HIV stigma limits the effectiveness of PMTCT in Guinea: the ANRS 12344-DIAVINA study.

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of HIV-infected children worldwide are born in West and Central African countries where access to prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) programmes is still limited. WHO recommends reinforced antiretroviral prophylaxis for infants at high risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (MTCT) but its implementation needs further investigation in the field. METHODS: The prospective ANRS 12344-DIAVINA study evaluated the feasibility of a strategy combining early infant diagnosis (EID) and reinforced antiretroviral prophylaxis in high-risk infants as identified by interviews with mothers at Ignace Deen Hospital, Conakry, Guinea. RESULTS: 6493 women were admitted for delivery, 6141 (94.6%) accepted HIV testing and 114 (1.9%) were HIV positive. Among these, 51 high-risk women and their 56 infants were included. At birth, a blood sample was collected for infant EID and reinforced antiretroviral prophylaxis was initiated in 48/56 infants (86%, 95% CI 77%-95%). Iron supplementation was given to 35% of infants for non-severe anaemia. Retrospective measurement of maternal plasma viral load (pVL) at delivery revealed that 52% of women had pVL < 400 copies/mL attributable to undisclosed HIV status and/or antiretroviral intake. Undisclosed HIV status was associated with self-stigmatization (85% versus 44%, P = 0.02). Based on the results of maternal pVL at delivery, 'real' high-risk infants were more frequently lost to follow-up (44% versus 8%, P < 0.01) in comparison with low-risk infants, and this was associated with mothers' stigmatization (69% versus 31%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Reinforced antiretroviral prophylaxis and EID at birth are widely feasible. However, mothers' self-disclosure of HIV status and antiretroviral intake do not allow adequate evaluation of MTCT risk, which argues for maternal pVL measurement near delivery. Furthermore, actions against stigmatization are crucial to improve PMTCT.

Lack of a Clinically Significant Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Etravirine and Raltegravir Using an Original Approach Based on Drug Metabolism, Protein Binding, and Penetration in Seminal Fluid: A Pharmacokinetic Substudy of the ANRS-163 ETRAL Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The ANRS163-ETRAL study showed that etravirine 200 mg/raltegravir 400 mg twice-daily dual therapy was highly effective in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients older than 45 years, with virologic and therapeutic success rates at week 48 of 99.4% and 94.5%, respectively. The objective of this study was to determine whether a clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir exists by assessing steady-state total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and inactive raltegravir-glucuronide concentrations 12 hours after last intake (C12h ) in blood plasma (BP) and seminal plasma (SP). DESIGN: Pharmacokinetic analysis of data from the ANRS163-ETRAL study. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-six HIV-1-infected patients (of the 165 patients included in the ANRS-163 ETRAL study) who were receiving etravirine 200 mg and raltegravir 400 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood was collected from all 146 patients at weeks 2-4, 12, 24, and 48, and semen was collected from 21 patients at week 48. The extent of BP and SP protein binding was determined by using ultrafiltration assay. Total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and raltegravir-glucuronide C12h were determined by ultra high performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry and interpreted by using the in vitro calculated protein-bound 95% inhibitory concentration (PBIC95 ) for wild-type (WT) HIV: etravirine (116 ng/ml) and raltegravir (15 ng/ml). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) total BP etravirine C12h (536 ng/ml [376-719]) and raltegravir (278 ng/ml [97-690]) were adequate in 99% and 96% of patients, respectively. Median (IQR) SP:BP C12h ratio and BP unbound fraction were etravirine 0.3 (0.2-0.5) and < 1%, respectively, raltegravir 1.8 (1.3-3.3) and 12%, respectively, and raltegravir-glucuronide 12.0 (6.5-17.7) and > 99%, respectively. The BP raltegravir metabolic ratio (raltegravir glucuronide:raltegravir ratio) was 1.7, suggesting only weak induction of raltegravir glucuronidation by etravirine. Only three patients had etravirine and raltegravir C12h < PBIC95 simultaneously. CONCLUSION: No clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir was detected. Total etravirine and raltegravir BP concentrations were adequate in most patients, favoring virologic efficacy and confirming good treatment adherence (> 95%), despite twice-daily administration. The long half-life of etravirine and higher unbound fraction SP of raltegravir (57%) ensured adequate concentrations of dual therapy in genital compartments. Our results indicate that etravirine and raltegravir have good, complementary pharmacokinetic profiles, suggesting that they could be used in a dual-treatment strategy.

