HIV cure: Are we going to make history?

BACKGROUND: At present, combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is the mainstay for the treatment of people living with HIV/AIDS. cART can suppress the viral load to a minimal level; however, the possibility of the emergence of full-blown AIDS is always there. In the latter part of the first decade of the 21st century, an HIV-positive person received stem cell transplantation (SCT) for treatment of his haematological malignancy. The patient was able to achieve remission of the haematological condition as well as of HIV following SCT. Thorough investigations of various samples including blood and biopsy could not detect the virus in the person's body. The person was declared to be the first cured case of HIV. LITERATURE SEARCH: Over the next decade, a few more similar cases were observed and have recently been declared cured of the infection. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane library and Google Scholar. Four such additional cases were found in literature. DESCRIPTION & DISCUSSION: These cases all share a common proposed mechanism for the HIV cure, that is, transplantation of stem cells from donors carrying a homozygous mutation in a gene encoding for CCR5 (receptor utilized by HIV for entry into the host cell), denoted as CCR5△32. This mutation makes the host immune cells devoid of CCR5, causing the host to acquire resistance against HIV. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review to look at relevant and updated information of all cured cases of HIV as well as the related landmarks in history and discusses the underlying mechanism(s).

Drug-Drug Interactions in Patients with COVID-19: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Eastern India.

Introduction: Concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) in non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients complicates the decision-making process regarding short- and long-term antithrombotic strategies. Patient profiles and usage rates of different antithrombotic combinations in this patient subgroup in Romania are poorly described. Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging viral infection without any approved treatment. Investigational therapies for COVID-19 may cause clinically important drug-drug interactions (DDIs). We aimed to study drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and their risk factors in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study in a tertiary care hospital dedicated to COVID-19 patients. The Lexi-Interact database was used to investigate clinically important DDIs. The database output, including interacting drug pairs, risk rating, reliability rating, mechanism, and management, was evaluated. Results: Medical records of 200 COVID-19 patients were analysed. All patients had at least one clinically important DDI. More than half of interactions were associated with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, the most commonly prescribed medications for the management of COVID-19. Concomitant drugs for comorbid conditions leading to polypharmacy were significantly associated with the occurrence of this. Conclusion: There is a higher chance of DDI, which necessitates ongoing care evaluation and therapy adjustment. Drugs used to treat COVID-19 should be carefully selected.

Evaluation of Ivermectin as a Potential Treatment for Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Double-Blind Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial in Eastern India.

BACKGROUND: There has been a growing interest in ivermectin ever since it was reported to have an in-vitro activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This trial was conducted to test the efficacy of ivermectin in mild and moderate coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). METHODS: A double blind, parallel, randomised, placebo-controlled trial conducted among adult COVID-19 patients with mild to moderate disease severity on admission in a COVID dedicated tertiary healthcare of eastern India. Enrolment was done between 1st August and 31st October 2020.  On day 1 and 2 post enrolment, patients in the intervention arm received ivermectin 12 mg while the patients in the non-interventional arm received placebo tablets. RESULTS: About one-fourth (23.6%) of the patients in the intervention arm and one-third (31.6%) in the placebo arm were tested reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) negative for SARS-CoV-2 on 6th day. Although this difference was found to be statistically insignificant [rate ratio (RR): 0.8; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.4-1.4; p=0.348]. All patients in the ivermectin group were successfully discharged. In comparison the same for the placebo group was observed to be 93%. This difference was found to be statistically significant (RR: 1.1; 95% CI; 1.0-1.2; p=0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of ivermectin in treatment regimen of mild to moderate COVID-19 patients could not be said with certainty based on our study results as it had shown only marginal benefit in successful discharge from the hospital with no other observed benefits.

Comparative study of efficacy of oral ivermectin versus some topical antiscabies drugs in the treatment of scabies.

BACKGROUND: The conventionally used topical antiscabetics have poor compliance. Ivermectin, an oral antiparasitic drug, has been shown to be an effective scabicide and could be a useful substitute. This study was designed to compare efficacy of oral ivermectin with commonly used topical antiscabies drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on four groups including 60 patients in each group by simple random sampling. Treatment given in each group was: Group 1: Ivermectin (200 µg/kg body weight) oral in a single dose, Group 2: Topical Permethrin 5% cream single application, Group 3: Topical gamma benzene hexachloride (GBHC) lotion 1% single application and Group 4: Topical Benzyl benzoate (BB) lotion 25% single application. All of the patients were followed for improvement in terms of severity of disease and severity of pruritus at the end of 1(st) wk and 6(th) wk. RESULTS: Efficacy of ivermectin, permethrin, GBHC and BB lotion considering improvement in severity of pruritus as parameter were 85%, 90%, 75% and 68.33% respectively at 2(nd) follow-up. Similarly considering improvement in severity of lesion as parameter, results were 80%, 88.33%, 71.66% and 65% respectively at 2(nd) follow up. Topical Permethrin (5%) was more effective as compared to topical BB lotion and topical GBHC lotion (p<0.05, significant) but statistical difference between efficacy of topical Permethrin and oral Ivermectin was non-significant (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The results suggested that oral Ivermectin and topical Permethrin (5%) were equally efficacious. Oral Ivermectin is well tolerated, non irritant to skin, does not show central nervous system side effects because it does not cross blood brain barrier. So, the good therapeutic response with few side effects seen with oral Ivermectin can be useful in those patients for whom topical treatment is potentially irritant and less well-tolerated.