Efficacy and safety of dolutegravir or darunavir in combination with lamivudine plus either zidovudine or tenofovir for second-line treatment of HIV infection (NADIA): week 96 results from a prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: WHO guidelines recommend dolutegravir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line HIV therapy, with NRTI switching from first-line tenofovir to zidovudine. We aimed to examine whether dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir, the best-in-class protease inhibitor drug, and whether maintaining tenofovir in second-line therapy is non-inferior to switching to zidovudine. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial (NADIA), participants with confirmed HIV first-line treatment failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies per mL) were recruited at seven clinical sites in Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Following a 2 × 2 factorial design and stratified by site and screening HIV-1 RNA concentration, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive a 96-week regimen containing either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (800 mg of darunavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir once daily) in combination with either tenofovir (300 mg once daily) plus lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or zidovudine (300 mg twice daily) plus lamivudine (150 mg twice daily). The NRTI drugs allocated by randomisation were administered orally in fixed-dose combination pills; other drugs were administered orally as separate pills. The previously reported primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Here, we report the main secondary outcome: the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 96 weeks (non-inferiority margin 12%). We analysed this outcome and safety outcomes in the intention-to-treat population, which excluded only those who were randomly assigned in error and withdrawn before receiving trial drugs. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03988452, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between July 30 and Dec 18, 2019, we screened 783 patients and enrolled 465. One participant was randomly assigned in error and immediately withdrawn. The remaining 464 participants were randomly assigned to receive either dolutegravir (n=235) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=229) and to receive lamivudine plus either tenofovir (n=233) or zidovudine (n=231). At week 96, 211 (90%) of 235 participants in the dolutegravir group and 199 (87%) of 229 participants in the darunavir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 2·9, 95% CI -3·0 to 8·7), indicating non-inferiority. Nine (4%) participants (all in the dolutegravir group) developed dolutegravir resistance; no participants developed darunavir resistance (p=0·0023). In the other randomised comparison, 214 (92%) of 233 patients in the tenofovir group and 196 (85%) of 231 patients in the zidovudine group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 7·0, 95% CI 1·2 to 12·8), showing non-inferiority and indicating the superiority of tenofovir (p=0·019). The proportions of participants with any grade 3-4 adverse event were similar between the dolutegravir (26 [11%]) and darunavir (28 [12%]) groups and between the tenofovir (22 [9%]) and zidovudine (32 [14%]) groups. There were no deaths related to study medication. INTERPRETATION: Dolutegravir-based and darunavir-based regimens maintain good viral suppression during 96 weeks; dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir but is at greater risk of resistance in second-line therapy. Tenofovir should be continued in second-line therapy, rather than being switched to zidovudine. FUNDING: Janssen.

Dolutegravir or Darunavir in Combination with Zidovudine or Tenofovir to Treat HIV.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends dolutegravir with two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Evidence is limited for the efficacy of this regimen when NRTIs are predicted to lack activity because of drug resistance, as well as for the recommended switch of an NRTI from tenofovir to zidovudine. METHODS: In a two-by-two factorial, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients for whom first-line therapy was failing (HIV-1 viral load, ≥1000 copies per milliliter) to receive dolutegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir and to receive tenofovir or zidovudine; all patients received lamivudine. The primary outcome was a week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter, assessed with the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm (noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the primary outcome, 12 percentage points). RESULTS: We enrolled 464 patients at seven sub-Saharan African sites. A week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in 90.2% of the patients in the dolutegravir group (212 of 235) and in 91.7% of those in the darunavir group (210 of 229) (difference, -1.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.7 to 3.7; P = 0.58; indicating noninferiority of dolutegravir, without superiority) and in 92.3% of the patients in the tenofovir group (215 of 233) and in 89.6% of those in the zidovudine group (207 of 231) (difference, 2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.32; indicating noninferiority of tenofovir, without superiority). In the subgroup of patients with no NRTIs that were predicted to have activity, a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in more than 90% of the patients in the dolutegravir group and the darunavir group. The incidence of adverse events did not differ substantially between the groups in either factorial comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Dolutegravir in combination with NRTIs was effective in treating patients with HIV-1 infection, including those with extensive NRTI resistance in whom no NRTIs were predicted to have activity. Tenofovir was noninferior to zidovudine as second-line therapy. (Funded by Janssen; NADIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03988452.).

