Defining a malaria diagnostic pathway from innovation to adoption: Stakeholder perspectives on data and evidence gaps.

Malaria, a major global health concern, requires effective diagnostic tools for patient care, disease control, and elimination. The pathway from concept to the adoption of diagnostic products is complex, involving multiple steps and stakeholders. To map this process, our study introduces a malaria-specific diagnostic pathway, synthesising existing frameworks with expert insights. Comprising six major stages and 31 related activities, the pathway retains the core stages from existing frameworks and integrates essential malaria diagnostic activities, such as WHO prequalification processes, global stakeholder involvement, and broader health systems considerations. To understand the scope and availability of evidence guiding the activities along this pathway, we conducted an online survey with 113 participants from various stages of the malaria diagnostic pathway. The survey assessed perceptions on four critical attributes of evidence: clear requirements, alignment with user needs, accuracy and reliability, and public and free availability. It also explored the types of evidence used and the challenges and potential solutions related to evidence generation and use. Respondents reported using a broad range of formal and informal data sources. Findings indicated differing levels of agreement on the attributes across pathway stages, with notable challenges in the Approvals and Manufacturing stage and consistent concerns regarding the public availability of data/evidence. The study offers valuable insights for optimising evidence generation and utilisation across the malaria diagnostic pathway. It highlights the need for enhanced stakeholder collaboration, improved data availability, and increased funding to support effective evidence generation, sharing, and use. We propose actionable solutions, including the use of public data repositories, progressive data sharing policies, open-access publishing, capacity-building initiatives, stakeholder engagement forums, and innovative funding solutions. The developed framework and study insights have broader applications, offering a model adaptable for other diseases, particularly for neglected tropical diseases, which face similar diagnostic challenges.

Testing novel strategies for patients hospitalised with HIV-associated disseminated tuberculosis (NewStrat-TB): protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: HIV-associated tuberculosis (TB) contributes disproportionately to global tuberculosis mortality. Patients hospitalised at the time of the diagnosis of HIV-associated disseminated TB are typically severely ill and have a high mortality risk despite initiation of tuberculosis treatment. The objective of the study is to assess the safety and efficacy of both intensified TB treatment (high dose rifampicin plus levofloxacin) and immunomodulation with corticosteroids as interventions to reduce early mortality in hospitalised patients with HIV-associated disseminated TB. METHODS: This is a phase III randomised controlled superiority trial, evaluating two interventions in a 2 × 2 factorial design: (1) high dose rifampicin (35 mg/kg/day) plus levofloxacin added to standard TB treatment for the first 14 days versus standard tuberculosis treatment and (2) adjunctive corticosteroids (prednisone 1.5 mg/kg/day) versus identical placebo for the first 14 days of TB treatment. The study population is HIV-positive patients diagnosed with disseminated TB (defined as being positive by at least one of the following assays: urine Alere LAM, urine Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra or blood Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra) during a hospital admission. The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at 12 weeks comparing, first, patients receiving intensified TB treatment to standard of care and, second, patients receiving corticosteroids to those receiving placebo. Analysis of the primary endpoint will be by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints include all-cause mortality at 2 and 24 weeks. Safety and tolerability endpoints include hepatoxicity evaluations and corticosteroid-related adverse events. DISCUSSION: Disseminated TB is characterised by a high mycobacterial load and patients are often critically ill at presentation, with features of sepsis, which carries a high mortality risk. Interventions that reduce this high mycobacterial load or modulate associated immune activation could potentially reduce mortality. If found to be safe and effective, the interventions being evaluated in this trial could be easily implemented in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04951986. Registered on 7 July 2021 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04951986.

Final 192-Week Efficacy and Safety Results of the ADVANCE Trial, Comparing 3 First-line Antiretroviral Regimens.

