| Literature DB >> 33076996 |
Juan Ignacio García1,2, Johanna Meléndez3, Rosa Álvarez4, Carlos Mejía-Chew5, Holden V Kelley6, Sabeen Sidiki6, Alejandra Castillo7,8, Claudia Mazariegos7,8, Cesar López-Téllez7,8, Diana Forno9, Nancy Ayala10, Joan-Miquel Balada-Llasat11, Carlos Rodolfo Mejía-Villatoro3, Shu-Hua Wang12, Jordi B Torrelles13, Janet Ikeda14,15.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improved point-of-care diagnostic tests for tuberculosis (TB) in severe immune suppressed people living with HIV (PLWH) are needed to decrease morbidity and mortality outcomes. The aim of the study is to evaluate the performance of the lipoarabinomannan antigen test (LAM-test) with and without α-mannosidase pre-treated urine in a cohort of PLWH in primary care clinics in Guatemala. We further determined TB incidence, and mortality rates and its risk factors in PLWH with TB symptoms.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; Lipoarabinomannan antigen; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Point-of-care diagnosis; Tuberculosis; Urine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33076996 PMCID: PMC7570414 DOI: 10.1186/s12981-020-00318-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AIDS Res Ther ISSN: 1742-6405 Impact factor: 2.846
Characteristics at baseline registration of PLWH enroled by Site
| Variable | Sitea1, n = 266 | Sitea 2, n = 95 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| nc | %d | nc | %d | |||
| Age | Median (IQR) | 264 | 36 (28–51) | 95 | 36 (31–44) | 0.831 |
| Sex | 266 | 95 | 0.229 | |||
| Male | 71.54 | 77.89 | ||||
| Female | 28.46 | 22.11 | ||||
| Diabetese | 245 | 32 | < 0.001 | |||
| Yes | 3.27 | 50.00 | ||||
| No | 96.73 | 50.00 | ||||
| BMIf | 217 | 95 | 0.146 | |||
| 19.71 (17.34–22.40) | 18.82 (16.60–21.50) | |||||
| TB symptoms | ||||||
| Cough | 264 | 71 | 0.639 | |||
| Yes | 72.24 | 74.74 | ||||
| Weight lost | 265 | 91 | NA | |||
| Yes | 48.11 | 100 | ||||
| Night sweating | 264 | 95 | 0.002 | |||
| Yes | 48.11 | 66.32 | ||||
| Fever | 263 | 79 | NA | |||
| Yes | 39.54 | 100 | ||||
| CD4 values at baseline | 247 | 95 | < 0.001 | |||
| 185.50 (89–398) | 49 (19–121) | |||||
| Viral load (copies/ml) | 241 | 95 | 0.059 | |||
| 39 200 (861–173 000) | 93 616 (6044–242 469) | |||||
| cART regimeng | 226 | 95 | < 0.001 | |||
| 1st line | 89.38 | 34.74 | ||||
| 2nd line | 10.62 | 65.26 | ||||
| cART defaulters | ||||||
| Yes | 18.72 | 18.00 | 0.431 | |||
| Death | 260 | 95 | ||||
| Yes | 11.20 | 27.37 | < 0.001 |
NA Not applied
aSite = Site 1 includes UAI 1 = “Dr. Isaac Cohen Alcahé” UAI and Rodolfo Robles Hospital. Site 2 includes UAI 2 = “Dr. Carlos Rodolfo Mejía-Villatoro” UAI and Roosevelt Hospital
bPearson’s Chi squared p values for categorical variables and Mann-Whitney median comparison p value for independent samples
cVariable sample size
dData are number (%) or median (IQR)
eHba1c measurements in % above 6.15 were considered the threshold for diabetic patients
fIn kg/m2
g1st line regimens are based on a-ABC in combination with 3TC and either EFV or NVP or LPV/RTV, or ABC in combination with AZT and either EFV or LPV/RTV, or ABC in combination with TDF and EFV; b-AZT in combination with 3TC and either EFV, or NVP, or LPV/RTV or ABC; c-TDF in combination with FTC and either 3TC, or EFV, or NVP, or LPV/RTV, or AZT and 3TC
2nd line regimens are based on: a-ABC in combination with AZT and LPV/RTV, or in combination with DDI plus EFV, or DDI plus NVP or DDI plus SQV/RTV, b-AZT in combination with 3TC plus ATV, or ATV/RTV or ATV/SQV, or AZT in combination with DDI plus LPV/RTV, c-DDI in combination TDF and EFV, or DDI in combination with 3TC plus NVP, or EFV, or SQV/RTV, or LPV/RTV
