Tolerability of postexposure antiretroviral prophylaxis for occupational exposures to HIV

Adherence, adverse drug reactions, and discontinuation associated with adverse drug reactions of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis: a meta-analysis based on cohort studies

Objective: Evaluate the profiles of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) adherence, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and discontinuation associated with ADRs to provide information for further PEP program improvement and increase adherence to PEP.Methods: The Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for cohort studies reporting data related to PEP adherence or ADRs (PROSPERO, CRD42022385073). Pooled estimates of adherence, the incidence of ADRs and discontinuation associated with ADRs, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated separately for the included literature using random effects models. For substantial heterogeneity, meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore sources of heterogeneity.Results: Overall adherence was 58.4% (95% CI: 50.9%-65.8%), with subgroup analysis showing differences in adherence across samples, with the highest adherence among men who had sex with men (MSM) (72.4%, 95% CI: 63.4%-81.3%) and the lowest adherence among survivors of sexual assault (SAs) (41.7%, 95% CI: 28.0%-55.3%). The incidence of ADRs was 60.3% (95% CI: 50.3%-70.3%), and the prevalence of PEP discontinuation associated with ADRs was 32.7% (95% CI: 23.7%-41.7%), with subgroup analyses revealing disparities in the prevalence of discontinuation associated with ADRs among samples with different drug regimens. Time trend analysis showed a slight downward trend in the incidence of ADRs and PEP discontinuation associated with ADRs.Conclusion: Adherence to PEP was less than 60% across samples, however, there was significant heterogeneity depending on the samples. SAs had the lowest adherence and the highest incidence of PEP discontinuation. Ongoing adherence education for participants, timely monitoring, and management of ADRs may improve adherence.

Occupational HIV risk for health care workers: risk factor and the risk of infection in the course of professional activities

Virtually created panic among health care workers about pandemic acquired immune deficiency syndrome prompted us to review the scientific literature to investigate the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission in the daily works of health care workers, especially surgeons and anesthesiologists. In this review, we report worldwide valuations of the number of HIV infections that may occur from unsafe daily work in health care. We also present how to minimize the risk of infection by taking precautions and how to utilize postexposure prophylaxis in accordance with the latest reports of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV-infected patients will be aging, and most of them will become the candidates for procedures such as major vascular reconstruction and artery bypass grafting, where the risks of blood contact and staff injury are high. For these reasons, all health care workers need to know how to prevent, and fight following the accidental exposure to HIV.

End Users' Views and Preferences on Prescribing and Taking Postexposure Prophylaxis for Prevention of HIV: Methods to Support World Health Organization Guideline Development

The 2014 World Health Organization guidelines for human immunodeficiency virus postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) are the first to combine recommendations for all populations and exposures. To inform the development of these guidelines, we gathered views of end users on key aspects of PEP provision. A mixed-methods approach was used to gather views from the populations for whom the guideline will be of relevance. Data gathered from an online survey, focus group discussions, and previously collected data from in-depth interviews with key populations were used to inform the development of recommendations, in particular where there is a paucity of evidence to assess the benefits and harms of an intervention. This was a successful method to gather end users' views and preferences; however, limitations exist in the generalizability and reliability of the evidence. Future guideline development processes should consider methods to include the views of end users to guide the decision-making process.

Adverse events and adherence to HIV post-exposure prophylaxis: a cohort study at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Ghana

Background

There is strong evidence that post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with antiretroviral drugs in the timely management of occupational exposures sustained by healthcare workers decreases the risk of HIV infection and PEP is now widely used. Antiretroviral drugs have well documented toxicities and produce adverse events in patients living with HIV/AIDS. In the era of “highly active antiretroviral therapy”, non-adherence to treatment has been closely linked to the occurrence of adverse events in HIV patients and this ultimately influences treatment success but the influence of adverse events on adherence during PEP is less well studied.

