Abstract

Despite availability of effective antiretroviral therapy (ART), many HIV patients still have a detectable viral load (VL). Predictive factors of detectable VL are not well documented. This study was done at two large multidisciplinary HIV outpatient clinics at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC). This is a retrospective case–control study of patients treated between 2016 and 2018. Cases had a VL ≥50 copies/mL in 2018. Controls had an undetectable VL from 2016 to 2018. Matching was based on gender and year of HIV diagnosis. Primary objective was to identify predictive factors of detectable VL. Secondary objectives included to identify predictive factors of virologic failure, low persistent viremia, and viral blip. A forward stepwise model selection by the Akaike Information Criterion of the conditional logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors. Two hundred cases were identified and matched with 200 controls. The cohort was mostly male (68.0%) with a median age of 54 years (21–83 years). Among cases, viral blip was the most common type of detectable VL (43.0%). The strong predictive factors for a detectable VL were adherence to ART and seeking health care services. Asylum seekers were less at risk of detectable VL. Adherence to ART was the only strong predictive factor for virologic failure. Three main predictive factors of detectable VL were identified in two ambulatory clinic hospitals in Montreal. Ascertaining these factors will allow for identification of patients more at risk of detectable VL.

Introduction

Worldwide ∼38 million individuals are infected with HIV.1 Evidence suggests better overall management of the disease, notably because of recent therapeutic advances including the advent of integrase inhibitors that are very effective and well tolerated.2 Despite better efficacy and tolerability with newer antiretroviral therapy (ART), some individuals still maintain a detectable viral load (VL). In 2017, 70% of people living with HIV were aware of their HIV status, 77% of these patients had access to ART, and 82% of them were maintaining an undetectable VL, whereas the Joint United Nations Program on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS) 90-90-90 goals set in 2014 target having 90% of HIV-infected people diagnosed, of whom 90% are receiving ART, and of whom 90% have an undetectable VL.3,4
In Quebec, ∼20,000 people were living with HIV in 2016. In Montreal, the City Without AIDS Action Plan estimated that in 2015 86% of people living with HIV in Montreal knew their status, 97% of these were treated, and 92% of these had an undetectable VL.3
Several authors have studied predictive factors of detectable VL in HIV patients taking ART medication.5–12 Potential factors included patient characteristics, type of treatments and virus features. Patient characteristics included history of injection drug use, female gender, ethnicity, inappropriate adherence to ART, time since diagnosis, and age <30 years old.5,7–9,13 Treatment-related predictors included past exposure to ART, history of virologic failure, and boosted protease inhibitor regimens.6,7 HIV mutations also predicted detectable VL.10–12
This study aimed to identify predictive factors of detectable VL in HIV-infected patients in the era of highly active ART that are well tolerated.

Methods

Setting

This study was conducted at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) multidisciplinary outpatient clinics for chronic viral illnesses. These clinics follow a significant portion of HIV patients in the province of Quebec, Canada, and are experienced in complex HIV cases. All HIV-infected patients who were followed at these clinics were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria. The potential subjects from the CHUM and MUHC clinics were identified through local databases.

Study design and objectives

This was a retrospective matched case–control study. The primary objective was to identify predictive factors of detectable VL (HIV RNA ≥50 copies/mL) in HIV-infected patients. Secondary objectives included to identify predictive factors of virologic failure, viral blip, and persistent low-level viremia.
Virologic failure was defined as a VL ≥200 copies/mL for two consecutive measurements or a VL ≥200 copies/mL for one measurement leading to a change in therapy or interventions to improve the effectiveness of ART. This modified definition was chosen because if a change of therapy was made after the first VL, the second one would be affected, therefore, influencing the classification. If an intervention was made on one VL ≥200 copies/mL, it was accepted that the VL was considered as a virologic failure by the clinicians. Viral blip was defined as a VL between 50 and 199 copies/mL at least once or VL ≥200 copies/mL with no change in therapy and/or intervention to improve the effectiveness of ART. This modified definition was used for the same mentioned reasons. The VL before and after the detectable VL had to be undetectable. Persistent low-level viremia was defined as a VL between 50 and 199 copies/mL for at least two consecutive measurements. VL was measured at the clinics every 3 to 6 months, or 1 to 2 months after a change in ART.

