METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional, online study, conducted between October-November 2020, assessed the impact of COVID-19 on HIV prevention and care among people living with HIV (PLHIV), key populations (KPs), and healthcare providers (HCPs). The study populations were recruited across ten Asian countries/territories, covering Hong Kong, India, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam.
RESULTS: Across the region, 702 PLHIV, 551 KPs, and 145 HCPs were recruited. Both PLHIV and KPs reported decreased or had yet to visit hospitals/clinics (PLHIV: 35.9%; KPs: 57.5%), reduced HIV RNA viral load testing (21.9%; 47.3%), and interruptions in antiretroviral therapy (ART) (22.3%) or decreased/complete stop of HIV prevention medication consumption (40.9%). Travel constraints (40.6%), financial issues (28.9%), and not receiving prescription refills (26.9%) were common reasons for interrupted ART access, whereas reduced engagements in behaviours that could increase the risks of HIV acquisition and transmission (57.7%), travel constraints (41.8%), and less hospital/clinic visits (36.7%) underlie the disruptions in HIV preventive medications. Decreased visits from PLHIV/KPs and rescheduled appointments due to clinic closure were respectively reported by 50.7%-52.1% and 15.6%-17.0% of HCPs; 43.6%-61.9% observed decreased ART/preventive medication refills. Although 85.0% of HCPs adopted telemedicine to deliver HIV care services, 56.4%-64.1% of PLHIV/KPs were not using telehealth services.
CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially disrupted HIV prevention to care continuum in Asia at the time of the study. The findings highlighted differences in HIV prevention to care continuum via telehealth services utilisation by PLHIV, KPs, and HCPs. Efforts are needed to optimise infrastructure and adapt systems for continued HIV care with minimal disruptions during health emergency crises.
METHODS: Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (EP0083; NCT03083665) evaluating BRV 50 mg/day and 200 mg/day in patients (≥16-80 years) with FOS with/without secondary generalization (focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures) despite current treatment with 1 or 2 concomitant antiseizure medications. Following an 8-week baseline, patients were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, BRV 50 mg/day, or BRV 200 mg/day, and entered a 12-week treatment period. Efficacy outcomes: percent reduction over placebo in 28-day FOS frequency (primary); 50% responder rate in FOS frequency; median percent reduction in FOS frequency from baseline; seizure freedom during treatment period (secondary). Primary safety endpoints: incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); TEAEs leading to discontinuation; serious TEAEs.
RESULTS: In this study, 448/449 randomized patients (mean age, 34.5 years; 53.8% female) received ≥1 dose of study medication (placebo/BRV 50 mg/BRV 200 mg/day: n = 149/151/148). Percent reduction over placebo in 28-day adjusted FOS frequency was 24.5% (p = 0.0005) and 33.4% (p
METHODS: This double-blind, multicenter, phase 3 study consisted of a 1-week observation period during which patients were treated with two patches of placebo, followed by a 6-week double-blind period where patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive once-daily blonanserin 40 mg, blonanserin 80 mg, or placebo patches. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in the total Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) score. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).
RESULTS: Between December 2014 and October 2018, patients were recruited and randomly assigned to blonanserin 40 mg (n = 196), blonanserin 80 mg (n = 194), or placebo (n = 190); of these, 77.2% completed the study. Compared with placebo, blonanserin significantly improved PANSS total scores at 6 weeks (least square mean [LSM] difference vs placebo: -5.6 with blonanserin 40 mg; 95% confidence interval [CI] -9.6, -1.6; adjusted p = 0.007, and - 10.4 with blonanserin 80 mg; 95% CI -14.4, -6.4; adjusted p