Early in 2020, the WHO recommended that existing drugs be evaluated as a repurposed resource to fight the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Here, we investigate the trends of using repurposed and off-label drugs among people living with HIV in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). From November 2020 to May 2021, data on the clinical outcomes of HIV-positive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were collected on eCRFs (SurveyMonkey (R) platform, Inc. San Mateo, CA, USA). Factors associated with the off-label drugs available at this time (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, favipiravir, oseltamivir, and lopinavir/ritonavir) were identified using logistic regression models. Of the 557 HIV-positive patients assessed with COVID-19 disease, 67 (12.0%) received off-label drugs, as well as 11.6% (16/138) of hospitalized and 12.2% (51/419) of ambulatory patients (p = 0.8564). In the adjusted logistic regression model, higher odds of off-label drug use were found in patients who had their diagnoses confirmed by an RT PCR test (aOR 5.08 [95%CI 1.17-22.0], p = 0.0396), and who came from a non-EU region (aOR 6.79 [95%CI 3.51-13.1], p < 0.0001). The only factor decreasing the odds of off-label drug use was co-infection (aOR 0.31 [95%CI 0.10-0.94], p < 0.0395). In a cohort of HIV patients from the CEE, 12% were prescribed off-label drugs for COVID-19. Symptomatic patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or who were from non-EU countries were more likely to receive a repurposed drug. Drug repurposing is an immediate solution to emerging pandemics. All data regarding the safety and effectiveness of such use should be monitored, reported, and publicly available. Access patterns within and outside the EU should be analyzed to prevent potential inequalities in access to care during epidemics in European settings.

Background: An estimated one quarter of the global population has tuberculosis infection (TBI), yet fewer than 5% are diagnosed and treated. Tuberculosis remains a leading killer among people with HIV, despite effective preventive strategies. Management of TBI is a key component of Tuberculosis Elimination Strategy, but implementation across Europe is heterogeneous. We aimed to assess national policies and clinical practices for TBI management among people with HIV in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), and to identify gaps affecting TB prevention. Methods: We conducted two surveys across 24 CEE countries. Survey 1 assessed national policies. Survey 2 evaluated clinical practices among HIV clinicians. Countries were stratified by TB incidence (< / ≥ 10 cases/100,000 population). Findings: Twenty-four and 43 experts participated in Survey 1 and 2, respectively. Most countries reported presence of national TBI guidelines (23/24) and Tuberculosis Elimination Strategies (19/24). However, substantial heterogeneity was observed in screening recommendations, diagnostic approaches, and prophylactic treatment prescription. Although 71% of countries recommended universal TBI screening, only 33% of clinicians reported implementing this in practice. Similarly, 26% of clinicians reported not prescribing prophylactic treatment. Limited access to interferon- gamma release assays and absence of surveillance systems were common. Discrepancies between policies and practice were observed across multiple domains. Interpretation: TBI management among people with HIV in CEE is marked by heterogeneity, inequities in access to diagnostics and treatment, lack of surveillance, and a clear gap between policy and practice. Strengthening implementation, improving access to diagnostics and treatment, and developing adaptable, harmonized guidelines are essential to support TB elimination.

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.

BACKGROUND:To date there remains much ambiguity in the literature regarding the immunological interplay between SARS-CoV-2 and HIV and the true risk posed to coinfected individuals. There has been little conclusive data regarding the use of CD4 cell count and HIV viral load stratification as predictors of COVID-19 severity in this cohort. METHODS:We performed a retrospective, observational cohort study on people living with HIV (PLWH) who contracted COVID-19 in central and eastern Europe. We enrolled 536 patients from 16 countries using an online survey. We evaluated patient demographics, HIV characteristics and COVID-19 presentation and outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.1. RESULTS:The majority of the study cohort were male (76.4%) and 152 (28.3%) had a significant medical comorbidity. Median CD4 cell count at COVID-19 diagnosis was 605 cells/μL [interquartile range (IQR) 409-824]. The majority of patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) were virally suppressed (92%). In univariate analysis, CD4 cell count <350 cells/μL was associated with higher rates of hospitalization (p < 0.0001) and respiratory failure (p < 0.0001). Univariate and multivariate analyses found that an undetectable HIV VL was associated with a lower rate of hospitalization (p < 0.0001), respiratory failure (p < 0.0001), ICU admission or death (p < 0.0001), and with a higher chance of full recovery (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION:We can conclude that detectable HIV viral load was an independent risk factor for severe COVID-19 illness and can be used as a prognostic indicator in this cohort.

