An In-Depth Comparison of Latency-Reversing Agent Combinations in Various In Vitro and Ex Vivo HIV-1 Latency Models Identified Bryostatin-1+JQ1 and Ingenol-B+JQ1 to Potently Reactivate Viral Gene Expression.

The persistence of latently infected cells in patients under combinatory antiretroviral therapy (cART) is a major hurdle to HIV-1 eradication. Strategies to purge these reservoirs are needed and activation of viral gene expression in latently infected cells is one promising strategy. Bromodomain and Extraterminal (BET) bromodomain inhibitors (BETi) are compounds able to reactivate latent proviruses in a positive transcription elongation factor b (P-TEFb)-dependent manner. In this study, we tested the reactivation potential of protein kinase C (PKC) agonists (prostratin, bryostatin-1 and ingenol-B), which are known to activate NF-κB signaling pathway as well as P-TEFb, used alone or in combination with P-TEFb-releasing agents (HMBA and BETi (JQ1, I-BET, I-BET151)). Using in vitro HIV-1 post-integration latency model cell lines of T-lymphoid and myeloid lineages, we demonstrated that PKC agonists and P-TEFb-releasing agents alone acted as potent latency-reversing agents (LRAs) and that their combinations led to synergistic activation of HIV-1 expression at the viral mRNA and protein levels. Mechanistically, combined treatments led to higher activations of P-TEFb and NF-κB than the corresponding individual drug treatments. Importantly, we observed in ex vivo cultures of CD8+-depleted PBMCs from 35 cART-treated HIV-1+ aviremic patients that the percentage of reactivated cultures following combinatory bryostatin-1+JQ1 treatment was identical to the percentage observed with anti-CD3+anti-CD28 antibodies positive control stimulation. Remarkably, in ex vivo cultures of resting CD4+ T cells isolated from 15 HIV-1+ cART-treated aviremic patients, the combinations bryostatin-1+JQ1 and ingenol-B+JQ1 released infectious viruses to levels similar to that obtained with the positive control stimulation. The potent effects of these two combination treatments were already detected 24 hours post-stimulation. These results constitute the first demonstration of LRA combinations exhibiting such a potent effect and represent a proof-of-concept for the co-administration of two different types of LRAs as a potential strategy to reduce the size of the latent HIV-1 reservoirs.

Prolonged antiretroviral therapy is associated with fewer anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in HIV-positive MSM in a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk of anal cancer. We evaluate the risk factors for anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) (the precursor of anal cancer) in HIV-positive MSM. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study within a cohort, 320 HIV-positive MSM were screened by anal cytology followed by high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) in case of abnormal cytology. Risk factors for anal HSIL were analysed. RESULTS: Men were mostly middle-aged Caucasians with median CD4+ T lymphocytes of 638 cells/µL, 87% on combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) for a median of 5 years. 198 anal cytology samples were normal. In the 122 patients with abnormal cytology, HRA with biopsies were performed: 12% (n=15) normal, 36% (n=44) anal low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and 51% (n=63) anal HSIL. Comparing patients with or without anal HSIL (normal cytology or normal biopsy or LSIL), we found in multivariate analysis significantly fewer anal HSIL in patients with cART ≥24 months (OR 0.32 CI 95% 0.162 to 0.631, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged cART (≥24 months) is associated with fewer anal HSIL.

Nonnucleoside Reverse-transcriptase Inhibitor- vs Ritonavir-boosted Protease Inhibitor-based Regimens for Initial Treatment of HIV Infection: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) cause faster virologic suppression, while ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) recover more CD4 cells. However, individual trials have not been powered to compare clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched databases to identify randomized trials that compared NNRTI- vs PI/r-based initial therapy. A metaanalysis calculated risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs), as appropriate. Primary outcome was death or progression to AIDS. Secondary outcomes were death, progression to AIDS, and treatment discontinuation. We calculated RR of virologic suppression and MD for an increase in CD4 cells at week 48. RESULTS: We included 29 trials with 9047 participants. Death or progression to AIDS occurred in 226 participants in the NNRTI arm and in 221 in the PI/r arm (RR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, .87-1.22; 12 trials; n = 3825), death in 205 participants in the NNRTI arm vs 198 in the PI/r arm (1.04; 0.86-1.25; 22 trials; n = 8311), and progression to AIDS in 140 participants in the NNRTI arm vs 144 in the PI/r arm (1.00; 0.80-1.25; 13 trials; n = 4740). Overall treatment discontinuation (1.12; 0.93-1.35; 24 trials; n = 8249) and from toxicity (1.21; 0.87-1.68; 21 trials; n = 6195) were comparable, but discontinuation due to virologic failure was more common with NNRTI (1.58; 0.91-2.74; 17 trials; n = 5371). At week 48, there was no difference between NNRTI and PI/r in virologic suppression (RR, 1.03; 0.98-1.09) or CD4(+) recovery (MD, -4.7 cells; -14.2 to 4.8). CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference in clinical and viro-immunologic outcomes between NNRTI- and PI/r-based therapy.

Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: Dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572), a once-daily, unboosted integrase inhibitor, was recently approved in the United States for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in combination with other antiretroviral agents. Dolutegravir, in combination with abacavir-lamivudine, may provide a simplified regimen. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study involving adult participants who had not received previous therapy for HIV-1 infection and who had an HIV-1 RNA level of 1000 copies per milliliter or more. Participants were randomly assigned to dolutegravir at a dose of 50 mg plus abacavir-lamivudine once daily (DTG-ABC-3TC group) or combination therapy with efavirenz-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)-emtricitabine once daily (EFV-TDF-FTC group). The primary end point was the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 48. Secondary end points included the time to viral suppression, the change from baseline in CD4+ T-cell count, safety, and viral resistance. RESULTS: A total of 833 participants received at least one dose of study drug. At week 48, the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter was significantly higher in the DTG-ABC-3TC group than in the EFV-TDF-FTC group (88% vs. 81%, P=0.003), thus meeting the criterion for superiority. The DTG-ABC-3TC group had a shorter median time to viral suppression than did the EFV-TDF-FTC group (28 vs. 84 days, P<0.001), as well as greater increases in CD4+ T-cell count (267 vs. 208 per cubic millimeter, P<0.001). The proportion of participants who discontinued therapy owing to adverse events was lower in the DTG-ABC-3TC group than in the EFV-TDF-FTC group (2% vs. 10%); rash and neuropsychiatric events (including abnormal dreams, anxiety, dizziness, and somnolence) were significantly more common in the EFV-TDF-FTC group, whereas insomnia was reported more frequently in the DTG-ABC-3TC group. No participants in the DTG-ABC-3TC group had detectable antiviral resistance; one tenofovir DF-associated mutation and four efavirenz-associated mutations were detected in participants with virologic failure in the EFV-TDF-FTC group. CONCLUSIONS: Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine had a better safety profile and was more effective through 48 weeks than the regimen with efavirenz-tenofovir DF-emtricitabine. (Funded by ViiV Healthcare; SINGLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01263015 .).

Resistance at virological failure using boosted protease inhibitors versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as first-line antiretroviral therapy--implications for sustained efficacy of ART in resource-limited settings.

BACKGROUND: Increases in the prevalence of resistance to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) have been observed among previously untreated individuals in all areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to examine whether first-line use of 2 NRTIs plus a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) could protect against emergence of NRTI resistance mutations, compared to the use of 2 NRTIs plus 1 NNRTI. METHODS: We carried out a weighted meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing bPI- with NNRTI-based first-line antiretroviral therapy regimens using random effects modeling. RESULTS: In intention to treat analyses, there was no difference in the risk of viral failure at week 48 between NNRTI and bPI (P = .19). At week 48, the overall difference between NNRTI- and PI-based regimens in selection of any major NRTI resistance mutation (crude unweighted prevalence 3.3% vs 1.6%) was 1.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4-3.0; P = .00927). There was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of K65R when comparing NNRTI (1.3%) with PI (0.67%); absolute weighted difference 1.0% (95% CI, .3-1.7; P = .00447). There was also a significant difference in prevalence of M184V/I between NNRTI and PI (crude unweighted prevalence 3.2% vs 1.4%); difference 1.6% (95% CI 0.1-3.1; P = .0368). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the equivalent efficacy and more favorable resistance implications of PI- versus NNRTI-based first line therapy, widespread use of PI-based first-line therapy is not warranted at this time, due to resource limitations and predicted increased risk of resistance-related failure of NNRTI/NRTI second-line regimens. PI-based first-line therapy could be reconsidered when antiretroviral agents from other classes become available for second-line regimens in resource-limited settings.