Definition of cases and controls

Inclusion criteria for cases were HIV-infected adults (≥18 years) who had a detectable VL at least once between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Inclusion criteria for controls were HIV-infected adults with an undetectable VL between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Patients had to be on the same ART from July 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017. Patients had to have at least one visit to the HIV clinic in the retrospective period (2016 to 2017) and one in the matching period (2018).
Cases and controls were matched with a 1:1 ratio based on gender and date of HIV diagnosis (≤1990, 1991–2000, 2001–2010, and 2011–2020) using ALEA function in Excel. To ensure that potentially predictive factors occurred before the detectable VL, the data on such factors were collected between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017.

Variables and data collection

Patients' electronic medical records were the only source of information used. The variables were divided into three categories: host related, treatment related, and virus related (Table 1). Complete list of the variables collected and their definitions are available in Supplementary Table S1. Clinical practitioners and trained research personnel reviewed medical records to extract data.
Table 1. Summary of Variables
Host related
 Absolute CD4 count
 Active or previous depression
 Active or previous psychiatric disease
 Age
 Asylum seeker
 Continent of birth
 Dependent child
 Detectable VL
 Gender
 Health care utilization
 HIV stage
 Homeless
 Incarceration/trouble with law
 Initiation of antiretroviral
 Medication adherence
 Medication insurance
 Nonadherence to clinic follow-up visits
 Number of medications in the file
 Patient assistance program
 Persistent low-level viremia
 Sexual orientation
 Substance abuse
 Transmission risk factor
 Viral blip
 Virologic failure
 Year of HIV diagnosis
Treatment related
 Antiretroviral experienced
 Drug interaction—bi- or trivalent cations
 Drug interaction—CYP3A4 inducers
 Drug interaction—gastric acid modifying agent
 INI-based regimen
 NNRTI-based regimen
 NRTI-containing regimen
 Number of antiretroviral regimens received since diagnosis
 Past virologic failure
 PI-based regimen
Virus related
 Genotypic sensitivity scorea
For a complete definition of variables, see Supplementary Table S1.
a
Genotypic sensitivity score was calculated by adding the number of antiretrovirals taken by the subject for which the HIV was susceptible.
INI, integrase inhibitors; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors; NRTIs, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors; PI, protease inhibitors; VL, viral load.

Statistical analysis

Sample size calculations are not suggested for predictive models.14 Descriptive data were collected. Continuous variables are summarized with medians and ranges and categorical variables by proportions. For the main analyses, Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE) was used to handle missing data using the R package MICE with default settings.15 Continuous, ordered categorical, and binary variables were imputed using predictive mean matching, proportional odds models, and logistic regression, respectively. While imputing the missing values in each variable, all other variables were considered as regressors, including the outcome, which is recommended practice.
Fifty data sets were imputed. For each completed data set, the outcome was regressed on each variable using conditional logistic regressions (bivariate analysis) and then on all variables (multivariable analysis),15 and the results from conditional logistic regressions were pooled using Rubin's Rule.16 In separate analyses to identify the strongest predictors, a variable selection method was used within the conditional logistic regression.17 To do so, a case–control pairs bootstrap with replacement was done, resulting in B = 200 data sets of size n with missingness, where n is the original sample size. Then MICE was applied to each data set separately to fill in the missingness (once per bootstrapped data set). A forward stepwise model selection by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) of the conditional logistic model was then applied on each of the resulting data sets using the stepAIC function in R. The range of selection frequencies was reported. Covariate relevance for prediction was based on the frequency of covariate selection over the bootstrap resamples. Predictors that appeared in at least 75% and 50% of analyses on the bootstrapped data sets were considered strong predictors and moderate predictors, respectively.
A conditional logistic regression representing the selected predictive model was then fit conditional on the selected variables (>50% selection). The standard confidence intervals (CIs) from this conditional regression are not interpretable (and thus not shown) because the same data were used to make the selection and to fit the model.
The bivariate analyses for the secondary outcomes followed the same steps as for the primary outcome. The same variable selection steps were also applied to secondary outcomes.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the CHUM and MUHC ethics committee.