Quantifying HIV transmission flow between high-prevalence hotspots and surrounding communities: a population-based study in Rakai, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: International and global organisations advocate targeting interventions to areas of high HIV prevalence (ie, hotspots). To better understand the potential benefits of geo-targeted control, we assessed the extent to which HIV hotspots along Lake Victoria sustain transmission in neighbouring populations in south-central Uganda. METHODS: We did a population-based survey in Rakai, Uganda, using data from the Rakai Community Cohort Study. The study surveyed all individuals aged 15-49 years in four high-prevalence Lake Victoria fishing communities and 36 neighbouring inland communities. Viral RNA was deep sequenced from participants infected with HIV who were antiretroviral therapy-naive during the observation period. Phylogenetic analysis was used to infer partial HIV transmission networks, including direction of transmission. Reconstructed networks were interpreted through data for current residence and migration history. HIV transmission flows within and between high-prevalence and low-prevalence areas were quantified adjusting for incomplete sampling of the population. FINDINGS: Between Aug 10, 2011, and Jan 30, 2015, data were collected for the Rakai Community Cohort Study. 25 882 individuals participated, including an estimated 75·7% of the lakeside population and 16·2% of the inland population in the Rakai region of Uganda. 5142 participants were HIV-positive (2703 [13·7%] in inland and 2439 [40·1%] in fishing communities). 3878 (75·4%) people who were HIV-positive did not report antiretroviral therapy use, of whom 2652 (68·4%) had virus deep-sequenced at sufficient quality for phylogenetic analysis. 446 transmission networks were reconstructed, including 293 linked pairs with inferred direction of transmission. Adjusting for incomplete sampling, an estimated 5·7% (95% credibility interval 4·4-7·3) of transmissions occurred within lakeside areas, 89·2% (86·0-91·8) within inland areas, 1·3% (0·6-2·6) from lakeside to inland areas, and 3·7% (2·3-5·8) from inland to lakeside areas. INTERPRETATION: Cross-community HIV transmissions between Lake Victoria hotspots and surrounding inland populations are infrequent and when they occur, virus more commonly flows into rather than out of hotspots. This result suggests that targeted interventions to these hotspots will not alone control the epidemic in inland populations, where most transmissions occur. Thus, geographical targeting of high prevalence areas might not be effective for broader epidemic control depending on underlying epidemic dynamics. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Child Health and Development, the Division of Intramural Research of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the World Bank, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the Johns Hopkins University Center for AIDS Research, and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Inferring HIV-1 transmission networks and sources of epidemic spread in Africa with deep-sequence phylogenetic analysis.

To prevent new infections with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in sub-Saharan Africa, UNAIDS recommends targeting interventions to populations that are at high risk of acquiring and passing on the virus. Yet it is often unclear who and where these 'source' populations are. Here we demonstrate how viral deep-sequencing can be used to reconstruct HIV-1 transmission networks and to infer the direction of transmission in these networks. We are able to deep-sequence virus from a large population-based sample of infected individuals in Rakai District, Uganda, reconstruct partial transmission networks, and infer the direction of transmission within them at an estimated error rate of 16.3% [8.8-28.3%]. With this error rate, deep-sequence phylogenetics cannot be used against individuals in legal contexts, but is sufficiently low for population-level inferences into the sources of epidemic spread. The technique presents new opportunities for characterizing source populations and for targeting of HIV-1 prevention interventions in Africa.

Evolution of Protease Inhibitor Resistance in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infected Patients Failing Protease Inhibitor Monotherapy as Second-line Therapy in Low-income Countries: An Observational Analysis Within the EARNEST Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Limited viral load (VL) testing in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment programs in low-income countries often delays detection of treatment failure. The impact of remaining on failing protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimens is unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively tested VL in 2164 stored plasma samples from 386 patients randomized to receive lopinavir monotherapy (after initial raltegravir induction) in the Europe-Africa Research Network for Evaluation of Second-line Therapy (EARNEST) trial. Protease genotypic resistance testing was performed when VL >1000 copies/mL. We assessed evolution of PI resistance mutations from virological failure (confirmed VL >1000 copies/mL) until PI monotherapy discontinuation and examined associations using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Median post-failure follow-up (in 118 patients) was 68 (interquartile range, 48-88) weeks. At failure, 20% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir. At 40-48 weeks post-failure, 68% and 51% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir and atazanavir; 17% had intermediate-level resistance (none high) to darunavir. Common PI mutations were M46I, I54V, and V82A. On average, 1.7 (95% confidence interval 1.5-2.0) PI mutations developed per year; increasing after the first mutation; decreasing with subsequent mutations (P < .0001). VL changes were modest, mainly driven by nonadherence (P = .006) and PI mutation development (P = .0002); I47A was associated with a larger increase in VL than other mutations (P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients develop intermediate/high-level lopinavir resistance within 1 year of ongoing viral replication on monotherapy but retain susceptibility to darunavir. Viral load increased slowly after failure, driven by non-adherence and PI mutation development. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00988039.