Background: ADVANCE compared 3 World Health Organization-recommended first-line regimens in participants with HIV who were antiretroviral naive. Methods: This randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial enrolled participants living with HIV with no antiretroviral exposure in the previous 6 months to 1 of the following arms: tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) / emtricitabine (FTC) + dolutegravir (DTG) (2 tablets), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) / FTC + DTG (2 tablets), or a fixed-dose combination of TDF / FTC / efavirenz (EFV) (1 tablet). We report the final safety and efficacy data up to 192 weeks. Results: Repeat consent from the original 351 participants randomized to each arm was obtained from 230 participants (66%) in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm, 209 (60%) in the TDF/FTC + DTG arm, and 183 (52%) in the TDF/FTC/EFV arm. At 192 weeks, 213 (61%) of the original 351 participants in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm, 195 (56%) in the TDF/FTC + DTG arm, and 172 (49%) in the TDF/FTC/EFV arm had confirmed RNA <50 copies/mL, with low virologic failure in all groups and no significant integrase inhibitor mutations in any arm. Mean weight gain was 8.9 kg (SD, 7.1) in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm, 5.9 kg (SD, 7.1) in the TDF/FTC + DTG arm, and 3.2 kg (SD, 8.1) in the TDF/FTC/EFV arm at 192 weeks from baseline and was greatest among women, those taking TAF, and those with lower baseline CD4 counts. The weight trajectory slowed after week 96. There were few clinical events and minor laboratory changes and differences among arms after 96 weeks. There were no significant differences in treatment-emergent hypertension or pregnancy outcomes by arm. Conclusions: High viral suppression was seen across arms, with no resistance to DTG. Weight gain continued but slowed after 96 weeks, with few clinical events or laboratory changes.

Risks of metabolic syndrome in the ADVANCE and NAMSAL trials.

Introduction: The ADVANCE and NAMSAL trials evaluating antiretroviral drugs have both reported substantial levels of clinical obesity in participants. As one of the main risk factors for metabolic syndrome, growing rates of obesity may drive metabolic syndrome development. This study aims to evaluate the risk of metabolic syndrome in the ADVANCE and NAMSAL trials. Methods: The number of participants with metabolic syndrome was calculated at baseline and week 192 as central obesity and any of the following two factors: raised triglycerides, reduced HDL-cholesterol, raised blood pressure and raised fasting glucose. Differences between the treatment arms were calculated using the χ2 test. Results: Across all visits to week 192, treatment-emergent metabolic syndrome was 15% (TAF/FTC + DTG), 10% (TDF/FTC + DTG) and 7% (TDF/FTC/EFV) in ADVANCE. The results were significantly higher in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm compared to the TDF/FTC/EFV arm (p < 0.001), and the TDF/FTC + DTG vs. the TDF/FTC/EFV arms (p < 0.05) in all patients, and in females. In NAMSAL, the incidence of treatment-emergent metabolic syndrome at any time point was 14% (TDF/3TC + DTG) and 5% (TDF/3TC + EFV) (p < 0.001). This incidence was significantly greater in the TDF/3TC/DTG arm compared to the TDF/3TC/EFV arm in all patients (p < 0.001), and in males (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In this analysis, we highlight treatment-emergent metabolic syndrome associated with dolutegravir, likely driven by obesity. Clinicians initiating or monitoring patients on INSTI-based ART must counsel for lifestyle optimisation to prevent these effects.

Standard-dose versus double-dose dolutegravir in HIV-associated tuberculosis in South Africa (RADIANT-TB): a phase 2, non-comparative, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The drug-drug interaction between rifampicin and dolutegravir can be overcome by supplemental dolutegravir dosing, which is difficult to implement in high-burden settings. We aimed to test whether virological outcomes with standard-dose dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) are acceptable in people with HIV on rifampicin-based antituberculosis therapy. METHODS: RADIANT-TB was a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, non-comparative, placebo-controlled trial at a single site in Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa. Participants were older than 18 years of age, with plasma HIV-1 RNA greater than 1000 copies per mL, CD4 count greater than 100 cells per µL, ART-naive or first-line ART interrupted, and on rifampicin-based antituberculosis therapy for less than 3 months. By use of permuted block (block size of 6) randomisation, participants were assigned (1:1) to receive either tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, lamivudine, and dolutegravir plus supplemental 50 mg dolutegravir 12 h later or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, lamivudine, and dolutegravir plus matched placebo 12 h later. Participants received standard antituberculosis therapy (rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for the first 2 months followed by isoniazid and rifampicin for 4 months). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 24 analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03851588. FINDINGS: Between Nov 28, 2019, and July 23, 2021, 108 participants (38 female, median age 35 years [IQR 31-40]) were randomly assigned to supplemental dolutegravir (n=53) or placebo (n=55). Median baseline CD4 count was 188 cells per µL (IQR 145-316) and median HIV-1 RNA was 5·2 log10 copies per mL (4·6-5·7). At week 24, 43 (83%, 95% CI 70-92) of 52 participants in the supplemental dolutegravir arm and 44 (83%, 95% CI 70-92) of 53 participants in the placebo arm had virological suppression. No treatment-emergent dolutegravir resistance mutations were detected up to week 48 in the 19 participants with study-defined virological failure. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were similarly distributed between the study arms. The most frequent grade 3 and 4 adverse events were weight loss (4/108 [4%]), insomnia (3/108 [3%]), and pneumonia (3/108 [3%]). INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that twice-daily dolutegravir might be unnecessary in people with HIV-associated tuberculosis. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.