Methods

Following the introduction of a HIV post-exposure prophylaxis program in the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in January 2005, the incidence of adverse events and adherence were documented in occupationally-exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) and healthcare students (HCSs). Cohort event monitoring was used in following-up on exposed HCWs/HCSs for the two study outcomes; adverse events and adherence. All adverse events reported were grouped by MedDRA system organ classification and then by preferred term according to prophylaxis regimen. Adherence was determined by the completion of prophylaxis schedule. Cox proportional regression analysis was applied to determine the factors associated with the cohort study outcomes. Differences in frequencies were tested using the Chi square test and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 228 exposed HCWs/HCSs were followed up during the study, made up of 101 exposed HCWs/HCSs administered lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/AZT) for 3 days; 75 exposed HCWs/HCSs administered lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/AZT) for 28 days; and 52 exposed HCWs/HCSs administered lamivudine/zidovudine/lopinavir-ritonavir (3TC/AZT/LPV-RTV) for 28 days. The frequency of adverse events was 28 % (n = 28) in exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 3 days, 91 % (n = 68) in exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 28 days and 96 % (n = 50) in exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT/LPV-RTV for 28 days. Nausea was the most commonly reported adverse events in all three regimens. Adherence was complete in all exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 3days, 56 % (n = 42) in exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 28 days and 62 % (n = 32) in exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT/LPV-RTV for 28 days. In the Cox regression multi-variate analysis, exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 3 days were 70 % less likely to report adverse events compared with exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 28 days (Adjusted HR = 0.30 [95 % CI, 0.18-0.48], p < 0.001). Exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 3 days were 75 % more likely to adhere to the schedule compared with exposed HCWs/HCSs administered 3TC/AZT for 28 days (Adjusted HR = 1.75 [95 % CI, 1.16-2.66], p = 0.008).

Conclusion

The intolerance to adverse events was cited as the sole reason for truncating PEP, thereby indicating the need for adequate, appropriate and effective counselling, education, active follow-up (possibly through mobile /phone contact) and management of adverse events. Education on the need to complete PEP schedule (especially for exposed HCWs/HCSs on 28-day schedule) can lead to increased adherence, which is very critical in minimizing the risk of HIV sero-conversion. The present results also indicate that cohort event monitoring could be an effective pharmacovigilance tool in monitoring adverse events in exposed HCWs/HCSs on HIV post-exposure prophylaxis.

Prevention of human immunodeficiency virus and AIDS: postexposure prophylaxis (including health care workers)

Postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), which is designed to prevent human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection after an exposure, is one of several strategies for HIV prevention. PEP was first used after occupational HIV exposures in the late 1980s, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issuing the first set of guidelines that included considerations regarding the use of antiretroviral agents for PEP after occupational HIV exposures in 1990. Use of PEP has been extended to nonoccupational exposures, including after sexual contact or injection-drug use. This article provides a rationale for PEP, assessment of the need for PEP, and details of its implementation.

Practical guidance for nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection: an editorial review

Postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) with antiretroviral medication has been used as an HIV-prevention strategy for nearly 20 years. The fact that approximately 50 000 new HIV infections occur in the United States each year reflects marked underutilization of nonoccupational PEP (NPEP). There have been several advances in NPEP in the past 10 years. Clinical trials from different countries have demonstrated better tolerability, completion rates, and fewer drug-drug interactions with newer antiretroviral agents. Notably, there has been a shift from zidovudine-based to tenofovir-based regimens. Three-drug therapy is now favored for all potential HIV exposures. More recently, the US Public Health Service and the New York State Department of Health recommended tenofovir/emtricitabine and raltegravir as the first-line regimen universally for PEP. Advances in HIV testing technology may also allow shorter duration of follow-up HIV testing after a high-risk exposure. This review will discuss challenges with previously recommended regimens, newer potential candidate agents and the rationale for using them, intervals for laboratory monitoring, and cost considerations for NPEP. NPEP can be viewed as an educable moment and a potential bridge to preexposure prophylaxis, as part of a combination prevention package, for those who are likely to have recurrent higher-risk exposures. Thus, risk-reduction counseling should be an integral aspect of NPEP.

Ginger for prevention of antiretroviral-induced nausea and vomiting: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

In this randomized clinical trial ginger efficacy for prevention of antiretroviral-induced nausea and vomiting (N/V) was investigated.

METHODS

From July 2011 until the end of June 2013, 102 HIV positive patients attending the HIV clinic of Imam Khomeini Hospital participated in the study. In a double blinded manner, participants randomly received either 500 mg ginger or placebo two times per day, 30 min before each dose of antiretroviral regimen for 14 days. The severity of nausea was assessed based on the visual analogue scale. The number of vomiting episodes were also recorded during the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 46 (90.2%) and 29 (56.4%) of the patients in placebo and ginger groups experienced some degree of nausea during the first 2 weeks of antiretroviral therapy (ART), respectively (p = 0.001). Frequency of mild, moderate and severe nausea were significantly lower in the ginger than placebo group (p = 0. 001). Also, 24 (47.1%) and 5 (9.8%) of the patients in the placebo and ginger groups reported at least one episode of vomiting during their time on ART, respectively (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Ginger was effective in ameliorating of antiretroviral-induced N/V.