(1) Background: Viral hepatitis C (HCV) and viral hepatitis B (HBV) are common co-infections in people living with HIV (PLWH). All PLWH should be vaccinated against HBV and hepatitis A (HAV) and treated for HBV and HCV. We aimed to compare testing, prophylaxis and treatment of viral hepatitis in PLWH in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in 2019 and 2022. (2) Methods: Data was collected through two on-line surveys conducted in 2019 and 2022 among 18 countries of the Euroguidelines in CEE (ECEE) Network Group. (3) Results: In all 18 countries the standard of care was to screen all PLWH for HBV and HCV both years; screening of HAV was routine in 2019 in 54.5% and in 2022 47.4% of clinics. Vaccination of PLWH against HAV was available in 2019 in 16.7%, in 2022 in 22.2% countries. Vaccination against HBV was available routinely and free of charge in 50% of clinics both in 2019 and 2022. In HIV/HBV co-infected the choice of NRTI was tenofovir-based in 94.4% of countries in both years. All clinics that responded had access to direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) but 50% still had limitations for treatment. (4) Conclusions: Although testing for HBV and HCV was good, testing for HAV is insufficient. Vaccination against HBV and especially against HAV has room for improvement; furthermore, HCV treatment access needs to overcome restrictions.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has been challenging time for medical care, especially in the field of infectious diseases (ID), but it has also provided an opportunity to introduce new solutions in HIV management. Here, we investigated the changes in HIV service provision across Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries before and after the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods: The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe Network Group consists of experts in the field of ID from 24 countries within the CEE region. Between 11 September and 29 September 2021, the group produced an on-line survey, consisting of 32 questions on models of care among HIV clinics before and after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Results: Twenty-three HIV centers from 19 countries (79.2% of all countries invited) participated in the survey. In 69.5% of the countries, there were more than four HIV centers, in three countries there were four centers (21%), and in four countries there was only one HIV center in each country. HIV care was based in ID hospitals plus out-patient clinics (52%), was centralized in big cities (52%), and was publicly financed (96%). Integrated services were available in 21 clinics (91%) with access to specialists other than ID, including psychologists in 71.5% of the centers, psychiatrists in 43%, gynecologists in 47.5%, dermatologists in 52.5%, and social workers in 62% of all clinics. Patient-centered care was provided in 17 centers (74%), allowing consultations and tests to be planned for the same day. Telehealth tools were used in 11 centers (47%) before the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, and in 18 (78%) after (p = 0.36), but were represented mostly by consultations over the telephone or via e-mail. After the COVID-19 outbreak, telehealth was introduced as a new medical tool in nine centers (39%). In five centers (28%), no new services or tools were introduced. Conclusions: As a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, tools such as telehealth have become popularized in CEE countries, challenging the traditional approach to HIV care. These implications need to be further evaluated in order to ascertain the best adaptations, especially for HIV medicine.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The Central and East Europe (CEE) region consists of countries with highly diversified HIV epidemics, health care systems and socioeconomic status. The aim of the present study was to describe variations in CKD burden and care between countries. The Euroguidelines in the CEE Network Group includes 19 countries and was initiated to improve the standard of care for HIV infection in the region. Information on kidney care in HIV-positive patients was collected through online surveys sent to all members of the Network Group. Almost all centres use regular screening for CKD in all HIV (+) patients. Basic diagnostic tests for kidney function are available in the majority of centres. The most commonly used method for eGFR calculation is the Cockcroft–Gault equation. Nephrology consultation is available in all centres. The median frequency of CKD was 5% and the main cause was comorbidity. Haemodialysis was the only modality of treatment for kidney failure available in all ECEE countries. Only 39% of centres declared that all treatment options are available for HIV+ patients. The most commonly indicated barrier in kidney care was patients’ noncompliance. In the CEE region, people living with HIV have full access to screening for kidney disease but there are important limitations in treatment. The choice of dialysis modality and access to kidney transplantation are limited. The main burden of kidney disease is unrelated to HIV infection. Patient care can be significantly improved by addressing noncompliance.