Initial Supplementary Dose of Dolutegravir in Second-Line Antiretroviral Therapy: A Noncomparative, Double-Blind, Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Dolutegravir concentrations are reduced by efavirenz induction effect necessitating twice-daily dolutegravir dosing when coadministered. Efavirenz induction persists for several weeks after stopping, which could potentially select for dolutegravir resistance if switching occurred with unsuppressed human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA levels and standard dolutegravir dosing. We evaluated the need for a lead-in supplementary dolutegravir dose in adults failing first-line tenofovir-emtricitabine-efavirenz (TEE). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in Khayelitsha, South Africa. Eligible patients had virologic failure (2 consecutive HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies/mL) on first-line TEE. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch to tenofovir-lamivudine-dolutegravir (TLD) with a supplementary 50 mg dolutegravir dose or placebo taken 12 hours later for 14 days. Primary outcome was proportion with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24. This study was not powered to compare arms. RESULTS: One hundred thirty participants were randomized (65 to each arm). Median baseline HIV-1 RNA was 4.0 log10 copies/mL and 76% had baseline resistance to both tenofovir and lamivudine. One participant died and 2 were lost to follow-up. At week 24, 55 of 64 (86% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 75%-93%]) in the supplementary dolutegravir arm and 53 of 65 (82% [95% CI: 70%-90%]) in the placebo arm had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were similar in frequency between arms. None of 6 participants (3 in each arm) eligible for resistance testing by 24 weeks developed dolutegravir resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings do not support the need for initial dolutegravir dose adjustment in patients switching to TLD who failed first-line TEE. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03991013.

Comparing Prospective Incident Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Rates During Successive Waves of Delta and Omicron in Johannesburg, South Africa.

In high-risk individuals in Johannesburg, during the Delta coronavirus disease 2019 wave, 22% (125/561) were positive, with 33% symptomatic (2 hospitalizations; 1 death). During Omicron, 56% (232/411) were infected, with 24% symptomatic (no hospitalizations or deaths). The remarkable speed of infection of Omicron over Delta poses challenges to conventional severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 control measures.

Phase 3 evaluation of an innovative simple molecular test for the diagnosis of malaria in different endemic and health settings in sub-Saharan Africa (DIAGMAL).

