Long-Term Trends of HIV Type 1 Drug Resistance Prevalence among Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients in Switzerland.

Background. Accurate quantification of the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) drug resistance in patients who are receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) is difficult, and results from previous studies vary. We attempted to assess the prevalence and dynamics of resistance in a highly representative patient cohort from Switzerland. Methods. On the basis of genotypic resistance test results and clinical data, we grouped patients according to their risk of harboring resistant viruses. Estimates of resistance prevalence were calculated on the basis of either the proportion of individuals with a virologic failure or confirmed drug resistance (lower estimate) or the frequency-weighted average of risk group-specific probabilities for the presence of drug resistance mutations (upper estimate). Results. Lower and upper estimates of drug resistance prevalence in 8064 ART-exposed patients were 50% and 57% in 1999 and 37% and 45% in 2007, respectively. This decrease was driven by 2 mechanisms: loss to follow-up or death of high-risk patients exposed to mono- or dual-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor therapy (lower estimates range from 72% to 75%) and continued enrollment of low-risk patients who were taking combination ART containing boosted protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors as first-line therapy (lower estimates range from 7% to 12%). A subset of 4184 participants (52%) had 1 study visit per year during 2002-2007. In this subset, lower and upper estimates increased from 45% to 49% and from 52% to 55%, respectively. Yearly increases in prevalence were becoming smaller in later years. Conclusions. Contrary to earlier predictions, in situations of free access to drugs, close monitoring, and rapid introduction of new potent therapies, the emergence of drug-resistant viruses can be minimized at the population level. Moreover, this study demonstrates the necessity of interpreting time trends in the context of evolving cohort populations.

Efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir-based therapy for treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients: the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Darunavir was designed for activity against HIV resistant to other protease inhibitors (PIs). We assessed the efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir for treatment-experienced patients seen in clinical practice. METHODS: We included all patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study starting darunavir after recording a viral load above 1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL given prior exposure to both PIs and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We followed these patients for up to 72 weeks, assessed virological failure using different loss of virological response algorithms and evaluated risk factors for virological failure using a Bayesian method to fit discrete Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Among 130 treatment-experienced patients starting darunavir, the median age was 47 years, the median duration of HIV infection was 16 years, and 82% received mono or dual antiretroviral therapy before starting highly active antiretroviral therapy. During a median patient follow-up period of 45 weeks, 17% of patients stopped taking darunavir after a median exposure of 20 weeks. In patients followed beyond 48 weeks, the rate of virological failure at 48 weeks was at most 20%. Virological failure was more likely where patients had previously failed on both amprenavir and saquinavir and as the number of previously failed PI regimens increased. CONCLUSIONS: As a component of therapy for treatment-experienced patients, darunavir can achieve a similar efficacy and tolerability in clinical practice to that seen in clinical trials. Clinicians should consider whether a patient has failed on both amprenavir and saquinavir and the number of failed PI regimens before prescribing darunavir.

Assessment of the capacity to consent to treatment in patients admitted to acute medical wards.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of capacity to consent to treatment is an important legal and ethical issue in daily medical practice. In this study we carefully evaluated the capacity to consent to treatment in patients admitted to an acute medical ward using an assessment by members of the medical team, the specific Silberfeld's score, the MMSE and an assessment by a senior psychiatrist. METHODS: Over a 3 month period, 195 consecutive patients of an internal medicine ward in a university hospital were included and their capacity to consent was evaluated within 72 hours of admission. RESULTS: Among the 195 patients, 38 were incapable of consenting to treatment (unconscious patients or severe cognitive impairment) and 14 were considered as incapable of consenting by the psychiatrist (prevalence of incapacity to consent of 26.7%). Agreement between the psychiatrist's evaluation and the Silberfeld questionnaire was poor (sensitivity 35.7%, specificity 91.6%). Experienced clinicians showed a higher agreement (sensitivity 57.1%, specificity 96.5%). A decision shared by residents, chief residents and nurses was the best predictor for agreement with the psychiatric assessment (sensitivity 78.6%, specificity 94.3%). CONCLUSION: Prevalence of incapacity to consent to treatment in patients admitted to an acute internal medicine ward is high. While the standardized Silberfeld questionnaire and the MMSE are not appropriate for the evaluation of the capacity to consent in this setting, an assessment by the multidisciplinary medical team concurs with the evaluation by a senior psychiatrist.

Vaniprevir with pegylated interferon alpha-2a and ribavirin in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C: a randomized phase II study.

