Suchergebnisse

Many successes have been achieved in HIV care in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC): increased number of HIV‐infected individuals receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART), wide decentralization, reduction in morbidity and mortality and accessibility to cheapest drugs. However, these successes should not hide existing failures and difficulties. In this paper, we underline several key challenges. First, ensure long‐term financing, increase available resources, in order to meet the increasing needs, and redistribute the overall budget in a concerted way amongst donors. Second, increase ART coverage and treat the many eligible patients who have not yet started ART. Competition amongst countries is expected to become a strong driving force in encouraging the least efficient to join better performing countries. Third, decrease early mortality on ART, by improving access to prevention, case‐finding and treatment of tuberculosis and invasive bacterial diseases and by getting people to start ART much earlier. Fourth, move on from WHO 2006 to WHO 2010 guidelines. Raising the cut‐off point for starting ART to 350 CD4/mm3 needs changing paradigm, adopting opt‐out approach, facilitating pro‐active testing, facilitating task shifting and increasing staff recruitments. Phasing out stavudine needs acting for a drastic reduction in the costs of other drugs. Scaling up routine viral load needs a mobilization for lower prices of reagents and equipments, as well as efforts in relation to point‐of‐care automation and to maintenance. The latter is a key step to boost the utilization of second‐line regimens, which are currently dramatically under prescribed. Finally, other challenges are to reduce lost‐to‐follow‐up rates; manage lifelong treatment and care for long‐term morbidity, including drug toxicity, residual AIDS and HIV‐non‐AIDS morbidity and aging‐related morbidity; and be able to face unforeseen events such as socio‐political and military crisis. An old African proverb states that the growth of a deep‐rooted tree cannot be stopped. Our tree is well rooted in existing field experience and is, therefore, expected to grow. In order for us to let it grow, long‐term cost‐effectiveness approach and life‐saving evidence‐based programming should replace short‐term budgeting approach.

Many successes have been achieved in HIV care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC): increased number of HIV-infected individuals receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART), wide decentralization, reduction in morbidity and mortality and accessibility to cheapest drugs. However, these successes should not hide existing failures and difficulties. In this paper, we underline several key challenges. First, ensure long-term financing, increase available resources, in order to meet the increasing needs, and redistribute the overall budget in a concerted way amongst donors. Second, increase ART coverage and treat the many eligible patients who have not yet started ART. Competition amongst countries is expected to become a strong driving force in encouraging the least efficient to join better performing countries. Third, decrease early mortality on ART, by improving access to prevention, case-finding and treatment of tuberculosis and invasive bacterial diseases and by getting people to start ART much earlier. Fourth, move on from WHO 2006 to WHO 2010 guidelines. Raising the cut-off point for starting ART to 350 CD4/mm3 needs changing paradigm, adopting opt-out approach, facilitating pro-active testing, facilitating task shifting and increasing staff recruitments. Phasing out stavudine needs acting for a drastic reduction in the costs of other drugs. Scaling up routine viral load needs a mobilization for lower prices of reagents and equipments, as well as efforts in relation to point-of-care automation and to maintenance. The latter is a key step to boost the utilization of second-line regimens, which are currently dramatically under prescribed. Finally, other challenges are to reduce lost-to-follow-up rates; manage lifelong treatment and care for long-term morbidity, including drug toxicity, residual AIDS and HIV-non-AIDS morbidity and aging-related morbidity; and be able to face unforeseen events such as socio-political and military crisis. An old African proverb states that the growth of a deep-rooted tree cannot ...

