Necropsy findings included liver cirrhosis and haemorrhagic necrosis of adrenal glands (panel B). Waterhouse-Friderichsen syndrome, sometimes also known as purpura fulminans, is described as acute ...haemorrhagic necrosis of the adrenal glands (adrenal apoplexy). Overwhelming meningococcaemia is an emergency disorder that, when associated with purpura fulminans with or without Waterhouse-Friderichsen syndrome, has a very poor prognosis. ...even today, W W Herrick's adage-“no other infection so quickly slays”-still applies.
Summary Background Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir) might be a safe and efficacious switch option for virologically suppressed ...patients with HIV who have neuropsychiatric side-effects on a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or who are on a multitablet NNRTI-containing regimen and want a regimen simplification. We assessed the non-inferiority of such a switch compared with continuation of an NNRTI-containing regimen. Methods STRATEGY-NNRTI is a 96 week, international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority trial enrolling adults (≥18 years) with HIV-1 and plasma HIV RNA viral load below 50 copies per mL for at least 6 months on an NNRTI plus emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen. With a computer-generated randomisation sequence, we randomly allocated participants (2:1; blocks of six, stratified by efavirenz use at screening) to switch to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir (switch group) or continue the NNRTI plus emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen (no-switch group). Key eligibility criteria included no history of virological failure and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 70 mL per min or greater. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma viral loads below 50 copies per mL at week 48 based on a snapshot algorithm with a non-inferiority margin of 12% (assessed by modified intention to treat). This trial is ongoing and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01495702. Findings Between Dec 29, 2011, and Dec 13, 2012, we randomly allocated 439 participants to treatment: 290 participants in the switch group and 143 participants in the no-switch group received treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. At week 48, 271 (93%) of 290 participants in the switch group and 126 (88%) of 143 participants in the no-switch group maintained plasma viral loads below 50 copies per mL (difference 5·3%, 95% CI −0·5 to 12·0; p=0·066). We detected no treatment-emergent resistance in either group. Safety events leading to discontinuation were uncommon in both groups: six (2%) of 291 participants in the switch group and one (1%) of 143 in the no-switch group. Interpretation Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir seems to be efficacious and well tolerated in virologically suppressed adults with HIV and might be a suitable alternative for patients on an NNRTI with emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen considering a regimen modification or simplification. Funding Gilead Sciences.
Summary Background In the primary analysis of SPRING-2 at week 48, dolutegravir showed non-inferior efficacy to and similar tolerability to raltegravir in adults infected with HIV-1 and naive for ...antiretroviral treatment. We present the 96 week results. Methods SPRING-2 is an ongoing phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 that started in Oct 19, 2010. We present results for the safety cutoff date of Jan 30, 2013. Patients had to be aged 18 years or older and have HIV-1 RNA concentrations of 1000 copies per mL or more. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or raltegravir (400 mg twice daily), plus investigator-selected tenofovir–emtricitabine or abacavir–lamivudine. Prespecified 96 week secondary endpoints included proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL, CD4 cell count changes from baseline, safety, tolerability, and genotypic or phenotypic resistance. We used an intention-to-treat exposed population (received at least one dose of study drug) for the analyses. Sponsor staff were masked to treatment assignment until primary analysis at week 48; investigators, site staff, and patients were masked until week 96. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01227824. Findings Of 1035 patients screened, 827 were randomly assigned to study group, and 822 received at least one dose of the study drug (411 patients in each group). At week 96, 332 (81%) of 411 patients in the dolutegravir group and 314 (76%) of 411 patients in the raltegravir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted difference 4·5%, 95% CI −1·1% to 10·0%) confirming non-inferiority. Secondary analyses of efficacy such as per protocol (HIV RNA <50 copies per mL: 83% for dolutegravir and 80% for raltegravir) and treatment-related discontinuation equals failure (93% without failure for dolutegravir; 91% for raltegravir) supported non-inferiority. Virological non-response occurred less frequently in the dolutegravir group (22 5% patients for dolutegravir vs 43 10% patients for raltegravir). Median increases in CD4 cell count from baseline were similar between groups (276 cells per μL for dolutegravir and 264 cells per μL for raltegravir). Ten patients (2%) in each group discontinued because of adverse events, with few such events between weeks 48 and 96 (zero in the dolutegravir group and one in the raltegravir group). No study-related serious adverse events occurred between week 48 and week 96. At virological failure, no additional resistance to integrase inhibitors or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors was detected since week 48 or in any patient receiving dolutegravir. Interpretation At week 96, once-daily dolutegravir was non-inferior to twice-daily raltegravir in treatment-naive, patients with HIV-1. Once-daily dosing without requirement for a pharmacokinetic booster makes dolutegravir-based therapy an attractive treatment option for HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients. Funding ViiV Healthcare.
Summary Background Our objective was to assess therapeutic non-inferiority of dual treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir and lamivudine to triple treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir plus two ...nucleos(t)ides for maintenance of HIV-1 viral suppression. Methods In this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, we recruited patients from 32 HIV units in hospitals in Spain and France. Eligible patients were HIV-infected adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL, for at least 6 months on triple treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir (twice daily) plus lamivudine or emtricitabine and a second nucleos(t)ide, with no resistance or virological failure to these drugs, and no positive hepatitis B serum surface antigen. Investigators at each centre randomly assigned patients (1:1; block size of four; stratified by time to suppression <1 year or >1 year and nadir CD4 cell count <100 cells per μL or >100 cells per μL; computer-generated random sequence) to continue triple treatment or switch to dual treatment (oral lopinavir 400 mg and oral ritonavir 100 mg twice daily plus oral lamivudine 300 mg once daily). The primary endpoint was response to treatment in the intention-to-treat population (all randomised patients) at 48 weeks. The non-inferiority margin was 12%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01471821. Findings Between Oct 1, 2011, and April 1, 2013, we randomly assigned 250 participants to continue triple treatment (127 51% patients) or switch to dual treatment (123 49% patients). In the intention-to-treat population, 110 (86·6%) of 127 patients in the triple-treatment group responded to treatment versus 108 (87·8%) of 123 in the dual-treatment group (difference −1·2% 95% CI −9·6 to 7·3; p=0·92), meeting the criteria for non-inferiority. Serious adverse events occurred in eight (7%) patients in the triple-treatment group and five (4%) in the dual-treatment group (p=0·515), and study drug discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in four (3%) in the triple-treatment group and one (1%) in the dual-treatment group (p=0·223). Interpretation Dual treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir plus lamivudine has non-inferior therapeutic efficacy and is similarly tolerated to triple treatment. Funding AbbVie and Red Temática Cooperativa de Investigación en Sida.