Vaniprevir (MK-7009) is a macrocyclic hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural protein 3/4A protease inhibitor. The aim of the present phase II study was to examine virologic response rates with vaniprevir in combination with pegylated interferon alpha-2a (Peg-IFN-α-2a) plus ribavirin (RBV). In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 infection (n = 94) were randomized to receive open-label Peg-IFN-α-2a (180 μg/week) and RBV (1,000-1,200 mg/day) in combination with blinded placebo or vaniprevir (300 mg twice-daily [BID], 600 mg BID, 600 mg once-daily [QD], or 800 mg QD) for 28 days, then open-label Peg-IFN-α-2a and RBV for an additional 44 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was rapid viral response (RVR), defined as undetectable plasma HCV RNA at week 4. Across all doses, vaniprevir was associated with a rapid two-phase decline in viral load, with HCV RNA levels approximately 3 log(10) IU/mL lower in vaniprevir-treated patients, compared to placebo recipients. Rates of RVR were significantly higher in each of the vaniprevir dose groups, compared to the control regimen (68.8%-83.3% versus 5.6%; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). There were numerically higher, but not statistically significant, early and sustained virologic response rates with vaniprevir, as compared to placebo. Resistance profile was predictable, with variants at R155 and D168 detected in a small number of patients. No relationship between interleukin-28B genotype and treatment outcomes was demonstrated in this study. The incidence of adverse events was generally comparable between vaniprevir and placebo recipients; however, vomiting appeared to be more common at higher vaniprevir doses. CONCLUSION: Vaniprevir is a potent HCV protease inhibitor with a predictable resistance profile and favorable safety profile that is suitable for QD or BID administration.

Reasons why emergency department providers do not rely on the pneumonia severity index to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Many emergency department (ED) providers do not follow guideline recommendations for the use of the pneumonia severity index (PSI) to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We identified the reasons why ED providers hospitalize low-risk patients or manage higher-risk patients as outpatients. METHODS: As a part of a trial to implement a PSI-based guideline for the initial site of treatment of patients with CAP, we analyzed data for patients managed at 12 EDs allocated to a high-intensity guideline implementation strategy study arm. The guideline recommended outpatient care for low-risk patients (nonhypoxemic patients with a PSI risk classification of I, II, or III) and hospitalization for higher-risk patients (hypoxemic patients or patients with a PSI risk classification of IV or V). We asked providers who made guideline-discordant decisions on site of treatment to detail the reasons for nonadherence to guideline recommendations. RESULTS: There were 1,306 patients with CAP (689 low-risk patients and 617 higher-risk patients). Among these patients, physicians admitted 258 (37.4%) of 689 low-risk patients and treated 20 (3.2%) of 617 higher-risk patients as outpatients. The most commonly reported reasons for admitting low-risk patients were the presence of a comorbid illness (178 [71.5%] of 249 patients); a laboratory value, vital sign, or symptom that precluded ED discharge (73 patients [29.3%]); or a recommendation from a primary care or a consulting physician (48 patients [19.3%]). Higher-risk patients were most often treated as outpatients because of a recommendation by a primary care or consulting physician (6 [40.0%] of 15 patients). CONCLUSION: ED providers hospitalize many low-risk patients with CAP, most frequently for a comorbid illness. Although higher-risk patients are infrequently treated as outpatients, this decision is often based on the request of an involved physician.

Continuous Sunitinib treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver (SASL) multicenter phase II trial (SAKK 77/06).

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (SU) is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenic activity. The objective of this trial was to demonstrate antitumor activity of continuous SU treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Key eligibility criteria included unresectable or metastatic HCC, no prior systemic anticancer treatment, measurable disease, and Child-Pugh class A or mild Child-Pugh class B liver dysfunction. Patients received 37.5 mg SU daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled. The median age was 63 years; 89% had Child-Pugh class A disease and 47% had distant metastases. PFS12 was rated successful in 15 patients (33%; 95% confidence interval, 20%-47%). Over the whole trial period, one complete response and a 40% rate of stable disease as the best response were achieved. The median PFS duration, disease stabilization duration, time to progression, and overall survival time were 1.5, 2.9, 1.5, and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infrequent. None of the 33 deaths were considered drug related. CONCLUSION: Continuous SU treatment with 37.5 mg daily is feasible and has moderate activity in patients with advanced HCC and mild to moderately impaired liver dysfunction. Under this trial design (>13 PFS12 successes), the therapy is considered promising. This is the first trial describing the clinical effects of continuous dosing of SU in HCC patients on a schedule that is used in an ongoing, randomized, phase III trial in comparison with the current treatment standard, sorafenib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00699374).

