Pharmacological data of a successful 4-days-a-week regimen in HIV antiretroviral therapy (ANRS 162-4D trial).

INTRODUCTION: Few data are available on plasma concentrations of antiretroviral therapy (ARV) during intermittent treatment. OBJECTIVE: To compare plasma concentrations in OFF vs ON treatment periods at several time points during treatment. METHODS: During a successful 48-week multicenter study (ANRS 162-4D trial) of 4 days with treatment (ON) followed by 3 days without treatment (OFF) in adults treated by two nucleoside analogues and a third agent belonging to a boosted protease-inhibitor (PI, darunavir [DRV], atazanavir [ATV], lopinavir [LPV]) or a non-nucleoside-reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI, efavirenz [EFV], etravirine [ETR], rilpivirine [RPV]) conducted in 100 patients (96% success), we determined the plasma concentrations of ARV. Blood samples were collected for analysis at inclusion (W0, 7/7 strategy for all patients), W16 and W40 (ON) and at W4, W8, W12, W24, W32 and W48 (OFF). RESULTS: A total of 866 samples was analysed. Plasma concentrations were not statistically lower after 4 days (ON) vs 7/7 days of treatment except for RPV (-30 ng/mL at 4/7, P = 0.003). Significant lower plasma concentrations were observed for OFF vs ON except for ETR (n = 5, P = 0.062). Overall, 87.1% of ON concentrations (ATV 92.1%, DRV 51.1%, LPV 62.5%, EFV 94.4%, ETR 100% and RPV 94.9%) and 21.8% of OFF concentrations (ATV 1.4%, DRV 0.0%, LPV 0.0%, EFV 16.0%, ETR 92.6% and RPV 39.0%) were above the theoretical limit of efficacy of the molecule. In the OFF period, 85.8% of PI concentrations were under the limit of quantification, while 98.0% of NNRTI concentrations were quantifiable. CONCLUSION: Despite low/undetectable PI/NNRTI plasma concentrations in the OFF period, patients maintained an undetectable viral load. The mechanistic explanation should be investigated.

Four-days-a-week antiretroviral maintenance therapy in virologically controlled HIV-1-infected adults: the ANRS 162-4D trial.

Background: Intermittent treatment could improve the convenience, tolerability and cost of ART, as well as patients' quality of life. We conducted a 48 week multicentre study of a 4-days-a-week antiretroviral regimen in adults with controlled HIV-1-RNA plasma viral load (VL). Methods: Eligible patients were adults with VL < 50 copies/mL for at least 1 year on triple therapy with a ritonavir-boosted PI (PI/r) or an NNRTI. The study protocol consisted of the same regimen taken on four consecutive days per week followed by a 3 day drug interruption. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants remaining in the strategy with VL < 50 copies/mL up to week 48. The study was designed to show an observed success rate of > 90%, with a power of 87% and a 5% type 1 error. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02157311) and EudraCT (2014-000146-29). Results: One hundred patients (82 men), median age 47 years (IQR 40-53), were included. They had been receiving ART for a median of 5.1 (IQR 2.9-9.3) years and had a median CD4 cell count of 665 (IQR 543-829) cells/mm3. The ongoing regimen included PI/r in 29 cases and NNRTI in 71 cases. At 48 weeks, 96% of participants (95% CI 90%-98%) had no failure while remaining on the 4-days-a-week regimen. Virological failure occurred in three participants, who all resumed daily treatment and became resuppressed. One participant stopped the strategy. No severe treatment-related events occurred. Conclusions: Antiretroviral maintenance therapy 4 days a week was effective for 48 weeks in 96% of patients, leading to potential reduction of long-term toxicities, high adherence to the antiretroviral regimen and drug cost saving.

Pharmacokinetic modelling of darunavir/ritonavir dose reduction (800/100 to 400/100 mg once daily) in a darunavir/ritonavir-containing regimen in virologically suppressed HIV-infected patients: ANRS 165 DARULIGHT sub-study.

