Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2022 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

Importance: Recent advances in treatment and prevention of HIV warrant updated recommendations to guide optimal practice. Objective: Based on a critical evaluation of new data, to provide clinicians with recommendations on use of antiretroviral drugs for the treatment and prevention of HIV, laboratory monitoring, care of people aging with HIV, substance use disorder and HIV, and new challenges in people with HIV, including COVID-19 and monkeypox virus infection. Evidence Review: A panel of volunteer expert physician scientists were appointed to update the 2020 consensus recommendations. Relevant evidence in the literature (PubMed and Embase searches, which initially yielded 7891 unique citations, of which 834 were considered relevant) and studies presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences between January 2020 and October 2022 were considered. Findings: Initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended as soon as possible after diagnosis of HIV. Barriers to care should be addressed, including ensuring access to ART and adherence support. Integrase strand transfer inhibitor-containing regimens remain the mainstay of initial therapy. For people who have achieved viral suppression with a daily oral regimen, long-acting injectable therapy with cabotegravir plus rilpivirine given as infrequently as every 2 months is now an option. Weight gain and metabolic complications have been linked to certain antiretroviral medications; novel strategies to ameliorate these complications are needed. Management of comorbidities throughout the life span is increasingly important, because people with HIV are living longer and confronting the health challenges of aging. In addition, management of substance use disorder in people with HIV requires an evidence-based, integrated approach. Options for preexposure prophylaxis include oral medications (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine) and, for the first time, a long-acting injectable agent, cabotegravir. Recent global health emergencies, like the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and monkeypox virus outbreak, continue to have a major effect on people with HIV and the delivery of services. To address these and other challenges, an equity-based approach is essential. Conclusions and Relevance: Advances in treatment and prevention of HIV continue to improve outcomes, but challenges and opportunities remain.

Primary Care Guidance for Persons With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: 2020 Update by the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have made it possible for persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to live a near expected life span, without progressing to AIDS or transmitting HIV to sexual partners or infants. There is, therefore, increasing emphasis on maintaining health throughout the life span. To receive optimal medical care and achieve desired outcomes, persons with HIV must be consistently engaged in care and able to access uninterrupted treatment, including ART. Comprehensive evidence-based HIV primary care guidance is, therefore, more important than ever. Creating a patient-centered, stigma-free care environment is essential for care engagement. Barriers to care must be decreased at the societal, health system, clinic, and individual levels. As the population ages and noncommunicable diseases arise, providing comprehensive healthcare for persons with HIV becomes increasingly complex, including management of multiple comorbidities and the associated challenges of polypharmacy, while not neglecting HIV-related health concerns. Clinicians must address issues specific to persons of childbearing potential, including care during preconception and pregnancy, and to children, adolescents, and transgender and gender-diverse individuals. This guidance from an expert panel of the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America updates previous 2013 primary care guidelines.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2020 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

Importance: Data on the use of antiretroviral drugs, including new drugs and formulations, for the treatment and prevention of HIV infection continue to guide optimal practices. Objective: To evaluate new data and incorporate them into current recommendations for initiating HIV therapy, monitoring individuals starting on therapy, changing regimens, preventing HIV infection for those at risk, and special considerations for older people with HIV. Evidence Review: New evidence was collected since the previous International Antiviral (formerly AIDS) Society-USA recommendations in 2018, including data published or presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences through August 22, 2020. A volunteer panel of 15 experts in HIV research and patient care considered these data and updated previous recommendations. Findings: From 5316 citations about antiretroviral drugs identified, 549 were included to form the evidence basis for these recommendations. Antiretroviral therapy is recommended as soon as possible for all individuals with HIV who have detectable viremia. Most patients can start with a 3-drug regimen or now a 2-drug regimen, which includes an integrase strand transfer inhibitor. Effective options are available for patients who may be pregnant, those who have specific clinical conditions, such as kidney, liver, or cardiovascular disease, those who have opportunistic diseases, or those who have health care access issues. Recommended for the first time, a long-acting antiretroviral regimen injected once every 4 weeks for treatment or every 8 weeks pending approval by regulatory bodies and availability. For individuals at risk for HIV, preexposure prophylaxis with an oral regimen is recommended or, pending approval by regulatory bodies and availability, with a long-acting injection given every 8 weeks. Monitoring before and during therapy for effectiveness and safety is recommended. Switching therapy for virological failure is relatively rare at this time, and the recommendations for switching therapies for convenience and for other reasons are included. With the survival benefits provided by therapy, recommendations are made for older individuals with HIV. The current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic poses particular challenges for HIV research, care, and efforts to end the HIV epidemic. Conclusion and Relevance: Advances in HIV prevention and management with antiretroviral drugs continue to improve clinical care and outcomes among individuals at risk for and with HIV.

Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (DISCOVER): primary results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide shows high antiviral efficacy and improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate when used for HIV treatment. Here, we report primary results from a blinded phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention. METHODS: This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in regions of Europe and North America, where there is a high incidence of HIV or prevalence of people living with HIV, or both. We enrolled adult cisgender men who have sex with men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV on the basis of their self-reported sexual behaviour in the past 12 weeks or their recent history (within 24 weeks of enrolment) of bacterial sexually transmitted infections. Participants with current or previous use of PrEP with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate were not excluded. We used a computer-generated random allocation sequence to randomly assign (1:1) participants to receive either emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). As such, all participants were given two tablets. The trial sponsor, investigators, participants, and the study staff who provided the study drugs, assessed the outcomes, and collected the data were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection, which was assessed when all participants had completed 48 weeks of follow-up and half of all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This full analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug and had at least one post-baseline HIV test. Non-inferiority of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was established if the upper bound of the 95·003% CI of the HIV incidence rate ratio (IRR) was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62. We prespecified six secondary bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints to evaluate using the safety analysis set. This analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02842086, and is no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 (92%) of 5857 participants were randomly assigned and received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693). At the time of the primary efficacy analysis (ie, when all participants had completed 48 weeks and 50% had completed 96 weeks) emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of the IRR, was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62 (IRR 0·47 [95% CI 0·19-1·15]). After 8756 person-years of follow-up, 22 participants were diagnosed with HIV, seven participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·06-0·33]), and 15 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (0·34 infections per 100 person-years [0·19-0·56]). Both regimens were well tolerated, with a low number of participants reporting adverse events that led to discontinuation of the study drug (36 [1%] of 2694 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group vs 49 [2%] of 2693 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was superior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints. INTERPRETATION: Daily emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide shows non-inferior efficacy to daily emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, and the number of adverse events for both regimens was low. Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide had more favourable effects on bone mineral density and biomarkers of renal safety than emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Fixed-dose combination bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir-containing regimens for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 144 results from two randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

