Prevalence of HIV-related pulmonary arterial hypertension in the current antiretroviral therapy era.

RATIONALE: The prevalence of HIV-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has not been evaluated since introduction of combined, highly active antiretroviral treatments. OBJECTIVES: To establish the current prevalence of PAH in a large HIV-positive population. METHODS: Prospective study conducted in 7,648 consecutive HIV-positive adults in 14 HIV clinics in France. PAH was identified through screening with a predefined algorithm. Patients with dyspnea unexplained by other causes underwent transthoracic Doppler echocardiography. PAH was suspected if peak velocity of tricuspid regurgitation was greater than 2.5 m/second and was confirmed by right heart catheterization. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: PAH was diagnosed if mean pulmonary arterial pressure at rest was 25 mm Hg or greater (with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure < or = 15 mm Hg) or 30 mm Hg or greater on exercise. A total of 739 patients had dyspnea, of which 312 met exclusion criteria and 150 refused to participate. Among the remaining 277, 30 had known PAH and 247 had unexplained dyspnea and underwent echocardiography; PAH was suspected in 18 and confirmed in 5, to give a total of 35 cases. The prevalence was thus 0.46% (95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.64%). All new cases had relatively milder PAH. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of HIV-associated PAH is about the same as it was in the early 1990s. Given the current good long-term prognosis of patients with HIV, the severity of PAH in HIV-infected patients, and the absence of predictive factors, careful screening for PAH is warranted for patients with unexplained dyspnea.

Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1 infection: 2008 recommendations of an International AIDS Society-USA panel.

Resistance to antiretroviral drugs remains an important limitation to successful human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) therapy. Resistance testing can improve treatment outcomes for infected individuals. The availability of new drugs from various classes, standardization of resistance assays, and the development of viral tropism tests necessitate new guidelines for resistance testing. The International AIDS Society-USA convened a panel of physicians and scientists with expertise in drug-resistant HIV-1, drug management, and patient care to review recently published data and presentations at scientific conferences and to provide updated recommendations. Whenever possible, resistance testing is recommended at the time of HIV infection diagnosis as part of the initial comprehensive patient assessment, as well as in all cases of virologic failure. Tropism testing is recommended whenever the use of chemokine receptor 5 antagonists is contemplated. As the roll out of antiretroviral therapy continues in developing countries, drug resistance monitoring for both subtype B and non-subtype B strains of HIV will become increasingly important.

Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1 infection: 2008 recommendations of an International AIDS Society-USA panel.

Resistance to antiretroviral drugs remains an important limitation to successful human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) therapy. Resistance testing can improve treatment outcomes for infected individuals. The availability of new drugs from various classes, standardization of resistance assays, and the development of viral tropism tests necessitate new guidelines for resistance testing. The International AIDS Society-USA convened a panel of physicians and scientists with expertise in drug-resistant HIV-1, drug management, and patient care to review recently published data and presentations at scientific conferences and to provide updated recommendations. Whenever possible, resistance testing is recommended at the time of HIV infection diagnosis as part of the initial comprehensive patient assessment, as well as in all cases of virologic failure. Tropism testing is recommended whenever the use of chemokine receptor 5 antagonists is contemplated. As the roll out of antiretroviral therapy continues in developing countries, drug resistance monitoring for both subtype B and non-subtype B strains of HIV will become increasingly important.

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2008 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: The availability of new antiretroviral drugs and formulations, including drugs in new classes, and recent data on treatment choices for antiretroviral-naive and -experienced patients warrant an update of the International AIDS Society-USA guidelines for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adult human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. OBJECTIVES: To summarize new data in the field and to provide current recommendations for the antiretroviral management and laboratory monitoring of HIV infection. This report provides guidelines in key areas of antiretroviral management: when to initiate therapy, choice of initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and how best to approach treatment options, including optimal use of recently approved drugs (maraviroc, raltegravir, and etravirine) in treatment-experienced patients. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A 14-member panel with expertise in HIV research and clinical care was appointed. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences since the last panel report (August 2006) through June 2008 were identified. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data that changed the previous guidelines were reviewed by the panel (according to section). Guidelines were drafted by section writing committees and were then reviewed and edited by the entire panel. Recommendations were made by panel consensus. CONCLUSIONS: New data and considerations support initiating therapy before CD4 cell count declines to less than 350/microL. In patients with 350 CD4 cells/microL or more, the decision to begin therapy should be individualized based on the presence of comorbidities, risk factors for progression to AIDS and non-AIDS diseases, and patient readiness for treatment. In addition to the prior recommendation that a high plasma viral load (eg, >100,000 copies/mL) and rapidly declining CD4 cell count (>100/microL per year) should prompt treatment initiation, active hepatitis B or C virus coinfection, cardiovascular disease risk, and HIV-associated nephropathy increasingly prompt earlier therapy. The initial regimen must be individualized, particularly in the presence of comorbid conditions, but usually will include efavirenz or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine). Treatment failure should be identified and managed promptly, with the goal of therapy, even in heavily pretreated patients, being an HIV-1 RNA level below assay detection limits.