Background: In the ANRS 165 DARULIGHT study (NCT02384967) carried out in HIV-infected patients, the use of a darunavir/ritonavir-containing regimen with a switch to a reduced dose of darunavir maintained virological efficacy (≤50 copies/mL) for 48 weeks with a good safety profile. Objectives: To assess the total and unbound blood plasma pharmacokinetics of darunavir and associated antiretrovirals, and their penetration into semen before and after dose reduction. Patients and methods: Patients receiving a darunavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg q24h)-containing regimen for >6 months with plasma HIV-RNA ≤50 copies/mL for >12 months were switched to 400/100 mg darunavir/ritonavir q24h at week 0. A 24 h intensive pharmacokinetic blood sampling and a trough seminal sampling were performed before (week 0) and after (week 12) dose reduction. Individual pharmacokinetic parameter estimates were obtained using non-linear mixed-effect modelling for darunavir/ritonavir in blood plasma and used to test for bioequivalence, whereas darunavir/ritonavir in seminal plasma and NRTIs were analysed using a non-compartmental approach. Results and conclusions: Fifteen patients completed the intensive pharmacokinetic analysis. There was no significant decrease in total and unbound darunavir blood plasma exposure despite a 50% decrease in darunavir daily dose from 800 to 400 mg (AUC0-24 = 65 563 versus 52 518 ng·h/mL; P = 0.25). A decrease in apparent oral clearance (CL/F) of both darunavir and ritonavir at week 12 suggests a modification of the initial darunavir/ritonavir daily dose balance (800/100 to 400/100 mg), in favour of a reduced inducer effect of darunavir on cytochrome P450 and efflux transporters compared with the standard dose.

Low-dose ritonavir-boosted darunavir in virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected adults: an open-label trial (ANRS 165 Darulight).

Objectives: To assess whether low-dose ritonavir-boosted darunavir (darunavir/r) in combination with two NRTIs could maintain virological suppression in patients on a standard regimen of darunavir/r + two NRTIs. Design: A multicentre, Phase II, non-comparative, single-arm, open-label study. Setting: Tertiary care hospitals in France. Subjects: One hundred HIV-1-infected adults with no darunavir or NRTI resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) and a plasma HIV RNA level ≤50 copies/mL for ≥12 months on once-daily darunavir/r (800/100 mg) + two NRTIs for ≥6 months were switched to darunavir/r 400/100 mg with the same NRTIs. Primary outcome measure: Proportion of patients with treatment success: plasma HIV RNA level ≤50 copies/mL up to 48 weeks without any change in the study regimen, in a modified ITT (mITT) analysis. Results: At baseline, most patients were male (78%), with a median age of 43 years, median duration of HIV RNA ≤50 copies/mL of 35 months and median CD4 T cell count of 633 cells/mm3. Seventy-six percent received tenofovir/emtricitabine and 24% abacavir/lamivudine. Five patients were excluded from the mITT analysis. The rate of treatment success through to week 48 was 91.6% (87/95; 95% CI 84.1%-96.3%). No RAM was detected in three amplifiable genotypes. A total of 212 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 64 patients (64%); 9 AEs were serious, none leading to treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: In HIV-infected patients well suppressed with darunavir/r (800/100 mg) and two NRTIs, a reduction of the darunavir dose to 400 mg/day maintained virological efficacy and was safe over 48 weeks.

Ritonavir-boosted darunavir combined with raltegravir or tenofovir-emtricitabine in antiretroviral-naive adults infected with HIV-1: 96 week results from the NEAT001/ANRS143 randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line antiretroviral therapy for HIV-1 infection includes two nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NtRTIs), but these drugs have limitations. We assessed the 96 week efficacy and safety of an NtRTI-sparing regimen. METHODS: Between August, 2010, and September, 2011, we enrolled treatment-naive adults into this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial in treatment-naive adults in 15 European countries. The composite primary outcome was change to randomised treatment before week 32 because of insufficient virological response, no virological response by week 32, HIV-1 RNA concentration 50 copies per mL or higher at any time after week 32; death from any cause; any new or recurrent AIDS event; or any serious non-AIDS event. Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral treatment with 400 mg raltegravir twice daily plus 800 mg darunavir and 100 mg ritonavir once daily (NtRTI-sparing regimen) or tenofovir-emtricitabine in a 245 mg and 200 mg fixed-dose combination once daily, plus 800 mg darunavir and 100 mg ritonavir once daily (standard regimen). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01066962. FINDINGS: Of 805 patients enrolled, 401 received the NtRTI-sparing regimen and 404 the standard regimen, with median follow-up of 123 weeks (IQR 112-133). Treatment failure was seen in 77 (19%) in the NtRTI-sparing group and 61 (15%) in the standard group. Kaplan-Meier estimated proportions of treatment failure by week 96 were 17·8% and 13·8%, respectively (difference 4·0%, 95% CI -0·8 to 8·8). The frequency of serious or treatment-modifying adverse events were similar (10·2 vs 8·3 per 100 person-years and 3·9 vs 4·2 per 100 person-years, respectively). INTERPRETATION: Our NtRTI-sparing regimen was non-inferior to standard treatment and represents a treatment option for patients with CD4 cell counts higher than 200 cells per µL. FUNDING: European Union Sixth Framework Programme, Inserm-ANRS, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck Laboratories.