Results

A total of 2,938 subjects were followed between 2016 and 2018. By applying the inclusion criteria to this cohort, 1,781 patients remained in the data set. After the application of the exclusion criteria, we selected 1,262 potential subjects. Of these, 200 (15.8%) had a detectable VL in 2018. All cases who were available were included. Cases were matched with 200 controls based on a 1:1 ratio (total 400 subjects).
Descriptive statistics of the study sample are given in Table 2. The study sample was mainly composed of males (68%) who were diagnosed with HIV before 2011 (86.5%). The median age was 54 years old. Of all patients, 61% were born in North America. The median CD4 lymphocyte count was 500 cells/μL for the cases and 600 cells/μL for the controls. Cases were less frequently men who have sex with men (35.0%) compared with controls (44.5%). Cases had more substance use disorders (33.0% vs. 21.5%), were more homeless (8.5% vs. 2.5%), and had a greater prevalence of previous or active psychiatric diseases (43.5% vs. 34.5%). Since HIV diagnosis, 34.8% (38.5% for cases vs. 31.0% for controls) of the subjects had received five or more ART treatments. Cases were more covered by a public or governmental insurance medication plan (76.5% vs. 63.0%). Cases had lower adherence to antiretrovirals (34.5% vs. 66.0%). Of all subjects, 41% missed two clinic appointments or more within a 12-month period.
Table 2. Summary of Descriptive Data
 Cases (n = 200)Controls (n = 200)Total (n = 400)Missing data (n = 400)
Matching variables
Gender (male, n, %)136 (68.0)136 (68.0)272 (68.0)0 (0.0)
Year of HIV diagnosis (n, %) 
 ≤199026 (13.0)26 (13.0)52 (13.0) 
 1991–200075 (37.5)75 (37.5)150 (37.5) 
 2001–201072 (36.0)72 (36.0)144 (36.0) 
 2011–202027 (13.5)27 (13.5)54 (13.5) 
Outcomes
Type of detectable VL (n, %)8 (2.0)
 Virologic failure78 (39.0)N/A78 (19.5) 
 Viral blip86 (43.0)N/A86 (21.5) 
 Persistent low-level viremia27 (13.5)N/A27 (6.8) 
Potential predictive factors
Median age (years, range)53 (21–82)54 (22–83)54 (21–83)0 (0.0)
HIV stage (n, %)0 (0.0)
 183 (41.5)92 (46.0)175 (43.8) 
 217 (8.5)32 (16.0)49 (12.3) 
 339 (19.5)31 (15.5)70 (17.5) 
 461 (30.5)45 (22.5)106 (26.5) 
Median absolute CD4 count (cells/μL, range)500 (0–1,620)600 (50–2,102)565 (0–2,102)13 (3.3)
Born outside of Canada (n, %)83 (41.5)84 (42.0)167 (41.8)0 (0.0)
Substance abuse (n, %)66 (33.0)43 (21.5)109 (27.3)12 (3.0)
Asylum seeker (n, %)16 (8.0)20 (10.0)36 (9.0)0 (0.0)
Incarceration/trouble with law (n, %)31 (15.5)13 (6.5)44 (11.0)0 (0.0)
Dependent child (n, %)27 (13.5)29 (14.5)56 (14.0)0 (0.0)
Homeless (n, %)17 (8.5)5 (2.5)22 (5.5)0 (0.0)
Active or previous psychiatric illness (n, %)87 (43.5)69 (34.5)156 (39.0)0 (0.0)
Active or previous depression (n, %)47 (23.5)45 (22.5)92 (23.0)0 (0.0)
Health care utilization (n, %)96 (48.0)61 (30.5)157 (39.3)0 (0.0)
Nonadherence to clinic follow-up (n, %)87 (43.5)77 (38.5)164 (41.0)0 (0.0)
Medication insurance (n, %)   57 (14.3)
Private insurance28 (14.0)36 (18.0)64 (16.0) 
Public or governmental insurance153 (76.5)126 (63.0)279 (69.8) 
Patient assistance programa (n, %)22 (11.0)18 (9.0)40 (10.0)0 (0.0)
Number of medications in the file (median, range)5 (1–22)5 (1–28)5 (1–28)0 (0.0)
Medication adherence (n, %)41 (10.3)
 Optimalb69 (34.5)132 (66.0)201 (50.3) 
 Suboptimal66 (33.0)35 (17.5)101 (25.3) 
 Discontinuation for >1 week49 (24.5)8 (4.0)57 (14.3) 
Antiretroviral experienced (n, %)   5 (1.3)
 Yes179 (89.5)168 (84.0)347 (86.8) 
 No19 (9.5)29 (14.5)48 (12.0) 
Initiation of antiretroviral (n, %)   76 (19.0)
 1986–200055 (27.5)57 (28.5)112 (28.0) 
 2001–200957 (28.5)56 (28.0)113 (28.3) 
 2010–201743 (21.5)56 (28.0)99 (24.8) 
Number of ART regimens received since diagnosis (n, %)   74 (18.5)
 1–246 (23.0)64 (32.0)110 (27.5) 
