Remdesivir is Associated with Reduced Mortality in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 Not Requiring Supplemental Oxygen.

Background: Remdesivir has demonstrated benefit in some hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on supplemental oxygen and in nonhospitalized patients breathing room air. The durability of this benefit across time periods with different circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants of concern (VOC) is unknown. This comparative effectiveness study in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and not receiving supplemental oxygen at admission compared those starting remdesivir treatment in the first 2 days of admission with those receiving no remdesivir during their hospitalization across different VOC periods. Method: Using a large, multicenter US hospital database, in-hospital mortality rates were compared among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 but not requiring supplemental oxygen at admission between December 2020 and April 2022. Patients receiving remdesivir at hospital admission were matched 1:1 to those not receiving remdesivir during hospitalization, using propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess 14- and 28-day in-hospital mortality rates or discharge to hospice. Results: Among the 121 336 eligible patients, 58 188 remdesivir-treated patients were matched to 17 574 unique patients not receiving remdesivir. Overall, 5.4% of remdesivir-treated and 7.3% in the non-remdesivir group died within 14 days, and 8.0% and 9.8%, respectively, died within 28 days. Remdesivir treatment was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the in-hospital mortality rate compared with non-remdesivir treatment (14-day and 28-day adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval], 0.75 [0.68-0.83] and 0.83 [0.76-0.90], respectively). This significant mortality benefit endured across the different VOC periods. Conclusions: Remdesivir initiation in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and not requiring supplemental oxygen at admission was associated with a significantly reduced in-hospital mortality rate. These findings highlight a potential survival benefit when clinicians initiated remdesivir on admission across the dominant variant eras of the evolving pandemic.

Remdesivir for Treatment of COVID-19 Requiring Oxygen Support: A Cross-Study Comparison from Two Large, Open-Label Studies.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir, an RNA-polymerase prodrug inhibitor approved for treatment of COVID-19, shortens recovery time and improves clinical outcomes. This prespecified analysis compared remdesivir plus standard-of-care (SOC) with SOC alone in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring oxygen support in the early stage of the pandemic. METHODS: Data for 10-day remdesivir treatment plus SOC from the extension phase of an open-label study (NCT04292899) were compared with real-world, retrospective data on SOC alone (EUPAS34303). Both studies included patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 up to 30 May 2020, with oxygen saturation ≤94%, on room air or supplemental oxygen (all forms), and with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score weighting was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics across treatment groups. The primary endpoint was time to all-cause mortality or end of study (day 28). Time-to-discharge, with a 10-day landmark to account for duration of remdesivir treatment, was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: 1974 patients treated with remdesivir plus SOC, and 1426 with SOC alone, were included after weighting. Remdesivir significantly reduced mortality versus SOC (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.54). This association was observed at each oxygen support level, with the lowest HR for patients on low-flow oxygen. Remdesivir significantly increased the likelihood of discharge at day 28 versus SOC in the 10-day landmark analysis (HR: 1.64; 95% confidence interval: 1.43-1.87). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir plus early-2020 SOC was associated with a 54% lower mortality risk and shorter hospital stays compared with SOC alone in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring oxygen support. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

Prevalence and Factors Associated With Patient-Clinician Discordance Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating Advanced Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and identify associated factors for patient-clinician discordance of disease assessment at biologic or Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) initiation and over 12 months following initiation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from a US RA registry. METHODS: Analyses included CorEvitas RA Registry patients who initiated their first biologic or JAKi on or after February 1, 2015, and had 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Positive discordance was defined as patient global assessment (visual analog scale [VAS-100]) minus physician's global assessment (VAS-100) equal to 30 points or more. Persistent discordance was defined as positive discordance at all three visits. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for positive discordance at initiation and for persistent discordance. RESULTS: Among 2227 first-time biologic/JAKi-initiating patients, 613 had both follow-up visits available and were included in initiation visit analyses, and of these, 163 had positive discordance at initiation and were included in persistent discordance analyses. About 30% of all patients had positive discordance at any visit, and one third of these (10% total) were persistent at all three visits. Multivariable analyses revealed that worse scores on the Clinical Disease Activity Index, greater patient-reported pain and fatigue, and greater functional impairment were associated with positive discordance at the time of therapy initiation. Being disabled versus working full-time and being female were associated with higher odds and having Medicare versus no insurance was associated with lower odds of having persistent positive discordance. CONCLUSION: Results suggest positive discordance is common among real-world patients with RA initiating their first biologic or JAKi. The identified risk factors associated with patient-clinician discordance will help clinicians foster a more patient-centric discussion in treatment decisions.

