BackgroundBone demineralization, which leads to osteoporosis and increased fracture risk, is a common metabolic disorder in HIV-infected individuals. In this study, we aimed to assess the change in bone quality using quantitative ultrasound (QUS) over 96 weeks of follow-up after initiation of second-line treatment, and to identify factors associated with change in bone quality.Methods and findingsIn a randomized trial (ANRS 12169), TDF and PI-naïve participants failing standard first-line treatment, from Burkina Faso, Cameroon, and Senegal were randomized to receive either TDF/FTC/LPVr, ABC/ddI/LPVr or TDF/FTC/DRVr. Their bone quality was assessed using calcaneal QUS at baseline and every 24 weeks until week 96. Stiffness index (SI) was used to measure bone quality.Out of 228 participants, 168 (74%) were women. At baseline, median age was 37 years (IQR: 33–46 years) and median T-CD4 count was 199 cells/μl (IQR: 113–319 cells/μl). The median duration of first-line antiretroviral treatment (ART) was 52 months (IQR: 36–72 months) and the median baseline SI was 101 (IQR: 87–116). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with baseline SI were sex (β = -10.8 [-18.1,-3.5] for women), age (β = -8.7 [-12.4,-5.1] per 10 years), body mass index (BMI) (β = +0.8 [0.1,1.5] per unit of BMI), and study site (β = +12.8 [6.5,19.1] for Cameroon). After 96 weeks of second-line therapy, a reduction of 7.1% in mean SI was observed, as compared with baseline. Factors associated with SI during the follow-up were similar to those found at baseline. Exposure to TDF was not associated with a greater loss of bone quality over time.ConclusionBone quality decreased after second-line ART initiation in African patients independently of TDF exposure. Factors associated with bone quality include age, sex, baseline BMI, study site, and duration of follow-up.

Background While dolutegravir has been added by WHO as a preferred second-line option for the treatment of HIV infection, boosted protease inhibitor (bPI)-based regimens are still needed as alternative second-line options. Identifying optimal bPI-based second-line combinations is essential, given associated high costs and funding constraints in low-and middleincome countries. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of three alternative bPI-based second-line regimens in Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Senegal. Methods We used data collected over 2010-2015 in the 2LADY trial/post-trial cohort. Patients with first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure were randomly assigned to tenofovir/emtricitabine + lopinavir/ritonavir (TDF/FTC LPV/r; arm A), abacavir + didanosine + lopinavir/ritonavir (arm B), or tenofovir/emtricitabine + darunavir/ritonavir (arm C). Costs (US dollars, 2016), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were computed for each country over 24 months of follow-up and extrapolated to 5 years using a simulated patient-level Markov model. We assessed uncertainty using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, scenarios and prices threshold analysis. Results In each country, over 24 months, arm A was significantly less costly than arms B and C