IntroductionTenofovir (TDF) with emtricitabine (FTC) and zidovudine (ZDV) is a recognized alternate first‐line antiretroviral (ART) regimen for patients who cannot start treatment with non‐nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). Clinical studies comparing TDF+FTC+ZDV to other regimens are lacking.MethodsParticipants in a trial of early ART in Côte d'Ivoire (Temprano ANRS 12136) started treatment with TDF/FTC plus either efavirenz (EFV) or ZDV (HIV‐1+2 dually infected patients and women refusing contraception or previously treated with nevirapine). We compared rates of upper digestive serious adverse events (sAEs) between TDF/FTC+EFV and TDF/FTC+ZDV patients during the first six months of treatment. sAEs were defined as either grade 3–4 AEs or persistent grade 1–2 AEs leading to drug discontinuation.ResultsA total of 197 patients (76% women, median CD4 count 395/mm3) started therapy with TDF/FTC, 126 with EFV and 71 with ZDV. During the first six months of ART, 94 patients had digestive AEs (nausea/vomiting) of any grade (EFV 36/126, 29%; ZDV 58/71, 82%, p<0.0001), including 20 sAEs (EFV 3/126, 5%; ZDV 17/71, 24%, p<0.0001). In‐patients on TDF/FTC+ZDV with digestive AEs, the median time to the first symptom was two days (IQR: 1–4). Plasma ZDV (Cmax) distributions and pill ZDV dosages were normal. Patients with digestive AEs had higher haemoglobin levels and tended to have higher body mass indices and more frequent past histories of cotrimoxazole (CTX) prophylaxis.ConclusionsWe observed an unexpectedly high rate of digestive sAEs in West African adults, mostly women, who started a 3‐nuc ART with TDF/FTC+ZDV in Côte d'Ivoire. These adults were participating in a trial of early ART and had much higher CD4 counts than those who currently routinely start ART in sub‐Saharan Africa. They all received CTX concomitantly with ZDV. We suggest that further early prescriptions of TDF+XTC+ZDV should be carefully monitored and that whenever possible, the rate of early upper digestive adverse events should be compared to that occurring in‐patients taking other drug regimens.Clinical Trial Number: NCT00495651.

IntroductionWhether early antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation could impact sexual risk behaviours remains to be documented. We aimed to investigate changes in sexual behaviours within the 24 months following an early versus standard ART initiation in HIV‐positive adults with high CD4 counts.MethodsWe used data from a prospective behavioural study nested in a randomized controlled trial of early ART (Temprano‐ANRS12136). Time trends in sexual behaviours from enrolment in the trial (M0) to 12‐month (M12) and 24‐month (M24) visits were measured and compared, using Generalized Estimating Equations models, between participants randomly assigned either to initiate ART immediately (early ART) or to defer ART initiation until on‐going WHO starting criteria are met (standard ART). Indicators of sexual behaviours included 1) sexual activity in the past year, 2) multiple partnership in the past year, 3) unprotected sex at last intercourse and 4) risky sex (i.e. unprotected sex with a partner of HIV negative/unknown status) at last intercourse.ResultsAnalyses included 1952 participants (975 with early ART and 977 with standard ART; overall median baseline CD4 count: 469/mm3). Among participants with early ART, significant decreases were found between M0 and M24 in sexual activity (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI] 0.57–0.92), multiple partnership (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41–0.79), unprotected sex (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47–0.75) and risky sex (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45–0.76). Among participants with standard ART, sexual behaviours showed similar trends over time. These decreases mostly occurred within the 12 months following enrolment in the trial in both groups and prior to ART initiation in participants with standard ART. For unprotected sex and risky sex, decreases were or tended to be more pronounced among patients reporting that their last sexual partner was non‐cohabiting.ConclusionsIn these sub‐Saharan adults with high CD4 counts, entry into HIV care, rather than ART initiation, resulted in decreased sexual activity and risky sexual behaviours. We did not observe any evidence of a risk compensation phenomenon associated with early ART initiation. These results illustrate the potential behavioural preventive effect of early entry into care, which goes hand in hand with early ART initiation.

International audience ; INTRODUCTION: Acute malnutrition (AM) is a continuum condition, arbitrarily divided into moderate and severe AM (SAM) categories, funded and managed in separate programmes under different protocols. Optimising acute MAlnutrition (OptiMA) treatment aims to simplify and optimise AM management by treating children with mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) <125 mm or oedema with one product-ready-to-use therapeutic food-at a gradually tapered dose. Our main objective was to compare the OptiMA strategy with the standard nutritional protocol in children 6-59 months presenting with MUAC <125 mm or oedema without additional complications, as well as in children classified as uncomplicated SAM (ie, MUAC <115 mm or weight-for-height Z-score (WHZ) <-3 or with oedema). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study was a non-inferiority, individually randomised controlled clinical trial conducted at community level in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Children 6-59 months presenting with MUAC <125 mm or WHZ <-3 or with bipedal oedema and without medical complication were included after signed informed consent in outpatient health facilities. All participants were followed for 6 months. Success in both arms was defined at 6 months post inclusion as being alive, not acutely malnourished per the definition applied at inclusion and without an additional episode of AM throughout the 6-month observation period. Recovery among children with uncomplicated SAM was the main secondary outcome. For the primary objective, 890 participants were needed, and 480 children with SAM were needed for the main secondary objective. We will perform non-inferiority analyses in per-protocol and intention-to-treat basis for both outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approvals were obtained from the National Health Ethics Committee of the Democratic Republic of Congo and from the Ethics Evaluation Committee of Inserm, the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Paris, France). We will submit results ...