BACKGROUND: In the primary week-48 analyses of two phase 3 studies, coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to a dolutegravir-containing regimen in treatment-naive people with HIV. We report week-144 efficacy and safety results from these studies. METHODS: We did two double-blind, active-controlled studies (now in open-label extension phase). Study 1 randomly assigned (1:1) HLA-B*5701-negative adults without hepatitis B virus co-infection to receive coformulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg, or coformulated dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg once daily. Study 2 randomly assigned (1:1) adults to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, or dolutegravir 50 mg given with coformulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg. We previously reported non-inferiority at the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week-144 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 144, by US Food and Drug Administration Snapshot algorithm, analysed in the same manner. These studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02607930 and NCT02607956. FINDINGS: 629 participants were randomly assigned and treated in study 1 (314 to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, and 315 to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine) and 645 in study 2 (327 to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, 325 to dolutegravir, emtricitabine, tenofovir alafenamide). At week 144, bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to both dolutegravir-containing regimens for efficacy. In study 1, 256 (82%) of 314 participants had plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 265 (84%) of 315 in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (difference -2·6%, 95% CI -8·5 to 3·4). In study 2, 262 (82%) of 320 participants had plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 273 (84%) of 325 in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group (difference -1·9%, -7·8 to 3·9). In both studies, no participant had treatment-emergent resistance to study drugs up to week 144. All treatment regimens were well tolerated with additional exposure. Adverse events that led to study drug discontinuation were reported for no participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group versus five (2%) of 315 in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (study 1), and six (2%) of 320 in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus six (2%) of 325 in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group (study 2). In study 1, statistically significant differences were observed in median changes from baseline in fasting total cholesterol (14 mg/dL vs 10 mg/dL; p=0·034), direct LDL (21 mg/dL vs 14 mg/dL; p=0·004), and total cholesterol to HDL ratio (-0·1 vs -0·3; p=0·007) at week 144; no differences were observed between groups in study 2. Weight gain was seen across all treatment groups in both studies, with no differences in median changes from baseline in weight at week 144 for either study. INTERPRETATION: These long-term data support the use of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people with HIV, with no emergent resistance. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Differential Plasma Protein Regulation and Statin Effects in Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-Infected and Non-HIV-Infected Patients Utilizing a Proteomics Approach.

BACKGROUND: People with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH) demonstrate increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Statins are being studied to prevent ASCVD in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), but little is known regarding the effects of statins on a broad range of inflammatory and cardiovascular proteins in this population. METHODS: We used a highly specific discovery proteomic approach (Protein Extension Assay), to determine statin effects on over 350 plasma proteins in relevant ASCVD pathways among HIV and non-HIV groups. Responses to pitavastatin calcium were assessed in 89 PWH in the INTREPID trial and 46 non-HIV participants with features of central adiposity and insulin resistance. History of cardiovascular disease was exclusionary for both studies. RESULTS: Among participants with HIV, PCOLCE (enzymatic cleavage of type I procollagen) significantly increased after pitavastatin therapy and PLA2G7 (systemic marker of arterial inflammation) decreased. Among participants without HIV, integrin subunit alpha M (integrin adhesive function) and defensin alpha-1 (neutrophil function) increased after pitavastatin therapy and PLA2G7 decreased. At baseline, comparing participants with and without HIV, differentially expressed proteins included proteins involved in platelet and endothelial function and immune activation. CONCLUSIONS: Pitavastatin affected proteins important to platelet and endothelial function and immune activation, and effects differed to a degree within PWH and participants without HIV.

