Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Uptake Among Men Who Have Sex With Men Who Used nPEP: A Longitudinal Analysis of Attendees at a Large Sexual Health Clinic in Montréal (Canada).

BACKGROUND: Reducing HIV transmission using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) requires focussing on individuals at high acquisition risk, such as men who have sex with men with a history of nonoccupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP). This study aims to characterize longitudinal trends in PrEP uptake and its determinants among nPEP users in Montréal. METHODS: Eligible attendees at Clinique médicale l'Actuel were recruited prospectively starting in October 2000 (nPEP) and January 2013 (PrEP). Linking these cohorts, we characterized the nPEP-to-PrEP cascade, examined the determinants of PrEP uptake after nPEP consultation using a Cox proportional-hazard model, and assessed whether PrEP persistence differed by nPEP history using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: As of August 2019, 31% of 2682 nPEP cohort participants had 2 or more nPEP consultations. Subsequent PrEP consultations occurred among 36% of nPEP users, of which 17% sought nPEP again afterward. Among 2718 PrEP cohort participants, 46% reported previous nPEP use. Among nPEP users, those aged 25-49 years [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1 to 1.7], with more nPEP episodes (HR = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.3 to 1.5), who reported chemsex (HR = 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.7), with a sexually transmitted infection history (HR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3 to 1.7), and who returned for their first nPEP follow-up visit (HR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.7 to 4.2) had higher rates of PrEP linkage. There was no difference in PrEP persistence between nPEP-to-PrEP and PrEP only participants. CONCLUSION: Over one-third of nPEP users were subsequently prescribed PrEP. However, the large proportion of men who repeatedly use nPEP calls for more efficient PrEP-linkage services and, among those who use PrEP, improved persistence should be encouraged.

Cohort profile: l'Actuel Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Cohort study in Montreal, Canada.

PURPOSE: The l'Actuel PrEP Cohort was established to monitor the uptake, effectiveness, safety and changes in sexual risk behaviours among individuals receiving pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the prevention of HIV. This prospective dynamic cohort is based at Clinique médicale l'Actuel, a large sexual health clinic located in Montreal, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Since the cohort inception in January of 2013 through June 2018, 2156 individuals consulted for PrEP as participants in the l'Actuel PrEP Cohort. Median age was 35 years (IQR: 29-44 years) and the majority (96%) were men who have sex with men. Among 1551 individuals who initiated PrEP care, the median duration of follow-up was 9.2 months (IQR: 3.7-19.6), with substantial variation based on year of cohort entry. The l'Actuel PrEP Cohort contains both daily and intermittent 'on-demand' PrEP users and has the largest reported population of intermittent PrEP users (n=406) in North America. FINDINGS TO DATE: No incident HIV infections have occurred among individuals using PrEP over 1637 person-years of follow-up. However, retention in PrEP care is essential as three individuals who discontinued PrEP subsequently acquired HIV, translating to an HIV incidence of 3.9 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI: 1.3 to 12.1). Among a sample of participants with 1 year of follow-up before and after PrEP initiation (n=109), a moderate increase in sexually transmitted infections was observed following PrEP start. FUTURE PLANS: The l'Actuel PrEP Cohort continues to grow with new participants starting PrEP monthly and extended follow-up for existing users. The cohort data will be used for ongoing monitoring of PrEP and for population-level modelling of the impact of PrEP on HIV incidence in Montreal.

Adherence to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) and Incidence of HIV Seroconversion in a Major North American Cohort.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the efficacy of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for sexual exposures. We sought to determine the factors associated with adherence to treatment and describe the incidence of PEP failures in a Montreal clinic. METHODS: We prospectively assessed all patients consulting for PEP following sexual exposures from October 2000 to July 2014. Patients were followed at 4 and 16 weeks after starting PEP. Treatment adherence was determined by self-report at week 4. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the factors predicting adherence to treatment. RESULTS: 3547 PEP consults were included. Patients were mainly male (92%), MSM (83%) and sought PEP for anal intercourse (72%). Seventy-eight percent (n = 2772) of patients received a prescription for PEP, consisting of Tenofovir/Emtracitabine (TVD) + Lopinavir/Ritonavir (LPV) in 74% of cases, followed by Zidovudine/Lamivudine (CBV) + LPV (10%) and TVD + Raltegravir (RAL) (8%). Seventy percent of patients were adherent to treatment. Compared to TVD+LPV, patients taking CBV+LPV were less likely to adhere to treatment (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.75), while no difference was observed for patients taking TVD+RAL (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83-1.59). First-time PEP consults, older and male patients were also more adherent to treatment. Ten treated patients seroconverted (0.37%) during the study period, yet only 1 case can be attributed to PEP failure (failure rate = 0.04%). CONCLUSION: PEP regimen was associated with treatment adherence. Patients were more likely to be adherent to TVD-based regimens. Ten patients seroconverted after taking PEP; however, only 1 case was a PEP failure as the remaining patients continued to engage in high-risk behavior during follow-up. One month PEP is an effective preventive measure to avoid HIV infection.

Removing inactive NRTIs in a salvage regimen is safe, maintains virological suppression and reduces treatment costs: results from the VERITAS study (TMC114HIV4054).

