Determinants of sustained viral suppression in HIV-infected patients with self-reported poor adherence to antiretroviral therapy.

BACKGROUND: Good adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) is critical for successful HIV treatment. However, some patients remain virologically suppressed despite suboptimal adherence. We hypothesized that this could result from host genetic factors influencing drug levels. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Caucasians treated with efavirenz (EFV) and/or boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) with self-reported poor adherence, defined as missing doses of ART at least weekly for more than 6 months. Participants were genotyped for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes previously reported to decrease EFV (rs3745274, rs35303484, rs35979566 in CYP2B6) and LPV/r clearance (rs4149056 in SLCO1B1, rs6945984 in CYP3A, rs717620 in ABCC2). Viral suppression was defined as having HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/ml throughout the study period. RESULTS: From January 2003 until May 2009, 37 individuals on EFV (28 suppressed and 9 not suppressed) and 69 on LPV/r (38 suppressed and 31 not suppressed) were eligible. The poor adherence period was a median of 32 weeks with 18.9% of EFV and 20.3% of LPV/r patients reporting missed doses on a daily basis. The tested SNPs were not determinant for viral suppression. Reporting missing >1 dose/week was associated with a lower probability of viral suppression compared to missing 1 dose/week (EFV: odds ratio (OR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.01-0.99; LPV/r: OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.94). In both groups, the probability of remaining suppressed increased with the duration of continuous suppression prior to the poor adherence period (EFV: OR 3.40, 95% CI: 0.62-18.75; LPV/r: OR 5.65, 95% CI: 1.82-17.56). CONCLUSIONS: The investigated genetic variants did not play a significant role in the sustained viral suppression of individuals with suboptimal adherence. Risk of failure decreased with longer duration of viral suppression in this population.

Higher CNS penetration-effectiveness of long-term combination antiretroviral therapy is associated with better HIV-1 viral suppression in cerebrospinal fluid.

OBJECTIVES: To determine HIV-1 RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of successfully treated patients and to evaluate if combination antiretroviral treatments with higher central nervous system penetration-effectiveness (CPE) achieve better CSF viral suppression. METHODS: Viral loads (VLs) and drug concentrations of lopinavir, atazanavir, and efavirenz were measured in plasma and CSF. The CPE was calculated using 2 different methods. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 87 CSF samples of 60 patients. In 4 CSF samples, HIV-1 RNA was detectable with 43-82 copies per milliliter. Median CPE in patients with detectable CSF VL was significantly lower compared with individuals with undetectable VL: CPE of 1.0 (range, 1.0-1.5) versus 2.3 (range, 1.0-3.5) using the method of 2008 (P = 0.011) and CPE of 6 (range, 6-8) versus 8 (range, 5-12) using the method of 2010 (P = 0.022). The extrapolated CSF trough levels for atazanavir (n = 12) were clearly above the 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) in only 25% of samples; both patients on atazanavir/ritonavir with detectable CSF HIV-1 RNA had trough levels in the range of the presumed IC50. The extrapolated CSF trough level for lopinavir (n = 42) and efavirenz (n = 18) were above the IC50 in 98% and 78%, respectively, of samples, including the patients with detectable CSF HIV-1 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that treatment regimens with high intracerebral efficacy reflected by a high CPE score are essential to achieve CSF HIV-1 RNA suppression. The CPE score including all drug components was a better predictor for treatment failure in the CSF than the sole concentrations of protease inhibitor or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor in plasma or CSF.

