Transfer Entropy as a Tool for Hydrodynamic Model Validation.

The validation of numerical models is an important component of modeling to ensure reliability of model outputs under prescribed conditions. In river deltas, robust validation of models is paramount given that models are used to forecast land change and to track water, solid, and solute transport through the deltaic network. We propose using transfer entropy (TE) to validate model results. TE quantifies the information transferred between variables in terms of strength, timescale, and direction. Using water level data collected in the distributary channels and inter-channel islands of Wax Lake Delta, Louisiana, USA, along with modeled water level data generated for the same locations using Delft3D, we assess how well couplings between external drivers (river discharge, tides, wind) and modeled water levels reproduce the observed data couplings. We perform this operation through time using ten-day windows. Modeled and observed couplings compare well; their differences reflect the spatial parameterization of wind and roughness in the model, which prevents the model from capturing high frequency fluctuations of water level. The model captures couplings better in channels than on islands, suggesting that mechanisms of channel-island connectivity are not fully represented in the model. Overall, TE serves as an additional validation tool to quantify the couplings of the system of interest at multiple spatial and temporal scales.

Reduction of soluble CD163, substance P, programmed death 1 and inflammatory markers: phase 1B trial of aprepitant in HIV-1-infected adults.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated safety, antiviral, immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties of aprepitant - a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist. DESIGN: Phase IB randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study. METHODS: Eighteen patients were randomized (nine to aprepitant and nine to placebo). The patients received once-daily treatment (375 mg aprepitant or placebo by oral administration) for 2 weeks and were followed off drug for 4 weeks. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in the plasma viremia or CD4(+) T cells during the dosing period. Aprepitant treatment was associated with significant decreases of median within patient change in percentages of CD4(+) T cells expressing programmed death 1 (-4.8%; P = 0.04), plasma substance P (-34.0 pg/ml; P = 0.05) and soluble CD163 (-563 ng/ml; P = 0.02), with no significant changes in the placebo arm. Mean peak aprepitant plasma concentration on day 14 was 7.6 ± 3.1 µg/ml. The use of aprepitant was associated with moderate increases in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein and high-density lipoprotein (median change = +31 mg/dl, P = 0.01; +26 mg/dl, P = 0.02; +3 mg/dl, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: Aprepitant was safe and well tolerated. At the dose used in this proof-of-concept phase IB study, aprepitant did not show a significant antiviral activity. Aprepitant-treated patients had decreased numbers of CD4(+) programmed death 1-positive cells and decreased plasma levels of substance P and soluble CD163, suggesting that blockade of the neurokinin 1 receptor pathway has a role in modulating monocyte activation in HIV infection. Prospective studies in virologically-suppressed individuals are warranted to evaluate the immunomodulatory properties of aprepitant. Exposures exceeding those attained in this trial are more likely to elicit clinical benefit.

A randomized, placebo controlled, double masked phase IB study evaluating the safety and antiviral activity of aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist in HIV-1 infected adults.

BACKGROUND: Neurokinin-1 receptor (NK1R) antagonists have anti-HIV activity in monocyte-derived macrophages, decrease CCR5 expression and improve natural killer cell function ex vivo. Aprepitant is a NK1R antagonist approved by FDA as an antiemetic. METHODS: We conducted a phase IB randomized, placebo controlled, double masked study to evaluate the safety, antiviral activity, pharmacokinetics and immune-modulatory effects of aprepitant in HIV-infected adults not receiving antiretroviral therapy, with CD4+ cell count ≥350 cells/mm(3) and plasma viral load ≥2,000 copies/ml. Subjects were stratified by viral load (< vs. ≥20,000 copies/ml) and randomized within each stratum to receive aprepitant at 125 mg QD(Low), or 250 mg QD(High), or placebo(PL) for 14 days, and followed for 42 days. RESULTS: Thirty subjects were randomized and 27 completed treatment (9, 8, 10 subjects in 125 (Low), 250 (High), and PL groups). 63% were male; 37% white; mean (SD) age 43 (9.3) years. Geometric mean baseline viral load (copies/ml) for Low, High, and PL was 15,709, 33,013, and 19,450, respectively. Mean (95%CI) change in log10 viral load at day 14 for Low, High, and PL was -0.02(-0.24,+0.20), -0.05(-0.21,+0.10), and +0.04(-0.08,+0.16), respectively. The number of subjects with AEs was 4(44.4%), 5(62.5%), and 1(10%) for Low, High, and PL. No Grade 4 AEs occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events of aprepitant were more common in the treated groups. At the dose used in this two-week phase IB study, aprepitant showed biological activity, but no significant antiviral activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00428519.

Poor immunogenicity of the H1N1 2009 vaccine in well controlled HIV-infected individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the H1N1 2009 vaccine in HIV-positive individuals. DESIGN: A single-arm study. SETTING: Clinic at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. PARTICIPANTS: HIV-infected adults with an indication for H1N1 vaccination. INTERVENTION: Single intramuscular 15 microg dose of the monovalent, unadjuvanted, inactivated, split virus H1N1 vaccine. MAIN OUTCOMES: Immunogenicity, safety and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 120 participants were enrolled, 71% men, 68% African-American, with median age of 46 years. All of them but one were on antiretroviral treatment, with a median current CD4 cell counts of 502 cells/microl, and a nadir CD4 cell counts of 132 cells/microl. The HIV RNA level was below 400 copies/ml in 92% of participants. All participants completed the 3 weeks of follow-up. Thirty of the 120 (25%) participants had antibody hemagglutination-inhibition assay titers equal or greater than 1: 40 at baseline. Among participants without evidence of previous exposure, only 61% develop protective titers by week 3 of the study. Nonresponders had lower current and nadir CD4 cell counts than responders. Only four of nine participants with detectable HIV viral load at baseline developed protective antibody titers. Age and race were not predictors of the response to the vaccine. The vaccine was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that only 60% of well controlled HIV-infected individuals without preexisting immunity to H1N1 develop protective antibody titers after immunization. Alternative vaccines, dosing, adjuvants or schedule strategies are needed to achieve effective immunization of this vulnerable population.