A rapid ART initiation approach can be beneficial in people with advanced HIV disease, in consideration of their high morbidity and mortality. The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy and safety of rapid ART start with BIC/FTC/TAF in this setting. Pilot, single-center, single-arm, prospective, phase IV clinical trial conducted in a tertiary Italian hospital. Thirty ART-naïve people presenting with advanced HIV-1 diagnosis (defined as the presence of an AIDS-defining event and/or CD4 cell count <200 µL), were enrolled. Main exclusion criteria were active tuberculosis, cryptococcosis and pregnant/breastfeeding women. BIC/FTC/TAF was started within 7 days from HIV diagnosis. The primary endpoint was clinical or virologic failure (VF). Immunological parameters, safety, feasibility, neurocognitive performances and patient-reported outcomes were assessed as well. Over the study period, 40 (34%) of 116 patients diagnosed with HIV infection at INMI Spallanzani had advanced disease, of whom 30 (26%) were enrolled. The proportion of participants with HIV-RNA < 50 cp/mL was 9/30 (30%) at week (w) 4, 19/30 (63%) at w12, 24/30 (80%) at w24, 23/30 (77%) at w36 and 27/30 (90%) at w48. Two unconfirmed VF occurred. No ART discontinuation due to toxicity or VF was observed. No ART modification was performed based on the review of genotype and no mutations for the study drugs were detected. Mean CD4 cells count changed by 133 cells/μL at BL to 309 cells/μL at w 48 and 83% of participants had a CD4 > 200 cells/µL at w 48. 2 participants developed IRIS and one was diagnosed with disseminated TB and needed an ART switch. Our results support the feasibility, efficacy and safety of BIC/FTC/TAF as a rapid ART strategy in patients with advanced HIV disease.

Background: There is conflicting evidence for how HIV influences COVID-19 infection. The aim of this study was to compare characteristics at presentation and the clinical outcomes of people living with HIV (PLWH) versus HIV-negative patients (non-PLWH) hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods: Primary endpoint: time until invasive ventilation/death. Secondary endpoints: time until ventilation/death, time until symptoms resolution. Results: A total of 1647 hospitalized patients were included (43 (2.6%) PLWH, 1604 non-PLWH). PLWH were younger (55 vs. 61 years) and less likely to be with PaO₂/FiO₂ < 300 mmHg compared with non-PLWH. Among PLWH, nadir of CD4 was 185 (75–322) cells/μL; CD4 at COVID-19 diagnosis was 272 cells/μL (127–468) and 77% of these were virologically suppressed. The cumulative probability of invasive mechanical ventilation/death at day 15 was 4.7% (95%CI 1.2–17.3) in PLWH versus 18.9% (16.9–21.1) in non-PLWH (p = 0.023). The cumulative probability of non-invasive/invasive ventilation/death at day 15 was 20.9% (11.5–36.4) in PLWH versus 37.6% (35.1–40.2) in non-PLWH (p = 0.044). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of invasive mechanical ventilation/death of PLWH was 0.49 (95% CI 0.12–1.96, p = 0.310) versus non-PLWH; similarly, aHR of non-invasive/invasive ventilation/death of PLWH was 1.03 (95% CI 0.53–2.00, p = 0.926). Conclusion: A less-severe presentation of COVID-19 at hospitalization was observed in PLWH compared to non-PLWH; no difference in clinical outcomes could be detected.

Background: we aim to investigate attitudes toward vaccination by analyzing empirical factors associated with vaccine acceptance in the Lazio region mpox vaccination (MpoxVax) campaign in Italy. Methods: all subjects who accessed MpoxVax and signed the informed consent were prospectively enrolled in the MPOX-VAC Study and were asked to fill out an anonymous survey. Two endpoints were selected: ‘delayed acceptance’ and ‘early acceptance’, defined as access for vaccination >60 and ≤30 days from the vaccination campaign starting (VCS), respectively. Results: over the study period, 1717 individuals underwent vaccination: 129 (7%) > 60 [1588 (92.5%) ≤ 60] and 676 (60%) ≤ 30 days from VCS. A bisexual orientation, a lower education level and a worse perceived physical and mental health were associated with delayed access to vaccination. Being pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users and, marginally, HIV positive; having a high perceived risk for mpox infection; and reporting high-risk behaviors like the use of recreational drugs/chems, sex under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol and having a higher number of principal sexual partners, were associated with early access to vaccination. Conclusions: according to our data, risk awareness was a major determinant of early MpoxVax acceptance. Conversely, worse perceived health status and a low educational level were critical factors associated with delayed vaccination.