HIV-1 envelope diversity and sensitivity to broadly neutralizing antibodies across stages of acute HIV-1 infection.

We studied the relationship between viral diversity and susceptibility to broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs) in longitudinal plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 89 people with HIV who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) during acute and early HIV-1 infection (AEHI). HIV-1 diversity and predicted bNAb susceptibility were comparable across AEHI. Diversity evolution was not observed during ART, suggesting (pro)viruses at initiation or during treatment may identify individuals with susceptible virus for bNAb interventional trials.

Twelve-month effectiveness and safety of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in people with HIV: Real-world insights from BICSTaR cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence is an essential component of evidence-based medicine. The aim of the BICSTaR (BICtegravir Single Tablet Regimen) study is to assess effectiveness and safety of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) in antiretroviral treatment-naïve (TN) and treatment-experienced (TE) people with HIV. METHODS: BICSTaR is a prospective, observational cohort study. Participants (≥18 years) are being followed for 24 months. A pooled analysis is presented at 12 months, with the primary endpoint of effectiveness (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) and secondary endpoints of safety and tolerability (as per protocol). An exploration of patient-reported outcome measures using standardized questionnaires is included. RESULTS: Between June 2018 and May 2021, 1552 people with HIV were enrolled across 12 countries. The analysed population comprised 1509 individuals (279 TN, 1230 TE); most were white (76%), male (84%) and had one or more comorbid conditions (68%). Median age was 47 years. After 12 months of B/F/TAF treatment, HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies/mL in 94% (221/236) of TN participants and 97% (977/1008) of TE participants. Median CD4 cell count increased by 214 cells/µL (p < 0.001) in TN participants and 13 cells/µL (p = 0.014) in TE participants; median CD4/CD8 ratios increased by 0.30 and 0.03, respectively (both p < 0.001). Persistence was high at 12 months (TN, 97%; TE, 95%). No resistance to B/F/TAF emerged. Study drug-related adverse events occurred in 13% of participants through 12 months, leading to B/F/TAF discontinuation in 6%. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide robust real-world evidence to support the broad use of B/F/TAF in both TN and TE people with HIV.

Clinical outcomes by supplemental oxygen use in remdesivir-treated, hospitalised adults with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials show different effects of remdesivir on clinical outcomes relative to COVID-19 severity at hospital admission; in Europe, there are few real-world data. METHODS: A multicentre, multinational retrospective cohort study in adult patients hospitalised with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 was conducted to understand remdesivir clinical use in different countries and to describe outcomes for patients receiving remdesivir stratified by oxygen use. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality at day 28 and hospitalisation duration. Patients were categorised by baseline disease severity: no supplemental oxygen (NSO); low flow oxygen ≤ 6 litres (l)/minute (LFO); high flow oxygen > 6 l/minute (HFO). RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-eight (448) patients (72 [16.1%] HFO; 295 [65.8%] LFO; 81 (18.1%] NSO) were included; median age was 65 years and 64% were male. Mortality was higher in patients on HFO (rate 23.6%) compared to LFO (10.2%; p = 0.001) or NSO (6.2%; p = 0.002). Duration of hospitalisation was longer in patients on HFO (13 days) compared to LFO (9 days; p = 0.003) and NSO (9 days; p = 0.021). Patients who initiated remdesivir ≥ 2 days compared to within a day of hospitalisation had a 4.2 times higher risk of death, irrespective of age, sex, comorbidities, and oxygen support at baseline. Requirement for mechanical ventilation/ECMO and readmission within 28 days of discharge was similar across groups. Remdesivir use and outcomes differed by country. CONCLUSIONS: A higher mortality rate and duration of hospitalisation was seen in remdesivir-treated COVID-19 patients on HFO compared to LFO and NSO. Initiation of remdesivir upon admission as opposed to delayed initiation has a mortality benefit. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04847622.

Prevalence of and risk factors for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection in entrants and residents of an Ethiopian prison.

BACKGROUND: Prisoners generally have a higher prevalence of HIV infection compared to the general population from which they come. Whether this higher prevalence reflects a higher HIV prevalence in those entering prisons or intramural transmission of HIV within prisons or both is unclear. Any of these possibilities would increase the prevalence found in resident prisoners above that in the general population. Moreover, comparisons of HIV prevalence in entrants and residents and in men and women in African prisons are not well documented. The purpose of this study was to estimate and compare the prevalence and risk factors for HIV infection amongst both male as well as female and entrant and resident prisoners in a large Ethiopian Federal Prison. METHODS: We studied consenting prisoners cross-sectionally from August 2014 through November 2016. Prison entrants were screened continuously for HIV infection and its associated risk factors and residents were screened in two waves one year apart. HIV was diagnosed at the prison hospital laboratory based on the Ethiopian national HIV rapid antibody testing protocol. An external, internationally-accredited reference laboratory confirmed results. Agreement of results between the laboratories were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 10,778 participants were screened for HIV. Most participants were young (median age of 26 years, IQR: 21-33), male (84%), single (61%), literate (89%), and urban residents (91%) without prior incarceration (96%). Prevalence of HIV was 3.4% overall. Rates of HIV (p = 0.80) were similar in residents and entrants in wave 1 and in entrants in both waves, but were 1.9-fold higher (5.4% vs 2.8%) in residents than entrants in wave 2 (both p<0.001). At entrance to the prison women were more likely to be HIV+ than men (5.5% in women vs 2.5% in men, p< 0.001). In contrast resident women were less likely to be HIV+, but this difference was not statistically significant (3.2% in women vs 4.3% in men, p = 0.125). Other risk factors associated with HIV infection were increasing age (p<0.001), female gender (p<0.001), marital status (never vs other categories, p = 0.016), smaller number of rooms in their houses pre-imprisonment (p = 0.031), TB diagnosis ever (p<0.001), number of lifetime sex partners (especially having 2-10, p<0.001), and genital ulcer (p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of HIV in the residents at this large, central Ethiopian prison was higher than that estimated for the general population and lower than in many other studies from other smaller Ethiopian prisons. A higher prevalence in residents than in entrants were found only in our second wave of screening after one year of continuous screening and treatment, possibly representing increased willingness of residents at increased risk of HIV to participate in the second wave. Thus, this findings did not clearly support intramural transmission of HIV or the effectiveness of screening to reduce prevalence. Finally, the higher HIV prevalence in women than men requires that they be similarly screened and treated for HIV infection.

Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in older individuals with HIV: Results of a 96-week, phase 3b, open-label, switch trial in virologically suppressed people ≥65 years of age.

OBJECTIVES: Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) is an effective treatment for HIV-1 infection; however, clinical trial data in older people living with HIV (PLWH) are lacking. The primary 24-week and secondary 48-week analyses of study GS-US-380-4449 (NCT03405935), which assessed the efficacy and safety of switching to B/F/TAF in older PLWH, have been published. Here we report the results of the final 96-week analyses from the study. METHODS: In this 96-week, phase 3b, open-label, single-arm trial, virologically suppressed PLWH aged ≥65 years switched from elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide or a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based regimen to B/F/TAF. Viral suppression, resistance, immune response, safety, tolerability and adherence were evaluated through week 96. RESULTS: Of 90 participants screened, 86 were enrolled and switched to B/F/TAF. No participants had HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/ml (by FDA Snapshot algorithm) at weeks 72 or 96; virologic suppression rates were 94.2% (81/86; 95% CI 87.0-98.1) and 74.4% (64/86; 95% CI 63.9-83.2), respectively. No treatment-emergent resistance was observed, and CD4 counts remained stable. There were no study drug-related serious adverse events. Three participants experienced drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events that led to premature drug discontinuation. There were no clinically relevant changes from baseline to week 96 in fasting lipid parameters, and the median change in body weight at week 96 was 0.0 kg (IQR -2.3, 2.0). Median self-reported adherence was 100% (IQR 100-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Switching to B/F/TAF is an effective long-term option for virologically suppressed adults ≥65 years of age, with favourable safety and tolerability profiles in this population.

Clinical Management of Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to characterize hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and describe their real-world treatment patterns and outcomes over time. METHODS: Adult patients hospitalized on May 1, 2020-December 31, 2020 with a discharge diagnosis of COVID-19 were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. Patient and hospital characteristics, treatments, baseline severity based on oxygen support, length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and mortality were examined. RESULTS: The study included 295657 patients (847 hospitals), with median age of 66 (interquartile range, 54-77) years. Among each set of demographic comparators, the majority were male, white, and over 65. Approximately 85% had no supplemental oxygen charges (NSOc) or low-flow oxygen (LFO) at baseline, whereas 75% received no more than NSOc or LFO as maximal oxygen support at any time during hospitalization. Remdesivir (RDV) and corticosteroid treatment utilization increased over time. By December, 50% were receiving RDV and 80% were receiving corticosteroids. A higher proportion initiated COVID-19 treatments within 2 days of hospitalization in December versus May (RDV, 87% vs 40%; corticosteroids, 93% vs 62%; convalescent plasma, 68% vs 26%). There was a shift toward initiating RDV in patients on NSOc or LFO (68.0% [May] vs 83.1% [December]). Median LOS decreased over time. Overall mortality was 13.5% and it was highest for severe patients (invasive mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [IMV/ECMO], 53.7%; high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation [HFO/NIV], 32.2%; LFO, 11.7%; NSOc, 7.3%). The ICU use decreased, whereas mortality decreased for NSOc and LFO. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical management of COVID-19 is rapidly evolving. This large observational study found that use of evidence-based treatments increased from May to December 2020, whereas improvement in outcomes occurred over this time-period.

Remdesivir Treatment in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Comparative Analysis of In-hospital All-cause Mortality in a Large Multicenter Observational Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir (RDV) improved clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in randomized trials, but data from clinical practice are limited. METHODS: We examined survival outcomes for US patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between August and November 2020 and treated with RDV within 2 days of hospitalization vs those not receiving RDV during their hospitalization using the Premier Healthcare Database. Preferential within-hospital propensity score matching with replacement was used. Additionally, patients were also matched on baseline oxygenation level (no supplemental oxygen charges [NSO], low-flow oxygen [LFO], high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation [HFO/NIV], and invasive mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [IMV/ECMO]) and 2-month admission window and excluded if discharged within 3 days of admission (to exclude anticipated discharges/transfers within 72 hours, consistent with the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial [ACTT-1] study). Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess time to 14-/28-day mortality overall and for patients on NSO, LFO, HFO/NIV, and IMV/ECMO. RESULTS: A total of 28855 RDV patients were matched to 16687 unique non-RDV patients. Overall, 10.6% and 15.4% RDV patients died within 14 and 28 days, respectively, compared with 15.4% and 19.1% non-RDV patients. Overall, RDV was associated with a reduction in mortality at 14 days (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.76 [0.70-0.83]) and 28 days (0.89 [0.82-0.96]). This mortality benefit was also seen for NSO, LFO, and IMV/ECMO at 14 days (NSO: 0.69 [0.57-0.83], LFO: 0.68 [0.80-0.77], IMV/ECMO: 0.70 [0.58-0.84]) and 28 days (NSO: 0.80 [0.68-0.94], LFO: 0.77 [0.68-0.86], IMV/ECMO: 0.81 [0.69-0.94]). Additionally, HFO/NIV RDV group had a lower risk of mortality at 14 days (0.81 [0.70-0.93]) but no statistical significance at 28 days. CONCLUSIONS: RDV initiated upon hospital admission was associated with improved survival among patients with COVID-19. Our findings complement ACTT-1 and support RDV as a foundational treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Pilot comparison of the ease of swallowing of single tablet antiretroviral regimens.

Daily adherence to lifelong antiretroviral therapy (ART) is required to achieve long term treatment success. However, patient preferences for ART tablet size have not been well studied. Our study assessed factors associated with the ease of swallowing (EoS) and tolerability of two placebo tablets representing and matching B/F/TAF (BPT) and DTG/ABC/3TC (DPT). Fifty ART-naïve patients were randomized into a two-period cross-over study. Likert scale (1-5) questionnaires were administered to assess patient factors influencing the ease of swallowing, adherence, home medications, medication preferences and perceptions. Comparisons were done using Student t-tests and ordinal regression. Participants were 64% female, 61% white, mean age 43 years, and taking a mean (median) of 4(1) pills/day. BPT was reported to be easier than DPT with ease of swallowability 1.76 vs. 2.42 (p < 0.001) (1 = very easy). DPT tablet was correctly perceived as larger than BPT (p < 0.001); with both tablets perceived as smaller than actual size (p < 0.001). EoS of either tablet was positively associated with the EoS of the largest home tablet medication (p = 0.021, p = 0.03). Patient's perceptions of EoS can affect their medication adherence, especially in HIV, and should be considered in treatment regimens.

Remdesivir Versus Standard-of-Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection: An Analysis of 28-Day Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been shown to shorten time to recovery and improve clinical outcomes in randomized trials. METHODS: This was the final day 28 comparative analysis of data from a phase 3, randomized, open-label study comparing 2 remdesivir regimens (5 vs 10 days, combined for this analysis [remdesivir cohort]) and a real-world retrospective longitudinal cohort study of patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (nonremdesivir cohort). Eligible patients, aged ≥18 years, had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score matching (up to 1:10 ratio) was used to ensure comparable populations. We assessed day 14 clinical recovery (determined using a 7-point ordinal scale) and day 28 all-cause mortality (coprimary endpoints). RESULTS: A total of 368 (remdesivir) and 1399 (nonremdesivir) patients were included in the matched analysis. The day 14 clinical recovery rate was significantly higher among the remdesivir versus the nonremdesivir cohort (65.2% vs 57.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.90; P = 0.002). The day 28 mortality rate was significantly lower in the remdesivir cohort versus the nonremdesivir cohort (12.0% vs 16.2%; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-.95; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was associated with significantly higher rates of day 14 clinical recovery, and lower day 28 mortality, compared with standard-of-care treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These data, taken together, support the use of remdesivir to improve clinical recovery and decrease mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Results from a Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Demonstration Project for At-risk Cisgender Women in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) is effective for reducing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) acquisition among cisgender women. We report results from the first US observational open-label demonstration project of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among at-risk cisgender women. METHODS: Adherence Enhancement Guided by Individualized Texting and Drug Levels was a 48-week, single-arm, open-label demonstration study of daily oral TDF/FTC in cisgender women ≥18 years old at risk for HIV. Adherence was supported using 2-way text messaging and titrated adherence counseling based on rapid-turnaround tenofovir diphosphate concentrations from dried blood spots. Study visits occurred at baseline, weeks 4 and 12, and quarterly through week 48. Outcomes included TDF/FTC adherence, retention, and persistence. RESULTS: From June 2016 to October 2018, 136 cisgender women enrolled (mean age, 40 years (standard deviation, 11); 38% non-Hispanic Black and 19% Latina). At 48 weeks, 84 (62%) participants were retained and 62 (46%) remained on PrEP. More than one-third (12/31) of those on study but off PrEP throughout the study discontinued TDF/FTC because of side effects, and 1 adverse event led to study discontinuation. Of 120 participants with drug concentrations measured, 67 (56%) had at least 1 concentration consistent with 6 doses/week; 22 (18%) had consistent ≥6 doses/week across all study visits attended. There were no incident HIV infections and 4 incident bacterial sexually transmitted infections. CONCLUSION: Adequate PrEP adherence for protective drug concentrations was not achieved for most study participants. More work needs to be done to fully explicate the reasons for nonadherence and low retention in cisgender women.

Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in Virologically Suppressed People with HIV Aged ≥ 65 Years: Week 48 Results of a Phase 3b, Open-Label Trial.

INTRODUCTION: We report the 48-week results of an ongoing study to assess the efficacy and safety of switching older people with HIV to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF). METHODS: This was a 96-week, phase 3b, open-label, single-arm study (GS-US-380-4449; NCT03405935). Virologically suppressed individuals aged ≥ 65 years receiving elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide or a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based regimen were switched to B/F/TAF. Primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/ml at week 24. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants (median age 69 [range 65-80] years; 87% male; 95% white) were enrolled and treated in five European countries. Rates of virologic suppression were 97.7% at week 24 and 90.7% at week 48; none had HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/ml, and 100% had virologic suppression by missing = excluded analysis at both time points. No treatment-emergent resistance was observed. There were no grade 3-4 study drug-related adverse events (AEs) or study drug-related serious AEs or deaths. Three AEs led to premature discontinuation; one (moderate abdominal discomfort) was attributed to the study drug by the investigator. At week 48, median changes from baseline in weight and estimated glomerular filtration rate were + 0.1 kg (interquartile range [IQR] - 1.0, 2.3) and - 6.0 ml/min (IQR - 10.2, 0.0), respectively. There were no clinically relevant changes from baseline to week 48 in fasting lipid parameters. Treatment satisfaction improved, and health-related quality of life was maintained from baseline through week 48. Median adherence to the study drug was 98.6% (IQR 96.0, 100). CONCLUSIONS: Switching to B/F/TAF was effective and well tolerated through 48 weeks in virologically suppressed adults aged ≥ 65 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03405935.

Switching to Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in Adults With HIV and M184V/I Mutation.

BACKGROUND: The ability of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) to maintain virologic suppression in participants with M184V and/or M184I resistance mutations from historical genotypic reports when switching from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based or abacavir (ABC)-based regimen was investigated. SETTING: Phase IIIb, 48-week, open-label, single-arm, multicenter, clinical trial (NCT02616029). METHODS: Virologically suppressed adults with HIV and documented M184V/I on historical genotypic records switched to E/C/F/TAF from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based or ABC-based regimen. The primary end point was HIV-1 RNA of <50 copies per milliliter at week 12 using pure virologic response (PVR). Secondary end points included HIV-1 RNA of <50 copies per milliliter at weeks 24/48 (PVR) and at weeks 12, 24, and 48 (Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), and change in CD4+ count at weeks 12, 24, and 48. RESULTS: M184V alone was reported in 82.8% of 64 participants; 9.4% and 7.8% had M184I and M184V/I, respectively, and 43.8% had archived M184V/I (baseline DNA). All (62/62 with available data, 100%, 95% confidence interval 94.2% to 100%) participants maintained PVR at weeks 12, 24, and 48. By Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, one participant had HIV-1 RNA of ≥50 copies per milliliter (week 12); confirmatory HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies per milliliter. No significant changes were observed in CD4+ cell count. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported by 10 (15.6%) participants. Six (9.4%) and 5 (7.8%) participants had grade 3-4 AEs or serious AEs, respectively (none drug related). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of the resistance mutations M184V/I did not jeopardize the efficacy of switching to E/C/F/TAF in virologically suppressed adults. High rates of virologic suppression were maintained throughout 48 weeks of therapy and treatment was well tolerated.

Pharmacokinetics of tenofovir alafenamide with and without cobicistat in pregnant and postpartum women living with HIV.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 10 mg with cobicistat and 25 mg without boosting in pregnant and postpartum women with HIV and to characterize TAF placental transfer and infant washout pharmacokinetics. DESIGN: Open-label, multicenter phase IV prospective study of TAF pharmacokinetics during pregnancy, postpartum, delivery, and infant washout. METHODS: Pregnant women receiving TAF 10 mg with cobicistat or TAF 25 mg without boosting as part of clinical care had intensive pharmacokinetic assessments performed during the second and third trimesters, and 6-12 weeks postpartum. Maternal and cord blood samples were collected at delivery, and washout pharmacokinetic samples were collected in infants. TAF concentrations were quantified using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. Comparisons between pregnancy and postpartum were made using geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Thirty-one pregnant women receiving TAF 10 mg with cobicistat-boosting and 27 women receiving TAF 25 mg without boosting were enrolled. TAF exposures did not significantly differ between pregnancy and postpartum when administered as 10 mg with cobicistat. Antepartum TAF exposures with the 25 mg dose were 33-43% lower in comparison with postpartum, but comparable with those measured in nonpregnant adults. TAF was below the lower limit of quantitation in 43 of 44 cord blood, 41 of 45 maternal blood at delivery, and all infant washout samples. CONCLUSION: TAF exposures were comparable or higher than those measured in nonpregnant adults during pregnancy and postpartum. These findings provide reassurance on adequate TAF exposures during pregnancy, and support efforts to expand the use of TAF in pregnant women with HIV.

Remdesivir for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Versus a Cohort Receiving Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy of the antiviral agent, remdesivir, versus standard-of-care treatment in adults with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using data from a phase 3 remdesivir trial and a retrospective cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with standard of care. METHODS: GS-US-540-5773 is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing two courses of remdesivir (remdesivir-cohort). GS-US-540-5807 is an ongoing real-world, retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes in patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (non-remdesivir-cohort). Inclusion criteria were similar between studies: patients had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, were hospitalized, had oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, and had pulmonary infiltrates. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the treatment effect of remdesivir versus standard of care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with recovery on day 14, dichotomized from a 7-point clinical status ordinal scale. A key secondary endpoint was mortality. RESULTS: After the inverse probability of treatment weighting procedure, 312 and 818 patients were counted in the remdesivir- and non-remdesivir-cohorts, respectively. At day 14, 74.4% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had recovered versus 59.0% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.03: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-3.08, P < .001). At day 14, 7.6% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had died versus 12.5% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (aOR 0.38, 95% CI: .22-.68, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, by day 14, remdesivir was associated with significantly greater recovery and 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care treatment in patients with severe COVID-19. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

PrEP Nonadherence, White Coat Dosing, and HIV Risk Among a Cohort of MSM.

Among a cohort of men who have sex with men in a pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence trial, syphilis requiring treatment was associated with white coat dosing (increased PrEP adherence immediately preceding study visits) when compared with participants with optimal drug concentrations. The findings highlight the need for identifying and reducing barriers to PrEP adherence.