INTRODUCTION:In the last decade, substantial differences in the epidemiology of, antiretroviral therapy (ART) for, cascade of care in and support to people with HIV in vulnerable populations have been observed between countries in Western Europe, Central Europe (CE) and Eastern Europe (EE). The aim of this study was to use a survey to explore whether ART availability and therapies have evolved in CE and EE according to European guidelines.METHODS:The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group conducted two identical multicentre cross-sectional online surveys in 2019 and 2021 concerning the availability and use of antiretroviral drugs (boosted protease inhibitors [bPIs], integrase inhibitors [INSTIs] and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs]), the introduction of a rapid ART start strategy and the use of two-drug regimens (2DRs) for starting or switching ART. We also investigated barriers to the implementation of these strategies in each region.RESULTS:In total, 18 centres participated in the study: four from CE, six from EE and eight from Southeastern Europe (SEE). Between those 2 years, older PIs were less frequently used and darunavir-based regimens were the main PIs (83%); bictegravir-based and tenofovir alafenamide-based regimens were introduced in CE and SEE but not in EE. The COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly interrupt delivery of ART in most centres. Two-thirds of centres adopted a rapid ART start strategy, mainly in pregnant women and to improve linkage of care in vulnerable populations. The main obstacle to rapid ART start was that national guidelines in several countries from all three regions did not support such as strategy or required laboratory tests first; an INSTI/NRTI combination was the most commonly prescribed regimen (75%) and was exclusively prescribed in SEE. 2DRs are increasingly used for starting or switching ART (58%), and an INSTI/NRTI was the preferred regimen (75%) in all regions and exclusively prescribed in SEE, whereas the use of bPIs declined. Metabolic disorders and adverse drug reactions were the main reasons for starting a 2DR; in the second survey, HIV RNA <500 000 c/ml and high cluster of differentiation (CD)-4 count emerged as additional important reasons.CONCLUSIONS:In just 2 years and in spite of the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, significant achievements concerning ART availability and strategies have occurred in CE, EE and SEE that facilitate the harmonization of those strategies with the European AIDS Clinical Society guidelines. Few exceptions exist, especially in EE. Continuous effort is needed to overcome various obstacles (administrative, financial, national guideline restrictions) in some countries.

Background: Following the introduction of direct-acting antiviral therapy in 2013, WHO launched the first Global Health Sector Strategy on Viral Hepatitis. We describe a hepatitis C virus (HCV) cascade of care in people with HIV (PWH) across Europe in terms of reaching the WHO elimination targets of diagnosing 90% and treating 80% of HCV-infected individuals. Methods: HIV/HCV-coinfected participants in the EuroSIDA cohort under prospective follow-up at October 1, 2019, were described using a nine-stage cascade of care. Care cascades were constructed across Europe, on a regional (n = 5) and country (n = 21) level. Results: Of 4773 anti-HCV positive PWH, 4446 [93.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 92.4-93.9)] were ever tested for HCV RNA, and 19.0% (95% CI 16.4-21.6) were currently HCV RNA positive, with the highest prevalence in Eastern and Central-Eastern Europe (33.7 and 29.6%, respectively). In Eastern Europe, 78.1% of the estimated number of chronic infections have been diagnosed, whereas this proportion was above 95% in the other four regions. Overall, 3116 persons have ever started treatment (72.5% of the ever chronically infected, 95% CI 70.9-74.0) and 2404 individuals (55.9% of the ever chronically infected, 95% CI 53.9-57.9) were cured. Cure proportion ranged from 11.2% in Belarus to 87.2% in Austria. Conclusion: In all regions except Eastern Europe, more than 90% of the study participants have been tested for HCV-RNA. In Southern and Central-Western regions, more than 80% ever chronically HCV-infected PWH received treatment. The proportion with cured HCV infection did not exceed 80% in any region, with significant heterogeneity between countries. In a pan-European cohort of PWH, all regions except Eastern Europe achieved the WHO target of diagnosing 90% of chronic HCV infections, while the target of treating 80% of eligible persons was achieved in none of the five regions.