Updated US Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to human immunodeficiency virus and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis

This report updates US Public Health Service recommendations for the management of healthcare personnel (HCP) who experience occupational exposure to blood and/or other body fluids that might contain human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Although the principles of exposure management remain unchanged, recommended HIV postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) regimens and the duration of HIV follow-up testing for exposed personnel have been updated. This report emphasizes the importance of primary prevention strategies, the prompt reporting and management of occupational exposures, adherence to recommended HIV PEP regimens when indicated for an exposure, expert consultation in management of exposures, follow-up of exposed HCP to improve adherence to PEP, and careful monitoring for adverse events related to treatment, as well as for virologic, immunologic, and serologic signs of infection. To ensure timely postexposure management and administration of HIV PEP, clinicians should consider occupational exposures as urgent medical concerns, and institutions should take steps to ensure that staff are aware of both the importance of and the institutional mechanisms available for reporting and seeking care for such exposures. The following is a summary of recommendations: (1) PEP is recommended when occupational exposures to HIV occur; (2) the HIV status of the exposure source patient should be determined, if possible, to guide need for HIV PEP; (3) PEP medication regimens should be started as soon as possible after occupational exposure to HIV, and they should be continued for a 4-week duration; (4) new recommendation-PEP medication regimens should contain 3 (or more) antiretroviral drugs (listed in Appendix A ) for all occupational exposures to HIV; (5) expert consultation is recommended for any occupational exposures to HIV and at a minimum for situations described in Box 1 ; (6) close follow-up for exposed personnel ( Box 2 ) should be provided that includes counseling, baseline and follow-up HIV testing, and monitoring for drug toxicity; follow-up appointments should begin within 72 hours of an HIV exposure; and (7) new recommendation-if a newer fourth-generation combination HIV p24 antigen-HIV antibody test is utilized for follow-up HIV testing of exposed HCP, HIV testing may be concluded 4 months after exposure ( Box 2 ); if a newer testing platform is not available, follow-up HIV testing is typically concluded 6 months after an HIV exposure.

Oral preexposure anti-HIV prophylaxis for high-risk U.S. populations: current considerations in light of new findings

This article reviews the status of current research evaluating oral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for prevention of HIV infection in high-risk populations. In animal model studies, the use of antiretrovirals has been shown to be effective in preventing HIV acquisition. Early-phase PrEP studies have established safety in humans. Currently, more than 20,000 men and women will soon be enrolled in studies of oral or topical chemoprophylaxis, testing a variety of drug delivery methods including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) gel applied vaginally or rectally, as well as oral PrEP using TDF by itself or coformulated with emtricitabine (FTC). The largest global PrEP trial in men who have sex with men (MSM), known as iPrEx has demonstrated that oral chemoprophylaxis can decrease HIV incidence in this population. Although TDF/FTC PrEP was generally well tolerated, side effects such as nausea, as well as mild and reversible renal abnormalities were increased among the men who received active medication, suggesting that PrEP users will need ongoing PrEP clinical monitoring. The prophylactic benefits of TDF/FTC were substantially attenuated by nonadherence, indicating that effective PrEP implementation programs will need to focus on this behavioral variable, in addition to safer sex counseling. This article considers biological, policy, and practical implications of large-scale oral PrEP implementation.

Opportunists and Opportunities: The 2010 SHEA Lecture

My experience as a hospital epidemiologist at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center has underscored the importance of aggressively managing infection with opportunistic pathogens and of taking advantage of opportunities as they arise (most often as crises). I review selected aspects of my career and use these as examples of the opportunists and opportunities now facing healthcare epidemiology.