Sustained viral suppression and higher CD4+ T-cell count reduces the risk of persistent cervical high-risk human papillomavirus infection in HIV-positive women.

BACKGROUND: Studies analyzing the impact of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) on cervical infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) have generated conflicting results. We assessed the long-term impact of cART on persistent cervical HR-HPV infection in a very large cohort of 652 women who underwent follow-up of HIV infection for a median duration of 104 months. METHODS: Prospective cohort of HIV-infected women undergoing HIV infection follow-up who had HR-HPV screening and cytology by Papanicolaou smear performed yearly between 2002 and 2011. RESULTS: At baseline, the median age was 38 years, the race/ethnic origin was sub-Sarahan Africa for 84%, the median CD4(+) T-cell count was 426 cells/µL, 79% were receiving cART, and the HR-HPV prevalence was 43%. The median interval of having had an HIV load of <50 copies/mL was 40.6 months at the time of a HR-HPV-negative test result, compared with 17 months at the time of a HR-HPV-positive test result (P < .0001, by univariate analysis). The median interval of having had a CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL was 18.4 months at the time of a HR-HPV-negative test result, compared with 4.45 months at the time of a HR-HPV-positive test result (P < .0001). In multivariate analysis, having had an HIV load of <50 copies/mL for >40 months (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], .76-.86; P < .0001) and having had a CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL for >18 months (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, .82-.94; P = .0002) were associated with a significantly decreased risk of HR-HPV infection. CONCLUSION: Sustained HIV suppression for >40 months and a sustained CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL for >18 months are independently and significantly associated with a decreased risk of persistent cervical HR-HPV infection.

Efficacy and safety of rilpivirine in treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected patients with hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus coinfection enrolled in the Phase III randomized, double-blind ECHO and THRIVE trials.

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and hepatic safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz were compared in treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults with concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the pooled week 48 analysis of the Phase III, double-blind, randomized ECHO (NCT00540449) and THRIVE (NCT00543725) trials. METHODS: Patients received 25 mg of rilpivirine once daily or 600 mg of efavirenz once daily, plus two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. At screening, patients had alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase levels ≤5× the upper limit of normal. HBV and HCV status was determined at baseline by HBV surface antigen, HCV antibody and HCV RNA testing. RESULTS: HBV/HCV coinfection status was known for 670 patients in the rilpivirine group and 665 in the efavirenz group. At baseline, 49 rilpivirine and 63 efavirenz patients [112/1335 (8.4%)] were coinfected with either HBV [55/1357 (4.1%)] or HCV [57/1333 (4.3%)]. The safety analysis included all available data, including beyond week 48. Eight patients seroconverted during the study (rilpivirine: five; efavirenz: three). A higher proportion of patients achieved viral load <50 copies/mL (intent to treat, time to loss of virological response) in the subgroup without HBV/HCV coinfection (rilpivirine: 85.0%; efavirenz: 82.6%) than in the coinfected subgroup (rilpivirine: 73.5%; efavirenz: 79.4%) (rilpivirine, P = 0.04 and efavirenz, P = 0.49, Fisher's exact test). The incidence of hepatic adverse events (AEs) was low in both groups in the overall population (rilpivirine: 5.5% versus efavirenz: 6.6%) and was higher in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients than in those not coinfected (26.7% versus 4.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic AEs were more common and response rates lower in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients treated with rilpivirine or efavirenz than in those who were not coinfected.