Comparative biological and clinical outcomes after a switch from a virologically unsuccessful first protease inhibitor-containing antiretroviral combination to a 3-drug regimen containing efavirenz, nevirapine, or abacavir.

BACKGROUND: Incomplete adherence is the main cause of antiretroviral therapy failure during initial combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). A switch to a protease inhibitor-sparing cART may be useful when a patient does not tolerate a first protease inhibitor-containing cART regimen. METHODS: To compare the biological and clinical outcomes of patients in whom a first protease inhibitor-containing cART regimen failed to control viral replication and whose treatment was switched to cART containing efavirenz, nevirapine, or abacavir, we studied 1440 patients from the French Hospital Database on HIV whose treatment was changed from a first protease inhibitor-containing cART to a 3-drug regimen with either efavirenz, nevirapine, or abacavir while their plasma viral load was detectable. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier 12-month probabilities of virological suppression were 73.6%, 53.9%, and 66.1% among patients whose treatment was switched to efavirenz-cART, nevirapine-cART, and abacavir-cART, respectively. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of virological suppression were antiretroviral exposure before the first cART, higher plasma viral load values at the treatment switch, a stavudine-lamivudine backbone after the switch (instead of a zidovudine-lamivudine backbone), and a switch to nevirapine (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.54-0.74], compared with efavirenz) or abacavir (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68-1.04] compared with efavirenz). There was no difference among the 3 groups with regard to immunological gain (>50 CD4+ T cells/mm3) or clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: When virological rebound occurs from receipt of protease inhibitor-containing cART, virological suppression can be obtained after a switch to a protease inhibitor-free cART--efavirenz-cART yielding the highest rate of virological suppression.

Switch from a first virologically effective protease inhibitor-containing regimen to a regimen containing efavirenz, nevirapine or abacavir.

BACKGROUND: Treatment simplification in antiretroviral-experienced patients receiving protease inhibitor (PI)-containing antiretroviral regimens seems safe, but randomized trials have limited power to detect differences in virological rebound (VR) between different switch strategies. METHODS: From the French Hospital Database on HIV, we selected 2462 patients with undetectable viral load (VL) who switched from a first PI-containing antiretroviral combination (cART) to a combination containing efavirenz (EFV), nevirapine (NVP) or abacavir (ABC). Factors associated with VR and with immunological efficacy (gain of > or = 50 CD4(+) cells/microl) were identified by using Cox models. RESULTS: The 12-month Kaplan-Meier probabilities of VR were 6.8, 13.7 and 12.3% in patients switching to EFV-cART, NVP-cART and ABC-cART, respectively. Factors associated with VR were female sex, younger age, antiretroviral exposure before the first cART, time on first cART, higher VL at first cART initiation, a stavudine/didanosine backbone (rather than zidovudine/lamivudine) after the switch, and a switch to NVP or ABC [respective adjusted hazard ratio versus EFV: 1.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21-1.94; and 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08]. When the analyses were restricted to patients who were antiretroviral-naive before their first cART, NVP (but not ABC) was associated with VR. Immunological outcomes did not differ among the three switch regimens. CONCLUSION: When VL is undetectable on a first PI-cART regimen, switching to an EFV-containing regimen is more likely to avoid VR than switching to an ABC or NVP-containing regimen. ABC may be an alternative to EFV for patients who were not exposed to antiretroviral before their first cART regimen, after checking for ABC resistance mutations.

Treatment for adult HIV infection: 2006 recommendations of the International AIDS Society--USA panel.

CONTEXT: Guidelines for antiretroviral therapy are important for clinicians worldwide given the complexity of the field and the varied clinical situations in which these agents are used. The International AIDS Society-USA panel has updated its recommendations as warranted by new developments in the field. OBJECTIVE: To provide physicians and other human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinicians with current recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in circumstances for which there is relatively unrestricted access to drugs and monitoring tools. The recommendations are centered on 4 key issues: when to start antiretroviral therapy; what to start; when to change; and what to change. Antiretroviral therapy in special circumstances is also described. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A 16-member noncompensated panel was appointed, based on expertise in HIV research and patient care internationally. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences from mid 2004 through May 2006 were identified and reviewed by all members of the panel. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data that might change previous guidelines were identified and reviewed. New guidelines were drafted by a writing committee and reviewed by the entire panel. CONCLUSIONS: Antiretroviral therapy in adults continues to evolve rapidly, making delivery of state-of-the-art care challenging. Initiation of therapy continues to be recommended in all symptomatic persons and in asymptomatic persons after the CD4 cell count falls below 350/microL and before it declines to 200/microL. A nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or a protease inhibitor boosted with low-dose ritonavir each combined with 2 nucleoside (or nucleotide) reverse transcriptase inhibitors is recommended with choice being based on the individual patient profile. Therapy should be changed when toxicity or intolerance mandate it or when treatment failure is documented. The virologic target for patients with treatment failure is now a plasma HIV-1 RNA level below 50 copies/mL. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy in the short-term and the long-term is crucial for treatment success and must be continually reinforced.