BACKGROUND: Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) have become the cornerstone for the management of malaria in many endemic settings, but their use is constrained for several reasons: (i) persistent malaria antigen (histidine-rich protein 2; HRP2) leading to false positive test results; (ii) hrp2 deletions leading to false negative PfHRP2 results; and (iii) limited sensitivity with a detection threshold of around 100 parasites/µl blood (pLDH- and HRP2-based) leading to false negative tests. Microscopy is still the gold standard for malaria diagnosis, and allows for species determination and quantitation, but requires trained microscopists, maintained microscopes and has detection limit issues. Consequently, there is a pressing need to develop and evaluate more sensitive and accurate diagnostic tests. To address this need we have developed a direct on blood mini PCR-NALFIA test that combines the benefits of molecular biology with low infrastructural requirements and extensive training. METHODS: This is a Phase 3 diagnostic evaluation in 5 African countries. Study sites (Sudan, Ethiopia, Burkina, Kenya and Namibia) were selected to ensure wide geographical coverage of Africa and to address various malaria epidemiological contexts ranging from high transmission to near elimination settings with different clinical scenarios and diagnostic challenges. Study participants will be enrolled at the study health facilities after obtaining written informed consent. Diagnostic accuracy will be assessed following the WHO/TDR guidelines for the evaluation of diagnostics and reported according to STARD principles. Due to the lack of a 100% specific and sensitive standard diagnostic test for malaria, the sensitivity and specificity of the new test will be compared to the available diagnostic practices in place at the selected sites and to quantitative PCR as the reference test. DISCUSSION: This phase 3 study is designed to validate the clinical performance and feasibility of implementing a new diagnostic tool for the detection of malaria in real clinical settings. If successful, the proposed technology will improve the diagnosis of malaria. Enrolment started in November 2022 (Kenya) with assessment of long term outcome to be completed by 2023 at all recruitment sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (www.pactr.org) PACTR202202766889963 on 01/02/2022 and ISCRTN (www.isrctn.com/) ISRCTN13334317 on 22/02/2022.

Randomized clinical trial of nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: The COVER trial evaluated whether nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir could lower the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nitazoxanide was selected given its favourable pharmacokinetics and in vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had shown favourable results in early clinical trials. METHODS: In this clinical trial in Johannesburg, South Africa, healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection were randomized to 24 weeks of either nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir as prevention, or standard prevention advice only. Participants were evaluated every 4 weeks for COVID-19 symptoms and had antibody and PCR testing. The primary endpoint was positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR and/or serology ≥7 days after randomization, regardless of symptoms. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 between each experimental arm and control. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and January 2022, 828 participants were enrolled. COVID-19 infections were confirmed in 100 participants on nitazoxanide (2234 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1837-2718), 87 on sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (2125 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1722-2622) and 111 in the control arm (1849 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1535-2227). There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint between the treatment arms, and the results met the criteria for futility. In the safety analysis, the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was low and similar across arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, nitazoxanide and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had no significant preventative effect on infection with SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection.

Progress towards antibiotic use targets in eight high-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare antibiotic sales in eight high-income countries using the 2019 World Health Organization (WHO) Access, Watch and Reserve (AWaRe) classification and the target of 60% consumption of Access category antibiotics. METHODS: We analysed data from a commercial database of sales of systemic antibiotics in France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and United States of America over the years 2013-2018. We classified antibiotics according to the 2019 AWaRe categories: Access, Watch, Reserve and Not Recommended. We measured antibiotic sales per capita in standard units (SU) per capita and calculated Access group sales as a percentage of total antibiotic sales. FINDINGS: In 2018, per capita antibiotic sales ranged from 7.4 SU (Switzerland) to 20.0 SU (France); median sales of Access group antibiotics were 10.9 SU per capita (range: 3.5-15.0). Per capita sales declined moderately over 2013-2018. The median percentage of Access group antibiotics was 68% (range: 22-77 %); the Access group proportion increased in most countries between 2013 and 2018. Five countries exceeded the 60% target; two countries narrowly missed it (> 55% in Germany and Italy). Sales of Access antibiotics in Japan were low (22%), driven by relatively high sales of oral cephalosporins and macrolides. CONCLUSION: We have identified changes to prescribing that could allow countries to achieve the WHO target. The 60% Access group target provides a framework to inform national antibiotic policies and could be complemented by absolute measures and more ambitious values in specific settings.

Virologic efficacy of tenofovir, lamivudine and dolutegravir as second-line antiretroviral therapy in adults failing a tenofovir-based first-line regimen.