BACKGROUND: Despite the benefit of maintaining inactive Nucleotide/side reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in salvage regimens, they are associated with increased toxicity and treatment costs. Current evidence suggests that NRTI-sparing regimens in patients failing ART are non-inferior to NRTI-including regimens. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of removing at least one inactive NRTI on virologic, safety, and financial outcomes. METHODS: Drug-resistant, virologically suppressed patients with CD4 >250 cells/ml on a stable regimen of four or more antiretrovirals (ARVs) were enrolled in a 48-week prospective, open-label pilot trial. One inactive NRTI was removed at baseline. Patients taking over five ARVs had a second inactive NRTI removed at 24 weeks. Viral load, CD4 count, and adverse events were assessed at baseline, 24, and 48 weeks. RESULTS: Thirty-one male patients participated. Twenty-nine (94%) patients had lamivudine (3TC) or emtricitabine (FTC) removed and four patients had an additional NRTI removed. One patient was excluded at week 26 for discontinuing an active NRTI. All patients maintained undetectable viral loads at weeks 24 (100%) and 48 [PP = 100%; Intent-to-treat (ITT) = 97%]. At 48 weeks, patients had a median gain of 20 CD4 (IQR: - 50, +133; mean +39) compared to baseline. Three patients exhibited Grade III bilirubin elevation (two Grade II and one Grade III at baseline), which returned to baseline levels. No serious adverse events were observed. Removal of one or two ARVs equated to a mean annual savings of $3319 CDN (11%) and $8630 CDN (24%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Removing inactive NRTIs in patients with a controlled viral load appears to be safe, maintains virological suppression, and reduces treatment costs.

Tolerability is more important than simplicity for treatment durability.

INTRODUCTION: Many studies have shown the superiority of single tablet regimens (STRs) of antiretrovirals for the treatment of HIV in terms of efficacy, adherence and rate of hospitalisation as they offer a low pill burden and once daily dosing. Our objective was to compare the duration of first-line STRs to multi-tablet regimens. METHODS: From our clinical database, we selected patients initiating any of the major first-line regimens between 2007 and 2013. Two STRs, Atripla (ATP) and Complera (CPLR), were compared to three non-STRs: two NRTIs and raltegravir (RAL), atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) or darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r). The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of the first-line regimen. The association between regimen type and duration was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, gender, baseline CD4, baseline viral load, risk factor, site and year of treatment initiation. RESULTS: A total of 743 patients (281 on STRs and 462 on non-STRs) were included. 693 (93%) were male and median age was 43 years. Median length of follow-up was 3.2 years. 56% of patients were MSM, 6% IDU and 6% from endemic countries. Patients on an STR were less likely to be IDU (p<0.024) and have a baseline HIV-RNA ≥100,000 copies/mL (p<0.011). Overall, 321 (43%) patients discontinued their regimen during the study period. The rate of discontinuation one year after starting ARV depends on the regimen: 29% for patients on 2NRTIs+DRV/r, 26% on ATP, 25% on 2NRTIs+ATV/r, 17% on 2NRTIs+RAL and 10% on CPLR (p<0.001). In the adjusted model, durability for STR and non-STR was equivalent (aHR=0.83, p=0.108). Compared to patients on ATP, patients on CPLR were less likely to discontinue (HR=0.58, p=0.070). No difference between ATP and the other regimens was observed: HR for 2NRTIs+RAL=0.92 (p=0.66), 2NRTIs+ DRV/r=1.16 (p=0.36), 2NRTIs+ATV/r=1.11 (p=0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that STRs do not necessarily result in a more durable treatment. Even with a higher pill burden and/or twice daily dosing, patients initiating therapy with RAL or boosted-PI based regimens were not more likely to discontinue the first-line regimen compared to patients on an STR. Among the STR subgroups, the regimen with better known tolerability conferred more durable treatment. Limitations included our inability to adjust for the patient's adherence to a given regimen.

Abacavir/lamivudine fixed-dose combination with ritonavir-boosted darunavir: a safe and efficacious regimen for HIV therapy.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment guidelines recommend the use of tenofovir (TDF) and emtricitabine (FTC) along with a third agent to treat HIV-positive adults. However, other treatment options, including the use of abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC) when used with ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r), have rarely been studied. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the coformulation of ABC/3TC administered with DRV/r in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients. METHODS: HIV-infected adults who received an open-label combination of ABC/3TC/ DRV/r were followed in a community clinic in Montréal. Patients had no resistance to any of the compounds in their regimen. Viral load (VL), CD4 cell count, AST, ALT, and creatinine levels were examined throughout the 48 weeks of follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with a mean age of 45 years were enrolled. Two did not return for follow-up and were excluded. Thirty-five (52%) were treatment- experienced and the remaining were treatment-naïve. HLA-B*5701 test results were available for 56 patients and none were positive. At baseline, mean VL was 4.8 log for treatment-naïve and 2.3 log for experienced patients. Twelve patients discontinued the study regimen prior to reaching the endpoint. At week 48, 79% had a VL <50. Median CD4 cell gain was higher among treatment-naïve patients (273 cells) than among treatment-experienced patients (102 cells) (P = .002). No patient experienced any grade 2 or higher liver enzyme elevation throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: The new combination of ABC/3TC/DRV/r demonstrates a high rate of antiviral activity with no major toxicity. The drug combination appears to be generally safe and well tolerated.