Genetic Study of SARS-CoV-2 Non Structural Protein 12 in COVID-19 Patients Non Responders to Remdesivir.

Remdesivir (RDV) was the first antiviral drug approved by the FDA to treat severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients. RDV inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication by stalling the non structural protein 12 (nsp12) subunit of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). No evidence of global widespread RDV-resistance mutations has been reported, however, defining genetic pathways to RDV resistance and determining emergent mutations prior and subsequent antiviral therapy in clinical settings is necessary. This study identified 57/149 (38.3%) patients who did not respond to one course (5-days) (n = 36/111, 32.4%) or prolonged (5 to 20 days) (n = 21/38, 55.3%) RDV therapy by subgenomic RNA detection. Genetic variants in the nsp12 gene were detected in 29/49 (59.2%) non responder patients by Illumina sequencing, including the de novo E83D mutation that emerged in an immunosuppressed patient after receiving 10 + 8 days of RDV, and the L838I detected at baseline and/or after prolonged RDV treatment in 9/49 (18.4%) non responder subjects. Although 3D protein modeling predicted no interference with RDV, the amino acid substitutions detected in the nsp12 involved changes on the electrostatic outer surface and in secondary structures that may alter antiviral response. It is important for health surveillance to study potential mutations associated with drug resistance as well as the benefit of RDV retreatment, especially in immunosuppressed patients and in those with persistent replication. IMPORTANCE This study provides clinical and microbiologic data of an extended population of hospitalized patients for COVID-19 pneumonia who experienced treatment failure, detected by the presence of subgenomic RNA (sgRNA). The genetic variants found in the nsp12 pharmacological target of RDV bring into focus the importance of monitoring emergent mutations, one of the objectives of the World Health Organization (WHO) for health surveillance. These mutations become even more crucial as RDV keeps being prescribed and new molecules are being repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. The present article offers new perspectives for the clinical management of non responder patients treated and retreated with RDV and emphasizes the need of further research of the benefit of combinatorial therapies and RDV retreatment, especially in immunosuppressed patients with persistent replication after therapy.

Do ART and Chemsex Drugs Get Along? Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in a Cohort of People Living with HIV Who Engaged in Chemsex: A Retrospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: People living with HIV (PLWH) who engaged in chemsex are at risk of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) with recreational drugs. This study aimed to characterize pDDIs between antiretroviral treatment (ART) and chemsex drugs and evaluate their association with unscheduled relevant hospital consultations. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective, observational study in a series of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) living with HIV who engaged in chemsex and who attended a tertiary hospital in Barcelona, Spain, from February 2018 through August 2019. Associations between all recorded pDDIs and relevant unscheduled consultations were estimated using the incidence rate (IR) per 100 person-years of those events compared between patients with no pDDI (green flag) or moderate severity pDDI (orange flag) with patients with high severity pDDI (red flag) using the incidence rate ratio (IRR). RESULTS: Among 172 PLWH engaged in chemsex, 249 ART regimens were prescribed: 44% based on integrase inhibitors, 30% on boosted ART, and 26% based on non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. The substances and recreational drugs most frequently used were erectile dysfunction agents (83%), methamphetamine (79%), GHB (77%), and alkyl nitrites (71%). Polydrug use was reported in 52%. We observed 2048 pDDIs. Of these, 23% were orange flag pDDIs; 88% related to boosted ARTs. The IR of the 285 unscheduled relevant episodes in patients with orange flag pDDIs was 64.67 (95% CI 40.07-89.28). The IRR of green flag pDDIs was 1.05 (95% CI 0.60-1.8; p = 0.876). CONCLUSION: One in four pDDIs were of moderate severity but no significant increase in the incidence of unscheduled relevant consultations was observed. A high number of unscheduled consultations, predominantly for psychiatric events and intoxication, were observed. Beyond using non-boosted ART to minimize pDDIs, other factors related to the practice of chemsex must be addressed, in order to offer a better approach.

Tacrolimus, Sirolimus and Everolimus Doses in HIV-Infected Solid-Organ Recipients, Requiring a Cobicistat-Based Antiretroviral Regimen: Report of Three Cases and Review.

People living with HIV should be considered candidates for solid-organ transplantation (SOT). However, managing HIV-infected patients undergoing SOT represents a major challenge due to the potential drug-drug interactions between antiretroviral drugs and immunosuppressive agents, particularly when resorting to antiretroviral drugs that require pharmacokinetic enhancers. We report three cases of cobicistat-tacrolimus co-administration, two of which also include the co-administration of mTOR inhibitors, in HIV-positive patients undergoing SOT (2 kidney and 1 liver recipient). We review previously reported cases and provide recommendations for initial management following transplantation.