BackgroundAdequate identification and testing of people at risk for HIV is fundamental for the HIV care continuum. A key strategy to improve timely testing is HIV indicator condition (IC) guided testing.AimTo evaluate the uptake of HIV testing recommendations in HIV IC-specific guidelines in European countries.MethodsBetween 2019 and 2021, European HIV experts reviewed guideline databases to identify all national guidelines of 62 HIV ICs. The proportion of HIV IC guidelines recommending HIV testing was reported, stratified by subgroup (HIV IC, country, eastern/western Europe, achievement of 90-90-90 goals and medical specialty).ResultsOf 30 invited European countries, 15 participated. A total of 791 HIV IC guidelines were identified: median 47 (IQR: 38-68) per country. Association with HIV was reported in 69% (545/791) of the guidelines, and 46% (366/791) recommended HIV testing, while 42% (101/242) of the AIDS-defining conditions recommended HIV testing. HIV testing recommendations were observed more frequently in guidelines in eastern (53%) than western (42%) European countries and in countries yet to achieve the 90-90-90 goals (52%) compared to those that had (38%). The medical specialties internal medicine, neurology/neurosurgery, ophthalmology, pulmonology and gynaecology/obstetrics had an HIV testing recommendation uptake below the 46% average. None of the 62 HIV ICs, countries or medical specialties had 100% accurate testing recommendation coverage in all their available HIV IC guidelines.ConclusionFewer than half the HIV IC guidelines recommended HIV testing. This signals an insufficient adoption of this recommendation in non-HIV specialty guidelines across Europe.

Background. To cure drug-resistant (DR) tuberculosis (TB), the antituberculous treatment should be guided by Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug-susceptibility testing (DST). In this study, we compared conventional DST performed in Minsk, Belarus, a TB DR high-burden country, with extensive geno- and phenotypic analyses performed at the WHO TB Supranational Reference Laboratory in Copenhagen, Denmark, for TB/HIV coinfected patients. Subsequently, DST results were related to treatment regimen and outcome. Methods. Thirty TB/HIV coinfected patients from Minsk were included and descriptive statistics applied. Results. Based on results from Minsk, 10 (33%) TB/HIV patients had drug-sensitive TB. Two (7%) had isoniazid monoresistant TB, 8 (27%) had multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB, 5 (17%) preextensive drug-resistant (preXDR) TB, and 5 (17%) had extensive drug-resistant (XDR) TB. For the first-line drugs rifampicin and isoniazid, there was DST agreement between Minsk and Copenhagen for 90% patients. For the second-line anti-TB drugs, discrepancies were more pronounced. For 14 (47%) patients, there were disagreements for at least one drug, and 4 (13%) patients were classified as having MDR-TB in Minsk but were classified as having preXDR-TB based on DST results in Copenhagen. Initially, all patients received standard anti-TB treatment with rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol. However, this was only suitable for 40% of the patients based on DST. On average, DR-TB patients were changed to 4 (IQR 3-5) active drugs after 1.5 months (IQR 1-2). After treatment adjustment, the treatment duration was 8 months (IQR 2-11). Four (22%) patients with DR-TB received treatment for >18 months. In total, sixteen (53%) patients died during 24 months of follow-up. Conclusions. We found high concordance for rifampicin and isoniazid DST between the Minsk and Copenhagen laboratories, whereas discrepancies for second-line drugs were more pronounced. For patients with DR-TB, treatment was often insufficient and relevant adjustments delayed. This example from Minsk, Belarus, underlines two crucial points in the management of DR-TB: the urgent need for implementation of rapid molecular DSTs and availability of second-line drugs in all DR-TB high-burden settings. Carefully designed individualized treatment regimens in accordance with DST patterns will likely improve patients’ outcome and reduce transmission with drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains.