Maraviroc for previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: CC chemokine receptor 5 antagonists are a new class of antiretroviral agents. METHODS: We conducted two double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies--Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2--with patients who had R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) only. They had been treated with or had resistance to three antiretroviral-drug classes and had HIV-1 RNA levels of more than 5000 copies per milliliter. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three antiretroviral regimens consisting of maraviroc once daily, maraviroc twice daily, or placebo, each of which included optimized background therapy (OBT) based on treatment history and drug-resistance testing. Safety and efficacy were assessed after 48 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 1049 patients received the randomly assigned study drug; the mean baseline HIV-1 RNA level was 72,400 copies per milliliter, and the median CD4 cell count was 169 per cubic millimeter. At 48 weeks, in both studies, the mean change in HIV-1 RNA from baseline was greater with maraviroc than with placebo: -1.66 and -1.82 log(10) copies per milliliter with the once-daily and twice-daily regimens, respectively, versus -0.80 with placebo in MOTIVATE 1, and -1.72 and -1.87 log(10) copies per milliliter, respectively, versus -0.76 with placebo in MOTIVATE 2. More patients receiving maraviroc once or twice daily had HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (42% and 47%, respectively, vs. 16% in the placebo group in MOTIVATE 1; 45% in both maraviroc groups vs. 18% in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). The change from baseline in CD4 counts was also greater with maraviroc once or twice daily than with placebo (increases of 113 and 122 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 54 in MOTIVATE 1; increases of 122 and 128 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 69 in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). Frequencies of adverse events were similar among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Maraviroc, as compared with placebo, resulted in significantly greater suppression of HIV-1 and greater increases in CD4 cell counts at 48 weeks in previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 who were receiving OBT. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00098306 and NCT00098722.)

96 week results from the MONET trial: a randomized comparison of darunavir/ritonavir with versus without nucleoside analogues, for patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at baseline.

BACKGROUND: In virologically suppressed patients, switching to darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy could avoid resistance and adverse events from continuing nucleoside analogues. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-six patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL on current antiretrovirals were switched to darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once daily, either as monotherapy (n = 127) or with two nucleoside analogues (n = 129). Treatment failure was defined as two consecutive HIV RNA levels at least 50 copies/mL by week 96, or discontinuation of study drugs. The trial had 80% power to show non-inferiority (δ = -12%) at week 48. Results Patients were 81% male, 91% Caucasian, and had a median baseline CD4 count of 575 cells/mm(3). There were more patients with hepatitis C co-infection at baseline in the monotherapy arm (18%) compared with the triple therapy arm (12%). In the efficacy analysis, HIV RNA <50 copies/mL by week 96 (per protocol, time to loss of virological response, switch equals failure) was 78% versus 82% in the monotherapy and triple therapy arms [difference -4.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -14.3% to +5.8%]; in a switch included analysis, HIV RNA <50 copies/mL was 93% versus 92% (difference +1.6%, 95% CI -5.0% to +8.1%). The percentage of patients with HIV RNA <5 copies/mL (optical density from the sample equal to the negative control) remained constant over time in both treatment arms. Conclusions In the week 96 analysis of the MONotherapy in Europe with TMC114 (MONET) trial, switching to darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy showed non-inferior efficacy to darunavir/ritonavir plus two nucleoside analogues in the switch included and observed failure analyses, but not in the main switch equals failure analysis.

Maraviroc versus efavirenz, both in combination with zidovudine-lamivudine, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive subjects with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: The MERIT (Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients) study compared maraviroc and efavirenz, both with zidovudine-lamivudine, in antiretroviral-naive patients with R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. METHODS: Patients screened for R5 HIV-1 were randomized to receive efavirenz (600 mg once daily) or maraviroc (300 mg once or twice daily) with zidovudine-lamivudine. Coprimary end points were proportions of patients with a viral load <400 and <50 copies/mL at week 48; the noninferiority of maraviroc was assessed. RESULTS: The once-daily maraviroc arm was discontinued for not meeting prespecified noninferiority criteria. In the primary 48-week analysis (n = 721), maraviroc was noninferior for <400 copies/mL (70.6% for maraviroc vs 73.1% for efavirenz) but not for <50 copies/mL (65.3% vs 69.3%) at a threshold of -10%. More maraviroc patients discontinued for lack of efficacy (11.9% vs 4.2%), but fewer discontinued for adverse events (4.2% vs 13.6%). In a post hoc reanalysis excluding 107 patients (15%) with non-R5 screening virus by the current, more sensitive tropism assay, the lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the difference between treatment groups was above -10% for each end point. CONCLUSIONS: Twice-daily maraviroc was not noninferior to efavirenz at <50 copies/mL in the primary analysis. However, 15% of patients would have been ineligible for inclusion by a more sensitive screening assay. Their retrospective exclusion resulted in similar response rates in both arms Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: (NCT00098293) .