Antiretroviral post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for occupational HIV exposure

BACKGROUND

Populations such as healthcare workers (HCWs), injection drug users (IDUs), and people engaging in unprotected sex are all at risk of being infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Animal models show that after initial exposure, HIV replicates within dendritic cells of the skin and mucosa before spreading through lymphatic vessels and developing into a systemic infection (CDC 2001). This delay in systemic spread leaves a "window of opportunity" for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) using antiretroviral drugs designed to block replication of HIV (CDC 2001). PEP aims to inhibit the replication of the initial inoculum of virus and thereby prevent establishment of chronic HIV infection.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of antiretroviral PEP post-occupational exposure to HIV.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AIDSearch, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness were searched from 1985 to January 2005 to identify controlled trials. There were no language restrictions. Because no controlled clinical trials were retrieved, the search was repeated on 31 May 2005 in MEDLINE, AIDSearch and EMBASE using a search strategy to identify analytic observational studies. Handsearches of the reference lists of all pertinent reviews and studies found were also undertaken. Experts in the field of HIV prevention were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: All controlled trials (including randomized clinical trials and controlled clinical trials). If no controlled trials were found, analytic studies (e.g. cohort and case-control studies) were considered. Descriptive studies (i.e. studies with no comparison groups) were excluded. Types of participants included:HCWs exposed to any known or potentially HIV contaminated product;anyone exposed to a needlestick contaminated by known or potentially HIV-infected blood or other bodily fluid in an occupational setting; andanyone exposed through the mucous membranes to an HIV-infected or potentially infected substance in occupational setting.Excluded: Sex workers (PEP post-sexual exposure is addressed in another Cochrane review (Martín 2005)). Types of interventions: Any intervention that administered single or combinations of antiretrovirals as PEP to people exposed to HIV through percutaneous injuries and/or occupational mucous membrane exposures when the HIV status of the source patient was positive or unknown. Studies comparing two types of PEP regimens were considered, as were studies comparing PEP with no intervention. Types of outcome measures:Incidence of HIV infection in those given PEP versus those given placebo or a different PEP regimen; Adherence to PEP; Complications of PEPTypes of outcome measures: Incidence of HIV infection in those given PEP versus those given placebo or a different PEP regimen; Adherence to PEP; Complications of PEP DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data concerning outcomes, details of the interventions, and other study characteristics were extracted by two independent authors (TY and JA) using a standardized data extraction form (Table 04). A third author (GK) resolved disagreements. The following information was gathered from each included study: location of study, date, publication status, demographics (e.g. age, gender, occupation, risk behavior, etc.) of participants/exposure modality, form of PEP used, duration of use, and outcomes. Odds ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as the measure of effect. A meta-analysis was performed for adverse events where two-drug regimens were compared with three-drug regimens. Due to overlap between Puro 2000 and Puro 2005, the former was not included in the combined analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Effect of PEP on HIV seroconversionNo randomized controlled trials were identified. Only one case-control study was included. HIV transmission was significantly associated with deep injury (OR 15, 95% CI 6.0 to 41), visible blood on the device (OR 6.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 21), procedures involving a needle placed in the source patient's blood vessel (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.7 to 12), and terminal illness in the source patient (OR 5.6, 95% CI 2.0 to 16). After controlling for these risk factors, no differences were detected in the rates at which cases and controls were offered post-exposure prophylaxis with zidovudine. However, cases had significantly lower odds of having taken zidovudine after exposure compared to controls (OR 0.19, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.52). No studies were found that evaluated the effect of two or more antiretroviral drugs for occupational PEP. Adherence to and complications with PEPEight reports from observational comparative studies confirmed findings that adverse events were higher with a three-drug regimen, especially one containing indinavir. However, discontinuation rates were not significantly different.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of occupational PEP is based on limited direct evidence of effect. However, it is highly unlikely that a definitive placebo-controlled trial will ever be conducted, and, therefore, on the basis of results from a single case-control study, a four-week regimen of PEP should be initiated as soon as possible after exposure, depending on the risk of seroconversion. There is no direct evidence to support the use of multi-drug antiretroviral regimens following occupational exposure to HIV. However, due to the success of combination therapies in treating HIV-infected individuals, a combination of antiretroviral drugs should be used for PEP. Healthcare workers should be counseled about expected adverse events and the strategies for managing these. They should also be advised that PEP is not 100% effective in preventing HIV seroconversion. A randomized controlled clinical trial is neither ethical nor practical. Due to the low risk of HIV seroconversion, a very large sample size would be required to have enough power to show an effect. More rigorous evaluation of adverse events, especially in the developing world, are required. Seeing that current practice is partly based on results from individual primary animal studies, we recommend a formal systematic review of all relevant animal studies.