Bictegravir combined with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Bictegravir co-formulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination is recommended for treatment of HIV-1-infection and might be better tolerated than other integrase inhibitor-based single-tablet regimens, but long-term outcomes data are not available. We assessed the efficacy, safety and tolerability of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with co-formulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine at week 96. METHODS: This ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial was done at 122 outpatient centres in nine countries. We enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) living with HIV who were treatment naive and HLA-B*5701 negative, did not have hepatitis B virus infection, and had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 50 mL/min. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive co-formulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the bictegravir group) or co-formulated dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg (the dolutegravir group), each with matching placebo, once daily for 144 weeks. Treatment allocation was masked to all participants and investigators. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. We previously reported the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week 96 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 96 by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607930. FINDINGS: Between Nov 13, 2015, and July 14, 2016, we screened 739 participants, of whom 108 were excluded and 631 enrolled and randomly assigned to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=316) or dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (n=315). Two participants in the bictegravir group did not receive at least one dose of their assigned drug and were excluded from analyses. At week 96, bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, with 276 (88%) of 314 participants in the bictegravir group versus 283 (90%) of 315 participants in the dolutegravir group achieving HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (difference -1·9%; 95% CI -6·9 to 3·1). The most common adverse events were nausea (36 [11%] of 314 for the bictegravir group vs 76 [24%] of 315 for the dolutegravir group), diarrhoea (48 [15%] vs 50 [16%]), and headache (41 [13%] vs 51 [16%]). 36 (11%) participants in the bictegravir group versus 39 (12%) participants in the dolutegravir group had a serious adverse event. Two individuals died in the bictegravir group (recreational drug overdose and suicide, neither of which was treatment related) and none died in the dolutegravir group. No participants discontinued because of adverse events in the bictegravir group compared with five (2%) of 315 in the dolutegravir group. Study drug-related adverse events were reported for 89 (28%) participants in the bictegravir group and 127 (40%) in the dolutegravir group. INTERPRETATION: These week 96 data support bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people living with HIV-1 with no emergent resistance. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Assessing statin effects on cardiovascular pathways in HIV using a novel proteomics approach: Analysis of data from INTREPID, a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: People with HIV (PWH) demonstrate increased cardiovascular disease (CVD), due in part to increased immune activation, inflammation, and endothelial dysfunction. METHODS: In a randomized trial (INTREPID), 252 HIV-infected participants with dyslipidemia and no history of coronary artery disease were randomized (1:1) to pitavastatin 4 mg vs. pravastatin 40 mg for 52 weeks. Using a proteomic discovery approach, 92 proteins biomarkers were assessed using Proximity Extension Assay technology to determine the effects of statins on key atherosclerosis and CVD pathways among PWH. 225 participants had specimens available for biomarker analysis pre- and post-baseline. FINDINGS: The mean age was 49.5 ±â€¯8.0 (mean ±â€¯SD), LDL-C 155 ±â€¯25 mg/dl and CD4 count 620 ±â€¯243 cell/mm3. Among all participants, three proteins significantly decreased: tissue factor pathway inhibitor [TFPI; t-statistic = -6.38, FDR p-value<0.0001], paraoxonase 3 [PON3; t-statistic = -4.64, FDR p-value = 0.0003], and LDL-receptor [LDLR; t-statistic = -4.45, FDR p-value = 0.0004]; and two proteins significantly increased galectin-4 [Gal-4; t-statistic = 3.50, FDR p-value = 0.01] and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 [IGFBP-2; t-statistic = 3.21, FDR p-value = 0.03]. The change in TFPI was significantly different between the pitavastatin and pravastatin groups. Among all participants, change in TFPI related to the change in LDL-C (r = 0.43, P < 0.0001) and change in Lp-PLA2 (r = 0.29, P < 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: Using a proteomics approach, we demonstrated that statins led to a significant reduction in the levels of TFPI, PON3, and LDLR and an increase in Gal-4 and IGFBP-2, key proteins involved in coagulation, redox signaling, oxidative stress, and glucose metabolism. Pitavastatin led to a greater reduction in TFPI than pravastatin. These data highlight potential novel mechanisms of statin effects among PWH. FUND: This work was supported by an investigator-initiated grant to S.K.G. from KOWA Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. and the National Institutes of Health [P30 DK040561; Nutrition Obesity Research Center at Harvard]. M.T. was support by National Institutes of Health [5KL2TR001100-05; Harvard Catalyst KL2 grant].

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2018 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

Importance: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is the cornerstone of prevention and management of HIV infection. Objective: To evaluate new data and treatments and incorporate this information into updated recommendations for initiating therapy, monitoring individuals starting therapy, changing regimens, and preventing HIV infection for individuals at risk. Evidence Review: New evidence collected since the International Antiviral Society-USA 2016 recommendations via monthly PubMed and EMBASE literature searches up to April 2018; data presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences. A volunteer panel of experts in HIV research and patient care considered these data and updated previous recommendations. Findings: ART is recommended for virtually all HIV-infected individuals, as soon as possible after HIV diagnosis. Immediate initiation (eg, rapid start), if clinically appropriate, requires adequate staffing, specialized services, and careful selection of medical therapy. An integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI) plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) is generally recommended for initial therapy, with unique patient circumstances (eg, concomitant diseases and conditions, potential for pregnancy, cost) guiding the treatment choice. CD4 cell count, HIV RNA level, genotype, and other laboratory tests for general health and co-infections are recommended at specified points before and during ART. If a regimen switch is indicated, treatment history, tolerability, adherence, and drug resistance history should first be assessed; 2 or 3 active drugs are recommended for a new regimen. HIV testing is recommended at least once for anyone who has ever been sexually active and more often for individuals at ongoing risk for infection. Preexposure prophylaxis with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and appropriate monitoring is recommended for individuals at risk for HIV. Conclusions and Relevance: Advances in HIV prevention and treatment with antiretroviral drugs continue to improve clinical management and outcomes for individuals at risk for and living with HIV.