Analysis of the costs and cost-effectiveness of the guidelines recommended by the 2018 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults / Análisis de Costes y de Coste/Eficacia de las Pautas Recomendadas por GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2018 Para el Tratamiento Antirretroviral Inicial en Adultos Infectados Por el VIH

Background: The GESIDA/National AIDS Plan expert panel recommended preferred regimens (PR), alternative regimens (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR. Methods: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug-resistance studies) over the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2018. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. Results: In the base-case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6788 euros for TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,649 euros for TAF/FTC + RAL (PR). The effectiveness varies from 0.82 for TAF/FTC + DRV/r (AR) to 0.91 for TAF/FTC+DTG (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-effectiveness, ranges from 7814 to 12,412 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TAF/FTC + RAL (PR), respectively. Conclusion: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR)

Introducción El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP), pautas alternativas (PA) y otras pautas (OP) para el tratamiento antirretroviral (TAR) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2018. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con PP y PA. Métodos: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50 copias/ml en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TAR y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: TAR (a precio oficial), manejo de efectos adversos, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA-B*5701. El ámbito es España, con costes de 2018. Se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. Resultados: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 6.788 para TAF/FTC/RPV (PA) y 10.649 para TAF/FTC+RAL (PP). La eficacia osciló entre 0,82 para TAF/FTC+DRV/r (PA) y 0,91 para TAF/FTC+DTG (PP). La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 7.814 y 12.412 por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para ABC/3TC/DTG (PP) y TAF/FTC+RAL (PP), respectivamente. Conclusión: Considerando el precio oficial del TAR, la pauta más eficiente fue ABC/3TC/DTG (PP), seguida de TAF/FTC/RPV (PA) y AF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PA)

Analysis of the costs and cost-effectiveness of the guidelines recommended by the 2018 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults.

BACKGROUND: The GESIDA/National AIDS Plan expert panel recommended preferred regimens (PR), alternative regimens (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug-resistance studies) over the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2018. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base-case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6788 euros for TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,649 euros for TAF/FTC+RAL (PR). The effectiveness varies from 0.82 for TAF/FTC+DRV/r (AR) to 0.91 for TAF/FTC+DTG (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-effectiveness, ranges from 7814 to 12,412 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TAF/FTC+RAL (PR), respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR).

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2017 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas recomendadas por GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2017 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el VIH

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the Spanish National AIDS Plan panel of experts have recommended preferred (PR), alternative (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral therapy (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2017. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies and HLA B*5701 screening. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2017. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranged from 6882 euro for TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,904 euros for TFV/FTC + RAL (PR). The efficacy varied from 0.82 for TFV/FTC + DRV/p (AR) to 0.92 for TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-efficacy, ranged from 7923 to 12,765 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TFV/FTC + RAL (PR), respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR)

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP), pautas alternativas (PA) y otras pautas (OP) para el tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2017. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con PP y PA. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral < 50 copias/mL en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TARV y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: TARV (a precio oficial), manejo de efectos adversos, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es España, con costes de 2017. Se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 6.882 euros para TFV/FTC/RPV (PA) y 10.904 euros para TFV/FTC + RAL (PP). La eficacia osciló entre 0,82 para TFV/FTC + DRV/p (PA) y 0,92 para TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PP). La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 7.923 y 12.765 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para ABC/3TC/DTG (PP) y TFV/FTC + RAL (PP), respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Considerando el precio oficial del TARV, la pauta más eficiente fue ABC/3TC/DTG (PP), seguida de TFV/FTC/RPV (PA) y TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2017 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults.

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the Spanish National AIDS Plan panel of experts have recommended preferred (PR), alternative (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral therapy (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2017. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies and HLA B*5701 screening. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2017. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranged from 6882 euro for TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,904 euros for TFV/FTC+RAL (PR). The efficacy varied from 0.82 for TFV/FTC+DRV/p (AR) to 0.92 for TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-efficacy, ranged from 7923 to 12,765 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TFV/FTC+RAL (PR), respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR).