Effects of chronic stavudine exposure on liver, pancreas and kidneys of pregnant rats and their fetuses: morphological and biochemical aspects

OBJECTIVE

To study the morphological and biochemical effects on liver, pancreas and kidney of pregnant rats and their fetuses subjected to stavudine treatment.

METHODS

Forty animals were distributed in four groups E1, E2, E3, and C (control) and received by gavage once a day 1, 3 or 9 mg/kg of stavudine in 2 mL distilled water, from days 1 to 20 of pregnancy. After this period, the animals were sacrificed; blood samples were collected for further determinations of AST, ALT, creatinine, urea, glucose and amylase. Samples of liver, kidneys and pancreas of every rat and of the corresponding fetuses were taken and examined under light microscopy.

RESULTS

The maternal livers of groups E1, E2 and E3 displayed progressive morphological alterations without corresponding changes in serum AST and ALT activity. Maternal kidney histology and function were similar in all groups. Maternal pancreas of groups E2 and E3 evidenced moderate and progressive signs of tissue damage without functional repercussion. All fetal livers, kidneys and pancreas presented normal morphology.

CONCLUSIONS

High doses of stavudine produced signs of mild to moderate maternal hepatic and pancreatic toxicity at the morphological level. This was not followed by changes in biochemical parameters, most conceivably due to the functional reserve of these organs.

Tolerability of Postexposure Prophylaxis with the Combination of Zidovudine-Lamivudine and Lopinavir-Ritonavir for HIV Infection

Tolerability of the combination of zidovudine-lamivudine and lopinavir-ritonavir as postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) for human immunodeficiency virus infection was prospectively assessed. A total of 121 patients were enrolled in the study; 23 patients discontinued PEP prematurely for reasons other than adverse events. Of the other 98 patients, 58 (59%) experienced adverse effects, which led to premature PEP discontinuation in 20 cases (20%).

Prophylaxis of HIV infection

The number of people infected with HIV continues to increase relentlessly. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) following exposure to HIV infection may prevent established HIV infection. Such intervention is supported by biological plausibility and limited data from animal and human studies. Antiretroviral prophylaxis is associated with significant side effects and the risk should be weighed against the potential benefits. PEP should be considered after significant occupational and non-occupational exposures. However, PEP is not suitable for individuals with repeated high-risk behaviour who are not willing to adhere to risk reduction practices. Primary prevention strategies remain the mainstay for control of the HIV epidemic and cannot be replaced by PEP. Guidance for PEP following exposure to HIV infection is available in many countries worldwide.

Stavudine effects on rat pregnancy outcome

OBJECTIVE

Stavudine is an inhibitor of HIV reverse transcriptase and acts as a chain terminator during DNA synthesis. The aim of the study presented here was to evaluate the effects of stavudine during rat pregnancy.

METHODS

Female rats were randomly divided into four treatment groups: GI (treated with the drug vehicle); GII; GIII; and GIV (treated with 1, 3 or 9 mg/kg of stavudine, respectively) (n = 25 pregnant rats for every group). Rats were treated by gavage once daily. The treatment period extended from day 0 until the 20th day of pregnancy. Body weights were recorded weekly during this period. At term, the rats were sacrificed, and the implantation sites and number of fetuses and resorptions were recorded. The fetuses were evaluated for external abnormalities under a stereomicroscope.

RESULTS

No differences in body weight gain between the groups were observed. The mean number of implantations per dam in stavudine-treated groups was higher than in the control group (P < 0.05); however, only GIII presented an increase in the mean number of resorptions compared to the other groups (P < 0.01). The resorption/implantation rate was higher in the GII group and lower in the GIV group as compared to the other groups. Neither the mean fetal weights nor the placental weights differed significantly among the groups. No external anomalies were observed at dissection in rat fetuses, placentae or uteri.

CONCLUSION

Rat pregnancy outcome seems to be affected by stavudine, mainly with respect to the mechanisms of intrauterine concept survival.

Haemodynamic crisis and reversible multiorgan failure caused by HIV post-exposure prophylaxis after needle-stick injury in a health care worker

We report the case of a 59-year-old nurse from our HIV ward who developed a severe haemodynamic crisis with concomitant acute multiorgan failure after initiation of a post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with zidovudine/lamivudine (CombivirTM) and lopinavir/ritonavir (KaletraTM) after a needle-stick injury with an HIV-contaminated needle. Although serious and life-threatening adverse effects of post-exposure prophylaxis have been documented in several cases, this is the first report of a severe acute cardiovascular incident following PEP initiation.