The return of PRO 140, a CCR5-directed mAb.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although antiretroviral therapy has become more potent and tolerable, adherence remains a barrier to continuous viral suppression and new approaches are needed. PRO 140 is a C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5)-directed mAb with potential for weekly subcutaneous dosing. This review discusses data from the PRO 140 clinical development program including emerging data from ongoing efficacy studies. RECENT FINDINGS: Phase II development of PRO 140 began over a decade ago, and recently initiated phase IIb and III trials are ongoing in study participants with virologic failure and as monotherapy maintenance in virologically suppressed study participants. PRO 140 previously demonstrated potency against CCR5-tropic virus in parenteral formulations with excellent short-term safety and tolerability, and low potential for tropism shifts or resistance. Studies are ongoing in treatment-experienced patients with multidrug resistant virus and as monotherapy maintenance in virologically suppressed patients. Partial data are available from these studies. To date, only a small number of study participants have achieved durable success on monotherapy maintenance. SUMMARY: PRO 140 has demonstrated antiviral potency, a high barrier to resistance, and a promising short-term safety profile. Ongoing trials are exploring efficacy against CCR5-tropic virus resistant to current antiretroviral therapy and safety and efficacy as monotherapy maintenance in individuals with viral suppression.

Pitavastatin versus pravastatin in adults with HIV-1 infection and dyslipidaemia (INTREPID): 12 week and 52 week results of a phase 4, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: People living with HIV-1 infection are at greater risk for cardiovascular disease than seronegative adults. Treatment of dyslipidaemia with statins has been challenging in people with HIV because of an increased potential for drug interactions due to competing cytochrome P450 metabolism between statins and commonly used antiretroviral agents. Neither pitavastatin nor pravastatin depend on cytochrome P450 for primary metabolism. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pitavastatin versus pravastatin in adults with HIV and dyslipidaemia. METHODS: In the INTREPID (HIV-infected patieNts and TREatment with PItavastatin vs pravastatin for Dyslipidemia) randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 4 trial (INTREPID, we recruited adults aged 18-70 years with controlled HIV (with CD4 counts >200 cells per µL and HIV-1 RNA <200 copies per mL) on antiretroviral therapy for at least 6 months and dyslipidaemia (LDL cholesterol 3·4-5·7 mmol/L and triglycerides ≤4·5 mmol/L) from 45 sites in the USA and Puerto Rico. Patients being treated with darunavir, or who had homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia or any condition causing secondary dyslipidaemia, or a history of statin intolerance, diabetes, or coronary artery disease were not eligible. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to pitavastatin 4 mg or pravastatin 40 mg with matching placebos once daily orally for 12 weeks, followed by a 40 week safety extension. Randomisation was stratified by viral hepatitis B or C coinfection and computer-generated. Investigators, patients, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was percentage change in fasting serum LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 12 and the primary efficacy analysis was done in the modified intention-to-treat population. The safety analysis included all patients who took at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01301066. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2011, and March 29, 2013, we randomly assigned 252 patients to the pitavastatin (n=126) or pravastatin group (n=126). LDL cholesterol reduction was 31·1% with pitavastatin and 20·9% with pravastatin (least squares mean difference -9·8%, 95% CI -13·8 to -5·9; p<0·0001) at 12 weeks. At week 52, four patients (3%) in the pitavastatin group and six (5%) in the pravastatin group had virological failure, with no significant difference between treatments. Both treatments had neutral effects on glucose metabolism parameters. 85 patients treated with pitavastatin (68%) and 88 patients treated with pravastatin (70%) reported treatment-emergent adverse events, and these caused study discontinuation in six patients (5%) versus five patients (4%). No serious adverse event occurred in more than one participant and none were treatment-related according to investigator assessment. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhoea in the pitavastatin group (n=12, 10%) and upper respiratory tract infection in the pravastatin group (n=14, 11%). 11 treatment-emergent serious adverse events were noted in seven patients (6%) in the pitavastatin group (atrial septal defect, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chest pain, diverticulitis, enterovesical fistula, gastroenteritis, viral gastroenteritis, herpes dermatitis, multiple fractures, respiratory failure, and transient ischaemic attack) and four events in three patients (2%) in the pravastatin group (cerebrovascular accident, arteriosclerosis coronary artery, myocardial infraction, and muscle haemorrhage). In the pravastatin treatment group, one additional patient discontinued due to an adverse event (prostate cancer that was diagnosed during the screening period, 42 days before first dose of study treatment, and therefore was not a treatment-emergent adverse event). INTERPRETATION: The INTREPID results support guideline recommendations for pitavastatin as a preferred drug in the treatment of dyslipidaemia in people with HIV. FUNDING: Kowa Pharmaceuticals America and Eli Lilly and Company.