Background: With advances in antiretroviral therapy for HIV treatment, newer drug combinations provide improved efficacy, safety, and compliance. This study evaluates switching to a regimen of doravirine (DOR), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and lamivudine (3TC) in a cohort of people living with HIV (PLWH). Methods: this Italian retrospective study included 426 PLWH who switched from rilpivirine (RPV)/TDF/emtricitabine (FTC) to DOR/3TC/TDF. The analysis focused on treatment effectiveness, safety, and metabolic and renal markers. Results: this study reports a treatment failure (defined as virological failure or discontinuation of the regimen) rate of 2.34% (95% confidence interval, 1.28–4.50%), with significant improvement in CD4 counts (+49.93 cells/µL, p < 0.001). Notably, the switch to DOR/3TC/TDF did not result in adverse metabolic effects or significant changes in renal function. Analysis of lipid profiles showed stabilization in the majority of PLWH. Conclusions: this study indicates that switching to a DOR/3TC/TDF from RPV/TDF/FTC is an effective and well-tolerated option for PLWH, with benefits in terms of maintaining viral suppression, CD4 count recovery, and metabolic health, without evidence of renal impairment. These results support the continued use of DOR/3TC/TDF as part of HIV treatment strategies and highlight the need for ongoing research to refine ART regimens for different populations.

Background: The recent resurgence of mpox in central Africa has been declared a new public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) requiring coordinated international responses. Vaccination is a priority to expand protection and enhance control strategies, but the vaccine’s need exceeds the currently available doses. Intradermal (ID) administration of one-fifth of the standard modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA-BN) dose was temporarily authorized during the 2022 PHEIC. Studies conducted before 2022 provided evidence about the humoral response against the vaccinia virus (VACV) after vaccination but not against the mpox virus (MPXV). Moreover, no data are available on the T-cell response elicited by MVA-BN administered subcutaneously or intradermally. Methods: We compare the two vaccine administration routes according to reactogenicity (n = 943) and immunogenicity (n = 225) of vaccine recipients attending INMI Spallanzani hospital during the 2022 vaccination campaign in Rome, Italy. Results: We found that the ID route elicited higher titers of MPXV-specific IgG (mean difference of 0.26 log₂, p = 0.05) and nAbs (0.24 log₂, p = 0.08) than the subcutaneous (SC) route one month after the complete vaccination cycle. At the same time, no evidence for a difference in cellular response was found. Conclusions: MVA-BN was globally well tolerated despite higher reactogenicity for the ID than the SC route, especially for the reactions at the local injection site. The ID dose-sparing strategy was proven safe and immunogenic and would make vaccination available to more people. Our data support the current WHO recommendation of using the ID route in low–medium-income countries (LMIC), although response data in people infected with the new 1b clade are urgently needed.

The new Nuvaxovid protein-based and Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA-based vaccines targeting Omicron XBB.1.5 were available during the 2023–2024 autumn/winter vaccination campaign for frail individuals, including people with HIV (PWH). We assessed the immune response in 51 PWH on stable ART who received a booster with either the Nuvaxovid protein-based (n = 25) or Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA-based XBB.1.5 vaccine (n = 26). The median age was 57 years (IQR 51–65), the median count of CD4 at T0 was 652/mmc (503–935), and CD4 nadir was 226/mmc (95–340). Samples were collected before (T0) and one month after (T1) the booster. We measured neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) titers against D614G, XBB.1.6, and JN.1 variants and T-cell IFN-γ levels produced upon specific stimulation. Regardless of the vaccine used, we observed a marked increase in nAbs titers from T0 to T1 against all the subvariants, but no evidence for a change in IFN-γ release. After controlling for confounders, there was no evidence for a difference in the T0-T1 change in nAbs titers against XBB.1.16 and JN.1 by the type of vaccine, while Nuvaxovid determined a smaller increase in D614G nAbs (p = 0.008). The XBB.1.5 protein-based vaccine’s immunogenicity as a fifth or later booster was comparable to the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine, particularly against recent Omicron variants.