OBJECTIVES:The aim of this international multicentre study was to review potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for real-life coadministration of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-specific medications.METHODS:The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe Network Group initiated a retrospective, observational cohort study of HIV-positive patients diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Data were collected through a standardized questionnaire and DDIs were identified using the University of Liverpool's interaction checker.RESULTS:In total, 524 (94.1% of 557) patients received cART at COVID-19 onset: 117 (22.3%) were female, and the median age was 42 (interquartile range 36-50) years. Only 115 (21.9%) patients were hospitalized, of whom 34 required oxygen therapy. The most frequent nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone was tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) with lamivudine or emtricitabine (XTC) (79.3%) along with an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) (68.5%), nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) (17.7%), protease inhibitor (PI) (13.7%) or other (2.5%). In total, 148 (28.2%) patients received COVID-19-specific treatments: corticosteroids (15.7%), favipiravir (7.1%), remdesivir (3.1%), hydroxychloroquine (2.7%), tocilizumab (0.6%) and anakinra (0.2%). In total, 62 DDI episodes were identified in 58 patients (11.8% of the total cohort and 41.9% of the COVID-19-specific treatment group). The use of boosted PIs and elvitegravir accounted for 43 DDIs (29%), whereas NNRTIs were responsible for 14 DDIs (9.5%).CONCLUSIONS:In this analysis from the Central and Eastern European region on HIV-positive persons receiving COVID-19-specific treatment, it was found that potential DDIs were common. Although low-dose steroids are mainly used for COVID-19 treatment, comedication with boosted antiretrovirals seems to have the most frequent potential for DDIs. In addition, attention should be paid to NNRTI coadministration.

BACKGROUND: Using 2004-2007 TB:HIV Study data from Europe and Latin America, we previously generated a health care index (HCI) for TB and HIV co-infected people. With improvements in diagnostic and management practices, we have now updated the HCI with new data.METHODS: We evaluated nine aspects of health care in Cox proportional hazards models on time from TB diagnosis to death. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the probability of death by HCI quartile.RESULTS: Of 1396 eligible individuals (72% male, 59% from Eastern Europe), 269 died within 12 months. Use of rifamycin/isoniazid/pyrazinamide-based treatment (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.89), TB drug susceptibility testing (DST) and number of active TB drugs (DST + <3 drugs (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.80-1.48), DST + ≥3 drugs (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35-0.70) vs. no DST), recent HIV-RNA measurement (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.82) and combination antiretroviral therapy use (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.97) were associated with mortality. These factors contributed respectively 5, -1, 8, 5 and 4 to the HCI. Lower HCI was associated with an increased probability of death; 30% (95% CI 26-35) vs. 9% (95% CI 6-13) in the lowest vs. the highest quartile.CONCLUSION: We found five potentially modifiable health care components that were associated with mortality among TB-HIV positive individuals. Validation of our HCI in other TB cohorts could enhance our findings.