Safety of etravirine in HIV-1/hepatitis B and/or C virus co-infected patients: pooled 96 week results from the Phase III DUET trials.

OBJECTIVES: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients are frequently co-infected with hepatitis B and/or C virus (HBV/HCV). The safety of etravirine was investigated over 96 weeks in patients co-infected with HIV type-1 (HIV-1) and HBV and/or HCV in the Phase III DUET trials. DUET-1 and DUET-2 are registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00254046 and NCT00255099, respectively). METHODS: Treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients with documented non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) resistance were randomized to receive either etravirine 200 mg or placebo, both twice daily plus a background regimen of darunavir/ritonavir, investigator-selected nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and optional enfuvirtide. Hepatitis co-infection status was confirmed by hepatitis B surface antigen or HCV antibody and qualitative HCV RNA. Co-infected patients were eligible if they did not require anti-hepatitis treatment and were clinically stable, with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) concentrations <5× the upper limit of normal. Adverse events (AEs) and laboratory parameters were analysed. RESULTS: Data were available for 566 etravirine- and 564 placebo-treated patients, of whom 72 (13%) and 68 (12%), respectively, were co-infected with HBV/HCV. Irrespective of co-infection status, the etravirine and placebo groups were comparable for the incidence of grade 3/4 AEs [co-infected: 31 (43%) versus 31 (46%) patients, respectively; non-co-infected: 200 (40%) versus 176 (35%), respectively] and serious AEs [co-infected: 25 (35%) versus 25 (37%), respectively; non-co-infected: 123 (25%) versus 119 (24%), respectively]. Consistent with the underlying hepatitis, relative to non-co-infected patients the co-infected patients, had a higher incidence of hepatic AEs [co-infected: 13 (18%) etravirine-treated versus 10 (15%) placebo-treated patients; non-co-infected: 36 (7%) versus 32 (6%), respectively], and grade 3/4 elevation of AST [co-infected: 8 (11%) versus 5 (7%), respectively; non-co-infected: 14 (3%) versus 9 (2%), respectively] and ALT [co-infected: 10 (14%) versus 6 (9%), respectively; non-co-infected: 14 (3%) versus 8 (2%), respectively]. Discontinuation due to hepatic AEs was low and comparable between the treatment groups, regardless of co-infection status (two co-infected patients in each treatment group; five etravirine-treated versus two placebo-treated non-co-infected patients). CONCLUSIONS: Etravirine demonstrated a similar safety profile to placebo in the subgroup of patients co-infected with HIV and HBV and/or HCV in the DUET trials. The incidence and severity of AEs with etravirine was generally comparable to placebo irrespective of co-infection status.

Clinical value of FDG-PET/CT for the diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus-associated fever of unknown origin: a retrospective study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the usefulness of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET/ computed tomography (CT) in patients affected by human immunodeficiency virus and suffering from fever of unknown origin (HIV-associated FUO). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten patients (six males, four females, age 24-48 years) suffering from HIV-associated FUO were studied by FDG-PET/CT. Final diagnosis was established either by microbiological or histopathological analysis or by a more than 6-month follow-up. FDG-PET/CT was regarded as 'helpful for diagnosis' when the abnormal uptake pointed to the organ or location where the cause of fever was thereafter identified. RESULTS: Nine out of 10 FDG-PET/CT were abnormal and the cause of fever was further demonstrated by other diagnostic procedures. An infectious process (tuberculosis) was diagnosed in six patients and a neoplasm in three (two lymphomas, one Kaposi's sarcoma). FDG-PET/CT directly suggested sites for biopsy in six patients (tuberculous lymphadenitis and neoplasm). The only patient with normal FDG-PET/CT suffered from drug-induced fever. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET/CT is a valuable tool in patients with HIV-associated FUO. FDG-PET/CT was categorized as 'helpful for diagnosis' in nine out of the 10 patients we studied. Adding the CT anatomical landmarks to the PET findings allowed an accurate and easy localization of the sites to be punctured in the six patients in whom histopathological diagnosis was needed.

Safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of 48 weeks of etravirine therapy in a phase IIb dose-ranging study involving treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: Etravirine (ETR; also known as TMC125) is a new nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor with activity against wild-type and nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). METHODS: This randomized, phase IIb, placebo-controlled, 2-stage, dose-escalating trial evaluated the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of 3 twice-daily doses of ETR (experimental formulation TF035; compared with placebo), administered with an individually optimized background regimen, in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. In stage 1 of the trial, 166 patients received ETR (400 mg or 800 mg twice daily) or placebo. In stage 2 of the trial, 74 patients received ETR (800 mg or 1200 mg twice daily) or placebo. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of the regimens over 48 weeks. RESULTS: Neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs) of interest occurred in 46.6% of patients in the combined ETR group and in 45.5% of patients in the combined placebo group (P=.89). Clinically relevant hepatic AEs occurred in 3.4% of patients who received ETR and in 6.1% of patients who received placebo (P=.47), and rash occurred in 19.5% and 12.1%, respectively (P=.25). In general, there was no evidence of a relationship between ETR dose and specific AEs. Most AEs were severity grade 1 or 2; the incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs was comparable between groups (27.0% in the combined ETR group vs. 27.3% in the placebo group). Plasma preparation tubes were used for viral load measurement. In stage 1, there was no statistically significant difference in efficacy between ETR and placebo. In stage 2, the decrease in log10 plasma viral load between baseline and week 24 was statistically significantly greater in patients who received ETR, compared with patients who received placebo; a trend in favor of ETR persisted until week 48. CONCLUSIONS: ETR was generally safe and well tolerated during long-term administration in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients, and it had a safety profile comparable to that of placebo.

Antiviral activity and safety of aplaviroc with lamivudine/zidovudine in HIV-infected, therapy-naive patients: the ASCENT (CCR102881) study.

BACKGROUND: This Phase IIb study explored the antiviral activity and safety of the investigational CCR5 antagonist aplaviroc (APL) in antiretroviral-naive patients harbouring R5-tropic virus. METHODS: One hundred and forty-seven patients were randomized 2:2:1 to one of two APL dosing regimens or efavirenz (EFV). All dosage arms were administered twice daily and in combination with lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/ZDV; Combivir, COM). Efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed. RESULTS: This study was prematurely terminated due to APL-associated idiosyncratic hepatotoxicity. The primary endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/ml who remained on randomized treatment through week 12. Of the 147 patients enrolled, 145 patients received one dose of treatment and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/ml at week 12 was 53%, 50% and 66% in the APL 600 mg twice daily, APL 800 mg twice daily, and EFV arms, respectively. Common clinical adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea, nausea, fatigue and headache. APL demonstrated non-linear pharmacokinetics with high interpatient variability. In addition to the hepatic findings, there was an apparent dose-response relationship in the incidence of diarrhoea. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas target plasma concentrations of APL were achieved, the antiviral activity of APL as the third agent in a triple drug regimen did not appear to be comparable to EFV in this treatment-naive patient population.

Prevalence and epidemiology of HIV type 1 drug resistance among newly diagnosed therapy-naive patients in Belgium from 2003 to 2006.

This study is the first prospective study to assess the prevalence, epidemiology, and risk factors of HIV-1 drug resistance in newly diagnosed HIV-infected patients in Belgium. In January 2003 it was initiated as part of the pan-European SPREAD program, and continued thereafter for four inclusion rounds until December 2006. Epidemiological, clinical, and behavioral data were collected using a standardized questionnaire and genotypic resistance testing was done on a sample taken within 6 months of diagnosis. Two hundred and eighty-five patients were included. The overall prevalence of transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance in Belgium was 9.5% (27/285, 95% CI: 6.6-13.4). Being infected in Belgium, which largely coincided with harboring a subtype B virus, was found to be significantly associated with transmission of drug resistance. The relatively high rate of baseline resistance might jeopardize the success of first line treatment as more than 1 out of 10 (30/285, 10.5%) viruses did not score as fully susceptible to one of the recommended first-line regimens, i.e., zidovudine, lamivudine, and efavirenz. Our results support the implementation of genotypic resistance testing as a standard of care in all treatment-naive patients in Belgium.