Viral suppression rates in salvage treatment with raltegravir improved with the administration of genotypic partially active or inactive nucleoside/tide reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) are often administered in salvage therapy even if genotypic resistance tests (GRTs) indicate high-level resistance, but little is known about the benefit of these additional NRTIs. METHODS: The effect of <2 compared with 2 NRTIs on viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL) at week 24 was studied in salvage patients receiving raltegravir. Intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed; last observation carried forward imputation was used to deal with missing information. Logistic regressions were weighted to create a pseudopopulation in which the probability of receiving <2 and 2 NRTIs was unrelated to baseline factors predicting treatment response. RESULTS: One-hundred thirty patients were included, of whom 58.5% (n = 76) received <2 NRTIs. NRTIs were often replaced by other drug classes. Patients with 2 NRTIs received less additional drug classes compared with patients with <2 NRTIs [median (IQR): 1 (1-2) compared with 2 (1-2), P Wilcoxon < 0.001]. The activity of non-NRTI treatment components was lower in the 2 NRTIs group compared with the <2 NRTIs group [median (IQR) genotypic sensitivity score: 2 (1.5-2.5) compared with 2.5 (2-3), P Wilcoxon < 0.001]. The administration of <2 NRTIs was associated with a worse viral suppression rate at week 24. The odds ratios were 0.34 (95% confidence interval: 0.13 to 0.89, P = 0.027) and 0.19 (95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.79, P = 0.023) when performing the last observation carried forward and the per-protocol approach, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that partially active or inactive NRTIs contribute to treatment response, and thus the use of 2 NRTIs in salvage regimens that include raltegravir seems warranted.

Transient detectable viremia and the risk of viral rebound in patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Temporary increases in plasma HIV RNA ('blips') are common in HIV patients on combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Blips above 500 copies/mL have been associated with subsequent viral rebound. It is not clear if this relationship still holds when measurements are made using newer more sensitive assays. METHODS: We selected antiretroviral-naive patients that then recorded one or more episodes of viral suppression on cART with HIV RNA measurements made using more sensitive assays (lower limit of detection below 50 copies/ml). We estimated the association in these episodes between blip magnitude and the time to viral rebound. RESULTS: Four thousand ninety-four patients recorded a first episode of viral suppression on cART using more sensitive assays; 1672 patients recorded at least one subsequent suppression episode. Most suppression episodes (87 %) were recorded with TaqMan version 1 or 2 assays. Of the 2035 blips recorded, 84 %, 12 % and 4 % were of low (50-199 copies/mL), medium (200-499 copies/mL) and high (500-999 copies/mL) magnitude respectively. The risk of viral rebound increased as blip magnitude increased with hazard ratios of 1.20 (95 % CI 0.89-1.61), 1.42 (95 % CI 0.96-2.19) and 1.93 (95 % CI 1.24-3.01) for low, medium and high magnitude blips respectively; an increase of hazard ratio 1.09 (95 % CI 1.03 to 1.15) per 100 copies/mL of HIV RNA. CONCLUSIONS: With the more sensitive assays now commonly used for monitoring patients, blips above 200 copies/mL are increasingly likely to lead to viral rebound and should prompt a discussion about adherence.

A conceptual framework to assess the effectiveness of HIV prevention

Aim: The relative effectiveness of different methods of prevention of HIV transmission is a subject of debate that is renewed with the integration of each new method. The relative weight of values and evidence in decision-making is not always clearly defined. Debate is often confused, as the proponents of different approaches address the issue at different levels of implementation. This paper defines and delineates the successive levels of analysis of effectiveness, and proposes a conceptual framework to clarify debate. Method / Issue: Initially inspired from work on contraceptive effectiveness, a first version of the conceptual framework was published in 1993 with definition of the Condom Effectiveness Matrix (Spencer, 1993). The framework has since integrated and further developed thinking around distinctions made between efficacy and effectiveness and has been applied to HIV prevention in general. Three levels are defined: theoretical effectiveness (ThE), use-effectiveness (UseE) and population use-effectiveness (PopUseE). For example, abstinence and faithfulness, as proposed in the ABC strategy, have relatively high theoretical effectiveness but relatively low effectiveness at subsequent levels of implementation. The reverse is true of circumcision. Each level is associated with specific forms of scientific enquiry and associated research questions: basic and clinical sciences with ThE; clinical and social sciences with UseE; epidemiology and social, economic and political sciences with PopUseE. Similarly, the focus of investigation moves from biological organisms, to the individual at the physiological and then psychological, social and ecological level, and finally takes as perspective populations and societies as a whole. The framework may be applied to analyse issues on any approach. Hence, regarding consideration of HIV treatment as a means of prevention, examples of issues at each level would be: ThE: achieving adequate viral suppression and non-transmission to partners; UseE: facility and degree of adherence to treatment and medical follow-up; PopUseE: perceived validity of strategy, feasibility of achieving adequate population coverage. Discussion: Use of the framework clarifies the questions that need to be addressed at all levels in order to improve effectiveness. Furthermore, the interconnectedness and complementary nature of research from the different scientific disciplines and the relative contribution of each become apparent. The proposed framework could bring greater rationality to the prevention effectiveness debate and facilitate communication between stakeholders.