AbstractBackgroundA novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was detected at the end of 2019 in China. There are many COVID-19 studies in progress however, little is known about the course of COVID-19 in people living with HIV (PLWH). The aim of our study was to describe epidemiology and clinical characteristics of PLWH diagnosed with COVID-19 reported form Central and Eastern European Countries.MethodsOn-line survey was sent to Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group. Analysis included all confirmed COVID-19 cases between March 11 and June 26 2020 among PLWH in 12 countries: Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, and Serbia.ResultsIn total 34 cases were reported. The mean age of those patients was 42.7 years (IQR = 35.8-48.5) and most of the patients were male (70.6% vs 29.4%). The mean CD4+ T-cell count prior COVID-19 diagnosis was 558 cells/mm3(IQR = 312-719) and HIV RNA viral load (VL) was undetectable in 18 of 34 (53%) cases, the data about most recent HIV RNA VL was not available in three cases (8,8%). Comorbidities were observed in 19 (55.9%) patients, mostly cardiovascular disease (27,8%), and in 10 (29.4%) patients had coinfection, mostly chronic hepatitis C (87.5%). The clinical course of COVID-19 was asymptomatic in 4 (12%) cases, mild disease without hospitalization was reported in 11 (32%) cases. Stable patients with respiratory and/or systemic symptoms have been documented in 14 (41%) cases; 5 (15%) patients were clinically unstable with respiratory failure. Full recovery was reported in 31 (91%) cases, two patients died. In one case the data was not available.ConclusionThis study from 12 countries in Central and Eastern Europe region indicates no alarming signals of increased morbidity or mortality from COVID-19 among HIV-positive persons there is a need for further research.

INTRODUCTION:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has hit the European region disproportionately. Many HIV clinics share staff and logistics with infectious disease facilities, which are now on the frontline in tackling COVID-19. Therefore, this study investigated the impact of the current pandemic situation on HIV care and continuity of antiretroviral treatment (ART) supplies in CEE countries.METHODS:The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group was established in February 2016 to review standards of care for HIV in the region. The group consists of professionals actively involved in HIV care. On March 19, 2020 we decided to review the status of HIV care sustainability in the face of the emerging SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Europe. For this purpose, we constructed an online survey consisting of 23 questions. Respondents were recruited from ECEE members in 22 countries, based on their involvement in HIV care, and contacted via email.RESULTS:In total, 19 countries responded: Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Russia, Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine. Most of the respondents were infectious disease physicians directly involved in HIV care (17/19). No country reported HIV clinic closures. HIV clinics were operating normally in only six countries (31.6%). In 11 countries (57.9%) physicians were sharing HIV and COVID-19 care duties. None of the countries expected shortage of ART in the following 2 weeks; however, five physicians expressed uncertainty about the following 2 months. At the time of providing responses, ten countries (52.6%) had HIV-positive persons under quarantine.CONCLUSIONS:A shortage of resources is evident, with an impact on HIV care inevitable. We need to prepare to operate with minimal medical resources, with the aim of securing constant supplies of ART. Non-governmental organizations should re-evaluate their earlier objectives and support efforts to ensure continuity of ART delivery.

ObjectivesPre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV infection is an important intervention for control of the HIV epidemic. The incidence of HIV infection is increasing in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Therefore, we investigated the change in PrEP use in CEE over time.MethodsThe Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group was initiated in February 2016 to compare standards of care for HIV and viral hepatitis infections in CEE. Data on access to PrEP were collected from 23 countries through online surveys in May–June 2017 (76 respondents) and in November 2018–May 2019 (28 respondents).ResultsAbout 34.2% of respondents stated that tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) was licensed for use in their country in 2017, and 66.7% that it was licensed for use in 2018 (P = 0.02). PrEP was recommended in national guidelines in 39.5% of responses in 2017 and 40.7% in 2018 (P = 0.378). About 70.7% of respondents were aware of “informal” PrEP use in 2017, while 66.6% were aware of this in 2018 (P = 0.698). In 2018, there were 53 centres offering PreP (the highest numbers in Poland and Romania), whereas six countries had no centres offering PreP. The estimated number of HIV‐negative people on PreP in the region was 4500 in 2018. Generic TDF/FTC costs (in Euros) ranged from €10 (Romania) to €256.92 (Slovakia), while brand TDF/FTC costs ranged from €60 (Albania) to €853 (Finland).ConclusionsAlthough the process of licensing TDF/FTC use for PrEP has improved, this is not yet reflected in the guidelines, nor has there been a reduction in the “informal” use of PrEP. PrEP remains a rarely used preventive method in CEE countries.