BackgroundGlobally, the population of adolescents living with perinatally acquired HIV (APHs) continues to expand. In this study, we pooled data from observational pediatric HIV cohorts and cohort networks, allowing comparisons of adolescents with perinatally acquired HIV in “real-life” settings across multiple regions. We describe the geographic and temporal characteristics and mortality outcomes of APHs across multiple regions, including South America and the Caribbean, North America, Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, and South and Southeast Asia.Methods and findingsThrough the Collaborative Initiative for Paediatric HIV Education and Research (CIPHER), individual retrospective longitudinal data from 12 cohort networks were pooled. All children infected with HIV who entered care before age 10 years, were not known to have horizontally acquired HIV, and were followed up beyond age 10 years were included in this analysis conducted from May 2016 to January 2017. Our primary analysis describes patient and treatment characteristics of APHs at key time points, including first HIV-associated clinic visit, antiretroviral therapy (ART) start, age 10 years, and last visit, and compares these characteristics by geographic region, country income group (CIG), and birth period. Our secondary analysis describes mortality, transfer out, and lost to follow-up (LTFU) as outcomes at age 15 years, using competing risk analysis. Among the 38,187 APHs included, 51% were female, 79% were from sub-Saharan Africa and 65% lived in low-income countries. APHs from 51 countries were included (Europe: 14 countries and 3,054 APHs; North America: 1 country and 1,032 APHs; South America and the Caribbean: 4 countries and 903 APHs; South and Southeast Asia: 7 countries and 2,902 APHs; sub-Saharan Africa, 25 countries and 30,296 APHs). Observation started as early as 1982 in Europe and 1996 in sub-Saharan Africa, and continued until at least 2014 in all regions. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of adolescent follow-up was 3.1 (1.5–5.2) years for the total cohort and 6.4 (3.6–8.0) years in Europe, 3.7 (2.0–5.4) years in North America, 2.5 (1.2–4.4) years in South and Southeast Asia, 5.0 (2.7–7.5) years in South America and the Caribbean, and 2.1 (0.9–3.8) years in sub-Saharan Africa. Median (IQR) age at first visit differed substantially by region, ranging from 0.7 (0.3–2.1) years in North America to 7.1 (5.3–8.6) years in sub-Saharan Africa. The median age at ART start varied from 0.9 (0.4–2.6) years in North America to 7.9 (6.0–9.3) years in sub-Saharan Africa. The cumulative incidence estimates (95% confidence interval [CI]) at age 15 years for mortality, transfers out, and LTFU for all APHs were 2.6% (2.4%–2.8%), 15.6% (15.1%–16.0%), and 11.3% (10.9%–11.8%), respectively. Mortality was lowest in Europe (0.8% [0.5%–1.1%]) and highest in South America and the Caribbean (4.4% [3.1%–6.1%]). However, LTFU was lowest in South America and the Caribbean (4.8% [3.4%–6.7%]) and highest in sub-Saharan Africa (13.2% [12.6%–13.7%]). Study limitat...

Introduction Since 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that all people living with HIV (PLHIV) initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART), irrespective of CD4+ count or clinical stage. National adoption of universal treatment has accelerated since WHO's 2015 “Treat All” recommendation; however, little is known about the translation of this guidance into practice. This study aimed to assess the status of Treat All implementation across regions, countries, and levels of the health care delivery system. Methods Between June and December 2017, 201/221 (91%) adult HIV treatment sites that participate in the global IeDEA research consortium completed a survey on capacity and practices related to HIV care. Located in 41 countries across seven geographic regions, sites provided information on the status and timing of site‐level introduction of Treat All, as well as site‐level practices related to ART initiation. Results Almost all sites (93%) reported that they had begun implementing Treat All, and there were no statistically significant differences in site‐level Treat All introduction by health facility type, urban/rural location, sector (public/private) or country income level. The median time between national policy adoption and site‐level introduction was one month. In countries where Treat All was not yet adopted in national guidelines, 69% of sites reported initiating all patients on ART, regardless of clinical criteria, and these sites had been implementing Treat All for a median period of seven months at the time of the survey. The majority of sites (77%) reported typically initiating patients on ART within 14 days of confirming diagnosis, with 60% to 62% of sites implementing Treat All in East, Southern and West Africa reporting same‐day ART initiation for most patients. Conclusions By mid‐ to late‐2017, the Treat All strategy was the standard of care at almost all IeDEA sites, including rural, primary‐level health facilities in low‐resource settings. While further assessments of site‐level capacity to provide high‐quality HIV care under Treat All and to support sustained viral suppression after ART initiation are needed, the widespread introduction of Treat All at the service delivery level is a critical step towards global targets for ending the HIV epidemic as a public health threat.

Children receiving ART in this resource-poor setting were at the highest risk of dying in the first 2 months of ART, particularly when they presented with malnutrition or oral candidiasis. Optimal timing of ART initiation during nutritional rehabilitation should be determined. Promotion of early care seeking, strengthened health care, and prevention services are important to further improve outcome of pediatric ART in resource-poor settings.