Randomized phase 2 trial of ixazomib and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma not refractory to bortezomib.

Proteasome inhibitors have become an integral part of myeloma therapy. Considerable efforts have gone into optimizing this therapeutic approach to obtain maximal proteasome inhibition with least toxicity. Ixazomib is the first oral proteasome inhibitor to enter the clinic and has been studied as a single agent as well as in various combinations. The current trial was designed to examine the efficacy and toxicity of combining 2 different doses of ixazomib (4 mg and 5.5 mg given weekly for 3 of 4 weeks) with 40 mg weekly of dexamethasone, in relapsed myeloma. Seventy patients were enrolled, 35 patients randomly assigned to each ixazomib dose. Overall, 30 (43%; 95% confidence interval, 31-55) of the patients achieved a confirmed partial response or better, with 31% achieving a response with 4 mg and 54% with 5.5 mg of ixazomib. The median event-free survival (EFS) for the entire study population was 8.4 months; 1-year overall survival was 96%. The EFS was 5.7 months for patients with prior bortezomib exposure and 11.0 months for bortezomib-naïve patients. A grade 3 or 4 adverse event considered at least possibly related to treatment was seen in 11 (32%) patients at 4 mg and in 21 (60%) at 5.5 mg. Dose reductions were more frequent with 5.5 mg dose. Overall, the ixazomib with dexamethasone has good efficacy in relapsed myeloma, is well-tolerated and with higher response rate at 5.5 mg, albeit with more toxicity. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01415882.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2016 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

IMPORTANCE: New data and therapeutic options warrant updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to treat or to prevent HIV infection in adults. OBJECTIVE: To provide updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adults (aged ≥18 years) with established HIV infection, including when to start treatment, initial regimens, and changing regimens, along with recommendations for using ARVs for preventing HIV among those at risk, including preexposure and postexposure prophylaxis. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A panel of experts in HIV research and patient care convened by the International Antiviral Society-USA reviewed data published in peer-reviewed journals, presented by regulatory agencies, or presented as conference abstracts at peer-reviewed scientific conferences since the 2014 report, for new data or evidence that would change previous recommendations or their ratings. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in the PubMed and EMBASE databases through April 2016. Recommendations were by consensus, and each recommendation was rated by strength and quality of the evidence. FINDINGS: Newer data support the widely accepted recommendation that antiretroviral therapy should be started in all individuals with HIV infection with detectable viremia regardless of CD4 cell count. Recommended optimal initial regimens for most patients are 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI). Other effective regimens include nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors or boosted protease inhibitors with 2 NRTIs. Recommendations for special populations and in the settings of opportunistic infections and concomitant conditions are provided. Reasons for switching therapy include convenience, tolerability, simplification, anticipation of potential new drug interactions, pregnancy or plans for pregnancy, elimination of food restrictions, virologic failure, or drug toxicities. Laboratory assessments are recommended before treatment, and monitoring during treatment is recommended to assess response, adverse effects, and adherence. Approaches are recommended to improve linkage to and retention in care are provided. Daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine is recommended for use as preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection in persons at high risk. When indicated, postexposure prophylaxis should be started as soon as possible after exposure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Antiretroviral agents remain the cornerstone of HIV treatment and prevention. All HIV-infected individuals with detectable plasma virus should receive treatment with recommended initial regimens consisting of an InSTI plus 2 NRTIs. Preexposure prophylaxis should be considered as part of an HIV prevention strategy for at-risk individuals. When used effectively, currently available ARVs can sustain HIV suppression and can prevent new HIV infection. With these treatment regimens, survival rates among HIV-infected adults who are retained in care can approach those of uninfected adults.

