Dima Dandachi

BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) may have numerous risk factors for acquiring coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and developing severe outcomes, but current data are conflicting. METHODS: Health-care providers enrolled consecutively, by nonrandom sampling, people living with HIV (PWH) with lab-confirmed COVID-19, diagnosed at their facilities between 1 April and 1 July 2020. Deidentified data were entered into an electronic Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) system. The primary endpoint was a severe outcome, defined as a composite endpoint of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, or death. The secondary outcome was the need for hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 286 patients included; the mean age was 51.4 years (standard deviation, 14.4), 25.9% were female, and 75.4% were African American or Hispanic. Most patients (94.3%) were on antiretroviral therapy, 88.7% had HIV virologic suppression, and 80.8% had comorbidities. Within 30 days of testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), 164 (57.3%) patients were hospitalized, and 47 (16.5%) required ICU admission. Mortality rates were 9.4% (27/286) overall, 16.5% (27/164) among those hospitalized, and 51.5% (24/47) among those admitted to an ICU. The primary composite endpoint occurred in 17.5% (50/286) of all patients and 30.5% (50/164) of hospitalized patients. Older age, chronic lung disease, and hypertension were associated with severe outcomes. A lower CD4 count (<200 cells/mm3) was associated with the primary and secondary endpoints. There were no associations between the ART regimen or lack of viral suppression and the predefined outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Severe clinical outcomes occurred commonly in PWH with COVID-19. The risks for poor outcomes were higher in those with comorbidities and lower CD4 cell counts, despite HIV viral suppression. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04333953.

Viral pathogens are increasingly recognized as a cause of pneumonia, in immunocompetent patients and more commonly among immunocompromised. Viral pneumonia in adults could present as community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), ranging from mild disease to severe disease requiring hospital admission and mechanical ventilation. Moreover, the role of viruses in hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia as causative agents or as co-pathogens and the effect of virus detection on clinical outcome are being investigated.More than 20 viruses have been linked to CAP. Clinical presentation, laboratory findings, biomarkers, and radiographic patterns are not characteristic to specific viral etiology. Currently, laboratory confirmation is most commonly done by detection of viral nucleic acid by reverse transcription-PCR of respiratory secretions.Apart from the US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for treatment of influenza pneumonia, the treatment of non-influenza respiratory viruses is limited. Moreover, the evidence supporting the use of available antivirals to treat immunocompromised patients is modest at best. With the widespread use of molecular diagnostics, an aging population, and advancement in cancer therapy, physicians will face a bigger challenge in managing viral respiratory tract infections. Emphasis on infection control measures to prevent the spread of respiratory viruses especially in healthcare settings is extremely important.

Telehealth could address many of the factors identified as barriers for retention in HIV care. In this study, we explore people with HIV (PWH)'s attitudes about using telemedicine for HIV care instead of face-to-face clinic visits. We administered a one-time survey to PWH presenting to an outpatient HIV center in Houston, Texas, from February to June 2018. The survey items were used to assess PWH's attitudes toward and concerns for telehealth and explanatory variables; 371 participants completed the survey; median age was 51, 36% and were female, and 63% was African American. Overall 57% of respondents were more likely to use telehealth for their HIV care if available, as compared with one-on-one in-person care, and 37% would use telehealth frequently or always as an alternative to clinic visits. Participants reported many benefits, including ability to fit better their schedule, decreasing travel time, and privacy but expressed concerns about the ability to effective communication and examination and the safety of personal information. Factors associated with likelihood of using telehealth include personal factors (US-born, men who have sex with men, higher educational attainment, higher HIV-related stigma perception), HIV-related factors (long-standing HIV), and structural factors (having difficulty attending clinic visits, not knowing about or not having the necessary technology). There was no association between participants with uncontrolled HIV, medication adherence, and likelihood of using telehealth. Telehealth programs for PWH can improve retention in care. Availability and confidence using various telehealth technologies need to be addressed to increase acceptability and usage of telehealth among PWH.

The study evaluates the acceptability and preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapy (LA-ART) among a diverse cohort of people with HIV infection (PWH). It consists of a self-administered survey and chart review of PWH presenting to an HIV clinic in Houston, Texas, between February and June 2018; 374 participants were included; 61% indicated that they were likely or very likely to use LA-ART formulations. When asked about preference, 41% preferred pills, 40% preferred injections, and 18% preferred an implant. The most common benefit reported was eliminating the need to remember taking daily HIV pills (74%); 43% were worried that LA-ART will not be as effective as pills. Participants with a college degree, men who have sex with men, and ART-experienced were more willing to use LA-ART. Participants who reported poor or fair health, or who screened positive for depression or anxiety were significantly less willing to use LA-ART. The likelihood of using LA-ART did not correlate with self-reported adherence and HIV suppression. Patients with difficulty scheduling and attending clinic visits preferred injections and implant over pills. Most participants indicated a willingness to use new LA ART formulations. However, 41% still prefers pills, and those more interested in LA-ART were not less adherent.

Importance: Immune dysregulation contributes to poorer outcomes in COVID-19. Objective: To investigate whether abatacept, cenicriviroc, or infliximab provides benefit when added to standard care for COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial using a master protocol to investigate immunomodulators added to standard care for treatment of participants hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. The results of 3 substudies are reported from 95 hospitals at 85 clinical research sites in the US and Latin America. Hospitalized patients 18 years or older with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 14 days and evidence of pulmonary involvement underwent randomization between October 2020 and December 2021. Interventions: Single infusion of abatacept (10 mg/kg; maximum dose, 1000 mg) or infliximab (5 mg/kg) or a 28-day oral course of cenicriviroc (300-mg loading dose followed by 150 mg twice per day). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to recovery by day 28 evaluated using an 8-point ordinal scale (higher scores indicate better health). Recovery was defined as the first day the participant scored at least 6 on the ordinal scale. Results: Of the 1971 participants randomized across the 3 substudies, the mean (SD) age was 54.8 (14.6) years and 1218 (61.8%) were men. The primary end point of time to recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia was not significantly different for abatacept (recovery rate ratio [RRR], 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.28]; P = .09), cenicriviroc (RRR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.86-1.18]; P = .94), or infliximab (RRR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.99-1.28]; P = .08) compared with placebo. All-cause 28-day mortality was 11.0% for abatacept vs 15.1% for placebo (odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.94]), 13.8% for cenicriviroc vs 11.9% for placebo (OR, 1.18 [95% CI 0.72-1.94]), and 10.1% for infliximab vs 14.5% for placebo (OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.90]). Safety outcomes were comparable between active treatment and placebo, including secondary infections, in all 3 substudies. Conclusions and Relevance: Time to recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia among hospitalized participants was not significantly different for abatacept, cenicriviroc, or infliximab vs placebo. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04593940.