High efficacy of first-line ART in a West African cohort, assessed by dried blood spot virological and pharmacological measurements.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the rate of viral success in HIV-infected patients on first-line ART by the assessment of dried blood spot (DBS) viral load (VL) and to assess the performance of DBS sampling for VL measurement, genotypic resistance and antiretroviral concentration determinations. METHODS: HIV-infected patients treated for >1 year with first-line ART in Niamey, Niger were included. VL based on nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA) assay (limit of quantification <800 copies/mL) was measured on DBS capillary samples. Resistance genotype was assessed for all detectable VLs (limit of detection >100 copies/mL); antiretroviral concentrations were interpreted using standard plasma cut-offs after extrapolation of blood to plasma results. Median (IQR) results are presented. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen patients (61% women), aged 41 (34-46) years, with 138 (56-235) CD4 cells/mm3 at baseline were included. After 4 (2-6) years of follow-up under therapy, CD4 gain was +197 (98-372) cells/mm3; 81% had VL <800 copies/mL. Antiretroviral concentrations were adequate in 87% of patients and nevirapine/efavirenz concentrations were related to viral success (P < 0.001). DBS genotypic resistance amplification succeeded in 71% of failing patients: NRTI drug resistance mutations were identified in 73% including resistance to lamivudine/emtricitabine (67%), abacavir (30%) and tenofovir (21%); and NNRTI drug resistance mutations were identified in 82% including resistance to rilpivirine (39%) and etravirine (15%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a good response after 4 years of first-line ART in Niger. Adherence was high, according to antiretroviral concentrations, and the majority of failures were explained by selection of drug resistance mutations detected in the DBS genotype. Using DBS might improve the assessment of ART failure in HIV-infected patients in low-income countries.

Virological outcome at week 48 of three recommended first-line regimens using ultrasensitive viral load and plasma drug assay.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the virological and pharmacological outcomes of three different recommended once-daily first-line regimens in a cross-sectional analysis within an observational cohort using ultra-sensitive HIV quantification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled all HIV-1-infected patients who initiated tenofovir/emtricitabine with efavirenz, darunavir/ritonavir or atazanavir/ritonavir as a first-line regimen between 1 November 2010 and 30 June 2012. An ultrasensitive viral load (VL) assay was performed and plasma drug concentrations at 24 h (C24) were determined at Week (W) 4, W12, W24, W36 and W48. RESULTS: Sixty patients initiated efavirenz, 81 darunavir/ritonavir and 27 atazanavir/ritonavir. A higher proportion of patients with a VL >100 000 copies/mL received darunavir/ritonavir (P = 0.022). At W48, 89%, 85% and 88% of the patients had a VL <50 copies/mL, 69%, 73% and 79% had a VL <20 copies/mL and 45%, 48% and 54% had a VL <1 copy/mL using the ultrasensitive assay in the efavirenz, darunavir/ritonavir and atazanavir/ritonavir groups, respectively. Patients with a detectable VL signal at W48 had a higher baseline VL than those with no detectable VL signal (P = 0.0001). A total of 92%, 93% and 91% of the efavirenz, darunavir and atazanavir C24 values were above the respective effective cut-offs. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational cohort, the choice of the regimen was related to the physicians' preferences and the patients' characteristics. The proportion of patients reaching VL <1 copy/mL at W48 was similar in the three regimens and was not associated with drug concentrations.

Highly multidrug-resistant HIV: clonal analysis and therapeutic strategies.

OBJECTIVES: There are today HIV-infected patients in therapeutic impasses because of highly multidrug-resistant (HMDR) viruses. We studied the distribution of resistance mutations at clonal level, and we analysed the therapeutic strategies used in such cases to achieve undetectable viraemia. METHODS: The HMDR profile was defined as a genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) ≤ 1.5 for etravirine and raltegravir with full resistance to darunavir. About 30 clones per gene and per patient were sequenced. Virtual phenotypes were determined. Efficacy of therapeutic strategies was evaluated by follow-up of viral loads, CD4 cell counts and trough concentrations of drugs. RESULTS: Among 1310 patients on treatment and with genotypic resistance testing, 25 (2%) were resistant to darunavir and 11 (0.8%) had an HMDR profile. Five-hundred clones could be analysed for four of them. HMDR profiles were harboured by the great majority of clones and all resistance mutations were located on the same strains for all genes. Despite this and a regimen with a GSS <2.0 in three patients, they achieved a viraemia <20 copies/mL. These results were obtained using different strategies: high doses of drugs; combination of antiretrovirals with full or intermediate susceptibility, such as tipranavir, etravirine or maraviroc; and use of alternative compounds, such as foscarnet or interferon. CONCLUSION: Patients with HMDR HIV were uncommon, but, in such cases, all resistance mutations were borne on the same majority strains. In this study, tipranavir was the only protease inhibitor with full or intermediate susceptibility. Despite very limited therapeutic options, an undetectable viraemia can be achieved by combining different strategies.