Outcomes of patients on dual-boosted PI regimens: experience of the Swiss HIV cohort study.

Dual-boosted protease inhibitors (DBPI) are an option for salvage therapy for HIV-1 resistant patients. Patients receiving a DBPI in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study between January1996 and March 2007 were studied. Outcomes of interest were viral suppression at 24 weeks. 295 patients (72.5%) were on DBPI for over 6 months. The median duration was 2.2 years. Of 287 patients who had HIV-RNA >400 copies/ml at the start of the regimen, 184 (64.1%) were ever suppressed while on DBPI and 156 (54.4%) were suppressed within 24 weeks. The median time to suppression was 101 days (95% confidence interval 90-125 days). The median number of past regimens was 6 (IQR, 3-8). The main reasons for discontinuing the regimen were patient's wish (48.3%), treatment failure (22.5%), and toxicity (15.8%). Acquisition of HIV through intravenous drug use and the use of lopinavir in combination with saquinavir or atazanavir were associated with an increased likelihood of suppression within 6 months. Patients on DBPI are heavily treatment experienced. Viral suppression within 6 months was achieved in more than half of the patients. There may be a place for DBPI regimens in settings where more expensive alternates are not available.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of efavirenz dose reduction using an in vitro-in vivo extrapolation model.

The pharmacokinetics (PK) of efavirenz (EFV) is characterized by marked interpatient variability that correlates with its pharmacodynamics (PD). In vitro-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) is a "bottom-up" approach that combines drug data with system information to predict PK and PD. The aim of this study was to simulate EFV PK and PD after dose reductions. At the standard dose, the simulated probability was 80% for viral suppression and 28% for central nervous system (CNS) toxicity. After a dose reduction to 400 mg, the probabilities of viral suppression were reduced to 69, 75, and 82%, and those of CNS toxicity were 21, 24, and 29% for the 516 GG, 516 GT, and 516 TT genotypes, respectively. With reduction of the dose to 200 mg, the probabilities of viral suppression decreased to 54, 62, and 72% and those of CNS toxicity decreased to 13, 18, and 20% for the 516 GG, 516 GT, and 516 TT genotypes, respectively. These findings indicate how dose reductions might be applied in patients with favorable genetic characteristics.

Implementation of raltegravir in routine clinical practice: selection criteria for choosing this drug, virologic response rates, and characteristics of failures.

BACKGROUND: Raltegravir (RAL) achieved remarkable virologic suppression rates in randomized-clinical trials, but today efficacy data and factors for treatment failures in a routine clinical care setting are limited. METHODS: First, factors associated with a switch to RAL were identified with a logistic regression including patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study with a history of 3 class failure (n = 423). Second, predictors for virologic outcome were identified in an intent-to-treat analysis including all patients who received RAL. Last observation carried forward imputation was used to determine week 24 response rate (HIV-1 RNA >or= 50 copies/mL). RESULTS: The predominant factor associated with a switch to RAL in patients with suppressed baseline RNA was a regimen containing enfuvirtide [odds ratio 41.9 (95% confidence interval: 11.6-151.6)]. Efficacy analysis showed an overall response rate of 80.9% (152/188), whereas 71.8% (84/117) and 95.8% (68/71) showed viral suppression when stratified for detectable and undetectable RNA at baseline, respectively. Overall CD4 cell counts increased significantly by 42 cells/microL (P < 0.001). Characteristics of failures were a genotypic sensitivity score of the background regimen <or=1, very low RAL plasma concentrations, poor adherence, and high viral load at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Virologic suppression rates in our routine clinical care setting were promising and comparable with data from previously published randomized-controlled trials.