The state of engagement in HIV care in the United States: from cascade to continuum to control.

The National HIV/AIDS Strategy and the promise of treatment as prevention have garnered considerable attention from the policy, practice, and scientific communities, with the treatment cascade becoming the sentinel image illustrating the domestic human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic. The cascade depicts prevalence estimates for sequential steps from HIV diagnosis through viral suppression, the most striking of which is that >50% of persons diagnosed with HIV are not in medical care. This heterogeneous group includes individuals not linked to medical care following HIV diagnosis and those entering care who are not retained, requiring reengagement from a range of community settings. This review synthesizes the state of engagement in HIV care in the United States, focusing on research, practice, and policy considerations. Included are conceptual frameworks, a review of health implications, measurement, monitoring, and evidence-based intervention approaches, and a look to the future in addressing the greatest challenge and opportunity facing our domestic HIV epidemic.

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2012 recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: New trial data and drug regimens that have become available in the last 2 years warrant an update to guidelines for antiretroviral therapy (ART) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adults in resource-rich settings. OBJECTIVE: To provide current recommendations for the treatment of adult HIV infection with ART and use of laboratory-monitoring tools. Guidelines include when to start therapy and with what drugs, monitoring for response and toxic effects, special considerations in therapy, and managing antiretroviral failure. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA EXTRACTION: Data that had been published or presented in abstract form at scientific conferences in the past 2 years were systematically searched and reviewed by an International Antiviral Society-USA panel. The panel reviewed available evidence and formed recommendations by full panel consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Treatment is recommended for all adults with HIV infection; the strength of the recommendation and the quality of the evidence increase with decreasing CD4 cell count and the presence of certain concurrent conditions. Recommended initial regimens include 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine) plus a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (efavirenz), a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (atazanavir or darunavir), or an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (raltegravir). Alternatives in each class are recommended for patients with or at risk of certain concurrent conditions. CD4 cell count and HIV-1 RNA level should be monitored, as should engagement in care, ART adherence, HIV drug resistance, and quality-of-care indicators. Reasons for regimen switching include virologic, immunologic, or clinical failure and drug toxicity or intolerance. Confirmed treatment failure should be addressed promptly and multiple factors considered. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for HIV patient care include offering ART to all patients regardless of CD4 cell count, changes in therapeutic options, and modifications in the timing and choice of ART in the setting of opportunistic illnesses such as cryptococcal disease and tuberculosis.

Guidelines for improving entry into and retention in care and antiretroviral adherence for persons with HIV: evidence-based recommendations from an International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care panel.

