Resistance to antiretroviral drugs remains an important limitation to successful human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) therapy. Resistance testing can improve treatment outcomes for infected ...individuals. The availability of new drugs from various classes, standardization of resistance assays, and the development of viral tropism tests necessitate new guidelines for resistance testing. The International AIDS Society-USA convened a panel of physicians and scientists with expertise in drug-resistant HIV-1, drug management, and patient care to review recently published data and presentations at scientific conferences and to provide updated recommendations. Whenever possible, resistance testing is recommended at the time of HIV infection diagnosis as part of the initial comprehensive patient assessment, as well as in all cases of virologic failure. Tropism testing is recommended whenever the use of chemokine receptor 5 antagonists is contemplated. As the roll out of antiretroviral therapy continues in developing countries, drug resistance monitoring for both subtype B and non-subtype B strains of HIV will become increasingly important.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, NUK, PNG, UL, UM, UPUK
The prevalence of HIV-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has not been evaluated since introduction of combined, highly active antiretroviral treatments.
To establish the current ...prevalence of PAH in a large HIV-positive population.
Prospective study conducted in 7,648 consecutive HIV-positive adults in 14 HIV clinics in France. PAH was identified through screening with a predefined algorithm. Patients with dyspnea unexplained by other causes underwent transthoracic Doppler echocardiography. PAH was suspected if peak velocity of tricuspid regurgitation was greater than 2.5 m/second and was confirmed by right heart catheterization.
PAH was diagnosed if mean pulmonary arterial pressure at rest was 25 mm Hg or greater (with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure < or = 15 mm Hg) or 30 mm Hg or greater on exercise. A total of 739 patients had dyspnea, of which 312 met exclusion criteria and 150 refused to participate. Among the remaining 277, 30 had known PAH and 247 had unexplained dyspnea and underwent echocardiography; PAH was suspected in 18 and confirmed in 5, to give a total of 35 cases. The prevalence was thus 0.46% (95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.64%). All new cases had relatively milder PAH.
The prevalence of HIV-associated PAH is about the same as it was in the early 1990s. Given the current good long-term prognosis of patients with HIV, the severity of PAH in HIV-infected patients, and the absence of predictive factors, careful screening for PAH is warranted for patients with unexplained dyspnea.
CONTEXT The availability of new antiretroviral drugs and formulations, including drugs in new classes, and recent data on treatment choices for antiretroviral-naive and -experienced patients warrant ...an update of the International AIDS Society–USA guidelines for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adult human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. OBJECTIVES To summarize new data in the field and to provide current recommendations for the antiretroviral management and laboratory monitoring of HIV infection. This report provides guidelines in key areas of antiretroviral management: when to initiate therapy, choice of initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and how best to approach treatment options, including optimal use of recently approved drugs (maraviroc, raltegravir, and etravirine) in treatment-experienced patients. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION A 14-member panel with expertise in HIV research and clinical care was appointed. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences since the last panel report (August 2006) through June 2008 were identified. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data that changed the previous guidelines were reviewed by the panel (according to section). Guidelines were drafted by section writing committees and were then reviewed and edited by the entire panel. Recommendations were made by panel consensus. CONCLUSIONS New data and considerations support initiating therapy before CD4 cell count declines to less than 350/μL. In patients with 350 CD4 cells/μL or more, the decision to begin therapy should be individualized based on the presence of comorbidities, risk factors for progression to AIDS and non-AIDS diseases, and patient readiness for treatment. In addition to the prior recommendation that a high plasma viral load (eg, >100 000 copies/mL) and rapidly declining CD4 cell count (>100/μL per year) should prompt treatment initiation, active hepatitis B or C virus coinfection, cardiovascular disease risk, and HIV-associated nephropathy increasingly prompt earlier therapy. The initial regimen must be individualized, particularly in the presence of comorbid conditions, but usually will include efavirenz or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine). Treatment failure should be identified and managed promptly, with the goal of therapy, even in heavily pretreated patients, being an HIV-1 RNA level below assay detection limits.
