COVID-19: Zinc and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) Deficiencies as Determinants of Risk and Severity of Disease: A Narrative Review.

A growing body of evidence supports the premise that deficiencies of zinc and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2, a zinc enzyme) determine severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). ACE2 is part of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and acts as a feedback control system moderating blood pressure, keeping blood pressure within normal limits. For a virus to infect a person, the virus has to get inside the person's cells. The virus that causes COVID-19 uses ACE2 to get into the cell. Think of this like an invader from outer space attacking your car by getting in through your cruise control; the RAS is like the cruise control of your car. What happens next depends on how robust your cruise control is. If your cruise control is young and healthy perhaps very little happens; your car may slow down or speed up a bit. But if your cruise control is in poor condition the attack might disrupt the entire speed control system; your car may brake suddenly or speed out of control and crash. Feedback control systems (natural or man-made) are designed to keep dynamic systems in control, but under certain situations can drive the system completely out of control. The RAS is composed of two feedback loops: the ACE loop provides amplification, increasing pro-inflammatory cytokines and blood pressure; the ACE2 loop provides fine control and mitigates the vasoconstrictive, pro-inflammatory, and thrombotic actions of the ACE loop. Usually, there is balance, but in the setting of COVID-19, underlying deficiencies of zinc and ACE2 can lead to an imbalance. Exacerbated by the severe downregulation of ACE2 seen with viral entry, a "tipping point" is reached with loss of control of the RAS system resulting in increased angiotensin II (Ang II) causing downstream vasoconstriction, inflammation, and thromboses. These, in turn, lead to complications often seen in "severe COVID-19" such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or cytokine storm, often seen in high-risk patients in the second week of illness. This model suggests that supplemental zinc could replenish zinc in ACE2, stabilize the ACE2 axis, and prevent disruption of the RAS. This would prevent the vasoconstrictive, inflammatory, and thrombotic actions of Ang II, thus preventing the severe COVID-19 complications which cause the high morbidity and mortality seen in high-risk patients with underlying zinc deficiency. Zinc supplements are available, easy to use, and relatively safe. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm safety and efficacy of zinc supplementation to decrease severity of and morality from COVID-19 in high-risk patients. Since replenishment of zinc and active ACE2 in patients in whom these are deficient may take weeks, supplementation in high-risk populations prior to COVID infection may be required. Such supplementation should not replace vaccination but may be useful in populations for whom vaccination is not available or for populations exposed to viral variants to which available vaccines have insufficient coverage.

TORO: ninety-six-week virologic and immunologic response and safety evaluation of enfuvirtide with an optimized background of antiretrovirals.

The additional 48-week optional treatment extension of the T-20 versus Optimized Regimen Only (TORO) studies evaluated long-term safety and efficacy of enfuvirtide (ENF) through week 96 in patients receiving ENF plus optimized background (OB) and patients switching to ENF plus OB from OB alone. Patient randomization was 2:1 to ENF plus OB (n = 663) and OB (n = 334), of which 89.7% and 89.8% were male, 89.3% and 88.6% were Caucasian, and median age was 41 and 42 years, respectively. HIV risk factors were comparable between the ENF plus OB and OB groups with the major factors being 65.2% versus 66.2% homosexual contact, 17.8% versus 19.8% heterosexual contact, 4.1% versus 4.8% bisexual contact, respectively, and 6.9% injection drug use in both groups. OB patients were allowed to switch to ENF plus OB at virologic failure before week 48 and required to switch at week 48 to continue in the study (n = 230). Efficacy and safety assessments were conducted for each group. At week 96, 55% of ENF plus OB subjects completed the study and 26.5% achieved a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter (17.5% achieved less than 50 copies per milliliter). Viral load and CD4 mean change from baseline was -2.1 and -1.1 log(10) HIV-1-RNA copies per milliliter and +166 and +116 CD4 cells/mm(3) for ENF plus OB and switch patients, respectively. No new ENF-related safety issues emerged in weeks 48-96. Injection site reactions led to discontinuation in 7% and 10% of ENF plus OB and switch patients, respectively. In conclusion, these data demonstrate durable efficacy and safety of ENF over 96 weeks and that early use of ENF in combination with other agents for the treatment of antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected subjects is beneficial.

Viral decay dynamics in HIV-infected patients receiving ritonavir-boosted saquinavir and efavirenz with or without enfuvirtide: a randomized, controlled trial (HIV-NAT 012).

The availability of enfuvirtide enables assessment of whether human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) decay can be enhanced by targeting reverse transcriptase, protease, and fusion. We performed a 12-week study of 22 patients randomized to receive ritonavir-boosted saquinavir and efavirenz with (the 3-target arm) or without (the 2-target arm) enfuvirtide. We observed no difference in the mean+/-SD elimination-rate constant for overall decay (0.142+/-0.040 per day and 0.128 +/- 0.033 per day in the 2- and 3-target arms, respectively; P>.1) or for modeled first-phase decay rate (-0.62+/-0.34 per day and -0.51+/-0.16 per day; P>.1). Antiretroviral therapy that inhibits HIV reverse transcriptase and protease exerts potent antiviral effects that might not be augmented by the addition of an HIV fusion inhibitor.

