Dataset Information

Quantifying pediatric patient need for second- and third-line HIV treatment: A tool for decision-making in resource-limited settings.

ABSTRACT: As national HIV programs across the world mature and continue to scale up towards UNAIDS' 90-90-90 targets, it is increasingly important to accurately estimate HIV treatment needs in pediatric patient populations to prepare for anticipated increases in demand. This is particularly vital in sub-Saharan Africa, where the bulk of the global pediatric HIV burden remains concentrated, and for treatment-experienced populations, for which data are severely limited. This article discusses the conceptual framework behind and application of a five-year country-level quantification and decision-making tool aimed at providing national HIV programs and their partners with a better understanding of their evolving national HIV treatment and programming needs for second-and third-line pediatric populations. The conceptual framework of the algorithm which undergirds the tool is the patient pathway, along which key influencing factors that determine whether pediatric HIV patients are linked to care, remain in treatment, and are appropriately switched to later lines of treatment are accounted for quantitatively. Excel-based and arithmetic, the algorithm is designed to use available national, regional, and global data for factors impacting patient estimates including treatment coverage; routine viral load testing; viral load non-suppression; confirmed treatment failure; and patient loss to follow up-outcomes for which data are generally very limited in this patient population. The ultimate output of the tool is an estimate of the aggregate annual number of patients by treatment line. Given the limitations in available data for pediatric HIV, particularly for patients on second- and third-line treatments, this tool may help fill a data gap by providing a mechanism for policymakers to scenario plan, thus aiding resource allocation decisions for pediatric HIV program scale-up. The tool may be used to streamline national antiretroviral procurement of later lines of treatment, especially in resource-limited settings, and may also be used to add value to broader HIV policy and planning processes at the national level.

SUBMITTER: Mohammed P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6855441 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quantifying pediatric patient need for second- and third-line HIV treatment: A tool for decision-making in resource-limited settings.

Mohammed Perry P Linden Andrea A Reilly Maura M

PloS one 20191114 11

As national HIV programs across the world mature and continue to scale up towards UNAIDS' 90-90-90 targets, it is increasingly important to accurately estimate HIV treatment needs in pediatric patient populations to prepare for anticipated increases in demand. This is particularly vital in sub-Saharan Africa, where the bulk of the global pediatric HIV burden remains concentrated, and for treatment-experienced populations, for which data are severely limited. This article discusses the conceptual ...[more]