Ethical considerations in global HIV phylogenetic research.

Phylogenetic analysis of pathogens is an increasingly powerful way to reduce the spread of epidemics, including HIV. As a result, phylogenetic approaches are becoming embedded in public health and research programmes, as well as outbreak responses, presenting unique ethical, legal, and social issues that are not adequately addressed by existing bioethics literature. We formed a multidisciplinary working group to explore the ethical issues arising from the design of, conduct in, and use of results from HIV phylogenetic studies, and to propose recommendations to minimise the associated risks to both individuals and groups. We identified eight key ethical domains, within which we highlighted factors that make HIV phylogenetic research unique. In this Review, we endeavoured to provide a framework to assist researchers, public health practitioners, and funding institutions to ensure that HIV phylogenetic studies are designed, done, and disseminated in an ethical manner. Our conclusions also have broader relevance for pathogen phylogenetics.

Lopinavir plus nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, lopinavir plus raltegravir, or lopinavir monotherapy for second-line treatment of HIV (EARNEST): 144-week follow-up results from a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Millions of HIV-infected people worldwide receive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in programmes using WHO-recommended standardised regimens. Recent WHO guidelines recommend a boosted protease inhibitor plus raltegravir as an alternative second-line combination. We assessed whether this treatment option offers any advantage over the standard protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) second-line combination after 144 weeks of follow-up in typical programme settings. METHODS: We analysed the 144-week outcomes at the completion of the EARNEST trial, a randomised controlled trial done in HIV-infected adults or adolescents in 14 sites in five sub-Saharan African countries (Uganda, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Kenya, Zambia). Participants were those who were no longer responding to non-NRTI-based first-line ART, as assessed with WHO criteria, confirmed by viral-load testing. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (lopinavir 400 mg with ritonavir 100 mg, twice per day) plus two or three clinician-selected NRTIs (protease inhibitor plus NRTI group), protease inhibitor plus raltegravir (400 mg twice per day; protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group), or protease inhibitor monotherapy (plus raltegravir induction for first 12 weeks, re-intensified to combination therapy after week 96; protease inhibitor monotherapy group). Randomisation was by computer-generated randomisation sequence, with variable block size. The primary outcome was viral load of less than 400 copies per mL at week 144, for which we assessed non-inferiority with a one-sided α of 0·025, and superiority with a two-sided α of 0·025. The EARNEST trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 37737787. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2010, and April 29, 2011, 1837 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 1277 patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group. In the primary (complete-case) analysis at 144 weeks, 317 (86%) of 367 in the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL compared with 312 (81%) of 383 in the protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group (p=0·07; lower 95% confidence limit for difference 10·2% vs specified non-inferiority margin 10%). In the protease inhibitor monotherapy group, 292 (78%) of 375 had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL; p=0·003 versus the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group at 144 weeks. There was no difference between groups in serious adverse events, grade 3 or 4 adverse events (total or ART-related), or events that resulted in treatment modification. INTERPRETATION: Protease inhibitor plus raltegravir offered no advantage over protease inhibitor plus NRTI in virological efficacy or safety. In the primary analysis, protease inhibitor plus raltegravir did not meet non-inferiority criteria. A regimen of protease inhibitor with NRTIs remains the best standardised second-line regimen for use in programmes in resource-limited settings. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UK Medical Research Council, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, Merck, ViiV Healthcare, WHO.

HIV-1 viral load and resistance in genital secretions in patients taking protease-inhibitor-based second-line therapy in Africa.

