Pancreatitis is a well-described complication of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) itself and its combination antiretroviral therapy. Historically, this has been predominantly associated with the usage of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors such as didanosine and stavudine, but only rarely with the usage of protease inhibitors via the induction of hypertriglyceridemia. Pancreatitis rates in HIV/AIDS population may have been exceedingly high because of the comorbid conditions prevalent in HIV/AIDS patients (e.g. ethanol use and biliary disease), and the use of non-combination antiretroviral therapy medications such as pentamidine, corticosteroids, ketoconazole, sulphonamides, metronidazole, isoniazid and opportunistic infections (e.g. cytomegalovirus, cryptosporidiosis, mycobacterial disease). In resource limited settings, where didanosine and stavudine are widely available in cheaper generic fixed dose combinations it is likely that their usage will remain in the first line HIV treatment in common. In such settings management or estimation of a patient's risk of pancreatitis still remains an issue of concern.

With no expected vaccine for HIV in the near future, we aimed to define the current situation and challenges for pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP) in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The Euroguidelines CEE Network Group members were invited to respond to a 27-item survey including questions on PrEP (response rate 91.6%). PrEP was licensed in 68.2%; 95 centers offered PrEP and the estimated number on PrEP was around 9000. It was available in daily (40.1%), on-demand (13.3%), or both forms (33.3%). The access rate was <1–80%. Three major barriers for access were lack of knowledge/awareness among people who are in need (59.1%), not being reimbursed (50.0%), and low perception of HIV risk (45.5%). Non-occupational PEP was available in 86.4% and was recommended in the guidelines in 54.5%. It was fully reimbursed in 36.4%, only for accidental exposures in 40.9%, and was not reimbursed in 22.72%. Occupational PEP was available in 95.5% and was reimbursed fully. Although PrEP scale-up in the region has gained momentum, a huge gap exists between those who are in need of and those who can access PrEP. Prompt action is required to address the urgent need for PrEP scale-up in the CEE region.

Introduction: People living with HIV (PLWH) are at higher risk of poorer COVID‐19 outcomes. Vaccination is a safe and effective method of prevention against many infectious diseases, including COVID‐19. Here we investigate the strategies for national COVID‐19 vaccination programmes across central and eastern Europe and the inclusion of PLWH in vaccination programmes.Methods: The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe Network Group consists of experts in the field of infectious diseases from 24 countries in the region. Between 1 November 2020 and 19 March 2021 the group proceeded an on‐line survey consisting of 20 questions.Results: Twenty‐two countries (out of 24 invited) participated in the survey and 20/22 countries in the period between December 2020 and March 2021 had already started their COVID‐19 vaccination programme. In total, seven different vaccines were used by participating countries. In 17/21 countries (81%), vaccinated persons were centralized within the national registry. In 8/21 countries (38%) PLWH were prioritized for vaccination (the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Montenegro, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) and the Czech Republic, Greece and Serbia had put in place national guidelines for vaccination of PLWH. In 14/20 countries (70%) vaccination was only provided by designated centres. Eighteen respondents (18/21; 85.7%) reported that they planned to follow up HIV patients vaccinated against COVID‐19, mainly by measuring antibody levels and checking COVID‐19 incidence (11/21; 52.3%).Conclusions: This survey‐based study suggests that there are significant differences in terms of prioritizing PLWH, the types of vaccines used, vaccination coverage, and the development and implementation of a vaccination programmes within the region. Regardless of heterogenicity and existing barriers within the region, systematic vaccination in PLWH should have the highest priority, especially in those with severe immunodeficiency, risk factors, and in the elderly, aiming for prompt and high vaccination coverage.

There is currently no evidence suggesting that COVID-19 takes a different course in HIV-positive patients on antiretroviral treatment compared to the general population. However, little is known about the relation between specific HIV-related factors and the severity of the COVID-19 disease. We performed a retrospective analysis of cases collected through an on-line survey distributed by the Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe Network Group. In statistical analyses characteristics of HIV-positive patients, asymptomatic/moderate and moderate/severe course were compared. In total 34 HIV-positive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were reported by 12 countries (Estonia, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Albania, Belarus, Romania, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Poland, Russia, Hungary, Bulgaria). Asymptomatic courses of COVID-19 were reported in four (12%) cases, 11 (32%) patients presented with mild disease not requiring hospitalization, moderate disease with respiratory and/or systemic symptoms was observed in 14 (41%) cases, and severe disease with respiratory failure was found in five (15%) patients. The HIV-related characteristics of patients with an asymptomatic/mild course of COVID-19 were comparable to those with a moderate/severe course of COVID-19, except for the use of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) in cART regimen (0.0% vs. 31.6% respectively, p = 0.0239). In our analyses HIV viral suppression and immunological status were not associated with the course of COVID-19 disease. On the contrary the cART regimen could contribute to severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Large and prospective studies are necessary to further investigate this relationship.