Evolution of drug resistance in HIV-infected patients remaining on a virologically failing combination antiretroviral therapy regimen.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the extent of drug resistance accumulation in patients kept on a virologically failing regimen and its determinants in the clinical setting. DESIGN: The study focused on 110 patients of EuroSIDA on an unchanged regimen who had two genotypic tests performed at two time points (t0 and t1) when viral load was > 400 copies/ml. METHODS: Accumulation of resistance between t0 and t1 was measured using genotypic susceptibility scores (GSS) obtained by counting the total number of active drugs (according to the Rega system v6.4.1) among all licensed antiretrovirals as of 1 January 2006. Patients were grouped according to the number of active drugs in the failing regimen at t0 (GSS_f-t0). RESULTS: At t0, patients had been on the failing combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) for a median of 11 months (range, 6-50 months). Even patients with extensive resistance to the failing regimen were still receiving benefit from treatment. An overall 6-monthly increase of 1.96 (SD, 2.23) International Aids Society-mutations and an average loss of 1.25 (SD, 1.81) active drugs were estimated. In comparison with patients with GSS_f-t0 = 0, the number of active drugs lost was -1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI), -2.13 to -0.03; P = 0.04] in those with GSS_f-t0 of 0.5-1.5 and -1.24 (95% CI, -2.44 to -0.04; P = 0.04) in those with GSS_f-t0 >or= 2. CONCLUSIONS: In patients kept on the same virologically failing cART regimen for a median of 6 months, there was considerable accumulation of drug resistance mutations, particularly in patients with initial low level of resistance to the failing regimen. Randomized comparisons of maintenance treatment strategies while awaiting a new suppressive therapy to become available are warranted.

Baseline factors prognostic of sustained virological response in patients with HIV-hepatitis C virus co-infection.

OBJECTIVE: To identify baseline characteristics predictive of a sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with HIV-hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infection treated with interferon-based therapy. DESIGN/METHODS: A stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis was used to explore the prognostic factors associated with SVR [undetectable HCV-RNA (< 50 IU/ml) at the end of untreated follow-up in week 72]. RESULTS: In all patients (n = 853), in addition to the HCV therapy received, the factors most predictive of SVR were baseline HCV-RNA [< or = versus > 400 000 IU/ml; odds ratio (OR) 4.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.15-7.22; P < 0.0001] and HCV genotype (OR 2.87; 95% CI 2.00-4.12; P < 0.0001). HIV treatment (with a protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; P = 0.034), race (P = 0.027), and body mass index (P = 0.039) were also weak predictors of HCV treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: In the AIDS PEGASYS Ribavirin International Co-infection Trial (APRICOT), the predictors of SVR among HIV-HCV co-infected patients treated with peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin were similar to those in patients with HCV mono-infection. The HCV genotype and pretreatment HCV-RNA level had the greatest influence on SVR.

Predictors of virological outcome and safety in primary HIV type 1-infected patients initiating quadruple antiretroviral therapy: QUEST GW PROB3005.

BACKGROUND: Initiation of antiretroviral therapy during primary human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 infection may confer long-term benefit. METHODS: After initiation of zidovudine, lamivudine, abacavir, and amprenavir therapy in patients in the QUEST cohort, predictors of virological outcome, virological and immunological changes, and adverse events were evaluated over 48 weeks. RESULTS: One hundred forty-eight patients started antiretroviral therapy during primary HIV-1 infection with < or =3 bands on Western Blot (median plasma HIV-1 RNA load, 5.4 log copies/mL; median CD4 cell count, 517 cells/mm(3)). By week 48, 36% of patients had stopped treatment or were lost to follow-up. Among the 115 patients receiving follow-up care at week 48 (102 of whom were receiving antiretroviral therapy), the median viral load decrease was -5.4 log copies/mL (interquartile range [IQR], -6.4 to -3.9 log copies/mL), and the median increase in CD4 cell count was 147 cells/mm(3) (IQR, -1 to 283 cells/mm(3)); 84.2% of patients had a viral load < or =50 copies/mL, and 44.7% of patients had a viral load < or =3 copies/mL. The median cell-associated RNA level decreased from 3.4 log copies/million PBMCs (IQR, 2.9-4.1 log copies/million PBMCs) to 0.8 log copies/million PBMCs (IQR, 0.5-1.4 log copies/million PBMCs), and the median cell-associated DNA level decreased from 2.8 log copies/million PBMCs (IQR, 2.4-3.0 log copies/million PBMCs) to 1.6 log copies/million PBMCs (IQR, 1.2-1.9 log copies/million PBMCs); 33.3% of patients had an undetectable RNA level, and 9.5% of patients had an undetectable cell-associated DNA level. The median CD8(+)/CD38(++) T cell count decreased from 459 cells/mm(3) (IQR, 208-974 cells/mm(3)) to 33 cells/mm(3) (IQR, 19-75 cells/mm(3)). Baseline CD8(+)/CD38(++) T cell count and cell-associated DNA level were independent inverse predictors for reaching a viral load < or =3 copies/mL. Eighty-three patients experienced a serious adverse event (median duration of an adverse event, 15 days).Conclusions. Initiation of antiretroviral therapy during primary HIV-1 infection was associated with very significant antiretroviral activity and a decrease in immune activation. Lower baseline CD8(+)/CD38(++) T cell count and cell-associated DNA level were predictive of achieving a viral load < or =3 copies/mL.

