Where are we with pre-exposure prophylaxis use in Central and Eastern Europe? Data from the Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group

OBJECTIVES

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV infection is an important intervention for control of the HIV epidemic. The incidence of HIV infection is increasing in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Therefore, we investigated the change in PrEP use in CEE over time.

METHODS

The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group was initiated in February 2016 to compare standards of care for HIV and viral hepatitis infections in CEE. Data on access to PrEP were collected from 23 countries through online surveys in May-June 2017 (76 respondents) and in November 2018-May 2019 (28 respondents).

RESULTS

About 34.2% of respondents stated that tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) was licensed for use in their country in 2017, and 66.7% that it was licensed for use in 2018 (P = 0.02). PrEP was recommended in national guidelines in 39.5% of responses in 2017 and 40.7% in 2018 (P = 0.378). About 70.7% of respondents were aware of "informal" PrEP use in 2017, while 66.6% were aware of this in 2018 (P = 0.698). In 2018, there were 53 centres offering PreP (the highest numbers in Poland and Romania), whereas six countries had no centres offering PreP. The estimated number of HIV-negative people on PreP in the region was 4500 in 2018. Generic TDF/FTC costs (in Euros) ranged from €10 (Romania) to €256.92 (Slovakia), while brand TDF/FTC costs ranged from €60 (Albania) to €853 (Finland).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the process of licensing TDF/FTC use for PrEP has improved, this is not yet reflected in the guidelines, nor has there been a reduction in the "informal" use of PrEP. PrEP remains a rarely used preventive method in CEE countries.

Comparison of Demographic, Epidemiological, Immunological, and Clinical Characteristics of Patients with HIV Mono-infection Versus Patients Co-infected with HCV or/and HBV: A Serbian Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to correlate the status of hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) co-infection in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection with clinical and demographic data prior to starting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and assess the impact of HCV and HBV co-infection on the natural history of HIV infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study involved a total of 836 treatment-naive patients with available serological status for HBV and HCV at the point of therapy initiation. Patients were stratified into four groups: HIV mono-infection, HIV/HCV, HIV/HBV, and HIV/HCV/HBV co-infection. Demographic, epidemiological, immunological and clinical characteristics were analyzed in order to assess the possible impact of HCV and HBV co-infection on HIV - related immunodeficiency and progression to AIDS.

RESULTS

The prevalence of HCV and HBV co-infection in our cohort was 25.7% and 6.3%, respectively. Triple HIV/HCV/HBV infection was recorded in 1.7% of the patients. In comparison with those co-infected with HCV, patients with HIV mono-infection had lower levels of serum liver enzymes activity and higher CD4 cell counts, and were less likely to have CD4 cell counts below100 cells/µL and clinical AIDS, with OR 0.556 and 0.561, respectively. No difference in the development of advanced immunodeficiency and/or AIDS was recorded between patients with HIV monoinfection and those co-infected with HBV, or both HCV/HBV.

CONCLUSION

HIV/HCV co-infection was found to be more prevalent than HIV/HBV co-infection in a Serbian cohort. Co-infection with HCV was related to more profound immunodeficiency prior to therapy initiation, reflecting a possible unfavorable impact of HCV on the natural history of HIV infection.

Transmission of HIV Drug Resistance and the Predicted Effect on Current First-line Regimens in Europe

Transmitted human immunodeficiency virus drug resistance in Europe is stable at around 8%. The impact of baseline mutation patterns on susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs should be addressed using clinical guidelines. The impact on baseline susceptibility is largest for nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

Background. Numerous studies have shown that baseline drug resistance patterns may influence the outcome of antiretroviral therapy. Therefore, guidelines recommend drug resistance testing to guide the choice of initial regimen. In addition to optimizing individual patient management, these baseline resistance data enable transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to be surveyed for public health purposes. The SPREAD program systematically collects data to gain insight into TDR occurring in Europe since 2001.

Methods. Demographic, clinical, and virological data from 4140 antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected individuals from 26 countries who were newly diagnosed between 2008 and 2010 were analyzed. Evidence of TDR was defined using the WHO list for surveillance of drug resistance mutations. Prevalence of TDR was assessed over time by comparing the results to SPREAD data from 2002 to 2007. Baseline susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs was predicted using the Stanford HIVdb program version 7.0.

Results. The overall prevalence of TDR did not change significantly over time and was 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.2%–9.5%) in 2008–2010. The most frequent indicators of TDR were nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations (4.5%), followed by nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations (2.9%) and protease inhibitor mutations (2.0%). Baseline mutations were most predictive of reduced susceptibility to initial NNRTI-based regimens: 4.5% and 6.5% of patient isolates were predicted to have resistance to regimens containing efavirenz or rilpivirine, respectively, independent of current NRTI backbones.

Conclusions. Although TDR was highest for NRTIs, the impact of baseline drug resistance patterns on susceptibility was largest for NNRTIs. The prevalence of TDR assessed by epidemiological surveys does not clearly indicate to what degree susceptibility to different drug classes is affected.

Comparison of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor use as part of first-line therapy in a Serbian and a UK HIV clinic

BACKGROUND

Use of dideoxynucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (dNRTIs) may lead to increased mitochondrial toxicity. We compared nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) use as part of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in two HIV clinics: one in a low-middle income (HIV Centre Belgrade [HCB], Serbia) and one a high income (ICDC, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK) country.

METHODS

Antiretroviral naïve patients starting ART from 2003 to 2005 were included. Specific NRTIs were compared between centers, focusing on dNRTI use. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the percentage of patients making changes to their NRTI backbone (a) for any reason or (b) for mitochondrial toxicity (peripheral neuropathy, pancreatitis, lactic acidosis) were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 287 HCB patients, 89 (31.0%) received didanosine (ddI)-containing, 39 (13.6%) stavudine (d4T)-containing, and 39 (13.6%) ddI+d4T-containing regimens; for 539 ICDC patients, these were 18 (3.3%), 66 (12.2%), and 0 (0.0%), respectively (p < .0001). After 12 months, 57.5% and 52.6% at HCB and ICDC had switched their NRTI backbone. This was reduced to 34.5% at HCB after excluding changes due to drug supply interruption and to 11.2% and 1.3% at HCB and ICDC after changes were made for mitochondrial-related reasons. At 6 months, 73/80 (91.3%) and 385/488 (78.9%) had viral load below 50 copies/mL at HCB and ICDC, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated at HCB faced higher levels of mitochondrial-related toxicity, likely due to greater dNRTI use.