 3–437 (18.5)40 (20.0)77 (19.3) 
 5 and more77 (38.5)62 (31.0)139 (34.8) 
 Past virologic failure (n, %)   116 (29.0)
 Yes74 (37.0)38 (19.0)112 (28.0) 
 No73 (36.5)99 (49.5)172 (43.0) 
ART therapy at matching date (n, %)   0 (0.0)
 IP based69 (34.5)53 (26.5)122 (30.5) 
 NNRTI based39 (19.5)52 (26.0)91 (22.8) 
 INI based145 (72.5)122 (61.0)267 (66.8) 
 NRTI containing189 (94.5)190 (95.0)379 (94.8) 
Drug interactions (n, %)   0 (0.0)
 With CYP3A4 inducers0 (0.0)0 (0.0)0 (0.0) 
 With bi- or trivalent cations44 (22.0)36 (18.0)80 (20.0) 
 With gastric acid-modifying agents3 (1.5)3 (1.5)6 (1.5) 
Genotypic sensitivity scorec (n, %)   97 (24.3)
 Under 28 (4.0)3 (1.5)11 (2.8) 
 2 and more150 (75.0)142 (71.0)292 (73.0) 
Descriptive datad
Continent of birth (n, %)0 (0.0)
 North America126 (63.0)118 (59.0)244 (61.0) 
 Africa32 (16.0)32 (16.0)64 (16.0) 
 South America30 (15.0)28 (14.0)58 (14.5) 
 Caribbean5 (2.5)9 (4.5)14 (3.5) 
 Europe5 (2.5)6 (3.0)11 (2.8) 
 Asia2 (1.0)6 (3.0)8 (2.0) 
 Oceania0 (0.0)1 (0.5)1 (0.03) 
Sexual orientation (n, %)28 (7.0)
 Men having sex with men70 (35.0)89 (44.5)159 (39.8) 
 Heterosexual109 (54.5)94 (47.0)203 (50.8) 
 Other6 (3.0)4 (2.0)10 (2.5) 
Transmission risk factore (n, %)26 (6.5)
 Injectable drug user43 (21.5)26 (13.0)69 (17.3) 
 Men having sex with men70 (35.0)89 (44.5)159 (39.8) 
 Heterosexual59 (29.5)61 (30.5)120 (30.0) 
 Mother to child7 (3.5)5 (2.5)12 (3.0) 
 Others36 (18.0)35 (17.5)71 (17.8) 
Substance use disorder ranked by substances (n, %)0 (0.0)
 Injectable drug user25 (12.5)11 (5.5)36 (9.0) 
 Methamphetamines7 (3.5)3 (1.5)10 (2.5) 
 Alcohol28 (14.0)22 (11.0)50 (12.5) 
 Other41 (20.5)31 (15.5)72 (18.0) 
For a complete definition of variables, see Supplementary Table S1.
a
Any type of discount provided by pharmaceuticals companies to a subject.
b
Mention of optimal adherence written in subject's chart.
c
Genotypic sensitivity score was calculated by adding the number of antiretrovirals taken by the subject for which the HIV was susceptible.
d
These data were not included in statistical analysis to identified predictive factors
e
Reasons of transmission documented in subject's chart.
ART, antiretroviral therapy; PI, protease inhibitors.
In the conditional multivariable regression, medication discontinuation for more than a week (odds ratio [OR]: 19.00, 95% CI: 5.59–64.57), suboptimal medication adherence (OR: 4.69, 95% CI: 2.03–10.84), health care utilization (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.10–4.48), and seeking asylum (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.06–0.84) were significantly associated with detectable VL (Table 3). The variables strongly predictive of the primary outcome were medication adherence (with two categories, selected in 99% of resampled data sets), asylum seeker status (83%), and seeking health care services defined as a visit to the emergency or hospitalization (76%) (Table 3). Complete results from the variable selection are presented in Figure 1. These results were consistent with the multivariable conditional logistic regression analysis (Table 3).
FIG. 1. Frequencies of variable selection when the outcome is detectable VL. c: integrase inhibitors. NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors; NRTIs, nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors; PI, protease inhibitor; VL, viral load.
Table 3. Pooled Estimated Odds Ratio and 95% Confidence Intervals from Conditional Logistic Regression Univariate Multivariate Frequencies of Variable Selection and Conditional Logistic Regression Model Fit After Variable Selection
CharacteristicsOR univariate (95% CI)OR multivariate (95% CI)Frequency of selectionOR multivariate frequencies ≥0.500
Age (years)0.83 (0.66–1.04)0.85 (0.57–1.27)0.305
Place of birth—outside of Canada0.97 (0.61–1.54)1.67 (0.74–3.76)0.410
