Background and ObjectiveSignificant controversy still exists about ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy (mtPI/rtv) as a simplification strategy that is used up to now to treat patients that have not experienced previous virological failure (VF) while on protease inhibitor (PI) -based regimens. We have evaluated the effectiveness of two mtPI/rtv regimens in an actual clinical practice setting, including patients that had experienced previous VF with PI-based regimens.MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed 1060 HIV-infected patients with undetectable viremia that were switched to lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy. In cases in which the patient had previously experienced VF while on a PI-based regimen, the lack of major HIV protease resistance mutations to lopinavir or darunavir, respectively, was mandatory. The primary endpoint of this study was the percentage of participants with virological suppression after 96 weeks according to intention-to-treat analysis (non-complete/missing = failure).ResultsA total of 1060 patients were analyzed, including 205 with previous VF while on PI-based regimens, 90 of whom were on complex therapies due to extensive resistance. The rates of treatment effectiveness (intention-to-treat analysis) and virological efficacy (on-treatment analysis) at week 96 were 79.3% (CI95, 76.8−81.8) and 91.5% (CI95, 89.6–93.4), respectively. No relationships were found between VF and earlier VF while on PI-based regimens, the presence of major or minor protease resistance mutations, the previous time on viral suppression, CD4+ T-cell nadir, and HCV-coinfection. Genotypic resistance tests were available in 49 out of the 74 patients with VFs and only four patients presented new major protease resistance mutations.ConclusionSwitching to mtPI/rtv achieves sustained virological control in most patients, even in those with previous VF on PI-based regimens as long as no major resistance mutations are present for the administered drug.

As in patients with cirrhosis, immediate therapy against HCV is warranted for patients with precirrhosis and HIV coinfection, as they are at risk of DC soon after the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis.

Bacteraemia or bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with much morbidity and mortality. Management of patients with bacteraemia is complex, and the increase in immunosuppressed patients and multidrug-resistant organisms poses additional challenges. The objective of this review is to assess the available published information about the impact of different aspects of management on the outcome of patients with BSI, and, specifically, the importance of infectious diseases specialists (IDS) consultation. The impact of management by IDS on different aspects, including interpretation of newer rapid techniques, early evaluation and treatment, and follow up, are reviewed. Overall, the available data suggest that IDS intervention improves the management and outcome of patients with BSI, either through consultation or structured unsolicited interventions in the context of multidisciplinary bacteraemia programmes.

The implementation of hepatitis C (HCV) direct-acting antiviral drugs is prioritized in several populations in which its application provides the most immediate and impactful benefit. In this scenario, a precise knowledge of the situation of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV chronic co-infection is required to adequately address this disease. This cross-sectional study was performed in 21 hospitals in Andalusia (Spain). The study population consisted of HIV-infected patients with an active HCV chronic infection who were not receiving HCV treatment at the time of inclusion. A total of 13,506 HIV-infected patients were included in the study. Of them, 2561 (18.9 %) presented chronic HCV infection. The majority of the patients included were on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART; 96.2 %), showed plasma levels with an undetectable HIV viral load (92.5 %), and had a good immunological status (median CD4+ cell count of 486 cells/mL). The HCV genotype distribution was as follows: 58.1 % were genotype 1, 1.1 % were genotype 2, 16.1 % were genotype 3, and 22.1 % were genotype 4 (2.6 % were missing data). In total, 24.8 % of the patients showed liver fibrosis stage F0–F1, 27.9 % showed stage F2, 16.7 % showed stage F3, and 21 % showed stage F4 (9.6 % were missing data). With regards to previous HCV treatment experiences, 68.05 % of the patients were naïve and 31.95 % had failed to respond to a previous treatment. The burden of HCV/HIV co-infected patients in our population was reported as one in five HIV-infected patients requiring HCV treatment. The implementation of extra resources to face this important health challenge is mandatory.

In April 2015, the Spanish National Health System (SNHS) developed a national strategic plan for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of hepatitis C virus (HCV). Our aim was to analyze the impact of this on human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients included in the HERACLES cohort during the first 6 months of its implementation. The HERACLES cohort (NCT02511496) was set up in March 2015 to evaluate the status and follow-up of chronic HCV infection in patients co-infected with HIV in the south of Spain. In September 2015, the data were analyzed to identify clinical events (death, liver decompensation, and liver fibrosis progression) and rate of treatment implementation in this population. The study population comprised a total of 3474 HIV/HCV co-infected patients. The distribution according to liver fibrosis stage was: 1152 F0–F1 (33.2 %); 513 F2 (14.4 %); 641 F3 (18.2 %); 761 F4 (21.9 %); and 407 whose liver fibrosis was not measured (12.3 %). During follow-up, 248 patients progressed by at least one fibrosis stage [7.1 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 6.3–8 %]. Among cirrhotic patients, 52 (6.8 %; 95 % CI: 5.2–8.9 %) developed hepatic decompensation. In the overall population, 50 patients died (1.4 %; 95 % CI: 1.1–1.9 %). Eight hundred and nineteen patients (23.56 %) initiated interferon (IFN)-free treatment during follow-up, of which 47.8 % were cirrhotic. In our study, during 6 months of follow-up, 23.56 % of HIV/HCV co-infected patients included in our cohort received HCV treatment. However, we observed a high incidence of negative short-term outcomes in our population.