A phase I study of the oral platinum agent satraplatin in sequential combination with capecitabine in the treatment of patients with advanced solid malignancies.

Abstract Background. The broad spectrum of antitumor activity of both the oral platinum analogue satraplatin (S) and capecitabine (C), along with the advantage of their oral administration, prompted a clinical study aimed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination. Patients and methods. Four dose levels of S (mg/m(2)/day) and C (mg/m(2)/day) were evaluated in adult patients with advanced solid tumors: 60/1650, 80/1650, 60/2000, 70/2000; a course consisted of 28 days with sequential administration of S (days 1-5) and C (days 8-21) followed by one week rest. Results. Thirty-seven patients were treated, 24 in the dose escalation and 13 in the expansion phase; at the MTD, defined at S 70/C 2000, two patients presented dose limiting toxicities: lack of recovery of neutropenia by day 42 and nausea with dose skip of C. Most frequent toxicities were nausea (57%), diarrhea (51%), neutropenia (46%), anorexia, fatigue, vomiting (38% each). Two partial responses were observed in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer and one in prostate cancer. Conclusion. At S 70/C 2000 the combination of sequential S and C is tolerated with manageable toxicities; its evaluation in platinum and fluorouracil sensitive tumor types is worthwhile because of the easier administration and lack of nephro- and neurotoxicity as compared to parent compounds.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 with triple therapy comprising telaprevir or boceprevir.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a leading cause of chronic hepatitis, liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide. Two first-generation protease inhibitors, telaprevir and boceprevir, have recently been approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1. Triple therapy comprising pegylated interferon-α, ribavirin and telaprevir or boceprevir increases sustained virological response rates to ~70% and allows to shorten treatment duration in ~½ of treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1. Sustained virological response rates in treatment-experienced patients depend on the response to previous treatment, ranging from >80% in previous relapsers to ~30% in previous null responders. These advances come at the expense of new adverse effects and increased cost. In addition, treatment of chronic hepatitis C will become more complex. In these times of changing medical practice, the present expert opinion statement by the Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver shall provide guidance on the treatment of chronic hepatitis C with triple therapy comprising telaprevir or boceprevir.

Assessment of the capacity to consent to treatment in patients admitted to acute medical wards

RAPPORT DE SYNTHÈSE : Introduction: L'évaluation de la capacité de discernement est importante d'un point de vue légal et éthique dans l'activité médicale quotidienne. Dans cette étude, nous avons évalué attentivement la capacité de discernement chez les patients admis dans un service médical aigu en utilisant l'évaluation du personnel médical, le score spécifique de Silberfeld, le MMSE ainsi que l'évaluation du psychiatre. Méthode : Pendant 3 mois, 195 patients admis dans un service de médecine interne d'un hôpital universitaire ont été inclus et leur capacité de discernement a été évaluée durant les premières 72 heures d'admission. Résultats : Sur les 195 patients, 38 furent incapables de discernement manifestement (patients inconscients ou avec des déficits cognitifs sévères) et 14 furent considérés incapables de discernement par le psychiatre (prévalence de l'incapacité de discernement de 26.7%). La corrélation entre l'évaluation du psychiatre et le questionnaire de Silberfeld fut faible (sensibilité 35.7%, spécificité 91.6%). Les cliniciens expérimentés montrèrent une plus haute corrélation (sensibilité 57.1 %, spécificité 96.5%). L'avis partagé par l'assistant, par le chef de clinique et l'infirmière se révéla le meilleur indicateur de l'évaluation psychiatrique (sensibilité 78.6%, spécificité 94.3%). Conclusion : La prévalence de l'incapacité de discernement chez les patients admis dans un service de médecine interne est élevée. Alors que le questionnaire de Silberfeld et le MMSE ne sont pas indiqués pour évaluer la capacité de discernement dans cette étude, l'évaluation par une équipe médicale multidisciplinaire reflète le mieux l'évaluation du psychiatre.