Summary Background Dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572) is a new HIV-1 integrase inhibitor that has antiviral activity with once daily, unboosted dosing. SPRING-1 is an ongoing study designed to select a dose ...for phase 3 assessment. We present data from preplanned primary and interim analyses. Methods In a phase 2b, multicentre, dose-ranging study, treatment-naive adults were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive 10 mg, 25 mg, or 50 mg dolutegravir or 600 mg efavirenz. Dose but not drug allocation was masked. Randomisation was by a central integrated voice-response system according to a computer-generated code. Study drugs were given with either tenofovir plus emtricitabine or abacavir plus lamivudine. Our study was done at 34 sites in France, Germany, Italy, Russia, Spain, and the USA beginning on July 9, 2009. Eligible participants were seropositive for HIV-1, aged 18 years or older, and had plasma HIV RNA viral loads of at least 1000 copies per mL and CD4 counts of at least 200 cells per μL. Our primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with viral load of less than 50 copies per mL at week 16 and we present data to week 48. Analyses were done on the basis of allocation group and included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00951015. Findings 205 patients were randomly allocated and received at least one dose of study drug: 53, 51, and 51 to receive 10 mg, 25 mg, and 50 mg dolutegravir, respectively, and 50 to receive efavirenz. Week 16 response rates to viral loads of at most 50 copies per mL were 93% (144 of 155 participants) for all doses of dolutegravir (with little difference between dose groups) and 60% (30 of 50) for efavirenz; week 48 response rates were 87% (139 of 155) for all doses of dolutegravir and 82% (41 of 50) for efavirenz. Response rates between nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor subgroups were similar. We identified three virological failures in the dolutegravir groups and one in the efavirenz group—we did not identify any integrase inhibitor mutations. We did not identify any dose-related clinical or laboratory toxic effects, with more drug-related adverse events of moderate-or-higher intensity in the efavirenz group (20%) than the dolutegravir group (8%). We did not judge that any serious adverse events were related to dolutegravir. Interpretation Dolutegravir was effective when given once daily without a pharmacokinetic booster and was well tolerated at all assessed doses. Our findings support the assessment of once daily 50 mg dolutegravir in phase 3 trials. Funding Shionogi-GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, LLC, now Shionogi-ViiV Healthcare, LLC.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
CONTEXT Guidelines for antiretroviral therapy are important for clinicians worldwide given the complexity of the field and the varied clinical situations in which these agents are used. The ...International AIDS Society–USA panel has updated its recommendations as warranted by new developments in the field. OBJECTIVE To provide physicians and other human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinicians with current recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in circumstances for which there is relatively unrestricted access to drugs and monitoring tools. The recommendations are centered on 4 key issues: when to start antiretroviral therapy; what to start; when to change; and what to change. Antiretroviral therapy in special circumstances is also described. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION A 16-member noncompensated panel was appointed, based on expertise in HIV research and patient care internationally. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences from mid 2004 through May 2006 were identified and reviewed by all members of the panel. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data that might change previous guidelines were identified and reviewed. New guidelines were drafted by a writing committee and reviewed by the entire panel. CONCLUSIONS Antiretroviral therapy in adults continues to evolve rapidly, making delivery of state-of-the-art care challenging. Initiation of therapy continues to be recommended in all symptomatic persons and in asymptomatic persons after the CD4 cell count falls below 350/μL and before it declines to 200/μL. A nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or a protease inhibitor boosted with low-dose ritonavir each combined with 2 nucleoside (or nucleotide) reverse transcriptase inhibitors is recommended with choice being based on the individual patient profile. Therapy should be changed when toxicity or intolerance mandate it or when treatment failure is documented. The virologic target for patients with treatment failure is now a plasma HIV-1 RNA level below 50 copies/mL. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy in the short-term and the long-term is crucial for treatment success and must be continually reinforced.
