Antiviral activity of apricitabine in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with M184V who are failing combination therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Apricitabine (ATC) is a novel deoxycytidine analogue nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) with significant antiviral activity in vitro, including activity against HIV-1 with reverse transcriptase mutations that confer resistance to other NRTIs. ATC has shown promising antiviral activity and good tolerability when given as monotherapy for 10 days in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: In this Phase II randomized, double-blind study, 51 treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with the reverse transcriptase mutation M184V who were failing therapy which included lamivudine (3TC) were randomized to receive twice-daily 600 mg ATC, 800 mg ATC or 150 mg 3TC for 21 days. Patients remained on their existing background regimen until day 21, when background therapy could be optimized according to genotype at screening. RESULTS: At day 21, the mean change in viral load was -0.71 and -0.90 log(10) HIV-1 RNA copies/mL in the 600 and 800 mg ATC groups, respectively, compared with a -0.03 log(10) change in the 3TC group. In patients with at least three thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) at baseline, greater reductions in viral load were observed in the 800 mg ATC group at day 21 than in the 600 mg ATC group. Few genotypic changes were detected at day 21 [two patients (600 mg ATC) lost and three patients (800 mg ATC) gained a TAM] and all patients with detectable virus retained the M184V mutation. The safety profiles of the two ATC doses were similar to that of 3TC. CONCLUSIONS: Over the 21-day treatment period, ATC showed promising antiviral activity and was well tolerated in treatment-experienced patients with M184V, with or without additional TAMs.

Dual therapy with raltegravir plus a fixed dose combination of darunavir/ritonavir in people living with HIV in Argentina.

OBJECTIVE: There are generic fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r) available in Argentina. Experiences with these FDCs in dual therapy remain limited in clinical practice. We aimed to describe clinical and virologic outcomes in patients exposed to FDC DRV/r + raltegravir (RAL) 400 mg every 12 h in a real-life setting. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of electronic medical records of HIV-infected patients under FDC DRV/r + RAL in an HIV clinic in Argentina (2014-2018). Individuals were classified as "switch group" (SG, undetectable viral load [VL] with any toxicity/comorbidity) and "virologic group· (VG, detectable viremia and infection by multidrug-resistant HIV). RESULTS: Of 7,380 patients on ART, 116 (1.5%) received FDC DRV/r + RAL, being 58% in SG. Sixty percent received DRV/r 800/100 mg dose (rest, 600/100 mg). The median (IQR) age and CD4+ T-cell count were: 52 (42-58) years, and 373 cell/µL (202-642). Ninety-eight percent were ART-experienced with a median of 3 (IQR 2-5) prior treatments. Main reasons for switch (SG) were renal (57%), cardiovascular (54%) and bone (14%) comorbidities. Median exposure to DRV/r + RAL was 18 months. Among patients in SG, 98% and 96% had undetectable VL at 6 and 12 months; in the VG, 89% and 87% had undetectable VL at 6 and 12 months. No patient required suspension due to toxicity/ intolerance. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of mostly experienced HIV-infected patients, FDC DRV/r + RAL was effective and safe. Such therapy may be considered an option for patients with comorbid conditions and/or with multidrug-resistant HIV.

Resistance to HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors in Argentina: first interim survey.

OBJECTIVE: No data on resistance to HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors (InSTIs) in Argentina are available as access to these drugs and to integrase genotypic resistance test is limited. We aimed to evaluate the clinical profile of patients who underwent an integrase genotypic resistance test, prevalence of InSTI resistance mutations and predicted efficacy of raltegravir, elvitegravir and dolutegravir in our country. METHODS: Retrospective multicentric pilot survey from January 2011 to November 2017 of InSTI-failing patients assisted at two private and one public healthcare institutions located in Buenos Aires city, Argentina. RESULTS: Sixty seven patients were included. Patients had a median of 5 (4-7) prior treatments. All patients had InSTI-containing regimens (median exposure of 22.5 months); 94% were under raltegravir therapy and 71.9% had InSTI-resistance mutations. Predominant major mutations were N155H (35.1%), Q148H/R (15.8%) and G140A/S (14%). Considering Stanford HIVdb program, extremely low and identical activity of raltegravir and elvitegravir was described while dolutegravir remained either partially or fully active in 97.7% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Integrase resistance test was prescribed almost exclusively in heavily pretrated raltegravir-exposed patients. The three main mutational pathways were described, with a predominance of N155H. Despite almost null susceptibility and extensive cross resistance was shown among raltegravir and elvitegravir, dolutegravir remains active in the majority of patients.