PMID: 31725749

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:For second-line antiretroviral therapy, WHO recommends a boosted protease inhibitor plus nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). However, concerns about toxicity and cross-resistance motivated a search for regimens that do not contain NRTIs. We aimed to assess whether boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir would be non-inferior to boosted lopinavir plus NRTIs for virological suppression in resource-limited settings. METHODS:A5273 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study at 15 AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) research sites in nine resource-limited countries (three sites each in India and South Africa, two each in Malawi and Peru, and one each in Brazil, Kenya, Tanzania, Thailand, and Zimbabwe). Adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of at least 1000 copies per mL after at least 24 weeks on a regimen based on a non-NRTI inhibitor were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (100 mg ritonavir, 400 mg lopinavir) plus 400 mg raltegravir twice a day (raltegravir group) or to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus two or three NRTIs selected from an algorithm (eg, zidovudine after failure with tenofovir and vice versa; NRTI group). Randomised group assignment was done with a computer algorithm concealed to site personnel, and stratified by HIV-1 RNA viral load, CD4 cell count, and intention to use zidovudine, with the groups balanced by each site. The primary endpoint was time to confirmed virological failure (two measurements of HIV-1 RNA viral load >400 copies per mL) at or after week 24 in the intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority (10% margin) was assessed by comparing the cumulative probability of virological failure by 48 weeks. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01352715. FINDINGS:Between March 13, 2012, and Oct 2, 2013, we randomly assigned 515 participants: 260 to the raltegravir group and 255 to the NRTI group; two participants in the raltegravir group and one in the NRTI group were excluded from analyses because of ineligibility. By the end of follow-up (October, 2014), 96 participants had virological failure (46 in the raltegravir group and 50 in the NRTI group). By 48 weeks, the cumulative probability of virological failure was 10·3% (95% CI 6·5-14·0) in the raltegravir group and 12·4% (8·3-16·5) in the NRTI group, with a weighted difference of -3·4% (-8·4 to 1·5), indicating that raltegravir was non-inferior, but not superior, to NRTIs. 62 (24%) participants in the raltegravir group and 81 (32%) in the NRTI group had grade 3 or higher adverse events; 19 (7%) and 29 (11%), respectively, had serious adverse events. Three participants in each group died, all from HIV-related causes. INTERPRETATION:In settings with extensive NRTI resistance but no available resistance testing, our data support WHO's recommendation for ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus NRTI for second-line antiretroviral therapy. Ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir is an appropriate alternative, especially if NRTI use is limited by toxicity. FUNDING:National Institutes of Health.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between hair antiretroviral hair concentrations as an objective, cumulative adherence metric, with self-reported adherence and virologic outcomes.DesignAnalysis of cohort A of the ACTG-A5288 study. These patients in resource-limited settings were failing second-line protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) but were susceptible to at least one nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) and their protease inhibitor, and continued taking their protease inhibitor-based regimen.MethodsAntiretroviral hair concentrations in participants taking two NRTIs with boosted atazanavir (n = 69) or lopinavir (n = 112) were analyzed at weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 using liquid-chromatography--tandem-mass-spectrometry assays. Participants' self-reported percentage of doses taken in the previous month; virologic failure was confirmed HIV-1 RNA at least 1000 copies/ml at week 24 or 48.ResultsFrom 181 participants with hair samples (61% women, median age: 39 years; CD4+ cell count: 167 cells/μl; HIV-1 RNA: 18 648 copies/ml), 91 (50%) experienced virologic failure at either visit. At 24 weeks, median hair concentrations were 2.95 [interquartile range (IQR) 0.49-4.60] ng/mg for atazanavir, 2.64 (IQR 0.73--7.16) for lopinavir, and 0.44 (IQR 0.11--0.76) for ritonavir. Plasma HIV-1 RNA demonstrated inverse correlations with hair levels (rs -0.46 to -0.74) at weeks 24 and 48. Weaker associations were seen with self-reported adherence (rs -0.03 to -0.24). Decreasing hair concentrations were significantly associated with virologic failure, the hazard ratio (95% CI) for ATV, LPV, and RTV were 0.69 (0.56-0.86), 0.77 (0.68-0.87), and 0.12 (0.06-0.27), respectively.ConclusionProtease inhibitor hair concentrations showed stronger associations with subsequent virologic outcomes than self-reported adherence in this cohort. Hair adherence measures could identify individuals at risk of second-line treatment failure in need of interventions.

Project description:Currently, conventional treatments for metastatic RCC (mRCC) include immune-based combination regimens and/or targeted therapies, the latter mainly acting on angiogenesis, a key element of the process of tumor growth and spread. Although these agents proved able to improve patients' outcomes, drug resistance and disease progression are still experienced by a substantial number of VEGFR-TKIs-treated mRCC patients. Following the inhibition of the VEGF/VEGFRs axis, two strategies have emerged: either specifically targeting resistance pathways, at the same time continuing to inhibit angiogenesis, or using a completely different approach aimed at re-activating the immune system through the use of inhibitors of specific negative immune checkpoints. These two approaches, practically represented by the use of either cabozantinib or nivolumab, seem to remain a rational therapeutic approach also when first-line immune-based combinations are used. The objective of this study is to design a preferential therapeutic pathway for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The procedure applied in this project was a group discussion, based on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method in a meeting session, aimed at defining the therapeutic choice for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The NGT process defined the most relevant parameters that, according to the interviewed panelists, clinicians should consider for the selection of the second-line therapy in the context of advanced renal cell carcinoma of mRCC. The algorithm developed for the treatment selection as a result of this process should thus be considered by clinicians as reference for therapy selection.Plain language summaryThe result of this paper was the definition of an algorithm intended to suggest a preferential therapeutic pathway considering both the outputs of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process and the actual clinical practice and the experience of selected panelists. During the NGT process and the discussion phase, panelists defined the most important parameters to be included in the algorithm that are important for the treatment definition. Cabozantinib and nivolumab are identified as the most reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after first-line treatment and are the medication options included in the algorithm for therapy selection.

Dataset Information

Quantifying pediatric patient need for second- and third-line HIV treatment: A tool for decision-making in resource-limited settings.

Publications

Quantifying pediatric patient need for second- and third-line HIV treatment: A tool for decision-making in resource-limited settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets