Antimicrobial for 7 or 14 Days for Febrile Urinary Tract Infection in Men: A Multicenter Noninferiority Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antimicrobial therapy for urinary tract infections (UTIs) in men remains controversial. METHODS: To compare 7 days to 14 days of total antibiotic treatment for febrile UTIs in men, this multicenter randomized, double-blind. placebo-controlled noninferiority trial enrolled 282 men from 27 centers in France. Men were eligible if they had a febrile UTI and urine culture showing a single uropathogen. Participants were treated with ofloxacin or a third-generation cephalosporin at day 1, then randomized at day 3-4 to either continue ofloxacin for 14 days total treatment, or for 7 days followed by placebo until day 14. The primary endpoint was treatment success, defined as a negative urine culture and the absence of fever and of subsequent antibiotic treatment between the end of treatment and 6 weeks after day 1. Secondary endpoints included recurrent UTI within weeks 6 and 12 after day 1, rectal carriage of antimicrobial-resistant Enterobacterales, and drug-related events. RESULTS: Two hundred forty participants were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic therapy for 7 days (115 participants) or 14 days (125 participants). In the intention-to-treat analysis, treatment success occurred in 64 participants (55.7%) in the 7-day group and in 97 participants (77.6%) in the 14-day group (risk difference, -21.9 [95% confidence interval, -33.3 to -10.1]), demonstrating inferiority. Adverse events during antibiotic therapy were reported in 4 participants in the 7-day arm and 7 in the 14-day arm. Rectal carriage of resistant Enterobacterales did not differ between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A treatment with ofloxacin for 7 days was inferior to 14 days for febrile UTI in men and should therefore not be recommended. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02424461; Eudra-CT: 2013-001647-32.

Maraviroc/raltegravir simplification strategy following 6 months of quadruple therapy with tenofovir/emtricitabine/maraviroc/raltegravir in treatment-naive HIV patients.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the virological efficacy of a 6 month maraviroc/raltegravir simplification strategy following 6 months of quadruple therapy combining tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine with maraviroc/raltegravir. METHODS: HIV-1-infected naive patients were enrolled in an open label, single-arm, Phase 2 trial. All patients received maraviroc 300 mg twice daily, raltegravir 400 mg twice daily and tenofovir/emtricitabine for 24 weeks. Patients with stable HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL stopped tenofovir/emtricitabine at week (W) 24 and pursued maraviroc/raltegravir until W48. The primary endpoint was the virological response defined by HIV-RNA <50 copies/mL at W48. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analysed. Patients were mostly male (94%), Caucasians (91%), MSM (82%); their median age was 42 years. At baseline, median CD4 cell count was 453 cells/mm3 and HIV-RNA was 4.3 log copies/mL. All patients had CCR5-tropic viruses by genotropism and phenotropism assays. All but one patient had an HIV-RNA < 50 copies/mL at W24 and entered the simplification phase. Virological success was maintained at W48 in 88% (90% CI 79%-97%) of patients. N155H mutation was detected at failure in one patient. No tropism switch was observed. Raltegravir and maraviroc plasma exposure were satisfactory in 92% and 79% of 41 samples from 21 patients. Five severe adverse events (SAEs) were observed up to W48; none was related to the study drugs. Four patients presented grade 3 AEs; none was related to the study. No grade 4 AE was observed. No patient died. CONCLUSIONS: Maraviroc/raltegravir maintenance therapy following a 6 month induction phase with maraviroc/raltegravir/tenofovir/emtricitabine was well tolerated and maintained virological efficacy in these carefully selected patients.

Efficacy and safety of a switch to rilpivirine-based regimens in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Rilpivirine (RPV) is a second-generation once-daily non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) which has shown non-inferior antiviral activity to efavirenz in treatment-naive patients. Data in treatment-experienced patients are more limited. We wished to assess the efficacy and safety of a switch to RPV-based regimens in well-suppressed treatment-experienced patients. METHODS: Between September 2012 and June 2013, all antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml, and switching to an RPV-based regimen, were analysed in this retrospective observational monocentric cohort study. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with virological success defined as a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml at 12 months using the FDA snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 281 participants were studied and 97% received a combination of RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. At month 12, the rate of virological success was 59% and increased to 72% using available data beyond month 12. Sixteen (6%) patients experienced virological failure, which was associated with the presence of the M184V/I resistance mutation in prior genotypes (P=0.02) and the use of a non-NNRTI as third agent before the switch (P=0.03). RPV-based regimens were overall well tolerated and only 23 (8%) patients discontinued ART because of adverse events, mostly neuropsychiatric adverse events. Switching to RPV was associated with significant but modest improvement of the lipid profile. CONCLUSIONS: In patients fully suppressed on ART, a switch to an RPV-based regimen should only be considered in the absence of prior virological failure or resistance mutations to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and NNRTIs to avoid virological failures.

La prévention pré-exposition au VIH-1 par les antirétroviraux, la PrEP.

Due to the lack of vaccine, the HIV epidemic is still uncontrolled. Use of antiretrovirals (ARV) for prevention, successfully implemented to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV, is a new avenue to control the epidemic. One approach is to treat all patients diagnosed with HIV, and suppress viremia and transmission to their partner. Another strategy is the use of ARV as a pre-exposition prophylaxis (PrEP) in HIV-negative at risk individuals. Oral tenofovir (TDF) ± emtricitabine (FTC) is the elected drug regimen for PrEP, given its safety, its long intracellular half-life and a high diffusion into mucosal entry sites. PrEP was investigated in randomized trials of oral or local gel given daily or at time of sexual intercourse in high-risk populations. PrEP efficacy is strongly correlated to adherence and concentrations of ARV. Adverse events have been infrequent. Selection of FTC-resistant strains has been mainly reported in undiagnosed HIV-infected participants using PrEP. PrEP is now strongly recommended by WHO in prevention programs for HIV in order to control the epidemic by 2030.

Efficacy and safety of rilpivirine-based regimens in treatment-experienced HIV-1 infected patients: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Rilpivirine (RPV) is a new once-daily, non-nucleoside, reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). In treatment-naïve patients, RPV has shown non-inferior antiviral activity to efavirenz but data in treatment-experienced patients are more limited. We assessed the efficacy and safety of RPV in treatment-experienced patients switching to a RPV-based regimen. METHODS: Between September 2012 and June 2013, all antiretroviral therapy (ART) experienced HIV-1 infected patients with a plasma HIV-RNA level <50 cp/mL, and switching to a RPV-based regimen, were enrolled in this prospective monocentric cohort study. Clinical and laboratory data were collected every 3 months to assess safety and efficacy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with virologic success (HIV-RNA load <50 cp/mL) at 12 months using the FDA snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 281 patients (76% male, median age: 47 years, 56% MSM) were enrolled in this study. Median lymphocyte CD4 count at baseline was 640/mm(3). Patients have received ART for a median of 7 years and viral replication was fully suppressed for a median of 3 years. Before the switch, 39% patients were treated with NNRTI, 52% with protease inhibitor and 7% with integrase inhibitor-based regimens. Reasons for switch were simplification (176 cases), adverse events (AEs) (93 cases) and others (12 cases). At month 12 (database frozen on June 2014) in the snapshot analysis, 56% of patients met virologic success, 5% experienced virologic failure (n=14) and 39% had no data in the window period. In the LOCF analysis (using data from the previous available visit before month 12), 89% patients were suppressed, 5% had virologic failure and 6% had no data. Genotypic resistance analysis was performed in 7/14 patients at the time of virologic failure (3 of whom had previous NRTI/NNRTI resistance-associated mutations (RAMs)), and new NNRTI and NRTI RAMs emerged in 4 patients. RPV-based regimen was generally well tolerated and only 6% of patients discontinued treatment for AEs. Grade 2-4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 39 patients: 6 had rashes, 13 neuropsychiatric symptoms, 10 GI symptoms, 10 biological abnormalities. At month 12, significant changes from baseline were seen for total and LDL cholesterol (-0.5 and -0.28 mmol/L, respectively, p<0.05 for both), and plasma creatinine (+5.8 µmol/L, p<10-4). CONCLUSIONS: In patients fully suppressed on ART, switching to a RPV-based regimen in clinical practice was well tolerated and associated with few virologic failures.

Challenges and opportunities for oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in the prevention of HIV infection: where are we in Europe?

Following US Food and Drugs Administration approval in July 2012 of daily oral tenofovir and emtricitabine for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV infection in high-risk individuals in the USA, there has been much controversy about the implementation of this PrEP regimen in other countries throughout the world, and in Europe in particular. In this review, we focus on the challenges and opportunities of a daily oral PrEP regimen to curb the rising incidence of HIV infection in high-risk groups, and particularly in men who have sex with men. A number of issues would need to be addressed before PrEP could be implemented, including assessing the real effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of daily PrEP, the sustainability of daily adherence, the risk of selecting resistance, the long-term safety, and the risk of change in sexual behavior that might offset the benefit of PrEP. Alternatives to a daily oral PrEP regimen are being explored.

[Tuberculosis treatment in adults]. / Traitement de la tuberculose maladie de l'adulte.

The quadritherapy by isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide and ethambutol, is still the gold standard for the treatment of tuberculosis disease. Except for severe presentations, the treatment remains based on a 6 months therapy with a 2 months induction phase. During the first health care contact, looking for an immunosupression and risk factors of hepatotoxicity and multiresistant strains is necessary. A close supervision by medical staff is recommended during all treatment duration. Rifampicin expose to drug interactions. In France, once the diagnosis is made, the referent practitioner and the biologist must notify the case to the local Health Authorities which is in charge of finding and treat, if needed, the newly infected case contacts. In order to prevent transmission, a respiratory isolation must be performed for smear positive patients. In case of renal or hepatic previous impairment, a multidisciplinary and closely supervision is recommended. Treatment of extensively and multi drug resistant (MDR) tuberculosis is based on combination of 2nd line drugs, and a prolonged treatment is advised. Expert supervision is necessary for case management.