Comparison of first-line antiretroviral therapy with regimens including nevirapine, efavirenz, or both drugs, plus stavudine and lamivudine: a randomised open-label trial, the 2NN Study.

BACKGROUND: The 2NN Study was a randomised comparison of the non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) nevirapine and efavirenz. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised trial, 1216 antiretroviral-therapy-naive patients were assigned nevirapine 400 mg once daily, nevirapine 200 mg twice daily, efavirenz 600 mg once daily, or nevirapine (400 mg) and efavirenz (800 mg) once daily, plus stavudine and lamivudine, for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with treatment failure (less than 1 log(10) decline in plasma HIV-1 RNA in the first 12 weeks or two consecutive measurements of more than 50 copies per mL from week 24 onwards, disease progression [new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention grade C event or death], or change of allocated treatment). Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Treatment failure occurred in 96 (43.6%) of 220 patients assigned nevirapine once daily, 169 (43.7%) of 387 assigned nevirapine twice daily, 151 (37.8%) of 400 assigned efavirenz, and 111 (53.1%) of 209 assigned nevirapine plus efavirenz. The difference between nevirapine twice daily and efavirenz was 5.9% (95% CI -0.9 to 12.8). There were no significant differences among the study groups in the proportions with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations below 50 copies per mL at week 48 (p=0.193) or the increases in CD4-positive cells (p=0.800). Nevirapine plus efavirenz was associated with the highest frequency of clinical adverse events, and nevirapine once daily with significantly more hepatobiliary laboratory toxicities than efavirenz. Of 25 observed deaths, two were attributed to nevirapine. INTERPRETATION: Antiretroviral therapy with nevirapine or efavirenz showed similar efficacy, so triple-drug regimens with either NNRTI are valid for first-line treatment. There are, however, differences in safety profiles. Combination of nevirapine and efavirenz did not improve efficacy but caused more adverse events.

Antibiotic management of outpatients with endocarditis due to penicillin-susceptible streptococci.

Thirty patients with endocarditis caused by penicillin-susceptible streptococci were enrolled in one of two groups in this study. Fifteen patients received ceftriaxone (2 g once daily) for 4 weeks; the other 15 received the same dosage of ceftriaxone for 2 weeks and then received oral amoxicillin (1 g four times a day) for 2 weeks. For the 27 patients treated predominantly as outpatients, 380 days of hospitalization were avoided. Clinical cure was achieved for all patients in both groups. We conclude that ceftriaxone, alone or followed by a course of amoxicillin, is an efficacious mode of treatment for infective endocarditis caused by penicillin-susceptible streptococci. Treatment with these agents can be administered predominantly on an outpatient basis.

[Analysis of urinary infection in the 1st month after kidney transplantation. Value of short prophylaxis with norfloxacin]. / Análisis de la infección urinaria en el primer mes postrasplante renal. Valor de la profilaxis corta con norfloxacino.

Urinary tract infection is the most common complication in the first month after renal transplant, and it is associated with rejection and relapses. In addition, it is the leading cause of gram negative bacilli bacteremia. In a program of continuous epidemiological surveillance from March 1979 to October 1988, we evaluated the urinary tract infections in the first month after renal transplant, considering the following variables: duration of bladder catheterization, urologic complications, type of immunosuppression and preoperative and postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. There were no differences between the development of urinary tract infections in relation with the duration of bladder catheterization (7 vs 4 days), the reduction of urologic complications (21 vs 6%), or with the introduction of cyclosporin to the conventional immunosuppressive regimen. However, when the group of 46 patients receiving postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (norfloxacin 800 mg/day every 12 h during the time of vesical catheterization less than or equal to 4 days) was compared with the 147 without postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, the rate of urinary tract infection in the first month was 8.7% vs 32.8%, respectively (p less than 0.01). Short-term prophylaxis with norfloxacin was a useful regimen, with good oral tolerance and a similar therapeutic efficacy as the sustained regimens reported in the literature.