An international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of pregabalin monotherapy in treatment of patients with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin monotherapy versus placebo for symptomatic pain relief and improvement of patient global assessment in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) enrolled from countries outside the United States. METHODS: This international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned 747 patients with FM to placebo or 300, 450, or 600 mg/day pregabalin twice daily for 14 weeks. Primary efficacy measures were endpoint mean pain scores and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Secondary outcomes included assessments of sleep and function. RESULTS: Patients in the 450 mg/day pregabalin group showed significant improvements versus placebo in endpoint mean pain score (-0.56; p = 0.0132), PGIC (73% improved vs 56% placebo; p = 0.0017), and function [Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score -5.85; p = 0.0012]. PGIC was also significant for 600 mg/day pregabalin (69% improved; p = 0.0227). Results for these endpoints were nonsignificant for pregabalin at 300 mg/day and for pain and FIQ score at 600 mg/day. Early onset of pain relief was seen, with separation from placebo detected by Week 1 in all pregabalin groups. All pregabalin doses demonstrated superiority to placebo on the Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep Scale Sleep Disturbance subscale and the Sleep Quality diary. Dizziness and somnolence were the most frequently reported adverse events. CONCLUSION: Pregabalin demonstrated modest efficacy in pain, global assessment, and function in FM at 450 mg/day, and improved sleep across all dose levels, but it did not provide consistent evidence of benefit at 300 and 600 mg/day in this study. Pregabalin was generally well tolerated for the treatment of FM. (Clinical trial registry NCT00333866).

Virologic and immunologic responses in treatment-naive patients to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or efavirenz with a common backbone.

Background: Atazanavir boosted with ritonavir (ATV/r) and efavirenz (EFV) are both recommended as first-line therapies for HIV-infected patients. We compared the 2 therapies for virologic efficacy and immune recovery. Methods: We included all treatment-naïve patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study starting therapy after May 2003 with either ATV/r or EFV and a backbone of tenofovir and either emtricitabine or lamivudine. We used Cox models to assess time to virologic failure and repeated measures models to assess the change in CD4 cell counts over time. All models were fit as marginal structural models using both point of treatment and censoring weights. Intent-to-treat and various as-treated analyses were carried out: In the latter, patients were censored at their last recorded measurement if they changed therapy or if they were no longer adherent to therapy. Results: Patients starting EFV (n = 1,097) and ATV/r (n = 384) were followed for a median of 35 and 37 months, respectively. During follow-up, 51% patients on EFV and 33% patients on ATV/r remained adherent and made no change to their first-line therapy. Although intent-to-treat analyses suggest virologic failure was more likely with ATV/r, there was no evidence for this disadvantage in patients who adhered to first-line therapy. Patients starting ATV/r had a greater increase in CD4 cell count during the first year of therapy, but this advantage disappeared after one year. Conclusions: In this observational study, there was no good evidence of any intrinsic advantage for one therapy over the other, consistent with earlier clinical trials. Differences between therapies may arise in a clinical setting because of differences in adherence to therapy.

Consensus 2012 sur le diagnostic et le traitement des patients atteints de démence en Suisse [Consensus 2012--diagnosis and treatment of patients with dementia in Switzerland].

The 2012 Swiss consensus paper on diagnosis and management of patients suffering from dementia resulted from the work of an expert panel who met on March 23d to 25th in Luzem. Based on a literature review, panel members wrote a first draft that was subsequently circulated among multiple dementia experts in Switzerland. After adaptation and revisions according to comments, all consulted dementia specialists and panel members fully endorse the consensus content. The conference was financed by the Swiss Alzheimer Forum.

Effects of pro-cholinergic treatment in patients suffering from spatial neglect.

Spatial neglect is a neurological condition characterized by a breakdown of spatial cognition contralateral to hemispheric damage. Deficits in spatial attention toward the contralesional side are considered to be central to this syndrome. Brain lesions typically involve right fronto-parietal cortices mediating attentional functions and subcortical connections in underlying white matter. Convergent findings from neuroimaging and behavioral studies in both animals and humans suggest that the cholinergic system might also be critically implicated in selective attention by modulating cortical function via widespread projections from the basal forebrain. Here we asked whether deficits in spatial attention associated with neglect could partly result from a cholinergic deafferentation of cortical areas subserving attentional functions, and whether such disturbances could be alleviated by pro-cholinergic therapy. We examined the effect of a single-dose transdermal nicotine treatment on spatial neglect in 10 stroke patients in a double-blind placebo-controlled protocol, using a standardized battery of neglect tests. Nicotine-induced systematic improvement on cancellation tasks and facilitated orienting to single visual targets, but had no significant effect on other tests. These results support a global effect of nicotine on attention and arousal, but no effect on other spatial mechanisms impaired in neglect.