International audience ; INTRODUCTION: Acute malnutrition (AM) is a continuum condition, arbitrarily divided into moderate and severe AM (SAM) categories, funded and managed in separate programmes under different protocols. Optimising acute MAlnutrition (OptiMA) treatment aims to simplify and optimise AM management by treating children with mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) <125 mm or oedema with one product-ready-to-use therapeutic food-at a gradually tapered dose. Our main objective was to compare the OptiMA strategy with the standard nutritional protocol in children 6-59 months presenting with MUAC <125 mm or oedema without additional complications, as well as in children classified as uncomplicated SAM (ie, MUAC <115 mm or weight-for-height Z-score (WHZ) <-3 or with oedema). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study was a non-inferiority, individually randomised controlled clinical trial conducted at community level in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Children 6-59 months presenting with MUAC <125 mm or WHZ <-3 or with bipedal oedema and without medical complication were included after signed informed consent in outpatient health facilities. All participants were followed for 6 months. Success in both arms was defined at 6 months post inclusion as being alive, not acutely malnourished per the definition applied at inclusion and without an additional episode of AM throughout the 6-month observation period. Recovery among children with uncomplicated SAM was the main secondary outcome. For the primary objective, 890 participants were needed, and 480 children with SAM were needed for the main secondary objective. We will perform non-inferiority analyses in per-protocol and intention-to-treat basis for both outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approvals were obtained from the National Health Ethics Committee of the Democratic Republic of Congo and from the Ethics Evaluation Committee of Inserm, the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Paris, France). We will submit results ...

OBJECTIVES: The main objective was to compare the OptiMA strategy- ie.supplementing with ready-to-use therapeutic food at a gradually reduced doses- with the current national standard protocol. METHODS: This non-inferiority, individually randomised controlled clinical trial was conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Children 6–59 months with MUAC < 125 mm or weight-for-height Zscore< −3 or oedema and without medical complication were randomized to either OptiMA or standard arm and followed for 6 months. The main outcome was a binary composite indicator at 6-months post inclusion: child alive, not acutely malnourished per the study definition, and without an additional episode of acute malnutrition throughout the observation period. Non-inferiority was shown if the upper-bound of the 95% CI of the difference of proportion of favourable outcome between the two strategies was less than 10% in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. Superiority (upper-bound of the 95% CI of this difference lower than 0%) was considered if non-inferiority was shown. RESULTS: Between July 2019 and July 2020, 981 children were enrolled. 896 children were included in the ITT analysis (450 OptiMA and 446 standard), 792 in the PP analysis. All children under OptiMA and 200 children in the standard arm were eligible for RUTF. ITT analysis showed 325 (72·2%) children had a favourable outcome under OptiMA versus 282 (63·2%) in the standard arm (difference: −9·2%, 95% CI: −15·9% to −2·0%). PP analysis was similar. Under OptiMA, weight and MUAC gain were greater (median weight gain, 1700 g versus 1600 g, P = 0·003 and median MUAC gain, 13 mm versus 12 mm, P = 0·012), and RUTF consumption was lower (median of 64 sachets versus 102 sachets, P = 0·018). There was no difference in hospitalization (10% OptiMA, 7% standard, P = 0·228) or mortality rates (0·2% in both arms). CONCLUSIONS: OptiMA was superior to the DRC standard protocol. It expanded access to RUTF, promoted improved anthropometry with lower RUTF ...

