Management of pharmacovigilance during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by the safety department of an academic sponsor: Lessons learnt and challenges from the EU DisCoVeRy clinical trial.

The current COVID-19 pandemic was an exceptional health situation, including for drug use. As there was no known effective drug for COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic, different drug candidates were proposed. In this article, we present the challenges for an academic Safety Department to manage the global safety of a European trial during the pandemic. The National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Inserm) conducted a European multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving three repurposed and one-in development drugs (lopinavir/ritonavir, IFN-ß1a, hydroxychloroquine, and remdesivir) in adults hospitalized with COVID-19. From 25 March 2020 to 29 May 2020, the Inserm Safety Department had to manage 585 Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) initial notification and 396 follow-up reports. The Inserm Safety Department's staff was mobilized to manage these SAEs and to report Expedited safety reports to the competent authorities within the legal timeframes. More than 500 queries were sent to the investigators due to a lack of or incoherent information on SAE forms. At the same time, the investigators were overwhelmed by the management of patients suffering from COVID-19 infection. These particular conditions of missing data and lack of accurate description of adverse events made evaluation of the SAEs very difficult, particularly the assessment of the causal role of each investigational medicinal product. In parallel, working difficulties were accentuated by the national lockdown, frequent IT tool dysfunctions, delayed implementation of monitoring and the absence of automatic alerts for SAE form modification. Although COVID-19 is a confounding factor per se, the delay in and quality of SAE form completion and the real-time medical analysis by the Inserm Safety Department were major issues in the quick identification of potential safety signals. To conduct a high-quality clinical trial and ensure patient safety, all stakeholders must take their roles and responsibilities.

Ensuring quality control in a COVID-19 clinical trial during the pandemic: The experience of the Inserm C20-15 DisCoVeRy study.

SETTING: Health measures taken during the pandemic deeply modified the clinical research practices. At the same time, the demand for the results of the COVID-19 trials was urgent. Thus, the objective of this article is to share Inserm's experience in ensuring quality control in clinical trials in this challenging context. OBJECTIVES: DisCoVeRy is a phase III randomized study that aimed at evaluating the safety and efficacy of 4 therapeutic strategies in hospitalized COVID-19 adult patients. Between March, 22nd 2020 and January, 20th 2021, 1309 patients were included. In order to guarantee the best quality of data, the Sponsor had to adapt to the current sanitary measures and to their impact on clinical research activity, notably by adapting Monitoring Plan objectives, involving the research departments of the participating hospitals and a network of clinical research assistants (CRAs). RESULTS: Overall, 97 CRAs were involved and performed 909 monitoring visits. The monitoring of 100% of critical data for all patients included in the analysis was achieved, and despite of the pandemic context, a conform consent was recovered for more than 99% of patients. Results of the study were published in May and September 2021. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The main monitoring objective was met thanks to the mobilization of considerable personnel resources, within a very tight time frame and external hurdles. There is a need for further reflection to adapt the lessons learned from this experience to the context of routine practice and to improve the response of French academic research during a future epidemic.

