Adaptive Strategies for Retention in Care among Persons Living with HIV.


Journal

NEJM evidence
ISSN: 2766-5526
Titre abrégé: NEJM Evid
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9918317485806676

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2023
Historique:
medline: 25 12 2023
pubmed: 25 12 2023
entrez: 25 12 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Optimizing retention in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment may require sequential behavioral interventions based on patients' response. In a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial in Kenya, we randomly assigned adults initiating HIV treatment to standard of care (SOC), Short Message Service (SMS) messages, or conditional cash transfers (CCT). Those with retention lapse (missed a clinic visit by ≥14 days) were randomly assigned again to standard-of-care outreach (SOC-Outreach), SMS+CCT, or peer navigation. Those randomly assigned to SMS or CCT who did not lapse after 1 year were randomly assigned again to either stop or continue the initial intervention. Primary outcomes were retention in care without an initial lapse, return to the clinic among those who lapsed, and time in care; secondary outcomes included adjudicated viral suppression. Average treatment effect (ATE) was calculated using targeted maximum likelihood estimation with adjustment for baseline characteristics at randomization and certain time-varying characteristics at rerandomization. Among 1809 participants, 79.7% of those randomly assigned to CCT (n=523/656), 71.7% to SMS (n=393/548), and 70.7% to SOC (n=428/605) were retained in care in the first year (ATE: 9.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.4%, 14.4% and ATE: 4.2%; 95% CI: -0.7%, 9.2% for CCT and SMS compared with SOC, respectively). Among 312 participants with an initial lapse who were randomly assigned again, 69.1% who were randomly assigned to a navigator (n=76/110) returned, 69.5% randomly assigned to CCT+SMS (n=73/105) returned, and 55.7% randomly assigned to SOC-Outreach (n=54/97) returned (ATE: 14.1%; 95% CI: 0.6%, 27.6% and ATE: 11.4%; 95% CI: -2.2%, 24.9% for navigator and CCT+SMS compared with SOC-Outreach, respectively). Among participants without lapse on SMS, continuing SMS did not affect retention (n=122/180; 67.8% retained) versus stopping (n=151/209; 72.2% retained; ATE: -4.4%; 95% CI: -16.6%, 7.9%). Among participants without lapse on CCT, those continuing CCT had higher retention (n=192/230; 83.5% retained) than those stopping (n=173/287; 60.3% retained; ATE: 28.6%; 95% CI: 19.9%, 37.3%). Among 15 sequenced strategies, initial CCT, escalated to navigator if lapse occurred and continued if no lapse occurred, increased time in care (ATE: 7.2%, 95% CI: 3.7%, 10.7%) and viral suppression (ATE: 8.2%, 95% CI: 2.2%, 14.2%), the most compared with SOC throughout. Initial SMS escalated to navigator if lapse occurred, and otherwise continued, showed similar effect sizes compared with SOC throughout. Active interventions to prevent retention lapses followed by navigation for those who lapse and maintenance of initial intervention for those without lapse resulted in best overall retention and viral suppression among the strategies studied. Among those who remained in care, discontinuation of CCT, but not SMS, compromised retention and suppression. (Funded by National Institutes of Health grants R01 MH104123, K24 AI134413, and R01 AI074345; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338739.).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Optimizing retention in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment may require sequential behavioral interventions based on patients' response.
METHODS METHODS
In a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial in Kenya, we randomly assigned adults initiating HIV treatment to standard of care (SOC), Short Message Service (SMS) messages, or conditional cash transfers (CCT). Those with retention lapse (missed a clinic visit by ≥14 days) were randomly assigned again to standard-of-care outreach (SOC-Outreach), SMS+CCT, or peer navigation. Those randomly assigned to SMS or CCT who did not lapse after 1 year were randomly assigned again to either stop or continue the initial intervention. Primary outcomes were retention in care without an initial lapse, return to the clinic among those who lapsed, and time in care; secondary outcomes included adjudicated viral suppression. Average treatment effect (ATE) was calculated using targeted maximum likelihood estimation with adjustment for baseline characteristics at randomization and certain time-varying characteristics at rerandomization.
RESULTS RESULTS
Among 1809 participants, 79.7% of those randomly assigned to CCT (n=523/656), 71.7% to SMS (n=393/548), and 70.7% to SOC (n=428/605) were retained in care in the first year (ATE: 9.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.4%, 14.4% and ATE: 4.2%; 95% CI: -0.7%, 9.2% for CCT and SMS compared with SOC, respectively). Among 312 participants with an initial lapse who were randomly assigned again, 69.1% who were randomly assigned to a navigator (n=76/110) returned, 69.5% randomly assigned to CCT+SMS (n=73/105) returned, and 55.7% randomly assigned to SOC-Outreach (n=54/97) returned (ATE: 14.1%; 95% CI: 0.6%, 27.6% and ATE: 11.4%; 95% CI: -2.2%, 24.9% for navigator and CCT+SMS compared with SOC-Outreach, respectively). Among participants without lapse on SMS, continuing SMS did not affect retention (n=122/180; 67.8% retained) versus stopping (n=151/209; 72.2% retained; ATE: -4.4%; 95% CI: -16.6%, 7.9%). Among participants without lapse on CCT, those continuing CCT had higher retention (n=192/230; 83.5% retained) than those stopping (n=173/287; 60.3% retained; ATE: 28.6%; 95% CI: 19.9%, 37.3%). Among 15 sequenced strategies, initial CCT, escalated to navigator if lapse occurred and continued if no lapse occurred, increased time in care (ATE: 7.2%, 95% CI: 3.7%, 10.7%) and viral suppression (ATE: 8.2%, 95% CI: 2.2%, 14.2%), the most compared with SOC throughout. Initial SMS escalated to navigator if lapse occurred, and otherwise continued, showed similar effect sizes compared with SOC throughout.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Active interventions to prevent retention lapses followed by navigation for those who lapse and maintenance of initial intervention for those without lapse resulted in best overall retention and viral suppression among the strategies studied. Among those who remained in care, discontinuation of CCT, but not SMS, compromised retention and suppression. (Funded by National Institutes of Health grants R01 MH104123, K24 AI134413, and R01 AI074345; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338739.).

Identifiants

pubmed: 38143482
doi: 10.1056/evidoa2200076
pmc: PMC10745095
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02338739']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Auteurs

Elvin H Geng (EH)

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis.

Thomas A Odeny (TA)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Lina M Montoya (LM)

Department of Biostatistics, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Sarah Iguna (S)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Jayne L Kulzer (JL)

Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Services, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.

Harriet Fridah Adhiambo (HF)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Ingrid Eshun-Wilson (I)

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis.

Eliud Akama (E)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Everlyne Nyandieka (E)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Mary A Guzé (MA)

Division of Prevention Science, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.

Starley Shade (S)

Division of Prevention Science, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.

Laura Packel (L)

Department of Biostatistics, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Branson Fox (B)

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis.

Carol Camlin (C)

Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Services, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.

Harsha Thirumurthy (H)

Division of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Catherine Lyons (C)

Division of HIV, Infectious Diseases and Global Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.

Elizabeth A Bukusi (EA)

Research Care Training Program, Centre for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.

Maya L Petersen (ML)

Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley.

Classifications MeSH