HIV stage—stage 3 or 41.69 (1.11–2.56)1.45 (0.77–2.76)0.5751.64
Asylum seeker0.71 (0.32–1.61)0.22 (0.06–0.84)0.8300.31
Patient assistance programa1.24 (0.65–2.34)0.63 (0.23–1.71)0.290
Dependent child0.89 (0.45–1.74)0.91 (0.29–2.90)0.330
Homeless3.40 (1.25–9.22)1.39 (0.24–7.95)0.235
Active or previous psychiatric illness1.47 (0.98–2.22)1.40 (0.56–3.48)0.295
Active or previous depression1.06 (0.66–1.69)0.61 (0.23–1.62)0.380
Nonadherence to clinic follow-up1.20 (0.82–1.76)0.76 (0.40–1.45)0.405
Medication adherence—discontinuation for >1 week13.31 (5.17–34.24)19.00 (5.59–64.57)0.99015.94
Medication adherence—suboptimal3.63 (2.06–6.37)4.69 (2.03–10.84)0.9903.87
Incarceration/trouble with the law2.80 (1.36–5.76)1.15 (0.31–4.30)0.270
Antiretroviral experienced1.71 (0.87–3.35)0.56 (0.18–1.79)0.255
Number of antiretroviral regimens received since diagnosis—3 or 41.35 (0.73–2.51)1.46 (0.46–4.59)0.400
Number of antiretroviral regimens received since diagnosis—5 or more2.10 (1.12–3.95)1.45 (0.38–5.62)0.400
Past virologic failure2.11 (1.27–3.51)1.19 (0.39–3.66)0.465
PI-based regimen1.47 (0.95–2.27)1.89 (0.70–5.11)0.400
NNRTI-based regimen0.68 (0.41–1.10)1.88 (0.63–5.64)0.270
INI-based regimen1.68 (1.10–2.56)3.22 (0.98–10.53)0.5751.67
NRTI-containing regimen0.91 (0.39–2.14)1.15 (0.24–5.43)0.260
Drug interaction (bi- or trivalent cations)1.35 (0.79–2.31)1.10 (0.47–2.56)0.270
Drug interaction (gastric acid modifying agent)b1.00 (0.20–4.95)
Resistance data not available0.67 (0.41–1.10)0.84 (0.35–2.01)0.300
Substance abuse1.78 (1.13–2.81)0.74 (0.35–1.60)0.280
Private medication insurance coverage0.67 (0.38–1.18)0.58 (0.22–1.49)0.5650.59
Health care utilization2.25 (1.44–3.51)2.22 (1.10–4.48)0.7601.91
Initiation of antiretroviral (year)—1986 to 20001.37 (0.59–3.18)1.33 (0.27–6.40)0.425
Initiation of antiretroviral (year)—2001 to 20091.31 (0.66–2.59)1.41 (0.41–4.86)0.425
Genotypic sensitivity score—2 or more1.16 (0.42–3.23)1.06 (0.21–5.49)0.400
Log absolute CD4 count0.55 (0.39–0.78)0.91 (0.53–1.56)0.315
Log number of medications in the file1.20 (0.89–1.61)1.08 (0.63–1.87)0.270
a
Any type of discount provided by pharmaceutical companies to a subject.
b
Interaction with gastric acid-modifying agents was too invariant (see Table 2), therefore, it was not included in the AIC.
AIC, Akaike Information Criterion.
In the conditional logistic regression analysis using only the selected variables (selection >50%), the asylum seeker status was inversely related to having a detectable VL (OR = 0.31) (Table 3). Stopping antiretrovirals for >1 week (OR = 15.94), suboptimal antiretroviral adherence by forgetting punctual doses (OR = 3.87), and seeking health care services (OR = 1.91) were positive predictive factors of detectable VL.
Of all cases (n = 200), 78 had virologic failure, 86 a viral blip, and 27 persistent low-level viremia. In the conditional logistic regression bivariate analyses of secondary outcomes, only inadequate medication adherence (forgetting punctual doses and stopping for >1 week) was a strong predictive factor of virologic failure (selected >75%) (Supplementary Table S2). When the outcome was viral blip, none of the variables were strong predictive factors (Supplementary Table S3). Owing to the very small sample size for persistent low-level viremia, the imputation models failed to converge when applied to the bootstrapped data sets (Supplementary Table S4). Frequencies of variable selection are not available for this last outcome. The full multivariable model failed to converge for virologic failure, resulting in highly unstable results for viral blip, and was impossible to conduct due to small sample size for persistent low-level viremia. Hence, multivariable results are not available for secondary outcomes.