BACKGROUND: HIV is transmitted primarily through sexual intercourse, and the objective of this study was therefore to assess whether there is occult viral replication and resistance in genital secretions in patients on protease inhibitor (PI)-based second-line therapy. METHODS: HIV-infected adults taking ritonavir-boosted lopinavir with either two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), raltegravir or as monotherapy for 96 weeks, were enrolled at seven clinical sites in Uganda. Viral load (VL) was measured in cervico-vaginal secretions or semen and in a corresponding plasma sample. Genotypic resistance was assessed in genital secretion samples and plasma samples. Results were compared between compartments and with the plasma resistance profile at first-line failure. RESULTS: Of the 111 participants enrolled (91 female, 20 male), 16 (14%) and 30 (27%) had VL >1,000 and >40 copies/ml, respectively, in plasma; 3 (3%) and 23 (21%) had VL >1,000 copies/ml and >40 copies/ml, respectively, in genital secretions. There was 74% agreement between plasma and genital secretion VL classification above/below 40 copies/ml threshold (kappa-statistic =0.29; P=0.001). RT mutations (both NRTI and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor) were detected in genital secretions in four patients (similar profile to corresponding plasma sample at first-line failure) and PI mutations were detected in two (one polymorphism with no impact on resistance; one with high-level PI resistance). CONCLUSIONS: High level (>1,000 copies/ml) viral replication and development of new RT or PI resistance in the genital compartment were rare. The risks of transmission arising from resistance evolution in the genital compartment are likely to be low on PI-based second-line therapy.

Nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor cross-resistance and outcomes from second-line antiretroviral therapy in the public health approach: an observational analysis within the randomised, open-label, EARNEST trial.

BACKGROUND: Cross-resistance after first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure is expected to impair activity of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in second-line therapy for patients with HIV, but evidence for the effect of cross-resistance on virological outcomes is limited. We aimed to assess the association between the activity, predicted by resistance testing, of the NRTIs used in second-line therapy and treatment outcomes for patients infected with HIV. METHODS: We did an observational analysis of additional data from a published open-label, randomised trial of second-line ART (EARNEST) in sub-Saharan Africa. 1277 adults or adolescents infected with HIV in whom first-line ART had failed (assessed by WHO criteria with virological confirmation) were randomly assigned to a boosted protease inhibitor (standardised to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir) with two to three NRTIs (clinician-selected, without resistance testing); or with raltegravir; or alone as protease inhibitor monotherapy (discontinued after week 96). We tested genotypic resistance on stored baseline samples in patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group and calculated the predicted activity of prescribed second-line NRTIs. We measured viral load in stored samples for all patients obtained every 12-16 weeks. This trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com (number ISRCTN 37737787) and ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00988039). FINDINGS: Baseline genotypes were available in 391 (92%) of 426 patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group. 176 (89%) of 198 patients prescribed a protease inhibitor with no predicted-active NRTIs had viral suppression (viral load <400 copies per mL) at week 144, compared with 312 (81%) of 383 patients in the protease inhibitor and raltegravir group at week 144 (p=0·02) and 233 (61%) of 280 patients in the protease inhibitor monotherapy group at week 96 (p<0·0001). Compared with results with no active NRTIs, 95 (85%) of 112 patients with one predicted-active NRTI had viral suppression (p=0·3) and 20 (77%) of 26 patients with two or three active NRTIs had viral suppression (p=0·08). Over all follow-up, greater predicted NRTI activity was associated with worse viral load suppression (global p=0·0004). INTERPRETATION: Genotypic resistance testing might not accurately predict NRTI activity in protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. Our results do not support the introduction of routine resistance testing in ART programmes in low-income settings for the purpose of selecting second-line NRTIs. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, UK Medical Research Council, Institito de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, WHO, Merck.

HIV Drug Resistance Mutations in Non-B Subtypes After Prolonged Virological Failure on NNRTI-Based First-Line Regimens in Sub-Saharan Africa.

