Browsing by Author "Swindells, Susan"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Developing Treatment Guidelines During a Pandemic Health Crisis: Lessons Learned From COVID-19.
    (Annals of internal medicine, 2021-08) Kuriakose, Safia; Singh, Kanal; Pau, Alice K; Daar, Eric; Gandhi, Rajesh; Tebas, Pablo; Evans, Laura; Gulick, Roy M; Lane, H Clifford; Masur, Henry; NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel; Aberg, Judith A; Adimora, Adaora A; Baker, Jason; Kreuziger, Lisa Baumann; Bedimo, Roger; Belperio, Pamela S; Cantrill, Stephen V; Coopersmith, Craig M; Davis, Susan L; Dzierba, Amy L; Gallagher, John J; Glidden, David V; Grund, Birgit; Hardy, Erica J; Hinkson, Carl; Hughes, Brenna L; Johnson, Steven; Keller, Marla J; Kim, Arthur Y; Lennox, Jeffrey L; Levy, Mitchell M; Li, Jonathan Z; Martin, Greg S; Naggie, Susanna; Pavia, Andrew T; Seam, Nitin; Simpson, Steven Q; Swindells, Susan; Tien, Phyllis; Waghmare, Alpana A; Wilson, Kevin C; Yazdany, Jinoos; Zachariah, Philip; Campbell, Danielle M; Harrison, Carly; Burgess, Timothy; Francis, Joseph; Sheikh, Virginia; Uyeki, Timothy M; Walker, Robert; Brooks, John T; Ortiz, Laura Bosque; Davey, Richard T; Doepel, Laurie K; Eisinger, Robert W; Han, Alison; Higgs, Elizabeth S; Nason, Martha C; Crew, Page; Lerner, Andrea M; Lund, Claire; Worthington, Christopher
    The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Predictors and outcomes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteremia among patients with HIV and tuberculosis co-infection enrolled in the ACTG A5221 STRIDE study.
    (BMC Infect Dis, 2015-01-13) Crump, John A; Wu, Xingye; Kendall, Michelle A; Ive, Prudence D; Kumwenda, Johnstone J; Grinsztejn, Beatriz; Jentsch, Ute; Swindells, Susan
    BACKGROUND: We evaluated predictors and outcomes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteremia among participants undergoing baseline mycobacterial blood culture in the ACTG A5221 STRIDE study, a randomized clinical trial comparing earlier with later ART among HIV-infected patients suspected of having tuberculosis with CD4-positive T-lymphocyte counts (CD4 counts) <250 cells/mm(3). We conducted a secondary analysis comparing participants with respect to presence or absence of M. tuberculosis bacteremia. METHODS: Participants with a baseline mycobacterial blood culture were compared with respect to the presence or absence of M. tuberculosis bacteremia. Baseline predictors of M. tuberculosis bacteremia were identified and participant outcomes were compared by mycobacteremia status. RESULTS: Of 90 participants with baseline mycobacterial blood cultures, 29 (32.2%) were female, the median (IQR) age was 37 (31-45) years, CD4 count was 81 (33-131) cells/mm(3), HIV-1 RNA level was 5.39 (4.96-5.83) log10 copies/mL, and 18 (20.0%) had blood cultures positive for M. tuberculosis. In multivariable analysis, lower CD4 count (OR 0.85 per 10-cell increase, p = 0.012), hemoglobin ≤8.5 g/dL (OR 5.8, p = 0.049), and confirmed tuberculosis (OR 17.4, p = 0.001) were associated with M. tuberculosis bacteremia. There were no significant differences in survival and AIDS-free survival, occurrence of tuberculosis immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), or treatment interruption or discontinuation by M. tuberculosis bacteremia status. IRIS did not differ significantly between groups despite trends toward more virologic suppression and greater CD4 count increases at week 48 in the bacteremic group. CONCLUSIONS: Among HIV-infected tuberculosis suspects, lower CD4 count, hemoglobin ≤8.5 g/dL, and the presence of microbiologically confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis were associated with increased adjusted odds of mycobacteremia. No evidence of an association between M. tuberculosis bacteremia and the increased risk of IRIS was detected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00108862 .