3rd line regimens and regimens including RAL, DRV, MRV used due to genetic resistance are included in 2nd line regimens. AZT (azidovudine), FTC (emtricitabine), TDF (tenofovir), NVP (nevirapine), ABC (abacabir), 3TC (lamivudine), LPV/RTV (lopinavir/ritonavir), EFV (efavirenz), ATV (atazanavir), RAL (raltegravir), DRV (darunavir), MRV (maraviroc), DDI (didanosine)
Fig. 1Patient flowchart for analyses of LAM and α-mannosidase urine LAM-test sensitivity and specificity and for mortality predictors
Sensitivity and specificity comparisons of LAM test after α-mannosidase treatment of urine vs. LAM test by Site and CD4 values using a composite gold standard
| LAM after α-mannosidase treatment of urine | LAM alone | LAM after α-mannosidase treatment of urine | LAM alone | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All CD4 values | Sensitivity (% (95% CI) | Sensitivity (% (95% CI) | Specificity (% (95% CI) | Specificity (% (95% CI) | ||||||
| Positive/N | Positive/N | Negative/N | Negative/N | |||||||
| Both Sitesa | 37/59 | 56.9 (44–69.2) | 37/59 | 55.2 (42.6–67.4) | 1 | 204/232 | 90.3 (85.6–93.8) | 202/232 | 90.2 (85.5–93.7) | 0.946 |
| Site1 | 26/41 | 52 (37.4–66.3) | 26/41 | 49.1 (35.1–63.2) | 1 | 194/218 | 92.8 (88.4–95.9) | 191/218 | 92.7 (88.3–95.9) | 0.944 |
| Site 2 | 11/18 | 73.3 (44.9–92.2) | 11/18 | 78.6 (49.2–95.3) | 1 | 10/14 | 58.8 (32.9–81.6) | 11/14 | 61.1 (35.7–82.7) | 1 |
aSite = Site 1 includes UAI 1 = “Dr. Isaac Cohen Alcahé” UAI and Rodolfo Robles Hospital. Site 2 includes UAI 2 = “Dr. Carlos Rodolfo Mejía” UAI and Roosevelt Hospital
b Fischer exact Chi square test was used in comparisons among UAI
Adjusted (aHR) Cox Hazard ratios for predictors of mortality in 343 PLWH with TB symptoms by Site
| Both Sitesa | Site 1a | Site 2a | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| aHR | aHR | aHR | ||||
| Ageb | ||||||
| ≤ 20 | ref | ref | NA | NA | ||
| 21–30 | 2.42 (0.29–20.17) | 0.412 | 1.00 (0.12–8.43) | 0.998 | ref | |
| 31–40 | 2.26(0.27–18.53) | 0.448 | 0.63 (0.07–5.30) | 0.673 | 1.01 (0.30–3.46) | 0.983 |
| 41–50 | 2.33 (0.28–19.06) | 0.43 | 1.08 (0.13–8.69) | 0.943 | 0.71 (0.16–3.06) | 0.643 |
| 51–60 | 2.72 (0.31–24.20) | 0.368 | 0.23 (0.01–3.91) | 0.307 | 2.20 (0.56–8.66) | 0.257 |
| >60 | 1.43 (0.13–15.66) | 0.957 | 0.69 (0.07–6.32) | 0.741 | NA | NA |
| Sex | ||||||
| Men | ref | ref | ref | |||
| Women | 1.31 (0.65–2.61) | 0.448 | 0.51 (0.14–1.87) | 0.312 | 2.43 (1.09–5.43) | 0.03 |
| Diabetesc | ||||||
| No | ref | ref | ref | |||
| Yes | 0.67 (0.12–3.86) | 0.658 | NA | NA | 0.52 (0.07–4.32) | 0.543 |
| BMId | ||||||
| ≥ 17 kg/m2 | ref | ref | ref | |||
| < 17 kg/m2 | 1.41 (0.72– 2.79) | 0.317 | 0.58 (0.12–2.73) | 0.495 | 2.77 (1.11–6.92) | 0.029 |
| ARTe | ||||||
| 1st line | ref | ref | ref | |||
| 2nd line | 2.39 (1.12–5.07) | 0.023 | 6.79 (2.16–21.31) | 0.001 | 0.93 (0.42–2.05) | 0.853 |
| LAM | ||||||
| Negative | ref | ref | ref | |||
| Positive | 1.98 (1.02–3.84) | 0.044 | 1.08 (0.32–3.67) | 0.897 | 2.10 (0.94–4.67) | 0.069 |
NA Not applied due to sample size limitations
The following confounders were used for adjustment: Age, sex, CD4 values, cART, viral load values, and WHO HIV stage
a Site = Site 1 includes UAI 1 = “Dr. Isaac Cohen Alcahé” UAI and Rodolfo Robles Hospital
Site 2 includes UAI 2 = “Dr. Carlos Rodolfo Mejía” UAI and Roosevelt Hospital
b Age was used as a continuous variable in the multivariable Cox regression for “Dr. Carlos Rodolfo Mejía-Villatoro” UAI
c Hba1c measurements in % above 6.15 were considered the threshold for diabetic patients
d In kg/m2
e1st and 2nd line regimens are shown in Table 1
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier survival estimates by LAM-test result