Abstract

IntroductionAs antiretroviral therapy (ART) is scaled up, more patients become eligible for routine viral load (VL) monitoring, the most important tool for monitoring ART efficacy. For HIV programmes to become effective, leakages along the VL cascade need to be minimized and treatment switching needs to be optimized. However, many HIV programmes in resource‐constrained settings report significant shortfalls.MethodsFrom a public sector HIV programme in rural Swaziland, we evaluated the VL cascade of adults (≥18 years) on ART from the time of the first elevated VL (>1000 copies/mL) between January 2013 and June 2014 to treatment switching by December 2015. We additionally described HIV drug resistance for patients with virological failure. We used descriptive statistics and Kaplan–Meier estimates to describe the different steps along the cascade and regression models to determine factors associated with outcomes.Results and DiscussionOf 828 patients with a first elevated VL, 252 (30.4%) did not receive any enhanced adherence counselling (EAC). Six hundred and ninety‐six (84.1%) patients had a follow‐up VL measurement, and the predictors of receiving a follow‐up VL were being a second‐line patient (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.72; p = 0.051), Hlathikhulu health zone (aHR: 0.79; p = 0.013) and having received two EAC sessions (aHR: 1.31; p = 0.023). Four hundred and ten patients (58.9%) achieved VL re‐suppression. Predictors of re‐suppression were age 50 to 64 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.02; p = 0.015) compared with age 18 to 34 years, being on second‐line treatment (aOR: 3.29; p = 0.003) and two (aOR: 1.66; p = 0.045) or three (aOR: 1.86; p = 0.003) EAC sessions. Of 278 patients eligible to switch to second‐line therapy, 120 (43.2%) had switched by the end of the study. Finally, of 155 successfully sequenced dried blood spots, 144 (92.9%) were from first‐line patients. Of these, 133 (positive predictive value: 92.4%) had resistance patterns that necessitated treatment switching.ConclusionsPatients on ART with high VLs were more likely to re‐suppress if they received EAC. Failure to re‐suppress after counselling was predictive of genotypically confirmed resistance patterns requiring treatment switching. Delays in switching were significant despite the ability of the WHO algorithm to predict treatment failure. Despite significant progress in recent years, enhanced focus on quality care along the VL cascade in resource‐limited settings is crucial.

Highlights

  • | INTRODUCTIONRoutine viral load (VL) monitoring is the most important tool for assessing a patient’s response to treatment, and assessing adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART)

  • As antiretroviral therapy (ART) is scaled up, more patients become eligible for routine viral load (VL) monitoring, the most important tool for monitoring ART efficacy

  • A total of 828 patients (Table 1) had at least one elevated VL recorded between January 2013 and June 2014

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

Routine viral load (VL) monitoring is the most important tool for assessing a patient’s response to treatment, and assessing adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Delaying treatment switching leads to accumulation of resistance mutations [3,4,5], unfavourable patient outcomes and increased risk of transmission of drug-resistant strains [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Understanding of the gaps along the VL cascade remains limited but is needed to inform VL scale-up in resource-limited settings. We evaluated the performance of the VL cascade in a public health sector programme and describe the ability of the WHO VL testing algorithm to predict the need for treatment switching

| METHODS
| RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
| CONCLUSIONS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call