Introduction Interruptions in treatment pose risks for people with HIV (PWH) and threaten progress in ending the HIV epidemic; however, the COVID‐19 pandemic's impact on HIV service delivery across diverse settings is not broadly documented. Methods From September 2020 to March 2021, the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium surveyed 238 HIV care sites across seven geographic regions to document constraints in HIV service delivery during the first year of the pandemic and strategies for ensuring care continuity for PWH. Descriptive statistics were stratified by national HIV prevalence (<1%, 1–4.9% and ≥5%) and country income levels. Results Questions about pandemic‐related consequences for HIV care were completed by 225 (95%) sites in 42 countries with low ( n = 82), medium ( n = 86) and high ( n = 57) HIV prevalence, including low‐ ( n = 57), lower‐middle ( n = 79), upper‐middle ( n = 39) and high‐ ( n = 50) income countries. Most sites reported being subject to pandemic‐related restrictions on travel, service provision or other operations (75%), and experiencing negative impacts (76%) on clinic operations, including decreased hours/days, reduced provider availability, clinic reconfiguration for COVID‐19 services, record‐keeping interruptions and suspension of partner support. Almost all sites in low‐prevalence and high‐income countries reported increased use of telemedicine (85% and 100%, respectively), compared with less than half of sites in high‐prevalence and lower‐income settings. Few sites in high‐prevalence settings (2%) reported suspending antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinic services, and many reported adopting mitigation strategies to support adherence, including multi‐month dispensing of ART (95%) and designating community ART pick‐up points (44%). While few sites (5%) reported stockouts of first‐line ART regimens, 10–11% reported stockouts of second‐ and third‐line regimens, respectively, primarily in high‐prevalence and lower‐income settings. Interruptions in HIV viral load (VL) testing included suspension of testing (22%), longer turnaround times (41%) and supply/reagent stockouts (22%), but did not differ across settings. Conclusions While many sites in high HIV prevalence settings and lower‐income countries reported introducing or expanding measures to support treatment adherence and continuity of care, the COVID‐19 pandemic resulted in disruptions to VL testing and ART supply chains that may negatively affect the quality of HIV care in these settings.

Background Estimates of incidence of switching to second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) among children with HIV are necessary to inform the need for paediatric second-line formulations. We aimed to quantify the cumulative incidence of switching to second-line ART among children in an international cohort collaboration. Methods In this international cohort collaboration study, we pooled individual patient-level data for children younger than 18 years who initiated ART (two or more nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors [NRTI] plus a non-NRTI [NNRTI] or boosted protease inhibitor) between 1993 and 2015 from 12 observational cohort networks in the Collaborative Initiative for Paediatric HIV Education and Research (CIPHER) Global Cohort Collaboration. Patients who were reported to be horizontally infected with HIV and those who were enrolled in trials of treatment monitoring, switching, or interruption strategies were excluded. Switch to second-line ART was defined as change of one or more NRTI plus either change in drug class (NNRTI to protease inhibitor or vice versa) or protease inhibitor change, change from single to dual protease inhibitor, or addition of a new drug class. We used cumulative incidence curves to assess time to switching, and multivariable proportional hazards models to explore patient-level and cohort-level factors associated with switching, with death and loss to follow-up as competing risks. Findings At the data cutoff of Sept 16, 2015, 182 747 children with HIV were included in the CIPHER dataset, of whom 93 351 were eligible, with 83 984 (90•0%) from sub-Saharan Africa. At ART initiation, the median patient age was 3•9 years (IQR 1•6-6•9) and 82 885 (88•8%) patients initiated NNRTI-based and 10 466 (11•2%) initiated protease inhibitor-based regimens. Median duration of follow-up after ART initiation was 26 months (IQR 9-52). 3883 (4•2%) patients switched to second-line ART after a median of 35 months (IQR 20-57) of ART. The cumulative incidence of switching at 3 years was 3•1% (95% CI 3•0-3•2), but this estimate varied widely depending on the cohort monitoring strategy, from 6•8% (6•5-7•2) in settings with routine monitoring of CD4 (CD4% or CD4 count) and viral load to 0•8% (0•6-1•0) in settings with clinical only monitoring. In multivariable analyses, patient-level factors associated with an increased likelihood of switching were male sex, older age at ART initiation, and initial NNRTI-based regimen (p<0•0001). Cohort-level factors that increased the likelihood of switching were higher-income country (p=0•0017) and routine or targeted monitoring of CD4 and viral load (p<0•0001), which was associated with a 166% increase in likelihood of switching compared with CD4 only monitoring (subdistributional hazard ratio 2•66, 95% CI 2•22-3•19). Interpretation Our global paediatric analysis found wide variations in the incidence of switching to second-line ART across monitoring strategies. These findings suggest the scale-up of viral load monitoring would probably increase demand for paediatri...