Réplication cérébrale du VIH malgré une thérapie antirétrovirale efficace: impact clinique et prise en charge [Intracerebral HIV replication despite an efficient antiretroviral treatment: clinical impact and management].

Various neurological and neuropsychological manifestations are still relatively frequently reported in HIV infected patients in the highly active antiretroviral therapy era. A fraction of them could be related to HIV replication in the central nervous system (CNS) despite adequate peripheral viral suppression. This hypothesis is supported by numerous reports of detectable HIV RNA in the cerebrospinal fluid in the context of a low or undetectable viremia in association with neurological or neuropsychological complaints. In addition, some antiviral molecules may not achieve adequate levels in the CNS, thus potentially favoring intracerebral HIV replication and even antiretroviral resistance. Neurologic manifestations in the presence of CNS HIV replication often decrease after antiretroviral treatment CNS penetration optimization.

Patterns of Adherence to Raltegravir-Based Regimens and the Risk of Virological Failure Among HIV-Infected Patients: The RALTECAPS Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:: Adherence patterns and their influence on virologic outcome are well characterized for protease inhibitor (PI)- and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based regimens. We aimed to determine how patterns of adherence to raltegravir influence the risk of virological failure. We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort following 81 HIV-infected antiretroviral-naive or experienced subjects receiving or starting twice-a-day raltegravir-based antiretroviral therapy. Their adherence patterns were monitored using the Medication Events Monitoring System. During follow-up (188 days, ±77), 12 (15%) of 81 subjects experienced virological failure. Longer treatment interruption [adjusted odds ratio per 24-hour increase: 2.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 6.9; P < 0.02] and average adherence (odds ratio per 5% increase: 0.68; 95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.00, P < 0.05) were both independently associated with virological failure controlling for prior duration of viral suppression. Timely interdose intervals and high levels of adherence to raltegravir are both necessary to control HIV replication.

Virological and immunological responses to efavirenz or boosted lopinavir as first-line therapy for patients with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz and lopinavir boosted with ritonavir are both recommended as first-line therapies for patients with HIV when combined with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. It is uncertain which therapy is more effective for patients starting therapy with an advanced infection. METHODS: We estimated the relative effect of these two therapies on rates of virological and immunological failure within the Swiss HIV Cohort Study and considered whether estimates depended on the CD4(+) T-cell count when starting therapy. We defined virological failure as either an incomplete virological response or viral rebound after viral suppression and immunological failure as failure to achieve an expected CD4(+) T-cell increase calculated from EuroSIDA statistics. RESULTS: Patients starting efavirenz (n=660) and lopinavir (n=541) were followed for a median of 4.5 and 3.1 years, respectively. Virological failure was less likely for patients on efavirenz, with the adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.63 (0.50-0.78) then multiplied by a factor of 1.00 (0.90-1.12) for each 100 cells/mm(3) decrease in CD4(+) T-cell count below the mean when starting therapy. Immunological failure was also less likely for patients on efavirenz, with the adjusted hazard ratio of 0.68 (0.51-0.91) then multiplied by a factor of 1.29 (1.14-1.46) for each 100 cells/mm(3) decrease in CD4(+) T-cell count below the mean when starting therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Virological failure is less likely with efavirenz regardless of the CD4(+) T-cell count when starting therapy. Immunological failure is also less likely with efavirenz; however, this advantage disappears if patients start therapy with a low CD4(+) T-cell count.

