Person:

Tsai, Alexander

Background: Many guidelines recommend adherence counseling prior to initiating antiretrovirals (ARVs), however the additional benefit of pre-therapy counseling visits on early adherence is not known. We sought to assess for a benefit of adherence counseling visits prior to ARV initiation versus adherence counseling during the early treatment period. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort of HIV-infected patients in Mbarara, Uganda. Adults were enrolled upon initiation of ARVs. Our primary exposure of interest was ARV adherence counseling prior to initiating therapy (versus concurrent with initiation of therapy). Our outcomes of interest were: 1) average adherence >90% in first three months; 2) absence of treatment interruptions >72 hours in first three months; and 3) Viral load >400 copies/ml at the three month visit. We fit univariable and multivariable regression models, adjusted for predictors of ARV adherence, to estimate the association between additional pre-therapy counseling visits and our outcomes. Results: 300 participants had records of counseling, of whom 231 (77%) completed visits prior to initiation of ARVs and 69 (23%) on or shortly after initiation. Median age was 33, 71% were female, and median CD4 was 133 cell/ml. Median 90-day adherence was 95%. Participants who completed pre-therapy counseling visits had longer delays from ARV eligibility to initiation (median 49 vs 14 days, p<0.01). In multivariable analyses, completing adherence counseling prior to ARV initiation was not associated with average adherence >90% (AOR 0.8, 95%CI 0.4–1.5), absence of treatment gaps (AOR 0.7, 95%CI 0.2–1.9), or HIV viremia (AOR 1.1, 95%CI 0.4–3.1). Conclusions: Completion of adherence counseling visits prior to ARV therapy was not associated with higher adherence in this cohort of HIV-infected patients in Uganda. Because mortality and loss-to-follow-up remain high in the pre-ARV period, policy makers should reconsider whether counseling can be delivered with ARV initiation, especially in patients with advanced disease.

Background: Ongoing conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan has resulted in a severe humanitarian crisis. We sought to characterize the nature and geographic scope of allegations of human rights violations perpetrated against civilians in Darfur and to evaluate their consistency with medical examinations documented in patients' medical records. Methods and Findings: This was a retrospective review and analysis of medical records from all 325 patients seen for treatment from September 28, 2004, through December 31, 2006, at the Nyala-based Amel Centre for Treatment and Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture, the only dedicated local provider of free clinical and legal services to civilian victims of torture and other human rights violations in Darfur during this time period. Among 325 medical records identified and examined, 292 (89.8%) patients from 12 different non-Arabic-speaking tribes disclosed in the medical notes that they had been attacked by Government of Sudan (GoS) and/or Janjaweed forces. Attacks were reported in 23 different rural council areas throughout Darfur. Nearly all attacks (321 [98.8%]) were described as having occurred in the absence of active armed conflict between Janjaweed/GoS forces and rebel groups. The most common alleged abuses were beatings (161 [49.5%]), gunshot wounds (140 [43.1%]), destruction or theft of property (121 [37.2%]), involuntary detainment (97 [29.9%]), and being bound (64 [19.7%]). Approximately one-half (36 [49.3%]) of all women disclosed that they had been sexually assaulted, and one-half of sexual assaults were described as having occurred in close proximity to a camp for internally displaced persons. Among the 198 (60.9%) medical records that contained sufficient detail to enable the forensic medical reviewers to render an informed judgment, the signs and symptoms in all of the medical records were assessed to be consistent with, highly consistent with, or virtually diagnostic of the alleged abuses. Conclusions: Allegations of widespread and sustained torture and other human rights violations by GoS and/or Janjaweed forces against non-Arabic-speaking civilians were corroborated by medical forensic review of medical records of patients seen at a local non-governmental provider of free clinical and legal services in Darfur. Limitations of this study were that patients seen in this clinic may not have been a representative sample of persons alleging abuse by Janjaweed/GoS forces, and that most delayed presenting for care. The quality of documentation was similar to that available in other conflict/post-conflict, resource-limited settings.