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2016 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas recomendadas por GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2016 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el VIH

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the AIDS National Plan panel of experts suggest preferred (PR), alternative (AR), and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for the year 2016. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficacy of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48 in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2016. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable, and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 4663 Euros for 3TC+LPV/r (OR) to 10,894 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL (PR). The efficacy varies from 0.66 for ABC/3TC+ATV/r (AR) and ABC/3TC+LPV/r (OR), to 0.89 for TDF/FTC+DTG (PR) and TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR). The efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, ranges from 5280 to 12,836 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for 3TC+LPV/r (OR), and RAL+DRV/r (OR), respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the overall most efficient regimen being 3TC+LPV/r (OR), among the PR and AR, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR). Among the AR regimes, the most efficient was TDF/FTC/RPV

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP), pautas alternativas (PA) y otras pautas (OP) para el tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2016. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50copias/ml en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TARV y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: TARV (a precio oficial), manejo de efectos adversos, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es España, con costes de 2016. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 4.663euros para 3TC+LPV/r (OP) y 10.894euros para TDF/FTC+RAL (PP). La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC+ATV/r (PA) y ABC/3TC+LPV/r (OP), y 0,89 para TDF/FTC+DTG (PP) y TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PA). La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 5.280 y 12.836euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para 3TC+LPV/r (OP) y RAL+DRV/r (OP), respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Aunque globalmente la pauta más eficiente fue 3TC+LPV/r (OP), considerando solamente las PP y las PA, la pauta más eficiente fue ABC/3TC/DTG (PP). De las PA, la más eficiente fue TDF/FTC/RPV

Cyclosporine A in addition to standard ART during primary HIV-1 infection: pilot randomized clinical trial.

Background: Initiating ART during acute/recent HIV-1 infection reduces viral reservoir formation. It has been proposed that, during this phase, the size of the viral reservoir could be further reduced by the association of immunomodulatory therapy with ART. Contradictory results have emerged, however, from two trials evaluating the impact on immune recovery and the viral reservoir of adding cyclosporine A to ART during primary HIV-1 infection. Patients and methods: Twenty patients with acute/recent HIV-1 infection were randomized to receive ART alone (tenofovir, emtricitabine and lopinavir/ritonavir) or associated with 8 weeks of cyclosporine A (0.3-0.6 mg/kg twice daily). The impact on viral load, immune response and integrated and non-integrated DNA viral reservoir at 0, 8 and 36 weeks of treatment was evaluated. Results: The estimated median time from HIV-1 infection to ART onset was 63 days (IQR 53; 79.5) with 90% of patients at Fiebig V stage. No significant differences were observed in viral load decay, CD4 T cell recovery, immune response markers or the evolution of integrated DNA at week 8 (end of cyclosporine A) and week 36 between groups. However, non-integrated DNA significantly increased in the cyclosporine A arm between weeks 0 and 36. Cyclosporine A was well tolerated. Conclusions: Adding cyclosporine A to ART during acute/recent infection did not improve immune recovery. However, unintegrated DNA increased in the cyclosporine A group, suggesting an anti-integration effect, a point warranting further research (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00979706).

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2016 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults.

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the AIDS National Plan panel of experts suggest preferred (PR), alternative (AR), and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for the year 2016. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficacy of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48 in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2016. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable, and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 4663 Euros for 3TC+LPV/r (OR) to 10,894 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL (PR). The efficacy varies from 0.66 for ABC/3TC+ATV/r (AR) and ABC/3TC+LPV/r (OR), to 0.89 for TDF/FTC+DTG (PR) and TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR). The efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, ranges from 5280 to 12,836 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for 3TC+LPV/r (OR), and RAL+DRV/r (OR), respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the overall most efficient regimen being 3TC+LPV/r (OR), among the PR and AR, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR). Among the AR regimes, the most efficient was TDF/FTC/RPV.

Costs and cost-effectiveness analysis of 2015 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas recomendadas por GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2015 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el VIH

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the AIDS National Plan panel of experts suggest a preferred (PR), alternative (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2015. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the effectiveness of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and effectiveness (cost/effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2015. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 4663 Euros for 3TC + LPV/r (OR) to 10,902 Euros for TDF/FTC + RAL (PR). The effectiveness varies from 0.66 for ABC/3TC + ATV/r (AR) and ABC/3TC + LPV/r (OR), to 0.89 for TDF/FTC + DTG (PR) and TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR). The efficiency, in terms of cost/effectiveness, ranges from 5280 to 12,836 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for 3TC + LPV/r (OR) and RAL + DRV/r (OR), respectively. CONCLUSION: The most efficient regimen was 3TC + LPV/r (OR). Among the PR and AR, the most efficient regimen was TDF/FTC/RPV (AR). Among the PR regimes, the most efficient was ABC/3TC + DTG