Treatment for adult HIV infection: 2006 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: Guidelines for antiretroviral therapy are important for clinicians worldwide given the complexity of the field and the varied clinical situations in which these agents are used. The International AIDS Society-USA panel has updated its recommendations as warranted by new developments in the field. OBJECTIVE: To provide physicians and other human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinicians with current recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in circumstances for which there is relatively unrestricted access to drugs and monitoring tools. The recommendations are centered on 4 key issues: when to start antiretroviral therapy; what to start; when to change; and what to change. Antiretroviral therapy in special circumstances is also described. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A 16-member noncompensated panel was appointed, based on expertise in HIV research and patient care internationally. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences from mid 2004 through May 2006 were identified and reviewed by all members of the panel. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data that might change previous guidelines were identified and reviewed. New guidelines were drafted by a writing committee and reviewed by the entire panel. CONCLUSIONS: Antiretroviral therapy in adults continues to evolve rapidly, making delivery of state-of-the-art care challenging. Initiation of therapy continues to be recommended in all symptomatic persons and in asymptomatic persons after the CD4 cell count falls below 350/microL and before it declines to 200/microL. A nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or a protease inhibitor boosted with low-dose ritonavir each combined with 2 nucleoside (or nucleotide) reverse transcriptase inhibitors is recommended with choice being based on the individual patient profile. Therapy should be changed when toxicity or intolerance mandate it or when treatment failure is documented. The virologic target for patients with treatment failure is now a plasma HIV-1 RNA level below 50 copies/mL. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy in the short-term and the long-term is crucial for treatment success and must be continually reinforced.

Treatment for adult HIV infection: 2004 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA Panel.

CONTEXT: Substantial changes in the field of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment have occurred in the last 2 years, prompting revision of the guidelines for antiretroviral management of adults with established HIV infection. OBJECTIVE: To update recommendations for physicians who provide HIV care regarding when to start antiretroviral therapy, what drugs to start with, when to change drug regimens, and what drug regimens to switch to after therapy fails. DATA SOURCES: Evidence was identified and reviewed by a 16-member noncompensated panel of physicians with expertise in HIV-related basic science and clinical research, antiretroviral therapy, and HIV patient care. The panel was designed to have broad US and international representation for areas with adequate access to antiretroviral management. STUDY SELECTION: Evidence considered included published basic science, clinical research, and epidemiological data (identified by experts in the field or extracted through MEDLINE searches using terms relevant to antiretroviral therapy) and abstracts from HIV-oriented scientific conferences between July 2002 and May 2004. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were reviewed to identify any information that might change previous guidelines. Based on panel discussion, guidelines were drafted by a writing committee and discussed by the panel until consensus was reached. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four antiretroviral drugs recently have been made available and have broadened the options for initial and subsequent regimens. New data allow more definitive recommendations for specific drugs or regimens to include or avoid, particularly with regard to initial therapy. Recommendations are rated according to 7 evidence categories, ranging from I (data from prospective randomized clinical trials) to VII (expert opinion of the panel). CONCLUSION: Further insights into the roles of drug toxic effects, drug resistance, and pharmacological interactions have resulted in additional guidance for strategic approaches to antiretroviral management.

Antiretroviral treatment for adult HIV infection in 2002: updated recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA Panel.

OBJECTIVE: New information warrants updated recommendations for the 4 central issues in antiretroviral therapy: when to start, what drugs to start with, when to change, and what to change to. These updated recommendations are intended to guide practicing physicians actively involved in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)- and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-related care. PARTICIPANTS: In 1995, physicians with specific expertise in HIV-related basic science and clinical research, antiretroviral therapy, and HIV patient care were invited by the International AIDS Society-USA to serve on a volunteer panel. In 1999, others were invited to broaden international representation. The 17-member panel met regularly in closed meetings between its last report in 2000 and April 2002 to review current data. The effort was sponsored and funded by the International AIDS Society-USA, a not-for-profit physician education organization. EVIDENCE AND CONSENSUS PROCESS: The full panel was convened in late 2000 and assigned 7 section committees. A section writer and 3 to 5 section committee members (each panel member served on numerous sections) identified relevant evidence and prepared draft recommendations. Basic science, clinical research, and epidemiologic data from the published literature and abstracts from recent (within 2 years) scientific conferences were considered by strength of evidence. Extrapolations from basic science data and expert opinion of the panel members were included as evidence. Draft sections were combined and circulated to the entire panel and discussed in a series of full-panel conference calls until consensus was reached. Final recommendations represent full consensus agreement of the panel. CONCLUSIONS: Because of increased awareness of the activity and toxicity of current drugs, the threshold for initiation of therapy has shifted to a later time in the course of HIV disease. However, the optimal time to initiate therapy remains imprecisely defined. Availability of new drugs has broadened options for therapy initiation and management of treatment failure, which remains a difficult challenge.