Background: Atypical antipsychotic medications are widely prescribed for the adjunctive treatment of depression, yet their total risk–benefit profile is not well understood. We thus conducted a systematic review of the efficacy and safety profiles of atypical antipsychotic medications used for the adjunctive treatment of depression. Methods and Findings: We included randomized trials comparing adjunctive antipsychotic medication to placebo for treatment-resistant depression in adults. Our literature search (conducted in December 2011 and updated on December 14, 2012) identified 14 short-term trials of aripiprazole, olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC), quetiapine, and risperidone. When possible, we supplemented published literature with data from manufacturers' clinical trial registries and US Food and Drug Administration New Drug Applications. Study duration ranged from 4 to 12 wk. All four drugs had statistically significant effects on remission, as follows: aripiprazole (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.48–2.73), OFC (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01–2.0), quetiapine (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.33–2.42), and risperidone (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.31–4.30). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 19 for OFC and nine for each other drug. All drugs with the exception of OFC also had statistically significant effects on response rates, as follows: aripiprazole (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.58–2.72; NNT, 7), OFC (OR, 1.30, 95% CI, 0.87–1.93), quetiapine (OR, 1.53, 95% CI, 1.17–2.0; NNT, 10), and risperidone (OR, 1.83, 95% CI, 1.16–2.88; NNT, 8). All four drugs showed statistically significant effects on clinician-rated depression severity measures (Hedges' g ranged from 0.26 to 0.48; mean difference of 2.69 points on the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale across drugs). On measures of functioning and quality of life, these medications produced either no benefit or a very small benefit, except for risperidone, which had a small-to-moderate effect on quality of life (g = 0.49). Treatment was linked to several adverse events, including akathisia (aripiprazole), sedation (quetiapine, OFC, and aripiprazole), abnormal metabolic laboratory results (quetiapine and OFC), and weight gain (all four drugs, especially OFC). Shortcomings in study design and data reporting, as well as use of post hoc analyses, may have inflated the apparent benefits of treatment and reduced the apparent incidence of adverse events. Conclusions: Atypical antipsychotic medications for the adjunctive treatment of depression are efficacious in reducing observer-rated depressive symptoms, but clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously in light of (1) the small-to-moderate-sized benefits, (2) the lack of benefit with regards to quality of life or functional impairment, and (3) the abundant evidence of potential treatment-related harm.

David Bangsberg and colleagues explore the challenges and rewards of sharing research findings with participants living with HIV enrolled in observational research in rural sub-Saharan Africa.

Background: Aripiprazole, a second-generation antipsychotic medication, has been increasingly used in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder and received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for this indication in 2005. Given its widespread use, we sought to critically review the evidence supporting the use of aripiprazole in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder and examine how that evidence has been disseminated in the scientific literature. Methods and findings: We systematically searched multiple databases to identify double-blind, randomized controlled trials of aripiprazole for the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder while excluding other types of studies, such as open-label, acute, and adjunctive studies. We then used a citation search to identify articles that cited these trials and rated the quality of their citations. Our evidence search protocol identified only two publications, both describing the results of a single trial conducted by Keck et al., which met criteria for inclusion in this review. We describe four issues that limit the interpretation of that trial as supporting the use of aripiprazole for bipolar maintenance: (1) insufficient duration to demonstrate maintenance efficacy; (2) limited generalizability due to its enriched sample; (3) possible conflation of iatrogenic adverse effects of abrupt medication discontinuation with beneficial effects of treatment; and (4) a low overall completion rate. Our citation search protocol yielded 80 publications that cited the Keck et al. trial in discussing the use of aripiprazole for bipolar maintenance. Of these, only 24 (30%) mentioned adverse events reported and four (5%) mentioned study limitations. Conclusions: A single trial by Keck et al. represents the entirety of the literature on the use of aripiprazole for the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. Although careful review identifies four critical limitations to the trial's interpretation and overall utility, the trial has been uncritically cited in the subsequent scientific literature.

