首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet Global Health >Community-based antiretroviral therapy versus standard clinic-based services for HIV in South Africa and Uganda (DO ART): a randomised trial
【24h】

Community-based antiretroviral therapy versus standard clinic-based services for HIV in South Africa and Uganda (DO ART): a randomised trial

机译:基于社区的抗逆转录病毒治疗与南非和乌干达艾滋病毒的标准诊所服务(DO艺术):随机试验

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background Community-based delivery of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV, including ART initiation, clinical and laboratory monitoring, and refills, could reduce barriers to treatment and improve viral suppression, reducing the gap in access to care for individuals who have detectable HIV viral load, including men who are less likely than women to be virally suppressed. We aimed to test the effect of community-based ART delivery on viral suppression among people living with HIV not on ART. Methods We did a household-randomised, unblinded trial (DO ART) of delivery of ART in the community compared with the clinic in rural and peri-urban settings in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa and the Sheema District, Uganda. After community-based HIV testing, people living with HIV were randomly assigned (1:1:1) with mobile phone software to community-based ART initiation with quarterly monitoring and ART refills through mobile vans; ART initiation at the clinic followed by mobile van monitoring and refills (hybrid approach); or standard clinic ART initiation and refills. The primary outcome was HIV viral suppression at 12 months. If the difference in viral suppression was not superior between study groups, an a-priori test for non-inferiority was done to test for a relative risk (RR) of more than 0·95. The cost per person virally suppressed was a co-primary outcome of the study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02929992 . Findings Between May 26, 2016, and March 28, 2019, of 2479 assessed for eligibility, 1315 people living with HIV and not on ART with detectable viral load at baseline were randomly assigned; 666 (51%) were men. Retention at the month 12 visit was 95% (n=1253). At 12 months, community-based ART increased viral suppression compared with the clinic group (306 [74%] vs 269 [63%], RR 1·18, 95% CI 1·07–1·29; psuperiority=0·0005) and the hybrid approach was non-inferior (282 [68%] vs 269 [63%], RR 1·08, 0·98–1·19; pnon-inferiority=0·0049). Community-based ART increased viral suppression among men (73%, RR 1·34, 95% CI 1·16–1·55; psuperiority0·0001) as did the hybrid approach (66%, RR 1·19, 1·02–1·40; psuperiority=0·026), compared with clinic-based ART (54%). Viral suppression was similar for men (n=156 [73%]) and women (n=150 [75%]) in the community-based ART group. With efficient scale-up, community-based ART could cost US$275–452 per person reaching viral suppression. Community-based ART was considered safe, with few adverse events. Interpretation In high and medium HIV prevalence settings in South Africa and Uganda, community-based delivery of ART significantly increased viral suppression compared with clinic-based ART, particularly among men, eliminating disparities in viral suppression by gender. Community-based ART should be implemented and evaluated in different contexts for people with detectable viral load. Funding The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; the University of Washington and Fred Hutch Center for AIDS Research; the Wellcome Trust; the University of Washington Royalty Research Fund; and the University of Washington King K Holmes Endowed Professorship in STDs and AIDS.
机译:背景技术基于背景的抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)的艾滋病毒(术语)的递送,包括艺术发起,临床和实验室监测和重新填充,可以降低治疗的障碍,提高病毒抑制,降低了对具有可检测的艾滋病毒病毒的个体的差距负荷,包括比女性更不可能被视为公民抑制的人。我们旨在测试艾滋病病毒治疗艾滋病毒的人们对艾滋病毒的病毒镇压的影响。方法与乌干达南非和乌干达塞默默区的农村和围城区环境中的诊所相比,我们在社区中提供了艺术艺术的家庭随机化,未粘性的审判(DO艺术品)。在基于社区的艾滋病毒检测后,艾滋病毒的人们随机分配(1:1:1),手机软件与季度监测和艺术品通过移动货车汇总的社区艺术启动;诊所的艺术启动,然后是移动范测监测和重新填充(混合方法);或标准诊所艺术启动和重新填充。主要结果在12个月内为HIV病毒抑制。如果研究组之间的病毒抑制差异不是优越的,则对非较低性的A-priori测试是为了测试超过0·95的相对风险(RR)。每人的成本是病毒抑制的是该研究的共同原发性结果。本研究在ClincoicalTrials.gov中注册,NCT02929992。 2016年5月26日和2019年3月28日的调查结果为2479年,评估资格,1315人患有艾滋病毒的人,而不是在基线的可检测病毒载量的艺术中被随机分配; 666(51%)是男性。 12月份访问的保留是95%(n = 1253)。 12个月,与临床组相比,基于社区的艺术增加了病毒抑制(306 [74%],RR1·18,95%CI 1·07-1·29; PSUPERIORY = 0·0005 [杂化方法是否是非劣等的(282 [68%] Vs 269 [63%],RR 1·08,0·98-1·19; PNON-DEMIORITY = 0·0049)。基于社区的艺术增加了男性病毒抑制(73%,RR 1·34,95%CI 1·16-1·55; PsuperioRity <0·0001)和混合方法(66%,RR 1·19,1 ·02-1·40; PSUPERIORITY = 0·026),与基于临床的艺术(54%)相比。病毒抑制对于男性(n = 156 [73%])和女性(n = 150 [75%])在基于社区的艺术组。随着高效的扩大,社区艺术可能占达到病毒抑制的每人275-452美元。基于社区的艺术被认为是安全的,少数不良事件。在南非和乌干达的高中艾滋病毒流行环境中解释,基于社区的艺术递送显着增加了病毒抑制与临床的艺术,特别是男性,消除了性别的病毒抑制的差异。应在可检测病毒载荷的人的不同背景下实施和评估社区艺术。资助比尔和梅琳达盖茨基金会;华盛顿大学和弗雷德·艾滋病研究中心;惠康信托;华盛顿州大学研究基金;和华盛顿王大学K福尔摩斯赋予了STDS和艾滋病的教授。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号