OBJECTIVE: Recycling tenofovir and lamivudine/emtricitabine (XTC) with dolutegravir would provide a more tolerable, affordable, and scalable second-line regimen than dolutegravir with an optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone. We evaluated efficacy of tenofovir/lamivudine/dolutegravir (TLD) in patients failing first-line tenofovir/XTC/efavirenz or nevirapine. DESIGN: Single arm, prospective, interventional study. SETTING: Two primary care clinics in Khayelitsha, South Africa. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty adult patients with two viral loads greater than 1000 copies/ml. INTERVENTION: Participants were switched to TLD with additional dolutegravir (50 mg) for 2 weeks to overcome efavirenz induction. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Proportion achieving viral load less than 50 copies/ml at week 24 using the FDA snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: Baseline median CD4+ cell count was 248 cells/µl, viral load 10 580 copies/ml and 48 of 54 (89%) had resistance (Stanford score ≥15) to one or both of tenofovir and XTC. No participants were lost to follow-up. At week 24, 51 of 60 [85%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 73-93%] were virologically suppressed, six had viral load 50-100 copies/ml, one had viral load 100-1000 copies/ml, one no viral load in window, and one switched because of tenofovir-related adverse event. No integrase mutations were detected in the one participant meeting criteria for resistance testing. Virological suppression was achieved by 29 of 35 (83%, 95% CI 66-93%) with resistance to tenofovir and XTC, 11 of 13 (85%, 95% CI 55-98%) with resistance to XTC, and six of six (100%, 95% CI 54-100%) with resistance to neither. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of adults switching to second-line TLD achieved virologic suppression despite substantial baseline NRTI resistance and most not suppressed had low-level viraemia (≤100 copies/ml). This suggests recycling tenofovir and XTC with dolutegravir could provide an effective second-line option.

Implications of weight gain with newer anti-retrovirals: 10-year predictions of cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term risks of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) secondary to weight gain and clinical obesity associated with the initiation of integrase strand transfer inhibitors and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in the ADVANCE trial using validated risk equation tools. DESIGN: Retrospective data analysis. METHODS: In ADVANCE, 1053 treatment-naive participants in South Africa (99% black, 59% female) were randomized to 96 weeks of TAF/emtricitabine + dolutegravir (TAF/FTC + DTG), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/FTC + DTG (TDF/FTC + DTG), or TDF/FTC + efavirenz (TDF/FTC/EFV). The 5 and 10-year risks of CVD were calculated using D:A:D, QRISK and Framingham, and T2DM risk using QDiabetes, Cambridge Diabetes and Leicester Practice Risk scores. Participants were included in this analysis if they were above 30 years old at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 217 (TAF/FTC + DTG), 218 (TDF/FTC + DTG), and 215 (TDF/FTC/EFV) participants had 96-week data available. Weight gain was +8.1, +4.2, and +2.4 kg on TAF/FTC + DTG, TDF/FTC + DTG, and TDF/FTC/EFV, respectively. Participants on TAF/FTC + DTG had greatest risk scores for CVD (using QRISK) and T2DM, driven by weight changes. Differences were statistically significant between TAF/FTC + DTG and TDF/FTC/EFV for CVD risk using the QRISK equation, equivalent to one extra case per 1000 people treated over 10 years, and between all treatment groups for T2DM risk. Six extra T2DM cases were predicted on TAF/FTC + DTG vs. TDF/FTC + DTG using QDiabetes. CONCLUSION: Obesity, especially with TAF/FTC + DTG, drove increased risk of T2DM, with some evidence of greater CVD risk. However, predictive tools have not been validated in the HIV-positive and black African population.

SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow assays for possible use in national covid-19 seroprevalence surveys (React 2): diagnostic accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of new lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) suitable for use in a national coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) seroprevalence programme (real time assessment of community transmission 2-React 2). DESIGN: Diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: Laboratory analyses were performed in the United Kingdom at Imperial College, London and university facilities in London. Research clinics for finger prick sampling were run in two affiliated NHS trusts. PARTICIPANTS: Sensitivity analyses were performed on sera stored from 320 previous participants in the React 2 programme with confirmed previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Specificity analyses were performed on 1000 prepandemic serum samples. 100 new participants with confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection attended study clinics for finger prick testing. INTERVENTIONS: Laboratory sensitivity and specificity analyses were performed for seven LFIAs on a minimum of 200 serum samples from participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and 500 prepandemic serum samples, respectively. Three LFIAs were found to have a laboratory sensitivity superior to the finger prick sensitivity of the LFIA currently used in React 2 seroprevalence studies (84%). These LFIAs were then further evaluated through finger prick testing on participants with confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection: two LFIAs (Surescreen, Panbio) were evaluated in clinics in June-July 2020 and the third LFIA (AbC-19) in September 2020. A spike protein enzyme linked immunoassay and hybrid double antigen binding assay were used as laboratory reference standards. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of LFIAs in detecting immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 compared with two reference standards. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of seven new LFIAs that were analysed using sera varied from 69% to 100%, and from 98.6% to 100%, respectively (compared with the two reference standards). Sensitivity on finger prick testing was 77% (95% confidence interval 61.4% to 88.2%) for Panbio, 86% (72.7% to 94.8%) for Surescreen, and 69% (53.8% to 81.3%) for AbC-19 compared with the reference standards. Sensitivity for sera from matched clinical samples performed on AbC-19 was significantly higher with serum than finger prick at 92% (80.0% to 97.7%, P=0.01). Antibody titres varied considerably among cohorts. The numbers of positive samples identified by finger prick in the lowest antibody titre quarter varied among LFIAs. CONCLUSIONS: One new LFIA was identified with clinical performance suitable for potential inclusion in seroprevalence studies. However, none of the LFIAs tested had clearly superior performance to the LFIA currently used in React 2 seroprevalence surveys, and none showed sufficient sensitivity and specificity to be considered for routine clinical use.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody lateral flow assay for antibody prevalence studies following vaccination: a diagnostic accuracy study.

Background: Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) are able to achieve affordable, large scale antibody testing and provide rapid results without the support of central laboratories. As part of the development of the REACT programme extensive evaluation of LFIA performance was undertaken with individuals following natural infection. Here we assess the performance of the selected LFIA to detect antibody responses in individuals who have received at least one dose of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine. Methods: This was a prospective diagnostic accuracy study. Sampling was carried out at renal outpatient clinic and healthcare worker testing sites at Imperial College London NHS Trust. Two cohorts of patients were recruited; the first was a cohort of 108 renal transplant patients attending clinic following two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the second cohort comprised 40 healthcare workers attending for first SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and subsequent follow up. During the participants visit, finger-prick blood samples were analysed on LFIA device, while paired venous sampling was sent for serological assessment of antibodies to the spike protein (anti-S) antibodies. Anti-S IgG was detected using the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG Quant II CMIA. A total of 186 paired samples were collected. The accuracy of Fortress LFIA in detecting IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 compared to anti-spike protein detection on Abbott Assay Results: The LFIA had an estimated sensitivity of 92.0% (114/124; 95% confidence interval [CI] 85.7% to 96.1%) and specificity of 93.6% (58/62; 95% CI 84.3% to 98.2%) using the Abbott assay as reference standard (using the threshold for positivity of 7.10 BAU/ml) Conclusions: Fortress LFIA performs well in the detection of antibody responses for intended purpose of population level surveillance but does not meet criteria for individual testing.

Unexpected interactions between dolutegravir and folate: randomized trial evidence from South Africa.

OBJECTIVE: Dolutegravir exposure at conception was associated with a preliminary signal of increased infant neural tube defect risk. As low maternal folate levels are linked with neural tube defects, we aimed to assess serum folate concentrations in women starting dolutegravir. DESIGN: We analysed serum folate concentrations from stored plasma among women enrolled in the South African ADVANCE trial. METHODS: We compared changes in mean serum folate and occurrence of low serum folate (<14.0 nmol/l) at weeks 0, 12 and 24 across study arms. In ADVANCE, 1053 treatment-naïve participants were randomized to initiate tenofovir-alafenamide/emtricitabine + dolutegravir (TAF/FTC + DTG), tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (TDF)/FTC + DTG or TDF/FTC/efavirenz (EFV). RESULTS: Analysis includes 406 females, mean age 31.5 years and baseline CD4+ cell count 356 cells/µl. At baseline, folate concentrations were similar across treatment arms. However, serum folate increased over 12 weeks in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm (+4.0 ±â€Š8.1 nmol/l), while folate concentrations decreased slightly in the TDF/FTC + DTG arm (-1.8 ±â€Š8.9 nmol/l) and decreased in the TDF/FTC/EFV arm (-5.9 ±â€Š8.1 nmol/l). Women taking TDF/FTC/EFV had low folate concentrations at both 12 and 24 weeks compared with the other arms (P < 0.001). Of 26 women who became pregnant on study before week 24, folate concentrations increased between baseline and 12 weeks by a mean 2.4 ±â€Š7.1 nmol/l in the TAF/FTC + DTG arm and 2.3 ±â€Š8.4 nmol/l in the TDF/FTC + DTG arm, but decreased by -3.3 ±â€Š8.1 with TDF/FTC/EFV arm. CONCLUSION: Unexpectedly, no declines were noted in the dolutegravir-containing arms, and concentrations were considerably higher than in the EFV arm. The possibility that dolutegravir may block cellular uptake of folate warrants investigation.

Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir regimens for the treatment of COVID-19: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The combination of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir has a well-established safety profile and improves clinical outcomes in HCV patients. In silico and in vitro studies suggest that sofosbuvir/daclatasvir may show antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Three clinical trials comparing sofosbuvir/daclatasvir-based regimens with a comparator in hospitalized COVID-19 patients were combined in a meta-analysis. The primary outcomes measured were clinical recovery within 14 days of randomization, time to clinical recovery and all-cause mortality. A two-step approach was used to analyse individual-level patient data. The individual trial statistics were pooled using the random-effects inverse-variance model. RESULTS: Our search identified eight studies of which three met the inclusion criteria (n = 176 patients); two studies were randomized and one was non-randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment arms. Clinical recovery within 14 days of randomization was higher in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir arms compared with control arms [risk ratio = 1.34 (95% CI = 1.05-1.71), P = 0.020]. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir improves time to clinical recovery [HR = 2.04 (95% CI = 1.25-3.32), P = 0.004]. The pooled risk of all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir arms compared with control arms [risk ratio = 0.31 (95% CI = 0.12-0.78), P = 0.013]. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that sofosbuvir/daclatasvir improves survival and clinical recovery in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. However, the sample size for analysis was relatively small, one of the trials was not randomized and the designs were not standardized. These results need to be confirmed in larger randomized controlled trials.

Reduced efficacy of HIV-1 integrase inhibitors in patients with drug resistance mutations in reverse transcriptase.

Little is known about the impact of pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) on the efficacy of second generation integrase inhibitors. We sequenced pretreatment plasma specimens from the ADVANCE trial (NCT03122262). Our primary outcome was 96-week virologic success, defined as a sustained viral load <1000 copies/mL from 12 weeks onwards, <200 copies/mL from 24 weeks onwards, and <50 copies/mL after 48 weeks. Here we report how this outcome was impacted by PDR, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) mutation list. Of 1053 trial participants, 874 (83%) have successful sequencing, including 289 (33%) randomized to EFV-based therapy and 585 (67%) randomized to DTG-based therapy. Fourteen percent (122/874) have ≥1 WHO-defined mutation, of which 98% (120/122) are NNRTI mutations. Rates of virologic suppression are lower in the total cohort among those with PDR 65% (73/112) compared to those without PDR (85% [605/713], P < 0.001), and for those on EFV-based treatment (60% [12/20] vs 86% [214/248], P = 0.002) and for those on DTG-based treatment (61/92 [66%] vs 84% [391/465] P < 0.001, P for interaction by regimen 0.49). Results are similar in multivariable models adjusted for clinical characteristics and adherence. NNRTI resistance prior to treatment is associated with long-term failure of integrase inhibitor-containing first-line regimens, and portends high rates of first-line failure in sub Saharan Africa.

Dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection (ADVANCE): week 96 results from a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: ADVANCE compared the efficacy and safety of two antiretroviral first-line combinations (dolutegravir combined with emtricitabine and either tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or tenofovir alafenamide), with a third regimen (efavirenz combined with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) previously recommended by WHO. Here, we report the 96-week data for the study. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 trial, was done at two research sites in Johannesburg, South Africa, after participant recruitment from 11 public health clinics also in Johannesburg. Eligible participants were aged 12 years or older with HIV-1 infection, who weighed at least 40 kg, had no antiretroviral exposure in the previous 6 months, with a creatinine clearance of more than 60 mL/min (>80 mL per min in individuals aged <19 years), and a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of 500 copies per mL or higher. Individuals who were pregnant or had tuberculosis were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by study staff using a computerised randomisation system. Randomisation was stratified by age (12 and <19 years and ≥19 years). Participants were randomly assigned to once-daily oral fixed-dose combination tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg and emtricitabine 200 mg, and once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg; once-daily oral fixed-dose combination tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg and emtricitabine 200 mg, and once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg; or once-daily oral fixed-dose combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and efavirenz 600 mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants who had a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48, which has been reported previously. Here, we report the key secondary efficacy endpoint of the proportion of participants who had a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL at the week 96 visit, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -10%. Safety data, including clinical, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and laboratory data, are also reported. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03122262. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2017, and May 14, 2018, we screened 1453 individuals, of whom 1053 were enrolled: 351 participants were randomly assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group, 351 to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group, and 351 to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and efavirenz group. All participants received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the primary analysis. At week 96, 276 (79%) of 351 participants in the tenofovir alafenamide, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group, 275 (78%) of 351 participants in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group, and 258 (74%) of 351 participants in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and efavirenz group had achieved a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL. Non-inferiority was established in all three comparisons. The proportion of patients with protocol-defined virological failure at week 96 was low in all treatment groups. Participants in the tenofovir alafenamide, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group had fewer changes in bone density than the two other treatment groups. Mean weight gain was substantial (7·1 kg [SD 7·4] in the tenofovir alafenamide, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group; 4·3 kg [6·7] in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir group, and 2·3 kg [7·0] in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and efavirenz group), and was greater among women than men. Ten (3%) of 351 participants in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and efavirenz group discontinued due to treatment-related adverse events, of which liver dysfunction (n=4) and rash (n=4) were most common. INTERPRETATION: Medium-term and long-term metabolic and clinical consequences of the considerable increase in bodyweight observed in participants given these antiretroviral regimens and the trajectory of this weight gain over time, especially among women, require further study. FUNDING: USAID, Unitaid, South African Medical Research Council, ViiV Healthcare.

Clinical and laboratory evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow assays for use in a national COVID-19 seroprevalence survey.

BACKGROUND: Accurate antibody tests are essential to monitor the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) can deliver testing at scale. However, reported performance varies, and sensitivity analyses have generally been conducted on serum from hospitalised patients. For use in community testing, evaluation of finger-prick self-tests, in non-hospitalised individuals, is required. METHODS: Sensitivity analysis was conducted on 276 non-hospitalised participants. All had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription PCR and were ≥21 days from symptom onset. In phase I, we evaluated five LFIAs in clinic (with finger prick) and laboratory (with blood and sera) in comparison to (1) PCR-confirmed infection and (2) presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on two 'in-house' ELISAs. Specificity analysis was performed on 500 prepandemic sera. In phase II, six additional LFIAs were assessed with serum. FINDINGS: 95% (95% CI 92.2% to 97.3%) of the infected cohort had detectable antibodies on at least one ELISA. LFIA sensitivity was variable, but significantly inferior to ELISA in 8 out of 11 assessed. Of LFIAs assessed in both clinic and laboratory, finger-prick self-test sensitivity varied from 21% to 92% versus PCR-confirmed cases and from 22% to 96% versus composite ELISA positives. Concordance between finger-prick and serum testing was at best moderate (kappa 0.56) and, at worst, slight (kappa 0.13). All LFIAs had high specificity (97.2%-99.8%). INTERPRETATION: LFIA sensitivity and sample concordance is variable, highlighting the importance of evaluations in setting of intended use. This rigorous approach to LFIA evaluation identified a test with high specificity (98.6% (95%CI 97.1% to 99.4%)), moderate sensitivity (84.4% with finger prick (95% CI 70.5% to 93.5%)) and moderate concordance, suitable for seroprevalence surveys.