Impact of lopinavir/ritonavir use on antiretroviral resistance in recent clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: This observational study was requested by French health authorities to determine the impact of lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra(®)) on antiretroviral resistance in clinical practice. Virological failures of lopinavir/ritonavir and their effects on the resistance to protease inhibitors and reverse transcriptase inhibitors were evaluated in protease inhibitor-experienced patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Virological failure was defined as an HIV-1 plasma viral load >50 copies/mL after at least 3 months of lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy. For all patients, a resistance genotypic test was available at failure and before lopinavir/ritonavir treatment. Data from 72 patients with inclusion criteria were studied. RESULTS: The mean viral load at baseline was 4 log(10) copies/mL (1.6-6.5). Mutations in the protease gene significantly selected between baseline and failure were L10V, K20R, L33F, M36I, I47V, I54V, A71V and I85V (P < 0.05). Patients who had more than seven protease inhibitor mutations at baseline showed a significantly increased risk of occurrence of protease inhibitor mutations. The proportion of viruses susceptible to atazanavir, fosamprenavir and darunavir decreased significantly between baseline and failure (P < 0.05). Among patients with a virus susceptible to atazanavir at day 0, 26% (n = 14) exhibited a virus resistant or possibly resistant at the time of failure. This proportion was 32% (n = 16) for fosamprenavir and 16% (n = 7) for darunavir. CONCLUSIONS: A darunavir-based regimen appears to be a sequential option in the case of lopinavir/ritonavir failure. To compare and determine the best treatment sequencing, similar studies should be performed for darunavir/ritonavir and atazanavir/ritonavir.

Atazanavir in pregnancy: impact on neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact on the neonate of maternal antiretroviral therapy with atazanavir (ATV). STUDY DESIGN: An observational study of 22 HIV-infected women receiving, for clinical indications, antiretroviral therapy with ATV 300 mg and ritonavir 100mg during pregnancy and their 23 HIV infants (including a twin pair). RESULTS: Mothers had received ATV for a median duration of 19 months [range 3-49] by delivery. At delivery, plasma HIV-RNA was <40 copies/mL in all patients. Liver enzymes were normal in 19/22 patients, but one woman had grade 3-4 liver toxicity. Maternal serum bilirubin concentrations were above the upper limit of normal in most patients, with grade 3 toxicity in 5 patients. All but one woman had trough ATV concentrations during pregnancy above the minimum effective concentration. The median cord blood ATV concentration was 130 ng/mL [range<30-758]; the cord/maternal ratio was 21%. All neonates were born at term [median 38.2 weeks]. Three neonates had mildly elevated AST transaminase levels. Bilirubin concentrations at birth were significantly higher than maternal concentrations, with a median of 44 µm/L [range 24-129]; values on days 2-3 were 63 [8-212]. Five neonates had jaundice requiring phototherapy, without liver damage, and recovered without sequelae. CONCLUSION: Neonates whose mothers were treated with ATV should be monitored for hyperbilirubinemia, which may be due to placental transfer of unconjugated bilirubin from the mother and/or a direct effect of transplacental ATV on bilirubin metabolism in the fetus.

Quasispecies variant dynamics during emergence of resistance to raltegravir in HIV-1-infected patients.