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP), pautas alternativas (PA) y otras pautas (OP) para el tratamiento antirretroviral como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2015. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50 copias/mL en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del tratamiento antirretroviral y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: tratamiento antirretroviral (a precio oficial), manejo de efectos adversos, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es España, con costes de 2015. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 4.663 euros para 3TC + LPV/r (OP) y 10.902 euros para TDF/FTC + RAL (PP). La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC + ATV/r (PA) y ABC/3TC + LPV/r (OP), y 0,89 para TDF/FTC + DTG (PP) y TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PA). La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 5.280 y 12.836 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para 3TC + LPV/r (OP) y RAL + DRV/r (OP), respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: La pauta más eficiente fue 3TC + LPV/r (OP). Entre las PP o PA, la pauta más eficiente fue TDF/FTC/RPV (PA). De las PP, la más eficiente fue ABC/3TC + DTG

Costs and cost-effectiveness analysis of 2015 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults.

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the AIDS National Plan panel of experts suggest a preferred (PR), alternative (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2015. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the effectiveness of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and effectiveness (cost/effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2015. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 4663 Euros for 3TC+LPV/r (OR) to 10,902 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL (PR). The effectiveness varies from 0.66 for ABC/3TC+ATV/r (AR) and ABC/3TC+LPV/r (OR), to 0.89 for TDF/FTC+DTG (PR) and TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR). The efficiency, in terms of cost/effectiveness, ranges from 5280 to 12,836 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for 3TC+LPV/r (OR) and RAL+DRV/r (OR), respectively. CONCLUSION: The most efficient regimen was 3TC+LPV/r (OR). Among the PR and AR, the most efficient regimen was TDF/FTC/RPV (AR). Among the PR regimes, the most efficient was ABC/3TC+DTG.

Interacciones graves o potencialmente letales entre antirretrovirales y otros medicamentos / Severe or life-threatening interactions between antiretrovirals and non-HIV drugs

El tratamiento antirretroviral de gran actividad (TARGA) ha permitido un buen control de la infección por VIH, y por lo tanto la población afectada envejece progresivamente y la esperanza de vida va siendo parecida a la de la población general. Por otro lado, se sabe que la infección por VIH predispone, incluso en pacientes con TARGA efectivo, a un mayor riesgo cardiovascular y a una mayor incidencia de algunas neoplasias. Por todo ello, la mayor parte de pacientes infectados por el VIH reciben diversos medicamentos (pautados por el facultativo o autoadministrados) además de los antirretrovirales. Este artículo revisa las interacciones que pueden provocar daños importantes o incluso poner en peligro la vida de los pacientes y que los clínicos —sobre todo los que no manejan directamente pacientes infectados por el VIH— tendrían que conocer. También se revisan las implicaciones de las interacciones entre antirretrovirales y otros fármacos en situaciones especiales, como la administración concomitante de citostáticos, inmuno-supresores utilizados en el trasplante de órganos sólidos o pacientes que reciben los nuevos tratamientos para el virus de la hepatitis C. En general, las pautas con 2 inhibidores nucleós(t)idos de la transcriptasa inversa con raltegravir o dolutegravir son las que tienen menos potencial de interacciones clínicamente significativas (AU)

Highly active antiretroviral therapy has helped to improved control of the HIV infection, and has led to a progressively older population with the infection having a life expectancy quite similar to that of the general population. On the other hand, it is also known that HIV infection, even in patients with undetectable viral loads and good immunity, carries an increased cardiovascular risk, as well as an increased incidence of certain cancers. Therefore, the majority of HIV-infected patients receive several drugs (either prescribed by the physician or self-administered) combined with antiretrovirals. This article reviews the interactions between antiretrovirals and other drugs that can cause significant damage to patients, or even be life-threatening and of whom clinicians, especially those not directly treating HIV-infected patients, should be aware. A review is also presented on the implications of interactions between antiretrovirals and other drugs in special situations, such as the co-administration with cytostatics, immunesuppressants used in solid organ transplantation, or patients receiving new treatments for hepatitis C. Generally, combinations with two nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and raltegravir (or in the near future, dolutegravir) are those with less potential for clinically significant interactions (AU)