Summary Background Early combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) initiation at the time of primary HIV-1 infection could restrict the establishment of HIV reservoirs. We aimed to assess the effect ...of a cART regimen intensified with raltegravir and maraviroc, compared with standard triple-drug cART, on HIV-DNA load. Methods In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from hospitals across France. Inclusion criteria were primary HIV-1 infection (an incomplete HIV-1 western blot and detectable plasma HIV-RNA), with either symptoms or a CD4+ cell count below 500 cells per μL. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to an intensive, five-drug cART regimen (raltegravir 400 mg and maraviroc 150 mg twice daily, and a fixed-dose combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 g plus emtricitabine 200 g, darunavir 800 g, and ritonavir 100 g once daily) or a standard triple-drug cART regimen (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 g plus emtricitabine 200 g, darunavir 800 g, and ritonavir 100 g once daily) using a predefined randomised list generated by randomly selected variable block sizes. The primary endpoint was the median number of HIV-DNA copies per 106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) at month 24, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who started their assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01033760. Findings Between April 26, 2010, and July 13, 2011, 110 patients were enrolled, of whom 92 were randomly assigned and 90 started treatment (45 in each treatment group). Six (13%) patients in the intensive cART group and two (4%) in the standard cART group discontinued before month 24. At month 24, HIV-DNA loads were similar between groups (2·35 IQR 2·05–2·50 log10 per 106 PBMC in the intensive cART group vs 2·25 1·71–2·55 in the standard cART group; p=0·21). Eight grade 3–4 clinical adverse events were reported in seven patients in the intensive cART group and seven grade 3–4 clinical adverse events were reported in seven patients in the standard cART group. Three serious clinical adverse events occurred: two (pancreatitis and lipodystrophy) in the standard cART group, which were regarded as treatment related, and one event (suicide attempt) in the intensive cART group that was unrelated to treatment. Interpretation After 24 months, cART intensified with raltegravir and maraviroc did not have a greater effect on HIV blood reservoirs than did standard cART. These results should help to design future trials of treatments aiming to decrease the HIV reservoir in patients with primary HIV-1 infection. Funding Inserm–ANRS, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck, and ViiV Laboratories.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Summary Background Two randomised, placebo-controlled trials—BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2—investigated the efficacy and safety of raltegravir, an HIV-1 integrase strand-transfer inhibitor. We report ...final results of BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2 combined at 3 years (the end of the double-blind phase) and 5 years (the end of the study). Methods Integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with HIV resistant to three classes of drug and who were failing antiretroviral therapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to raltegravir 400 mg twice daily or placebo, both with optimised background treatment. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until week 156, after which all patients were offered open-label raltegravir until week 240. The primary endpoint was previously assessed at 16 weeks. We assessed long-term efficacy with endpoints of the proportion of patients with an HIV viral load of less than 50 copies per mL and less than 400 copies per mL, and mean change in CD4 cell count, at weeks 156 and 240. Findings 1012 patients were screened for inclusion. 462 were treated with raltegravir and 237 with placebo. At week 156, 51% in the raltegravir group versus 22% in the placebo group (non-completer classed as failure) had viral loads of less than 50 copies per mL, and 54% versus 23% had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL. Mean CD4 cell count increase (analysed by an observed failure approach) was 164 cells per μL versus 63 cells per μL. After week 156, 251 patients (54%) from the raltegravir group and 47 (20%) from the placebo group entered the open-label raltergravir phase; 221 (47%) versus 44 (19%) completed the entire study. At week 240, viral load was less than 50 copies per mL in 193 (42%) of all patients initially assigned to raltegravir and less