OBJECTIVE: To determine drug resistance mutation (DRM) patterns in a large cohort of patients failing nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based first-line antiretroviral therapy regimens in programs without routine viral load (VL) monitoring and to examine intersubtype differences in DRMs. DESIGN: Sequences from 787 adults/adolescents who failed an NNRTI-based first-line regimen in 13 clinics in Uganda, Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Malawi were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between specific DRMs and Stanford intermediate-/high-level resistance and factors including REGA subtype, first-line antiretroviral therapy drugs, CD4, and VL at failure. RESULTS: The median first-line treatment duration was 4 years (interquartile range 30-43 months); 42% of participants had VL ≥100,000 copies/mL and 63% participants had CD4 <100 cells/mm. Viral subtype distribution was A1 (40%; Uganda and Kenya), C (31%; Zimbabwe and Malawi), and D (25%; Uganda and Kenya), and recombinant/unclassified (5%). In general, DRMs were more common in subtype-C than in subtype-A and/or subtype-D (nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mutations K65R and Q151M; NNRTI mutations E138A, V106M, Y181C, K101E, and H221Y). The presence of tenofovir resistance was similar between subtypes [P (adjusted) = 0.32], but resistance to zidovudine, abacavir, etravirine, or rilpivirine was more common in subtype-C than in subtype-D/subtype-A [P (adjusted) < 0.02]. CONCLUSIONS: Non-B subtypes differ in DRMs at first-line failure, which impacts on residual nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and NNRTI susceptibility. In particular, higher rates of etravirine and rilpivirine resistance in subtype-C may limit their potential utility in salvage regimens.

Neurocognitive Function at the First-Line Failure and on the Second-Line Antiretroviral Therapy in Africa: Analyses From the EARNEST Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess neurocognitive function at the first-line antiretroviral therapy failure and change on the second-line therapy. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial was conducted in 5 sub-Saharan African countries. METHODS: Patients failing the first-line therapy according to WHO criteria after >12 months on non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors-based regimens were randomized to the second-line therapy (open-label) with lopinavir/ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice daily) plus either 2-3 clinician-selected nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, raltegravir, or as monotherapy after 12-week induction with raltegravir. Neurocognitive function was tested at baseline, weeks 48 and 96 using color trails tests 1 and 2, and the Grooved Pegboard test. Test results were converted to an average of the 3 individual test z-scores. RESULTS: A total of 1036 patients (90% of those >18 years enrolled at 13 evaluable sites) had valid baseline tests (58% women, median: 38 years, viral load: 65,000 copies per milliliter, CD4 count: 73 cells per cubic millimeter). Mean (SD) baseline z-score was -2.96 (1.74); lower baseline z-scores were independently associated with older age, lower body weight, higher viral load, lower hemoglobin, less education, fewer weekly working hours, previous central nervous system disease, and taking fluconazole (P < 0.05 in multivariable model). Z-score was increased by mean (SE) of +1.23 (0.04) after 96 weeks on the second-line therapy (P < 0.001; n = 915 evaluable), with no evidence of difference between the treatment arms (P = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in sub-Saharan Africa failing the first-line therapy had low neurocognitive function test scores, but performance improved on the second-line therapy. Regimens with more central nervous system-penetrating drugs did not enhance neurocognitive recovery indicating this need not be a primary consideration in choosing a second-line regimen.

Assessment of second-line antiretroviral regimens for HIV therapy in Africa.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and toxic effects of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) are uncertain when these agents are used with a protease inhibitor in second-line therapy for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in resource-limited settings. Removing the NRTIs or replacing them with raltegravir may provide a benefit. METHODS: In this open-label trial in sub-Saharan Africa, we randomly assigned 1277 adults and adolescents with HIV infection and first-line treatment failure to receive a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (lopinavir-ritonavir) plus clinician-selected NRTIs (NRTI group, 426 patients), a protease inhibitor plus raltegravir in a superiority comparison (raltegravir group, 433 patients), or protease-inhibitor monotherapy after 12 weeks of induction therapy with raltegravir in a noninferiority comparison (monotherapy group, 418 patients). The primary composite end point, good HIV disease control, was defined as survival with no new World Health Organization stage 4 events, a CD4+ count of more than 250 cells per cubic millimeter, and a viral load of less than 10,000 copies per milliliter or 10,000 copies or more with no protease resistance mutations at week 96 and was analyzed with the use of imputation of data (≤4%). RESULTS: Good HIV disease control was achieved in 60% of the patients (mean, 255 patients) in the NRTI group, 64% of the patients (mean, 277) in the raltegravir group (P=0.21 for the comparison with the NRTI group; superiority of raltegravir not shown), and 55% of the patients (mean, 232) in the monotherapy group (noninferiority of monotherapy not shown, based on a 10-percentage-point margin). There was no significant difference in rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events among the three groups (P=0.82). The viral load was less than 400 copies per milliliter in 86% of patients in the NRTI group, 86% in the raltegravir group (P=0.97), and 61% in the monotherapy group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When given with a protease inhibitor in second-line therapy, NRTIs retained substantial virologic activity without evidence of increased toxicity, and there was no advantage to replacing them with raltegravir. Virologic control was inferior with protease-inhibitor monotherapy. (Funded by European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership and others; EARNEST Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN37737787, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00988039.).

