Once daily maraviroc 300 mg or 150 mg in combination with ritonavir-boosted darunavir 800/100 mg.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc when dosed at 150 or 300 mg once daily with 800/100 mg of darunavir/ritonavir. METHODS: A retrospective case-note review of HIV-infected adults taking maraviroc was conducted. Patients on a maraviroc-based regimen for a minimum of 5 weeks were grouped as receiving: (i) 300 mg of maraviroc twice daily with 245 mg of tenofovir/200 mg of emtricitabine; (ii) 300 mg of maraviroc once daily with 800/100 mg of darunavir/ritonavir once daily; and (iii) 150 mg of maraviroc once daily with 800/100 mg of darunavir/ritonavir once daily. C(trough) and C(peak) data were collected at 2, 12 or 24 h post-dose. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included, providing 115 samples. The median (IQR) C(peak) was 378 (350-640) ng/mL for 300 mg of maraviroc twice daily with 245 mg of tenofovir/200 mg of emtricitabine (n=9), 728 (378-935) ng/mL for 300 mg of maraviroc once daily with darunavir/ritonavir (n=29) and 364 (104-624) ng/mL for 150 mg of maraviroc once daily with darunavir/ritonavir (n=2; P=0.24). The median (IQR) C(trough) was 46 (33-61) ng/mL for 300 mg of maraviroc twice daily with 245 mg of tenofovir/200 mg of emtricitabine (n=12), 70 (49-97) ng/mL for 300 mg of maraviroc once daily with darunavir/ritonavir (n=34) and 43 (35-55) ng/mL for 150 mg of maraviroc once daily with darunavir/ritonavir (n=17; P=0.001). The maraviroc C(trough) in black patients (n=34) was 61 (45-110) ng/mL and in white patients (n=29) it was 49 (42-70) ng/mL (P=0.04). The C(peak) in black patients (n=20) was 800 (397-1060) ng/mL versus 387 (336-723) ng/mL in white patients (n=20; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Once daily coadministration of 300 mg of maraviroc with 800/100 mg of darunavir/ritonavir was well tolerated and had favourable pharmacokinetics when compared with 300 mg of maraviroc twice daily with 245 mg of tenofovir/200 mg of emtricitabine. A 24% higher C(trough) and 107% higher C(peak) was seen in black patients compared with white patients.

Candida auris outbreak: Mortality, interventions and cost of sustaining control.

OBJECTIVE: Candida auris has recently emerged as a global cause of multidrug resistant fungal outbreaks. An outbreak occurred at a tertiary care center in London in 2016. Transmission characteristics, interventions, patient outcomes and cost of resources are described. METHODS: Outbreak interventions included patient isolation, contact screening, single-use equipment, environmental screening and decontamination, staff education, and enhanced surveillance. Risk factors for infection were recorded. Survival probabilities of patients with C. auris and other Candida bloodstream infections (BSI) were calculated. Antifungal susceptibility and epidemiological typing were performed. Actual and opportunity costs of interventions were determined. RESULTS: 34 patients acquired the organism including 8 with BSI. Clinical infection was significantly associated with prolonged hospital stay, haemodialysis and antifungal therapy. Variable susceptibility to amphotericin and the triazoles was seen and isolates clustered with the South Asian strains. No significant difference was detected in the survival probabilities of C. auris BSI compared to other candidemias. Outbreak control cost in excess of £1 million and £58,000/month during the subsequent year. CONCLUSION: C. auris outbreaks can be controlled by a concerted infection control strategy but can be expensive. Transmission maybe prolonged due to patient movements and unidentified transmission mechanisms.