Durable efficacy of enfuvirtide over 48 weeks in heavily treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in the T-20 versus optimized background regimen only 1 and 2 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The T-20 Versus Optimized Background Regimen Only (TORO) 1 and TORO 2 clinical trials are open-label, controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 studies comparing enfuvirtide plus an optimized background (OB) of antiretrovirals (n = 661) with OB alone (n = 334) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: The primary objective at week 48 was to investigate durability of efficacy, as measured by the percentage of patients maintaining their week 24 response or improving. Efficacy analyses used the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 73.7% of patients randomized to the enfuvirtide group remained on treatment through week 48 versus 21.3% originally randomized to the control group. At week 48, a higher proportion of week 24 responders maintained their response or were new responders in the enfuvirtide group than in the control group in each responder category: HIV-1 RNA level > or =1.0 log(10) change from baseline, <400 copies/mL and <50 copies/mL (37.4%, 30.4%, and 18.3% in the enfuvirtide group vs. 17.1%, 12.0%, and 7.8% in the control group, respectively; P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). CD4 cell count increases from baseline were twice as great in the enfuvirtide group as in the control group. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate durable efficacy of enfuvirtide plus OB over 48 weeks.

Safety of enfuvirtide in combination with an optimized background of antiretrovirals in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected adults over 48 weeks.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral tolerability is a critical factor contributing to treatment outcome. The T-20 Versus Optimized Background Regimen Only (TORO) studies assessed the safety and efficacy of enfuvirtide in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: A total of 997 patients were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to an optimized background antiretroviral regimen plus enfuvirtide (n = 663) or an optimized background regimen alone (control group; n = 334). Control patients could switch to enfuvirtide on virologic failure. RESULTS: In total, 26.5% of patients randomized to enfuvirtide and 36.6% to the control group discontinued study treatment before week 48; the percentage of patients withdrawn for safety reasons (including adverse events [AEs], deaths, and laboratory abnormalities) was 14.0% in the enfuvirtide group and 11.6% in the control group. Injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred in 98% of enfuvirtide patients and led to treatment discontinuation in 4.4%. Treatment-related (defined as possibly, probably, or remotely) AE rates per 100 patient-years were lower with enfuvirtide (96.2) than in the control group (149.9); diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue, the most frequently reported AEs, were significantly less frequent with enfuvirtide than in the control group. Pneumonia was significantly more frequent in patients treated with enfuvirtide (6.7 vs. 0.6 events per 100 patient-years), although the incidence was within expected ranges for this population. Lymphadenopathy was also higher in enfuvirtide-treated patients (7.1 vs. 1.2 events per 100 patient-years) for control patients. CONCLUSION: The addition of enfuvirtide to an optimized background regimen does not exacerbate AEs commonly associated with antiretrovirals. ISRs limited treatment in <5% of patients.

Characterization of determinants of genotypic and phenotypic resistance to enfuvirtide in baseline and on-treatment HIV-1 isolates.

BACKGROUND: Enfuvirtide (ENF) is the first of a novel class of drugs that block HIV gp41-mediated viral fusion to host cells. Viruses with mutations at positions 36-38 in HIV-1 gp41 and/or reduced susceptibility to ENF have been selected both in vitro and in vivo. METHODS: An analysis of baseline and on-treatment ENF susceptibility in virus samples from Phase II clinical trial patients treated with ENF as functional monotherapy for 28 days (TRI-003) or in combination with oral antiretrovirals for >/= 48 weeks (T20-205, T20-206 and T20-208). Population sequencing identified amino acid (aa) substitutions at positions 36-45 of gp41 in plasma HIV-1. ENF susceptibility of virus isolates was tested in the cMAGI assay and viral DNA was sequenced for selected isolates. RESULTS: HIV-1 gp41 aa 36-45 were highly conserved in virus from ENF-naive patients, except for a 15% incidence of N42S which did not reduce sensitivity to ENF. Virus from patients experiencing viral load rebound exhibited reduced susceptibility to ENF and substitutions in gp41 aa 36-45. The most common substitutions observed on treatment were at positions 36, 38, 40, 42 and 43. On-treatment changes in the phenotypic susceptibility of virus isolates to ENF were generally associated with genotypic changes in aa 36-45. There was a relatively lower incidence of ENF resistance in patients with baseline sensitivity to more oral antiretrovirals in comparison to patients sensitive to fewer antiretrovirals. CONCLUSIONS: These data identify the importance of HIV-1 gp41 aa 36-45 in the emergence of resistance to ENF.