Interstitial 12p deletion involving more than 40 genes in a patient with postnatal microcephaly, psychomotor delay, optic nerve atrophy, and facial dysmorphism.

Interstitial deletions of chromosome 12p are rare, and the phenotype spectrum is therefore still unknown. The thirteen patients reported so far suffer from developmental delay, optic nerve hypoplasia, micropenis, hypoplastic hair and skin, oligodontia, brachydactyly, and arterial hypertension. We report a de novo 12p12.2-p11.22 deletion of 9.2 Mb detected by array CGH analysis in a boy with global developmental delay, muscular hypotonia, postnatal microcephaly, facial dysmorphism including small ears, epicanthus, broad nasal bridge and hypoplastic nostrils. In addition, the patient had optic nerve atrophy, inverted nipples, micropenis, and a hemangioma. The deleted region encompasses more than 40 reference genes. We compare phenotype and deletion extent of our index patient to that of previous reports and thereby contribute to the understanding of interstitial 12p deletion phenotypes. Knowledge of the pattern of this deletion phenotype will help clinicians to diagnose this abnormality in their patients and to counsel the parents accordingly. Further descriptions may be able to contribute to the clarification.

Imatinib mesylate in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous mastocytosis.

Diffuse cutaneous mastocytosis is a less common but potentially life-threatening variant of childhood mastocytosis. Here we report 2 children with diffuse cutaneous mastocytosis in whom an activating somatic KIT mutation was detected. Treatment with imatinib, a KIT inhibitor, resulted in resolution of the lesions and were well tolerated by the patients.

A hospital-based intermittent nocturnal hemodialysis program for children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a hospital-based nocturnal hemodialysis (NHD) program for children and adolescents. STUDY DESIGN: Sixteen patients (age, 0.5 to 17 years) were prospectively included. Uremia-associated measures as well as amount and dosage of medication were enumerated. Quality of life also was evaluated. Results were compared with data of the same patients on conventional hemodialysis and with matched control subjects (conventional HD). RESULTS: NHD was well tolerated. Median Kt/V values increased. Predialytic mean arterial pressure, urea, phosphate, and parathyroid hormone levels decreased. There was an increase in protein catabolic rate. Dietary and fluid restrictions could be lifted. Amount and dosage of phosphate and potassium binders and antihypertensive medication could be reduced. Quality of life improved and days of absence from school decreased in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to a better control of uremia-associated measures, NHD allows free dietary and fluid intake and improves patient well-being. Given the continuing shortage of donor organs for kidney transplantation and the high morbidity and mortality on conventional HD, intensified dialysis regimens are a much-needed therapeutic option.

Interaction of the adenovirus type 5 E4 Orf3 protein with promyelocytic leukemia protein isoform II is required for ND10 disruption.

Nuclear domain 10 (ND10s), or promyelocytic leukemia protein (PML) nuclear bodies, are spherical nuclear structures that require PML proteins for their formation. Many viruses target these structures during infection. The E4 Orf3 protein of adenovirus 5 (Ad5) rearranges ND10s, causing PML to colocalize with Orf3 in nuclear tracks or fibers. There are six different PML isoforms (I to VI) present at ND10s, all sharing a common N terminus but with structural differences at their C termini. In this study, PML II was the only one of these six isoforms that was found to interact directly and specifically with Ad5 E4 Orf3 in vitro and in vivo; these results define a new Orf3 activity. Three of a series of 18 mutant Orf3 proteins were unable to interact with PML II; these were also unable to cause ND10 rearrangement. Moreover, in PML-null cells that contained neoformed ND10s comprising a single PML isoform, only ND10s formed of PML II were rearranged by Orf3. These data show that the interaction between Orf3 and PML II is necessary for ND10 rearrangement to occur. Finally, Orf3 was shown to self-associate in vitro. This activity was absent in mutant Orf3 proteins that were unable to form tracks and to bind PML II. Thus, Orf3 oligomerization may mediate the formation of nuclear tracks in vivo and may also be important for PML II binding.