Discussion

This study was a retrospective matched case–control study of HIV-infected individuals followed at the CHUM and MUHC clinics in 2018. Of the 2,938 subjects, 200 were considered cases and were matched with 200 controls.
Establishing predictive factors and models of detectable VL is essential for early identification of patients at risk of this outcome. Detectable VL can lead to increased morbidity and mortality.2,7 Determining causality of the predictive factors of detectable VL was not the goal of this study.
Results from the main analysis showed that being an asylum seeker was inversely related to detectable VL. This could be, in part, explained by the existence of the Canadian Interim Federal Health Program that facilitates the access for asylum seekers to medications and to a systematic HIV screening system. The multidisciplinary approach offered by both clinics also ensures extensive follow-up in this population that may explain the better outcomes observed in our study. Mendelsohn et al.18 showed similar HIV control between refugees and host community patients. Tiittala et al.19 found major HIV knowledge gaps in migrants in comparison with the general population but had no data on how these differences could impact the HIV VL.
Seeking health care services was associated with a significant increase in the risk of detectable VL. Requiring more frequent medical assistance could be seen as a surrogate for the complexity of the disease, therefore, implying comorbidities and social precariousness.20 Chow et al.21 performed an observational study that revealed a strong connection between hospitalization rate and high VL count.
Stopping ART for >1 week and forgetting punctual doses were found to be highly predictive of detectable VL. Many studies identify nonadherence to antiretrovirals as a plausible cause of detectable VL.9,22–25 Virologic rebound is expected after cessation of ART.26–28 This study asserts that establishing patient's adherence history is useful for identifying at-risk patients. Specific causes of inadequate adherence were not explored in this study.
Adherence to ART was found to be the only significant predictive factor of virologic failure. However, the sample sizes for the secondary outcomes were small (n = 200), which limited the number of predictors that could be identified. Results concerning viral blips and persistent low-level viremia were inconclusive since none of the variables were selected in >75% of resampled data sets.
This study has strengths and limitations. The data were collected by medical chart review by trained clinicians allowing for adequate analysis of the information in the chart. The study population was representative of the target population because it included a substantial proportion of the HIV-infected patients in Montreal, Canada. Furthermore, all subjects who fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria for cases were included. However, the definitions of cases included only the patients who had a detectable VL in 2018. Only 200 cases were included, which is a relatively small sample size. This made analysis of secondary outcomes more difficult. Temporal ordering was ensured by doing baseline data collection during a time period (January 2016 to December 2017) before the outcomes (assessed in 2018). However, the data collection period could have differed between subjects depending on start of medical follow-up at clinic and the time of the detectable VL. This could enhance the link between the predictive factors and the detectable VL. In our clinical setting, detectable VL usually triggers more extensive investigation of patient adherence and socioeconomic factors. This could lead to report bias in the medical records. Data collection was limited by information available in subjects' files due to the observational retrospective study design producing missing data for many variables. Multiple imputation was done to limit the impact of the missing data. As gender at birth and date of HIV diagnosis were used as matching variables, their predictive potential of detectable VL could not be evaluated. Gender has previously been identified as influencing VL.5 HIV diagnosis year was chosen as a matching criterion because this variable ensures that cases and controls have a history of exposure similar to antiretrovirals and professional care. Indeed, data on time of ART initiation, ART-experienced, and number of ART regimens since diagnosis were similar between cases and controls.