Minor protease inhibitor mutations at baseline do not increase the risk for a virological failure in HIV-1 subtype B infected patients.

BACKGROUND: Minor protease inhibitor (PI) mutations often exist as polymorphisms in HIV-1 sequences from treatment-naïve patients. Previous studies showed that their presence impairs the antiretroviral treatment (ART) response. Evaluating these findings in a larger cohort is essential. METHODS: To study the impact of minor PI mutations on time to viral suppression and time to virological failure, we included patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study infected with HIV-1 subtype B who started first-line ART with a PI and two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Cox regression models were performed to compare the outcomes among patients with 0 and ≥ 1 minor PI mutation. Models were adjusted for baseline HIV-1 RNA, CD4 cell count, sex, transmission category, age, ethnicity, year of ART start, the presence of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mutations, and stratified for the administered PIs. RESULTS: We included 1199 patients of whom 944 (78.7%) received a boosted PI. Minor PI mutations associated with the administered PI were common: 41.7%, 16.1%, 4.7% and 1.9% had 1, 2, 3 or ≥ 4 mutations, respectively. The time to viral suppression was similar between patients with 0 (reference) and ≥ 1 minor PI mutation (multivariable hazard ratio (HR): 1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-1.3], P = .196). The time to virological failure was also similar (multivariable HR:.9 [95% CI:.5-1.6], P = .765). In addition, the impact of each single minor PI mutation was analyzed separately: none was significantly associated with the treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of minor PI mutations at baseline has no effect on the therapy outcome in HIV infected individuals.

Prévention et prise en charge de la résistance antivirale dans l'hépatite B chronique [A primer on the management of antiviral resistance in chronic hepatitis B]

Treatment options for chronic hepatitis B have significantly expanded over the last decade. Six nucleoside or nucleotide analogs (NA) with activity against the hepatitis B virus are currently available. Prolonged NA treatment is required in many cases to maintain viral suppression, with an inherent risk of the development of antiviral resistance. The purpose of this concise review is to provide an introduction to the prevention, diagnosis and management of antiviral resistance in chronic hepatitis B.

HBV genotypes and response to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in HIV/HBV-coinfected persons.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) genotypes can influence treatment outcome in HBV-monoinfected and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HBV-coinfected patients. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) plays a pivotal role in antiretroviral therapy (ART) of HIV/HBV-coinfected patients. The influence of HBV genotypes on the response to antiviral drugs, particularly TDF, is poorly understood. METHODS: HIV/HBV-co-infected participants with detectable HBV DNA prior to TDF therapy were selected from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. HBV genotypes were identified and resistance testing was performed prior to antiviral therapy, and in patients with delayed treatment response (>6 months). The efficacy of TDF to suppress HBV (HBV DNA <20 IU/mL) and the influence of HBV genotypes were determined. RESULTS: 143 HIV/HBV-coinfected participants with detectable HBV DNA were identified. The predominant HBV genotypes were A (82 patients, 57 %); and D (35 patients, 24 %); 20 patients (14 %) were infected with multiple genotypes (3 % A + D and 11 % A + G); and genotypes B, C and E were each present in two patients (1 %). TDF completely suppressed HBV DNA in 131 patients (92 %) within 6 months; and in 12 patients (8 %), HBV DNA suppression was delayed. No HBV resistance mutations to TDF were found in patients with delayed response, but all were infected with HBV genotype A (among these, 5 patients with genotype A + G), and all had previously been exposed to lamivudine. CONCLUSION: In HIV/HBV-coinfected patients, infection with multiple HBV genotypes was more frequent than previously reported. The large majority of patients had an undetectable HBV viral load at six months of TDF-containing ART. In patients without viral suppression, no TDF-related resistance mutations were found. The role of specific genotypes and prior lamivudine treatment in the delayed response to TDF warrant further investigation.