Structured Treatment Interruptions and Low Doses of IL-2 in Patients with Primary HIV Infection. Inflammatory, Virological and Immunological Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Interventions during primary HIV infection (PHI) can modify the clinical course during the chronic phase. The long-term effect of structured treatment interruptions (STI) followed by low doses of interleukin-2 (IL-2) in treated PHI patients is unknown. METHODS: Twelve PHI patients with viral load (VL) <20 copies/mL, CD4 cells >500 cells/mm3, and CD4/CD8 ratio >1, on antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiated within the first 90 days of infection and continued for at least 12 months were included. They underwent four STI and were then allocated (week 0 of the study) to ART alone or ART plus low doses of IL-2. ART was stopped once VL <20 copies/mL ('final stop'). Primary endpoints were VL<3000 copies/mL and CD4 cells >500 cells/mm3 at 48 weeks; secondary endpoints were immune activation, inflammatory markers until 48 weeks and the time before resuming ART (CD4 <350 cells/mm3 or AIDS) after 'final stop', compared between groups. RESULTS: Ten out of 12 patients were males, median age was 35 years and the main risk was men-who-have-sex-with-men. Only one out of 12 patients (in the STI group) maintained VL<3000 copies/mL and CD4 cells >500 cells/mm3 without ART at 48 weeks. All other virological and immunological parameters were comparable between groups at week 0, 'final stop' and week 48. However, the proportion of CD8-CD38+ cells, tumor necrosis factor and srIL-2 were higher in the IL-2 group at 'final stop' and week 24. All these differences vanished during follow-up. At 5 years after the final stop 3 out of 6 patients in the IL-2 group and 6 out of 6 patients in the STI group have resumed ART (P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: STI and IL-2 failed to achieve virological control after ART interruption. STI were not deleterious in long-term follow-up, an important issue for eradication and functional cure trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02300623.

Executive summary of the GESIDA/National AIDS Plan Consensus Document on antiretroviral therapy in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (updated January 2015).

In this update, antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for all patients infected by type 1 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1). The strength and grade of the recommendation vary depending on the CD4+ T-lymphocyte count, the presence of opportunistic infections or comorbid conditions, age, and the efforts to prevent the transmission of HIV. The objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable plasma viral load (PVL). Initial ART should comprise three drugs, namely, two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) and one drug from another family. Three of the recommended regimens, all of which have an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) as the third drug, are considered a preferred regimen; a further seven regimens, which are based on an INSTI, an non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), or a protease inhibitor boosted with ritonavir (PI/r), are considered alternatives. The reasons and criteria for switching ART are presented both for patients with an undetectable PVL and for patients who experience virological failure, in which case the rescue regimen should include three (or at least two) drugs that are fully active against HIV. The specific criteria for ART in special situations (acute infection, HIV-2 infection, pregnancy) and comorbid conditions (tuberculosis and other opportunistic infections, kidney disease, liver disease, and cancer) are updated.

Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas recomendadas por GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2014 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el VIH / Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2014 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the National AIDS Plan panel of experts suggest preferred (PR) and alternative (AR) regimens of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2014. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: An economic assessment was made of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied by considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and costs correspond to those of 2014. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 5133 Euros for ABC/3TC + EFV to 11,949 Euros for TDF/FTC + RAL. The efficacy varies between 0.66 for ABC/3TC + LPV/r and ABC/3TC + ATV/r, and 0.89 for TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI. Efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, ranges from 7546 to 13,802 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC + EFV and TDF/FTC + RAL respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC + EFV (AR), followed by the non-nucleoside containing PR (TDF/FTC/RPV and TDF/FTC/EFV). The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida ha recomendado pautas preferentes (PP) y alternativas (PA) de tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2014. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50 copias/mL en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TARV y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos, cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando sólo costes directos diferenciales: fármacos (a precio oficial), manejo de efectos adversos, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es España, con costes de 2014. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo tres escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 5.133 euros para ABC/3TC + EFV y 11.949 euros para TDF/FTC + RAL. La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC + LPV/r y ABC/3TC + ATV/r, y 0,89 para TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI. La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 7.546 y 13.802 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para ABC/3TC + EFV y TDF/FTC + RAL, respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Considerando el precio oficial del TARV, la pauta más eficiente fue ABC/3TC + EFV (PA), seguida de las PP que contienen no nucleósidos (TDF/FTC/RPV y TDF/FTC/EFV). El análisis de sensibilidad confirmó la robustez de estos hallazgos

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2014 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults.