Ensuring quality control in a COVID-19 clinical trial during the pandemic: The experience of the Inserm C20-15 DisCoVeRy study.

SETTING: Health measures taken during the pandemic deeply modified the clinical research practices. At the same time, the demand for the results of the COVID-19 trials was urgent. Thus, the objective of this article is to share Inserm's experience in ensuring quality control in clinical trials in this challenging context. OBJECTIVES: DisCoVeRy is a phase III randomized study that aimed at evaluating the safety and efficacy of 4 therapeutic strategies in hospitalized COVID-19 adult patients. Between March, 22nd 2020 and January, 20th 2021, 1309 patients were included. In order to guarantee the best quality of data, the Sponsor had to adapt to the current sanitary measures and to their impact on clinical research activity, notably by adapting Monitoring Plan objectives, involving the research departments of the participating hospitals and a network of clinical research assistants (CRAs). RESULTS: Overall, 97 CRAs were involved and performed 909 monitoring visits. The monitoring of 100% of critical data for all patients included in the analysis was achieved, and despite of the pandemic context, a conform consent was recovered for more than 99% of patients. Results of the study were published in May and September 2021. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The main monitoring objective was met thanks to the mobilization of considerable personnel resources, within a very tight time frame and external hurdles. There is a need for further reflection to adapt the lessons learned from this experience to the context of routine practice and to improve the response of French academic research during a future epidemic.

Management of pharmacovigilance during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by the safety department of an academic sponsor: Lessons learnt and challenges from the EU DisCoVeRy clinical trial.

The current COVID-19 pandemic was an exceptional health situation, including for drug use. As there was no known effective drug for COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic, different drug candidates were proposed. In this article, we present the challenges for an academic Safety Department to manage the global safety of a European trial during the pandemic. The National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Inserm) conducted a European multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving three repurposed and one-in development drugs (lopinavir/ritonavir, IFN-ß1a, hydroxychloroquine, and remdesivir) in adults hospitalized with COVID-19. From 25 March 2020 to 29 May 2020, the Inserm Safety Department had to manage 585 Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) initial notification and 396 follow-up reports. The Inserm Safety Department's staff was mobilized to manage these SAEs and to report Expedited safety reports to the competent authorities within the legal timeframes. More than 500 queries were sent to the investigators due to a lack of or incoherent information on SAE forms. At the same time, the investigators were overwhelmed by the management of patients suffering from COVID-19 infection. These particular conditions of missing data and lack of accurate description of adverse events made evaluation of the SAEs very difficult, particularly the assessment of the causal role of each investigational medicinal product. In parallel, working difficulties were accentuated by the national lockdown, frequent IT tool dysfunctions, delayed implementation of monitoring and the absence of automatic alerts for SAE form modification. Although COVID-19 is a confounding factor per se, the delay in and quality of SAE form completion and the real-time medical analysis by the Inserm Safety Department were major issues in the quick identification of potential safety signals. To conduct a high-quality clinical trial and ensure patient safety, all stakeholders must take their roles and responsibilities.

Practices in research, surveillance and control of neglected tropical diseases by One Health approaches: A survey targeting scientists from French-speaking countries.