Conclusion

This retrospective matched case–control study demonstrated that inadequate adherence (forgetting punctual doses and stopping antiretroviral for more than a week) to ART and seeking health care services are predictors of detectable VL. Similar findings were obtained by other research teams. In our clinical setting, being an asylum seeker was inversely related to detectable VL. Ascertaining these factors will allow for identification of patients more at risk of detectable VL. When intervening in these at-risk patients, clinicians should use an individualized approach to prevent the occurrence of predictive factors of detectable VL.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Stéphanie Matte (CHUM), Dr. Cécile Tremblay (CHUM), Dr. Marina Klein (MUHC), and Costas Pexos (MUHC) for their help in accessing data and the patients followed at each clinic.

Supplementary Material

File (supp_data.docx)
File (supp_tables1.docx)
File (supp_tables2.docx)
File (supp_tables3.docx)
File (supp_tables4.docx)

References

1. UNAIDS.gov [Internet]: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Global HIV & AIDS statistics. Fact sheet—World AIDS day 2020 [updated December 1, 2020]. Available at https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/fact-sheet, accessed December 8, 2020.
2. Clinicalinfo-HIV.gov [Internet]: Rockville; Department of Health and Human Service. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Adults and Adolescents with HIV. [updated December 18, 2019; for review December 8, 2020]. Available at https://clinicalinfo.hiv.gov/en/guidelines, accessed December 8, 2020.
3. Mercure SA, Girard G, Landry A, et al.: Plan d'action commun 2019–2020 [Internet]. Montreal; (2018). [for review December 8, 2020] Available at www.montrealsanssida.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Plan_d-Action_commun_2019-2020.pdf, accessed December 8, 2020.
4. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS): 90-90-90 An ambitious treatment target to help end the AIDS epidemic [Internet]. October, 2014 [for review December 8, 2020] Available at https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/90-90-90_en.pdf, accessed December 8, 2020.
5. Lima VD, St-Jean M, Rozada I, et al.: Progress towards the United Nations 90-90-90 and 95-95-95 targets: The experience in British Columbia, Canada. J Int AIDS Soc 2017;20: e25011.
6. Robbins GK, Johnson KL, Chang Y, et al.: Predicting virologic failure in an HIV clinic. Clin Infect Dis Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am 2010;50:779–786.
7. O'Connor J, Smith C, Lampe FC, et al.: Durability of viral suppression with first-line antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV in the UK: An observational cohort study. Lancet HIV 2017;4:e295–e302.
8. Leierer G, Grabmeier-Pfistershammer K, Steuer A, et al.: Factors associated with low-level viraemia and virological failure: Results from the Austrian HIV Cohort Study. PLoS One 2015;10:e0142923.
9. Gras G, Schneider M-P, Cavassini M, et al.: Patterns of adherence to raltegravir-based regimens and the risk of virological failure among HIV-infected patients: The RALTECAPS cohort study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2012;61:265–269.
10. Li H, Zhong M, Guo W, et al.: Prevalence and mutation patterns of HIV drug resistance from 2010 to 2011 among ART-failure individuals in the Yunnan Province, China. PLoS One 2013;8:e72630.
11. Ceccarelli L, Salpini R, Moudourou S, et al.: Characterization of drug resistance mutations in naïve and ART-treated patients infected with HIV-1 in Yaounde, Cameroon. J Med Virol 2012;84:721–727.
12. Langs-Barlow A, Paintsil E: Impact of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 sequence diversity on antiretroviral therapy outcomes. Viruses 2014;6:3855–3872.
13. Craw JA, Beer L, Tie Y, Jaenicke T, Shouse RL, Prejean J: Viral rebound among persons with diagnosed HIV who achieved viral suppression, United States. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2020;84:133–140.
14. Riley RD, Snell KI, Ensor J, et al.: Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: PART II—Binary and time-to-event outcomes. Stat Med 2019;38:1276–1296.
15. Buuren Sv, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K: mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. J Stat Softw 2011;45:1–67.
16. Rubin DB: Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys [Internet]. Wiley (2004). (Wiley Classics Library). Available at https://books.google.ca/books?id=bQBtw6rx_mUC
17. Heymans MW, van Buuren S, Knol DL, van Mechelen W, de Vet HC: Variable selection under multiple imputation using the bootstrap in a prognostic study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7:33.
18. Mendelsohn JB, Schilperoord M, Spiegel P, et al.: Is forced migration a barrier to treatment success? Similar HIV treatment outcomes among refugees and a surrounding host community in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. AIDS Behav 2014;18:323–334.
19. Tiittala P, Kivelä P, Liitsola K, et al.: Important gaps in HIV knowledge, attitudes and practices among young asylum seekers in comparison to the general population. J Immigr Minor Health 2018;20:1415–1423.
20. Aidala AA, Wilson MG, Shubert V, et al.: Housing status, medical care, and health outcomes among people living with HIV/AIDS: A systematic review. Am J Public Health 2016;106:e1–e23.
21. Chow J, Nijhawan A, Raifman J, Gebo K, Moore R, Berry S: Hospitalization rates among persons with HIV who gained medicaid or private insurance in 2014. Open Forum Infect Dis 2018;5(Suppl 1):S548.
22. Thompson MA, Mugavero MJ, Amico KR, et al.: Guidelines for improving entry into and retention in care and antiretroviral adherence for persons with HIV: Evidence-based recommendations from an International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care panel. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:817–833.
23. Rangarajan S, Donn JC, Giang LT, et al.: Factors associated with HIV viral load suppression on antiretroviral therapy in Vietnam. J Virus Erad 2016;2:94–101.
24. Kwobah CM, Mwangi AW, Koech JK, Simiyu GN, Siika AM: Factors associated with first-line antiretroviral therapy failure amongst HIV-infected African patients: A case-control study. World J AIDS 2012;2:271–278.
25. Court R, Leisegang R, Stewart A, et al.: Short term adherence tool predicts failure on second line protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy: An observational cohort study. BMC Infect Dis 2014;14:664.
26. Le CN, Britto P, Brummel SS, et al.: Time to viral rebound and safety after antiretroviral treatment interruption in postpartum women compared with men. AIDS 2019;33:2149–2156.
27. Davey RT, Bhat N, Yoder C, et al.: HIV-1 and T cell dynamics after interruption of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in patients with a history of sustained viral suppression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:15109–15114.
28. Conway JM, Perelson AS: Post-treatment control of HIV infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2015;112:5467–5472.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses
AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses
Volume 38Issue Number 7July 2022
Pages: 552 - 560
PubMed: 34538065