Daily and on-demand HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil (ANRS PREVENIR): a prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are few data available regarding the use of on-demand pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention. We aimed to assess PrEP effectiveness, adherence, and safety in adults using daily or on-demand PrEP. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational cohort study (ANRS PREVENIR) at 26 sites in the Paris region, France. We enrolled HIV-negative adults (aged ≥18 years) at high risk of HIV infection who were starting or continuing PrEP. PrEP was prescribed as a fixed-dose combination of tenofovir disoproxil and emtricitabine (245 mg and 200 mg, respectively, per pill). PrEP could be prescribed as a daily regimen with one pill per day or, in men who have sex with men (MSM) or in transgender women who have sex with men, as an on-demand regimen following the IPERGAY dosing recommendation. At enrolment and every 3 months thereafter, participants were tested for HIV and provided information regarding the PrEP dosing regimen used. Adherence to PrEP was assessed by self-report and by tenofovir diphosphate concentrations in dried blood spots. The primary outcome of HIV-1 incidence was assessed using Poisson regression among participants who started PrEP. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03113123, and EudraCT, 2016A0157744. FINDINGS: Between May 3, 2017, and May 2, 2019, 3082 people were assessed for eligibility and 3065 participants were enrolled. 3056 (99·7%) of 3065 participants reported using PrEP and were included in the analyses. The median age was 36 years (IQR 29-43), 1344 (44·0%) of 3056 participants were PrEP-naive, and 3016 (98·7%) were MSM. At enrolment, 1540 (50·5%) of 3049 participants opted for daily PrEP dosing and 1509 (49·5%) opted for on-demand PrEP dosing; these proportions remained stable during follow-up. Median follow-up was 22·1 months (IQR 15·9-29·7) and incidence of study discontinuation was 17·6 participants (95% CI 16·5-18·7) per 100 person-years. At the data cutoff on Sept 30, 2020, there had been six HIV-1 seroconversions (three participants using daily PrEP and three using on-demand PrEP; all were MSM) over 5623 person-years. Overall HIV-1 incidence was 1·1 cases (95% CI 0·4-2·3) per 1000 person-years, and did not differ between participants using daily PrEP and those using on-demand PrEP (incidence rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·13-7·49; p=0·99). Four participants (two using daily PrEP and two using on-demand PrEP) discontinued PrEP due to treatment-related adverse events (nausea [n=2], vomiting and diarrhoea [n=1], and lumbar pain [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: In this study, which enrolled mainly MSM, HIV-1 incidence on PrEP was low and did not differ between participants using daily PrEP and those using on-demand PrEP. On-demand PrEP therefore represents a valid alternative to daily PrEP for MSM, providing greater choice in HIV prevention. FUNDING: ANRS/Maladies Infectieuses Emergentes, Gilead Sciences, SIDACTION, and Région Ile de France. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Lack of a Clinically Significant Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Etravirine and Raltegravir Using an Original Approach Based on Drug Metabolism, Protein Binding, and Penetration in Seminal Fluid: A Pharmacokinetic Substudy of the ANRS-163 ETRAL Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The ANRS163-ETRAL study showed that etravirine 200 mg/raltegravir 400 mg twice-daily dual therapy was highly effective in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients older than 45 years, with virologic and therapeutic success rates at week 48 of 99.4% and 94.5%, respectively. The objective of this study was to determine whether a clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir exists by assessing steady-state total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and inactive raltegravir-glucuronide concentrations 12 hours after last intake (C12h ) in blood plasma (BP) and seminal plasma (SP). DESIGN: Pharmacokinetic analysis of data from the ANRS163-ETRAL study. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-six HIV-1-infected patients (of the 165 patients included in the ANRS-163 ETRAL study) who were receiving etravirine 200 mg and raltegravir 400 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood was collected from all 146 patients at weeks 2-4, 12, 24, and 48, and semen was collected from 21 patients at week 48. The extent of BP and SP protein binding was determined by using ultrafiltration assay. Total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and raltegravir-glucuronide C12h were determined by ultra high performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry and interpreted by using the in vitro calculated protein-bound 95% inhibitory concentration (PBIC95 ) for wild-type (WT) HIV: etravirine (116 ng/ml) and raltegravir (15 ng/ml). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) total BP etravirine C12h (536 ng/ml [376-719]) and raltegravir (278 ng/ml [97-690]) were adequate in 99% and 96% of patients, respectively. Median (IQR) SP:BP C12h ratio and BP unbound fraction were etravirine 0.3 (0.2-0.5) and < 1%, respectively, raltegravir 1.8 (1.3-3.3) and 12%, respectively, and raltegravir-glucuronide 12.0 (6.5-17.7) and > 99%, respectively. The BP raltegravir metabolic ratio (raltegravir glucuronide:raltegravir ratio) was 1.7, suggesting only weak induction of raltegravir glucuronidation by etravirine. Only three patients had etravirine and raltegravir C12h < PBIC95 simultaneously. CONCLUSION: No clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir was detected. Total etravirine and raltegravir BP concentrations were adequate in most patients, favoring virologic efficacy and confirming good treatment adherence (> 95%), despite twice-daily administration. The long half-life of etravirine and higher unbound fraction SP of raltegravir (57%) ensured adequate concentrations of dual therapy in genital compartments. Our results indicate that etravirine and raltegravir have good, complementary pharmacokinetic profiles, suggesting that they could be used in a dual-treatment strategy.