OBJECTIVES: The main secondary objective of OptiMA-DRC trial was to compare the OptiMA strategy, ie.supplementing with one product, ready-to-use therapeutic food at a gradually reduced doses, with the current national nutritionnal standard protocol in children with uncomplicated severe acute malnutrition (SAM) at inclusion (MUAC 125 mm for OptiMA and MUAC > 125 mm or WHZ >−1.5 for the standard arm, and absence of oedema, for two consecutive weeks in treatment with a 4-week minimum stay, and at any time during 6-months post-inclusion. Non-inferiority was shown if the upper-bound of the 95%CI of the difference of proportion of recovery between the two strategies was less than 10% in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. Superiority (upper-bound of the 95%CI of this difference lower than 0%) was considered if non-inferiority was shown. RESULTS: Overall, 482 children with uncomplicated SAM were included in ITT analysis (242 OptiMA, 240 standard). At 6 months, 231 (95·5%) children recovered under OptiMA versus 234 (97·5%) under standard protocol (difference −2·0%, 95%CI: −1·96% to 6·4%). PP analysis was similar. There was no difference in hospitalization (11% OptiMA, 12% standard, P = 0·887) or mortality rates (0·2% both arms). Under OptiMA, weight and MUAC gains in recovered children (N = 465) were greater (median weight gain, 1400g versus 1200g, P< 0·001; median MUAC gain, 14 mm versus 11 mm, P < 0·001) and RUTF consumption (sachets) was lower (median 74 versus 112, P < 0·001). CONCLUSIONS: Children with ...

International audience ; BACKGROUND: Global access to acute malnutrition treatment is low. Different programmes using different nutritional products manage cases of severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition separately. We aimed to assess whether integrating severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition treatment into one programme, using a single nutritional product and reducing the dose as the child improves, could achieve similar or higher individual efficacy, increase coverage, and minimise costs compared with the current programmes.METHODS: We conducted an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Acutely malnourished children aged 6-59 months with a mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) of less than 125 mm or oedema were randomly assigned (1:1), using specially developed software and random blocks (size was kept confidential), to either the current standard strategy (one programme for severe acute malnutrition using ready-to-use therapeutic food [RUTF] at an increasing dose as weight increased, another for moderate acute malnutrition using a fixed dose of ready-to-use supplementary food [RUSF]) or the OptiMA strategy (a single programme for both severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition using RUTF at a decreasing dose as MUAC and weight increased). The primary endpoint was a favourable outcome at 6 months, defined as being alive, not acutely malnourished as per the definition applied at inclusion, and with no further episodes of acute malnutrition throughout the 6-month observation period; the endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat (all children) and per-protocol populations (participants who had a minimum prescription of 4 weeks' RUTF, received at least 90% of the total amount of RUTF they were supposed to receive as per the protocol, or were prescribed RUSF rations for a minimum of 4 weeks [ie, minimum of 28 RUSF sachets], and had a maximum interval of 6 weeks between any two visits in the 6-month ...

International audience ; BACKGROUND: Global access to acute malnutrition treatment is low. Different programmes using different nutritional products manage cases of severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition separately. We aimed to assess whether integrating severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition treatment into one programme, using a single nutritional product and reducing the dose as the child improves, could achieve similar or higher individual efficacy, increase coverage, and minimise costs compared with the current programmes.METHODS: We conducted an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Acutely malnourished children aged 6-59 months with a mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) of less than 125 mm or oedema were randomly assigned (1:1), using specially developed software and random blocks (size was kept confidential), to either the current standard strategy (one programme for severe acute malnutrition using ready-to-use therapeutic food [RUTF] at an increasing dose as weight increased, another for moderate acute malnutrition using a fixed dose of ready-to-use supplementary food [RUSF]) or the OptiMA strategy (a single programme for both severe acute malnutrition and moderate acute malnutrition using RUTF at a decreasing dose as MUAC and weight increased). The primary endpoint was a favourable outcome at 6 months, defined as being alive, not acutely malnourished as per the definition applied at inclusion, and with no further episodes of acute malnutrition throughout the 6-month observation period; the endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat (all children) and per-protocol populations (participants who had a minimum prescription of 4 weeks' RUTF, received at least 90% of the total amount of RUTF they were supposed to receive as per the protocol, or were prescribed RUSF rations for a minimum of 4 weeks [ie, minimum of 28 RUSF sachets], and had a maximum interval of 6 weeks between any two visits in the 6-month ...