History

Published online: 11 July 2022
Published in print: July 2022
Published ahead of print: 8 November 2021
Published ahead of production: 20 September 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Topics

Authors

Affiliations

Audrey Bouchard
Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
François Bourdeau
Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Julien Roger
Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Vincent-Thierry Taillefer
Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Nancy L. Sheehan
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Chronic Viral Illness Service, and McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
Mireille Schnitzer
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Guanbo Wang
Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Imma Judy Jean Baptiste François
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Chronic Viral Illness Service, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Canada.

Notes

Address correspondence to: Rachel Therrien, Pharmacy Department, University of Montreal Hospital Center, 1051 Sanguinet Street, Montreal H2X3E4, Quebec, Canada [email protected]

Authors' Contributions

The first four authors have equally contributed to the study and writing of the article as part of a research project for the residency in hospital pharmacy. M.S. and G.W. are involved as statisticians and wrote their specific sections. I.J.J.B.F. helped in collecting the data as a student in biopharmaceutical sciences. R.T. and N.L.S. as clinical and faculty pharmacists supervised the conception and redaction of this study.

Author Disclosure Statement

R.T. received a grant from Gilead Sciences for travel expenses when presenting at Fast-track cities 2019, London, 09/11/2019 and has received honoraria from ViivHealthcare, Gilead, and Merck as consultant or education for the HIV medication guide website (hivmedicationguide.com). N.L.S. has received honoraria from Viiv Health care and Merck Canada. The other authors had no conflict of interest.

Funding Information

This study was supported by the Faculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada, who gave a grant to finance statistical analysis.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export citation

Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/ePub

Get Access

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.

Society Access

If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.

Restore your content access

Enter your email address to restore your content access:

Note: This functionality works only for purchases done as a guest. If you already have an account, log in to access the content to which you are entitled.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media

Back to Top