OBJECTIVES: Raltegravir is the first approved inhibitor of HIV-1 integrase (IN). In most patients, raltegravir failure is associated with mutations in the IN gene, through two different genetic pathways: 155 (N155H) or 148 (Q148K/R/H). The objective of this study was to characterize the dynamics of HIV-1 quasispecies variant populations in patients who failed to respond to raltegravir treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Bulk genotyping and clonal analysis were performed during the follow-up of 10 patients who failed to respond to raltegravir treatment. RESULTS: Treatment failed through the 155 pathway in six patients and through the 148 pathway in two patients; two further patients switched from the 155 to the 148 pathway. In the two patients switching from the 155 to the 148 pathway, clonal analysis showed that Q148R/H and N155H mutations were present on different strands, suggesting that these two pathways are independent. This was consistent with our finding that each genetic profile was associated with different secondary mutations. We observed a greater variability among quasispecies associated with the 155 pathway, and IC(50) determinations showed that the fold resistance to raltegravir, relative to wild-type, was 10 for the N155H mutant and 50 for the G140S+Q148H mutant. CONCLUSIONS: Clonal analysis strongly suggests that the two main genetic pathways, 155 and 148, involved in the development of resistance to raltegravir are independent and exclusive. Moreover, the switch of the resistance profile from 155 to 148 may be related to the higher level of resistance to raltegravir conferred by the 148 pathway and also to the higher instability of the 155 pathway.

Mutations associated with failure of raltegravir treatment affect integrase sensitivity to the inhibitor in vitro.

Raltegravir (MK-0518) is a potent inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) integrase and is clinically effective against viruses resistant to other classes of antiretroviral agents. However, it can select mutations in the HIV integrase gene. Nine heavily pretreated patients who received salvage therapy including raltegravir and who subsequently developed virological failure under raltegravir therapy were studied. For each patient, the sequences of the integrase-coding region were determined and compared to that at the beginning of the treatment. Four different mutation profiles were identified in these nine patients: E92Q, G140S Q148H, N155H, and E157Q mutations. For four patients, each harboring a different profile, the wild-type and mutated integrases were produced, purified, and assayed in vitro. All the mutations identified altered the activities of integrase protein: both 3' processing and strand transfer activities were moderately affected in the E92Q mutant; strand transfer was markedly impaired in the N155H mutant; both activities were strongly impaired in the G140S Q148H mutant; and the E157Q mutant was almost completely inactive. The sensitivities of wild-type and mutant integrases to raltegravir were compared. The E92Q and G140S Q148H profiles were each associated with a 7- to 8-fold decrease in sensitivity, and the N155H mutant was more than 14-fold less sensitive to raltegravir. At least four genetic profiles (E92Q, G140S Q148H, N155H, and E157Q) can be associated with in vivo treatment failure and resistance to raltegravir. These mutations led to strong impairment of enzymes in vitro in the absence of raltegravir: strand transfer activity was affected, and in some cases 3' processing was also impaired.

Factors associated with the selection of mutations conferring resistance to protease inhibitors (PIs) in PI-experienced patients displaying treatment failure on darunavir.

The objective of this study was to characterize the mutations selected by darunavir (DRV) use in protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced patients and the associated factors. We analyzed treatment failure in 54 PI-experienced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients on a DRV- and ritonavir-containing regimen. Viral genotyping was carried out at the baseline, at between 1 and 3 months of treatment, and at between 3 and 6 months of treatment to search for the selection of mutations conferring resistance to PIs. The median baseline HIV RNA level was 4.9 log(10) copies/ml, and the median CD4 count was 87 cells/mm(3). At the baseline, the median numbers of resistance mutations were as follows: 3 DRV resistance mutations, 4 major PI resistance mutations, and 10 minor PI resistance mutations. The most common mutations that emerged at rebound included V32I (44%), I54M/L (24%), L33F (25%), I84V (21%), and L89V (12%). Multivariate analysis showed that higher baseline HIV RNA levels and smaller numbers of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor simultaneously used with DRV were associated with a higher risk of DRV resistance mutation selection. By contrast, L76V, a known DRV resistance mutation, was found to decrease the risk of selection of another DRV resistance mutation. The occurrence of virological failure while a patient was on DRV was associated with the selection of mutations that increased the level of DRV resistance without affecting susceptibility to tipranavir (TPV). In these PI-treated patients who displayed treatment failure while they were on a DRV-containing regimen, we confirmed the set of emerging mutations associated with DRV failure and identified the factors associated with the selection of these mutations. TPV susceptibility does not seem to be affected by the selection of a DRV resistance mutation.

Selection of a rare resistance profile in an HIV-1-infected patient exhibiting a failure to an antiretroviral regimen including tenofovir DF.

The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) resistance profile, K65R, K70E and M184V, on reverse transcriptase gene was associated with the virologic rebound consecutively to the switch of lopinavir/r to tenofovir DF in a stable regimen with nucleoside backbone of abacavir, lamivudine and didanosine. The high selective pressure on the same resistance pathway was probably associated with the loss of antiviral potency, even in well-controlled patient.