Pharmacokinetics of two randomized trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of indinavir, saquinavir and lopinavir in combination with low-dose ritonavir: the MaxCmin1 and 2 trials.

Our objective was to identify possible differences in protease inhibitor plasma concentrations between and within three protease inhibitor regimens (indinavir, saquinavir and lopinavir all in combination with low-dose ritonavir) and to relate these differences to safety and efficacy. Data originated from pre-defined pharmacokinetic substudies within two randomized 48-week trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of three protease inhibitor regimens. At weeks 4 and 48, plasma was collected and minimum drug plasma concentrations, C(min), were obtained. Out of 656 randomized patients, 283 patients had available C(min) at week 4. Indinavir, saquinavir and lopinavir C(min) were high when combined with low-dose ritonavir. No significant difference in the proportion of patients experiencing treatment failure could be found according to the C(min) within any treatment arm. A saquinavir C(min) > 2000 ng/ml was associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal grade 3 or 4 adverse events and higher total cholesterol. Overall, there were no changes in C(min) from week 4 to week 48 in patients who remained on therapy. No association between treatment failure and the C(min) could be demonstrated. Associations between high C(min) and toxicity were identified in the saquinavir arm; therefore, dose reductions may be appropriate in certain patients with C(min) several times above the minimum effective concentration.

Occult HIV-1 drug resistance to thymidine analogues following failure of first-line tenofovir combined with a cytosine analogue and nevirapine or efavirenz in sub Saharan Africa: a retrospective multi-centre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: HIV-1 drug resistance to older thymidine analogue nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor drugs has been identified in sub-Saharan Africa in patients with virological failure of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing the modern nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and correlates of thymidine analogue mutations (TAM) in patients with virological failure of first-line tenofovir-containing ART. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed patients from 20 studies within the TenoRes collaboration who had locally defined viral failure on first-line therapy with tenofovir plus a cytosine analogue (lamivudine or emtricitabine) plus a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI; nevirapine or efavirenz) in sub-Saharan Africa. Baseline visits in these studies occurred between 2005 and 2013. To assess between-study and within-study associations, we used meta-regression and meta-analyses to compare patients with and without TAMs for the presence of resistance to tenofovir, cytosine analogue, or NNRTIs. FINDINGS: Of 712 individuals with failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens, 115 (16%) had at least one TAM. In crude comparisons, patients with TAMs had lower CD4 counts at treatment initiation than did patients without TAMs (60·5 cells per µL [IQR 21·0-128·0] in patients with TAMS vs 95·0 cells per µL [37·0-177·0] in patients without TAMs; p=0·007) and were more likely to have tenofovir resistance (93 [81%] of 115 patients with TAMs vs 352 [59%] of 597 patients without TAMs; p<0·0001), NNRTI resistance (107 [93%] vs 462 [77%]; p<0·0001), and cytosine analogue resistance (100 [87%] vs 378 [63%]; p=0·0002). We detected associations between TAMs and drug resistance mutations both between and within studies; the correlation between the study-level proportion of patients with tenofovir resistance and TAMs was 0·64 (p<0·0001), and the odds ratio for tenofovir resistance comparing patients with and without TAMs was 1·29 (1·13-1·47; p<0·0001) INTERPRETATION: TAMs are common in patients who have failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens in sub-Saharan Africa, and are associated with multidrug resistant HIV-1. Effective viral load monitoring and point-of-care resistance tests could help to mitigate the emergence and spread of such strains. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.