignancies were included and compared (1:1) with suitably matched (cancer-free) controls. The primary outcome was the risk of a ≥ 25% reduction in the absolute CD4+ count during follow-up. The risks for virological failure (i.e. a confirmed plasma viral load >50 copies/mL), incidental AIDS-related illnesses and death over time were also assessed. Multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression analyses were used to identify the outcome predictors. RESULTS: One-hundred-and-ten patients with cancer and 110 controls were followed for a median of 4.4 years. In a Cox model, the CD4+ depletion was strongly predicted by external radiotherapy (ERT) exposure (HR = 5.1, 95% CI, 3.0-8.6, P < 0.0001) but not by chemotherapy. For patients exposed to ERT, the magnitude of the CD4+ depletion peaked 6 months after their cancer diagnosis (mean CD4+ drop at this time =  -283 ± 370 cells/mm(3)). Overall, the cancer patients were also more likely to experience virological failure than the controls (HR = 1.7, 95% CI, 1.1-2.7, P = 0.03). Finally, the incidence of AIDS-related illnesses was similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In PLHIV, cancer treatment increased the risk for prolonged CD4+ depletion and virological failure but had no impact on AIDS-related events when appropriate prophylaxes were implemented.

Finger-stick whole blood HIV-1/-2 home-use tests are more sensitive than oral fluid-based in-home HIV tests.

BACKGROUND: Several countries have recently recommended the expansion of anti-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody testing, including self-testing with rapid tests using oral fluid (OF). Several tests have been proposed for at-home use, but their diagnostic accuracy has not been fully evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of 5 rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of anti-HIV-1/2 antibodies, with 4 testing OF and 1 testing whole blood. METHODS: Prospective multi-center study in France. HIV-infected adults and HIV-uninfected controls were systematically screened with 5 at-home HIV tests using either OF or finger-stick blood (FSB) specimens. Four OF tests (OraQuick Advance Rapid HIV-1/2, Chembio DPP HIV 1/2 Assay, test A, and test B) and one FSB test (Chembio Sure Check HIV1/2 Assay) were performed by trained health workers and compared with laboratory tests. RESULTS: In total, 179 HIV-infected patients (M/F sex ratio: 1.3) and 60 controls were included. Among the HIV-infected patients, 67.6% had an undetectable HIV viral load in their plasma due to antiretroviral therapy. Overall, the sensitivities of the OF tests were 87.2%, 88.3%, 58.9%, and 28% (for OraQuick, DPP, test A, and test B, respectively) compared with 100% for the FSB test Sure Check (p<0.0001 for all comparisons). The OraQuick and DPP OF tests' sensitivities were significantly lower than that of the FSB-based Sure Check (p<0.05). The sensitivities of the OF tests increased among the patients with a detectable HIV viral load (>50 copies/mL), reaching 94.8%, 96.5%, 90%, and 53.1% (for OraQuick, DPP, test A, and test B, respectively). The specificities of the four OF tests were 98.3%, 100%, 100%, and 87.5%, respectively, compared with 100% for the FSB test. CONCLUSION: An evaluation of candidates for HIV self-testing revealed unexpected differences in performance of the rapid tests: the FSB test showed a far greater reliability than OF tests.