DESCRIPTION: After HIV diagnosis, timely entry into HIV medical care and retention in that care are essential to the provision of effective antiretroviral therapy (ART). Adherence to ART is among the key determinants of successful HIV treatment outcome and is essential to minimize the emergence of drug resistance. The International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care convened a panel to develop evidence-based recommendations to optimize entry into and retention in care and ART adherence for people with HIV. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to produce an evidence base restricted to randomized, controlled trials and observational studies with comparators that had at least 1 measured biological or behavioral end point. A total of 325 studies met the criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted and coded data from each study using a standardized data extraction form. Panel members drafted recommendations based on the body of evidence for each method or intervention and then graded the overall quality of the body of evidence and the strength for each recommendation. RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations are provided for monitoring entry into and retention in care, interventions to improve entry and retention, and monitoring of and interventions to improve ART adherence. Recommendations cover ART strategies, adherence tools, education and counseling, and health system and service delivery interventions. In addition, they cover specific issues pertaining to pregnant women, incarcerated individuals, homeless and marginally housed individuals, and children and adolescents, as well as substance use and mental health disorders. Recommendations for future research in all areas are also provided.

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2010 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: Recent data regarding the consequences of untreated human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and the expansion of treatment choices for antiretroviral-naive and antiretroviral-experienced patients warrant an update of the International AIDS Society-USA guidelines for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adults with HIV infection. OBJECTIVES: To provide updated recommendations for management of HIV-infected adults, using antiretroviral drugs and laboratory monitoring tools available in the international, developed-world setting. This report provides guidelines for when to initiate antiretroviral therapy, selection of appropriate initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and what regimens to use when changing. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A panel with expertise in HIV research and clinical care reviewed relevant data published or presented at selected scientific conferences since the last panel report through April 2010. Data were identified through a PubMed search, review of scientific conference abstracts, and requests to antiretroviral drug manufacturers for updated clinical trials and adverse event data. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: New evidence was reviewed by the panel. Recommendations were drafted by section writing committees and reviewed and edited by the entire panel. The quality and strength of the evidence were rated and recommendations were made by full panel consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Patient readiness for treatment should be confirmed before initiation of antiretroviral treatment. Therapy is recommended for asymptomatic patients with a CD4 cell count < or = 500/microL, for all symptomatic patients, and those with specific conditions and comorbidities. Therapy should be considered for asymptomatic patients with CD4 cell count > 500/microL. Components of the initial and subsequent regimens must be individualized, particularly in the context of concurrent conditions. Patients receiving antiretroviral treatment should be monitored regularly; treatment failure should be detected and managed early, with the goal of therapy, even in heavily pretreated patients, being HIV-1 RNA suppression below commercially available assay quantification limits.

Phase 2a study of the CCR5 monoclonal antibody PRO 140 administered intravenously to HIV-infected adults.

The anti-CCR5 antibody PRO 140 has shown potent and prolonged antiretroviral activity in subjects infected with CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV-1. Prior studies have examined single intravenous doses ranging up to 5 mg/kg of body weight or up to three subcutaneous doses ranging up to 324 mg. Here we report the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that examined the antiviral activity, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single 5-mg/kg and 10-mg/kg intravenous infusions of PRO 140 in 31 treated subjects. Eligibility criteria included HIV-1 RNA levels of >5,000 copies/ml, CD4(+) cell counts of >300/µl, no antiretroviral therapy for ≥12 weeks, and detection of only R5 HIV-1 in the original Trofile assay. Following poststudy testing with an enhanced-sensitivity Trofile assay, one subject treated with 10 mg/kg was reclassified as having dual/mixed-tropic virus at screening, and the data for that subject were censored from efficacy analyses. The mean maximum reduction of the HIV-1 RNA level from the baseline level was 1.8 log(10) units for both the 5-mg/kg and 10-mg/kg doses (P < 0.0001 relative to placebo). Viral loads reached their nadir at day 12 posttreatment and remained significantly (P < 0.01) reduced through day 29 for both PRO 140 dose groups. Treatment was generally well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicity being observed. Peak serum concentrations and overall exposures increased proportionally with dose. In summary, single 5-mg/kg and 10-mg/kg doses of PRO 140 exhibited potent, long-lived antiviral activity and were generally well tolerated. The findings further delineate the safety and antiviral properties of this novel, long-acting antiretroviral agent.