Background: There is conflicting evidence on the immunologic benefit of treating helminth co-infections (“deworming”) in HIV-infected individuals. Several studies have documented reduced viral load and increased CD4 count in antiretroviral therapy (ART) naïve individuals after deworming. However, there are a lack of data on the effect of deworming therapy on CD4 count recovery among HIV-infected persons taking ART. Methodology/Principal Findings To estimate the association between empiric deworming therapy and CD4 count after ART initiation, we performed a retrospective observational study among HIV-infected adults on ART at a publicly operated HIV clinic in southwestern Uganda. Subjects were assigned as having received deworming if prescribed an anti-helminthic agent between 7 and 90 days before a CD4 test. To estimate the association between deworming and CD4 count, we fit multivariable regression models and analyzed predictors of CD4 count, using a time-by-interaction term with receipt or non-receipt of deworming. From 1998 to 2009, 5,379 subjects on ART attended 21,933 clinic visits at which a CD4 count was measured. Subjects received deworming prior to 668 (3%) visits. Overall, deworming was not associated with a significant difference in CD4 count in either the first year on ART (β = 42.8; 95% CI, −2.1 to 87.7) or after the first year of ART (β = −9.9; 95% CI, −24.1 to 4.4). However, in a sub-analysis by gender, during the first year of ART deworming was associated with a significantly greater rise in CD4 count (β = 63.0; 95% CI, 6.0 to 120.1) in females. Conclusions/Significance: Empiric deworming of HIV-infected individuals on ART conferred no significant generalized benefit on subsequent CD4 count recovery. A significant association was observed exclusively in females and during the initial year on ART. Our findings are consistent with recent studies that failed to demonstrate an immunologic advantage to empirically deworming ART-naïve individuals, but suggest that certain sub-populations may benefit.

Introduction: Adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) is a critical determinant of HIV-1 RNA viral suppression and health outcomes. It is generally accepted that HIV-related stigma is correlated with factors that may undermine ART adherence, but its relationship with ART adherence itself is not well established. We therefore undertook this review to systematically assess the relationship between HIV-related stigma and ART adherence. Methods: We searched nine electronic databases for published and unpublished literature, with no language restrictions. First we screened the titles and abstracts for studies that potentially contained data on ART adherence. Then we reviewed the full text of these studies to identify articles that reported data on the relationship between ART adherence and either HIV-related stigma or serostatus disclosure. We used the method of meta-synthesis to summarize the findings from the qualitative studies. Results: Our search protocol yielded 14,854 initial records. After eliminating duplicates and screening the titles and abstracts, we retrieved the full text of 960 journal articles, dissertations and unpublished conference abstracts for review. We included 75 studies conducted among 26,715 HIV-positive persons living in 32 countries worldwide, with less representation of work from Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Among the 34 qualitative studies, our meta-synthesis identified five distinct third-order labels through an inductive process that we categorized as themes and organized in a conceptual model spanning intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural levels. HIV-related stigma undermined ART adherence by compromising general psychological processes, such as adaptive coping and social support. We also identified psychological processes specific to HIV-positive persons driven by predominant stigmatizing attitudes and which undermined adherence, such as internalized stigma and concealment. Adaptive coping and social support were critical determinants of participants’ ability to overcome the structural and economic barriers associated with poverty in order to successfully adhere to ART. Among the 41 quantitative studies, 24 of 33 cross-sectional studies (71%) reported a positive finding between HIV stigma and ART non-adherence, while 6 of 7 longitudinal studies (86%) reported a null finding (Pearson's χ 2=7.7; p=0.005). Conclusions: We found that HIV-related stigma compromised participants’ abilities to successfully adhere to ART. Interventions to reduce stigma should target multiple levels of influence (intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural) in order to have maximum effectiveness on improving ART adherence.

In a Perspective accompanying Bor and colleagues, Alexander Tsai and Mark Siedner discuss the gender gap in ART uptake and HIV mortality in Africa.