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.

Clinical benefit of fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer and primary or acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors: final results of phase II Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Trial (SAKK 21/00).

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant, an estrogen receptor antagonist, in postmenopausal women with hormone-responsive tumors progressing after aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a phase II, open, multicenter, noncomparative study. Two patient groups were prospectively considered: group A (n=70) with AI-responsive disease and group B (n=20) with AI-resistant disease. Fulvestrant 250 mg was administered as intramuscular injection every 28 (+/-3) days. RESULTS: All patients were pretreated with AI and 84% also with tamoxifen or toremifene; 67% had bone metastases and 45% liver metastases. Fulvestrant administration was well tolerated and yielded a clinical benefit (CB; defined as objective response or stable disease [SD] for >or=24 weeks) in 28% (90% confidence interval [CI] 19% to 39%) of patients in group A and 37% (90% CI 19% to 58%) of patients in group B. Median time to progression (TTP) was 3.6 (95% CI 3.0 to 4.8) months in group A and 3.4 (95% CI 2.5 to 6.7) months in group B. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 30% of patients who had progressed following prior AI treatment gained CB with fulvestrant, thereby delaying indication to start chemotherapy. Prior response to an AI did not appear to be predictive for benefit with fulvestrant.

Residual antimalarials in malaria patients from Tanzania--implications on drug efficacy assessment and spread of parasite resistance.

Repeated antimalarial treatment for febrile episodes and self-treatment are common in malaria-endemic areas. The intake of antimalarials prior to participating in an in vivo study may alter treatment outcome and affect the interpretation of both efficacy and safety outcomes. We report the findings from baseline plasma sampling of malaria patients prior to inclusion into an in vivo study in Tanzania and discuss the implications of residual concentrations of antimalarials in this setting. In an in vivo study conducted in a rural area of Tanzania in 2008, baseline plasma samples from patients reporting no antimalarial intake within the last 28 days were screened for the presence of 14 antimalarials (parent drugs or metabolites) using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Among the 148 patients enrolled, 110 (74.3%) had at least one antimalarial in their plasma: 80 (54.1%) had lumefantrine above the lower limit of calibration (LLC = 4 ng/mL), 7 (4.7%) desbutyl-lumefantrine (4 ng/mL), 77 (52.0%) sulfadoxine (0.5 ng/mL), 15 (10.1%) pyrimethamine (0.5 ng/mL), 16 (10.8%) quinine (2.5 ng/mL) and none chloroquine (2.5 ng/mL). The proportion of patients with detectable antimalarial drug levels prior to enrollment into the study is worrying. Indeed artemether-lumefantrine was supposed to be available only at government health facilities. Although sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is only recommended for intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp), it was still widely used in public and private health facilities and sold in drug shops. Self-reporting of previous drug intake is unreliable and thus screening for the presence of antimalarial drug levels should be considered in future in vivo studies to allow for accurate assessment of treatment outcome. Furthermore, persisting sub-therapeutic drug levels of antimalarials in a population could promote the spread of drug resistance. The knowledge on drug pressure in a given population is important to monitor standard treatment policy implementation.