One health (OH) approaches have increasingly been used in the last decade in the fight against zoonotic neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). However, descriptions of such collaborations between the human, animal and environmental health sectors are still limited for French-speaking tropical countries. The objective of the current survey was to explore the diversity of OH experiences applied to research, surveillance and control of NTDs by scientists from French-speaking countries, and discuss their constraints and benefits. Six zoonotic NTDs were targeted: echinococcoses, trypanosomiases, leishmaniases, rabies, Taenia solium cysticercosis and leptospiroses. Invitations to fill in an online questionnaire were sent to members of francophone networks on NTDs and other tropical diseases. Results from the questionnaire were discussed during an international workshop in October 2019. The vast majority (98%) of the 171 respondents considered OH approaches relevant although only 64% had implemented them. Among respondents with OH experience, 58% had encountered difficulties mainly related to a lack of knowledge, interest and support for OH approaches by funding agencies, policy-makers, communities and researchers. Silos between disciplines and health sectors were still strong at both scientific and operational levels. Benefits were reported by 94% of respondents with OH experience, including increased intellectual stimulation, stronger collaborations, higher impact and cost-efficiency of interventions. Recommendations for OH uptake included advocacy, capacity-building, dedicated funding, and higher communities' involvement. Improved research coordination by NTD networks, production of combined human-animal health NTD impact indicators, and transversal research projects on diagnostic and reservoirs were also considered essential.

An open-label randomized controlled trial of the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir plus IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-ß-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support. METHODS: We conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 583 participants-lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)-among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54-71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45-1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62-1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms. CONCLUSION: In adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.

Prevalence and Genetics of Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy in the Danish Population.

PURPOSE: In Denmark, the occurrence of Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) has continuously been monitored since 1944. We provide here a summary of 70 years of data collection including registered lines and subjects by the end of 2012. METHODS: Affected individuals were identified from a national register of hereditary eye diseases at the National Eye Clinic (NEC), a tertiary low vision rehabilitation center for the entire Danish population. The assembling of LHON pedigrees was based on the reconstruction of published families and newly diagnosed cases from 1980 to 2012 identified in the files of NEC. Genealogic follow-up on the maternal ancestry of all affected individuals was performed to identify a possible relation to an already known maternal line. A full genotypic characterization of the nation-based LHON cohort is provided. RESULTS: Forty different lines were identified. The number of live affected individuals with a verified mitochondrial DNA mutation was 104 on January 1, 2013, which translates to a prevalence rate of 1:54,000 in the Danish population. CONCLUSIONS: Haplogroup distribution as well as mutational spectrum of the Danish LHON cohort do not deviate from those of other European populations. The genealogic follow-up reveals a relatively high turnover among families with approximately 15 newly affected families per century and the dying out of earlier maternal lines.

Acceptance rate of clinical study endpoints and adequacy of source documentation: experience from clinical study endpoint review in NEAT001/ANRS143.

INTRODUCTION: NEAT001/ANRS143 was an open-label, randomized, non-inferiority study comparing raltegravir+darunavir/r(RGV+DRV/r) vs. tenofovir/emtricitabine+darunavir/r (TDF/FTC+DRV/r) in HIV-infected antiretroviral naïve adults. Primary efficacy outcome was a composite of virological and clinical events by week 96. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical trial units collected and translated supporting documentation (SD) related to the investigator-reported events. A coordinator checked events and SD for consistency and completeness. The Endpoint Review Committee (ERC) determined if clinical events met pre-defined diagnostic criteria in categories "confirmed" or "probable". The ERC of 12 experienced, independent clinicians served in groups of three conducting individual reviews in writing, blinded to treatment arm. Differences of opinion were adjudicated in a second review by direct dialogue between reviewers. "Confirmed" events required adequate SD like laboratory, radiographic or pathology diagnostic reports. "Probable" events were typically based on clinical criteria. RESULTS: Of the 164 serious and 3,964 adverse events reported in the study, 133 qualified for endpoint review, for a total of 153 adjudications: CONCLUSIONS: Blinded endpoint review prevented unacceptably high false positive event rates documenting that real-time ascertainment of clinical endpoints is crucial for appropriateness of the overall results. Non-confirmed events jeopardize the statistical power in this and probably all kinds of clinical studies. The rejection rate was not indicative of poor study conduct - on the contrary over-reporting prevented missing events, which would have adversely impacted the trial. Adequacy of SD and investigator training on possible differences in event criteria in daily pragmatic clinical management compared to protocol defined criteria is essential.