than 400 copies per mL in 210 (45%); mean CD4 cell count increased by 183 cells per μL. Virological failure occurred in 166 raltegravir recipients (36%) during the double-blind phase and in 17 of all patients (6%) during the open-label phase. The most common drug-related adverse events at 5 years in both groups were nausea, headache, and diarrhoea, and occurred in similar proportions in each group. Laboratory test results were similar in both treatment groups and showed little change after year 2. Interpretation Raltegravir has a favourable long-term efficacy and safety profile in integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with triple-class resistant HIV in whom antiretroviral therapy is failing. Raltegravir is an alternative for treatment-experienced patients, particularly those with few treatment options. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
CONTEXT Substantial changes in the field of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
treatment have occurred in the last 2 years, prompting revision of the guidelines
for antiretroviral management of ...adults with established HIV infection. OBJECTIVE To update recommendations for physicians who provide HIV care regarding
when to start antiretroviral therapy, what drugs to start with, when to change
drug regimens, and what drug regimens to switch to after therapy fails. DATA SOURCES Evidence was identified and reviewed by a 16-member noncompensated panel
of physicians with expertise in HIV-related basic science and clinical research,
antiretroviral therapy, and HIV patient care. The panel was designed to have
broad US and international representation for areas with adequate access to
antiretroviral management. STUDY SELECTION Evidence considered included published basic science, clinical research,
and epidemiological data (identified by experts in the field or extracted
through MEDLINE searches using terms relevant to antiretroviral therapy) and
abstracts from HIV-oriented scientific conferences between July 2002 and May
2004. DATA EXTRACTION Data were reviewed to identify any information that might change previous
guidelines. Based on panel discussion, guidelines were drafted by a writing
committee and discussed by the panel until consensus was reached. DATA SYNTHESIS Four antiretroviral drugs recently have been made available and have
broadened the options for initial and subsequent regimens. New data allow
more definitive recommendations for specific drugs or regimens to include
or avoid, particularly with regard to initial therapy. Recommendations are
rated according to 7 evidence categories, ranging from I (data from prospective
randomized clinical trials) to VII (expert opinion of the panel). CONCLUSION Further insights into the roles of drug toxic effects, drug resistance,
and pharmacological interactions have resulted in additional guidance for
strategic approaches to antiretroviral management.
The ongoing phase IIb POWER 1 (TMC114-C213) trial is designed to assess efficacy and safety of the protease inhibitor (PI) TMC114 (darunavir) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients.
This ...randomized, partially blinded, 24-week dose-finding study compared efficacy and safety of four doses of TMC114 plus low-dose ritonavir (TMC114/r) with investigator-selected control PI(s) (CPIs).
Patients with one or more primary PI mutation and HIV RNA > 1000 copies/ml received optimized background therapy, plus TMC114/r 400/100 mg once daily, 800/100 mg once daily, 400/100 mg twice daily or 600/100 mg twice daily, or CPI(s). The primary endpoint (intent-to-treat) compared proportions of patients achieving viral load reduction >or= 1.0 log10 copies/ml from baseline.
In total, 318 patients were treated. Baseline mean viral load was 4.48 log10 copies/ml; median CD4 cell count was 179 cells/microl. In the CPI arm 62% of patients discontinued (virological failure: 54%); 10% of TMC114/r patients discontinued. More TMC114/r (69-77%) than CPI patients (25%) reached the primary endpoint (P < 0.001); 43-53% of TMC114/r patients and 18% of the CPI arm achieved viral load < 50 copies/ml (P < 0.001). TMC114/r demonstrated greater mean CD4 cell count increases versus CPI(s) (68-124 versus 20 cells/microl; P < 0.05). TMC114/r 600/100 mg twice daily demonstrated the highest virological and immunological responses. Adverse event incidence was similar between treatments; headache and diarrhoea were more common with CPI(s).
TMC114/r demonstrated statistically higher 24-week virological response rates and CD4 cell count increases than CPI(s). TMC114/r 600/100 mg twice daily has received regulatory approval in treatment-experienced patients.
PDF