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA and the National AIDS Plan panel of experts suggest preferred (PR) and alternative (AR) regimens of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2014. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with these regimens. METHODS: An economic assessment was made of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied by considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and costs correspond to those of 2014. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable. RESULTS: In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 5133 Euros for ABC/3TC+EFV to 11,949 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The efficacy varies between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and ABC/3TC+ATV/r, and 0.89 for TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI. Efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, ranges from 7546 to 13,802 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC+EFV and TDF/FTC+RAL respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC+EFV (AR), followed by the non-nucleoside containing PR (TDF/FTC/RPV and TDF/FTC/EFV). The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings.

[Severe or life-threatening interactions between antiretrovirals and non-HIV drugs]. / Interacciones graves o potencialmente letales entre antirretrovirales y otros medicamentos.

Highly active antiretroviral therapy has helped to improved control of the HIV infection, and has led to a progressively older population with the infection having a life expectancy quite similar to that of the general population. On the other hand, it is also known that HIV infection, even in patients with undetectable viral loads and good immunity, carries an increased cardiovascular risk, as well as an increased incidence of certain cancers. Therefore, the majority of HIV-infected patients receive several drugs (either prescribed by the physician or self-administered) combined with antiretrovirals. This article reviews the interactions between antiretrovirals and other drugs that can cause significant damage to patients, or even be life-threatening and of whom clinicians, especially those not directly treating HIV-infected patients, should be aware. A review is also presented on the implications of interactions between antiretrovirals and other drugs in special situations, such as the co-administration with cytostatics, immunesuppressants used in solid organ transplantation, or patients receiving new treatments for hepatitisC. Generally, combinations with two nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and raltegravir (or in the near future, dolutegravir) are those with less potential for clinically significant interactions.

Executive summary of the GeSIDA/National AIDS Plan consensus document on antiretroviral therapy in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (updated January 2014).

In this update, antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for all patients infected by type 1 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1). The strength and grade of the recommendation varies with clinical circumstances, number of CD4 cells, comorbid conditions and prevention of transmission of HIV. The objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable plasma viral load. Initial ART should always comprise a combination of 3 drugs, including 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and a third drug from a different family (non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, protease inhibitor, or integrase inhibitor). This update presents the causes and criteria for switching ART in patients with undetectable plasma viral load and in cases of virological failure. An update is also provided for the specific criteria for ART in special situations (acute infection, HIV-2 infection, and pregnancy) and with comorbid conditions (tuberculosis or other opportunistic infections, kidney disease, liver disease, and cancer).

Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2013 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana / Analysis of costs and cost-effectiveness of preferred GESIDA/National AIDS Plan regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus infected adult patients in 2013

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida ha propuesto «pautas preferentes» de tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2013. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral < 50 copias/ml en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TARV y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos [EA], cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: fármacos (a precio oficial), manejo de EA, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es Espańa, con costes de 2013. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 6.747 euros para TDF/FTC + NVP y 12.059 euros para TDF/FTC + RAL. La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC + LPV/r y ABC/3TC + ATV/r, y 0,87 para TDF/FTC + RAL y ABC/3TC + RAL. La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 8.396 y 13.930 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para TDF/FTC/RPV y TDF/FTC + RAL, respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Considerando el precio oficial del TARV, la pauta más eficiente fue TDF/FTC/RPV, seguida de las otras pautas que contienen no nucleósidos. El análisis de sensibilidad confirmó la robustez de estos hallazgos

INTRODUCTION: The GESIDA and National AIDS Plan panel of experts have proposed "preferred regimens" of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients for 2013. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and effectiveness of initiating treatment with these "preferred regimens". METHODS: An economic assessment of costs and effectiveness (cost/effectiveness) was performed using decision tree analysis models. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of having viral load < 50 copies/mL at week48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regime was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regime and drug resistance analyses) during the first 48 weeks. The perspective of the analysis is that of the National Health System was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies, and determination of HLA B*5701. The setting is Spain and the costs are those of 2013. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was performed, constructing three scenarios for each regimen: baseline, most favourable, and most unfavourable cases. RESULTS: In the baseline case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6,747euros for TDF/FTC+NVP to 12,059 euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The effectiveness ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and ABC/3TC+ATV/r, and 0.87 for TDF/FTC+RAL and ABC/3TC+RAL. Effectiveness, in terms of cost/effectiveness, varies between 8,396euros and 13,930 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for TDF/FTC/RPV and TDF/FTC+RAL, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Taking ART at official prices, the most effective regimen was TDF/FTC/RPV, followed by the rest of non-nucleoside containing regimens. The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings