Liver enzyme elevation after lamivudine withdrawal in HIV-hepatitis B virus co-infected patients: the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

Background The principal causes of liver enzyme elevation among HIV-hepatitis B virus (HBV) co-infected patients are the hepatotoxic effects of antiretroviral therapy (ART), alcohol abuse, ART-induced immune reconstitution and the exacerbation of chronic HBV infection. Objectives To investigate the incidence and severity of liver enzyme elevation, liver failure and death following lamivudine (3TC) withdrawal in HIV-HBV co-infected patients. Methods Retrospective analysis of the Swiss HIV Cohort Study database to assess the clinical and biological consequences of the discontinuation of 3TC. Variables considered for analysis included liver enzyme, HIV virological and immunological parameters, and medication prescribed during a 6-month period following 3TC withdrawal. Results 3TC was discontinued in 255 patients on 363 occasions. On 147 occasions (109 patients), a follow-up visit within 6 months following 3TC withdrawal was recorded. Among these patients, liver enzyme elevation occurred on 42 occasions (29%), three of them (2%) with severity grade III and five of them (3.4%) with severity grade IV elevations (as defined by the AIDS Clinical Trials Group). Three patients presented with fulminant hepatitis. One death (0.7%) was recorded. Conclusions HBV reactivation leading to liver dysfunction may be an under-reported consequence of 3TC withdrawal in HIV-HBV co-infected patients. Regular monitoring of HBV markers is warranted if active therapy against HBV is discontinued.

Choice of Initial Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in Individuals With HIV Infection: Determinants and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND Current guidelines give recommendations for preferred combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). We investigated factors influencing the choice of initial cART in clinical practice and its outcome. METHODS We analyzed treatment-naive adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection participating in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study and starting cART from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2009. The primary end point was the choice of the initial antiretroviral regimen. Secondary end points were virologic suppression, the increase in CD4 cell counts from baseline, and treatment modification within 12 months after starting treatment. RESULTS A total of 1957 patients were analyzed. Tenofovir-emtricitabine (TDF-FTC)-efavirenz was the most frequently prescribed cART (29.9%), followed by TDF-FTC-lopinavir/r (16.9%), TDF-FTC-atazanavir/r (12.9%), zidovudine-lamivudine (ZDV-3TC)-lopinavir/r (12.8%), and abacavir/lamivudine (ABC-3TC)-efavirenz (5.7%). Differences in prescription were noted among different Swiss HIV Cohort Study sites (P < .001). In multivariate analysis, compared with TDF-FTC-efavirenz, starting TDF-FTC-lopinavir/r was associated with prior AIDS (relative risk ratio, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.78-4.35), HIV-RNA greater than 100 000 copies/mL (1.53; 1.07-2.18), and CD4 greater than 350 cells/μL (1.67; 1.04-2.70); TDF-FTC-atazanavir/r with a depressive disorder (1.77; 1.04-3.01), HIV-RNA greater than 100 000 copies/mL (1.54; 1.05-2.25), and an opiate substitution program (2.76; 1.09-7.00); and ZDV-3TC-lopinavir/r with female sex (3.89; 2.39-6.31) and CD4 cell counts greater than 350 cells/μL (4.50; 2.58-7.86). At 12 months, 1715 patients (87.6%) achieved viral load less than 50 copies/mL and CD4 cell counts increased by a median (interquartile range) of 173 (89-269) cells/μL. Virologic suppression was more likely with TDF-FTC-efavirenz, and CD4 increase was higher with ZDV-3TC-lopinavir/r. No differences in outcome were observed among Swiss HIV Cohort Study sites. CONCLUSIONS Large differences in prescription but not in outcome were observed among study sites. A trend toward individualized cART was noted suggesting that initial cART is significantly influenced by physician's preference and patient characteristics. Our study highlights the need for evidence-based data for determining the best initial regimen for different HIV-infected persons.

Cost-effectiveness of Tenofovir / Emtricitabine / Efavirenz versus Zidovudine / Lamivudine / Efavirenz as fist-line regimens for the treatment of HIV-infected patients in low-income settings

The Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) is the combination of at least three antiretroviral compounds. The combination purpose is to reduce the likelihood of drug resistance. However in the long-term the resistance to the first-line combination occurs and leads to treatment failure. Thus, a second-line and even a third-line regimen are recommended in the long run. [...] [P. 5] The two treatment alternatives under comparison: Tenofovir (300 mg) CO-formulated with Emtricitabine (200 mg) and Efavirenz (600 mg) currently known under the brand name Atripla (R) was introduced in July 2006 in the United States market. The excellent safety profile and ease of use make this combination a perfect first-line regimen in low-income settings. Therefore, this treatment option was recommended in WHO 2006 reviewed guidelines. Unfortunately, Tenofovir and Emtricitabine compounds are still costly and not yet widely available. For a matter of simplification this regimen is referred in this report as "the recent" therapy. Initially, we had in mind to consider the most frequently used first-line regimen in low-income countries (Stavudine / Larnivudme / Nevirapine) as a comparator for this economic evaluation. Unfortunately, according to the literature review results (see Annex 3); there was no data available comparing head to head the effectiveness of this regimen with the recent one. Instead, we selected a less frequently but commonly used first-line regimen in low-income countries as a comparator: Zidovudine, Lamivudine, Efavirenz. This combination has extensive experience in durability, safety and toxicity and seems to be an optimal choice for a first-line regimen according to the clinical trial group 384 team. Furthermore, Zidovudine, one of the compounds of this combination is now recommended as one of the preferred NNRTI [Non Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors] options to be considered by countries instead of Stavudine (the most used NNRTI in limited-income countries). As this combination has been included in the WHO guidelines as a first-line therapy since 2003 when WHO launched the "3 by 5" scaling-up initiative, this combination of drugs is referred in this report as the "old" therapy. Objectives: The primary objective of this economic evaluation is to compare the two first-line HAARTs introduced above, in a low-income setting context. Both of these combinations are recommended by the 2006 WHO guidelines as potential first-line regimens. The secondary objective is to provide a simplified and comprehensible cost-effectiveness modeling tool in order to help policy makers, in resource-limited settings, make decisions about which first-line HAART to fund using the scarce resources available. [P. 6-7]

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2012 recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: New trial data and drug regimens that have become available in the last 2 years warrant an update to guidelines for antiretroviral therapy (ART) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adults in resource-rich settings. OBJECTIVE: To provide current recommendations for the treatment of adult HIV infection with ART and use of laboratory-monitoring tools. Guidelines include when to start therapy and with what drugs, monitoring for response and toxic effects, special considerations in therapy, and managing antiretroviral failure. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA EXTRACTION: Data that had been published or presented in abstract form at scientific conferences in the past 2 years were systematically searched and reviewed by an International Antiviral Society-USA panel. The panel reviewed available evidence and formed recommendations by full panel consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Treatment is recommended for all adults with HIV infection; the strength of the recommendation and the quality of the evidence increase with decreasing CD4 cell count and the presence of certain concurrent conditions. Recommended initial regimens include 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine) plus a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (efavirenz), a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (atazanavir or darunavir), or an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (raltegravir). Alternatives in each class are recommended for patients with or at risk of certain concurrent conditions. CD4 cell count and HIV-1 RNA level should be monitored, as should engagement in care, ART adherence, HIV drug resistance, and quality-of-care indicators. Reasons for regimen switching include virologic, immunologic, or clinical failure and drug toxicity or intolerance. Confirmed treatment failure should be addressed promptly and multiple factors considered. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for HIV patient care include offering ART to all patients regardless of CD4 cell count, changes in therapeutic options, and modifications in the timing and choice of ART in the setting of opportunistic illnesses such as cryptococcal disease and tuberculosis.

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2014 recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

IMPORTANCE: New data and antiretroviral regimens expand treatment choices in resource-rich settings and warrant an update of recommendations to treat adults infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). OBJECTIVE: To provide updated treatment recommendations for adults with HIV, emphasizing when to start treatment; what treatment to start; the use of laboratory monitoring tools; and managing treatment failure, switches, and simplification. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA SYNTHESIS: An International Antiviral Society-USA panel of experts in HIV research and patient care considered previous data and reviewed new data since the 2012 update with literature searches in PubMed and EMBASE through June 2014. Recommendations and ratings were based on the quality of evidence and consensus. RESULTS: Antiretroviral therapy is recommended for all adults with HIV infection. Evidence for benefits of treatment and quality of available data increase at lower CD4 cell counts. Recommended initial regimens include 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs; abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine) and a third single or boosted drug, which should be an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (dolutegravir, elvitegravir, or raltegravir), a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (efavirenz or rilpivirine) or a boosted protease inhibitor (darunavir or atazanavir). Alternative regimens are available. Boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy is generally not recommended, but NRTI-sparing approaches may be considered. New guidance for optimal timing of monitoring of laboratory parameters is provided. Suspected treatment failure warrants rapid confirmation, performance of resistance testing while the patient is receiving the failing regimen, and evaluation of reasons for failure before consideration of switching therapy. Regimen switches for adverse effects, convenience, or to reduce costs should not jeopardize antiretroviral potency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: After confirmed diagnosis of HIV infection, antiretroviral therapy should be initiated in all individuals who are willing and ready to start treatment. Regimens should be selected or changed based on resistance test results with consideration of dosing frequency, pill burden, adverse toxic effect profiles, comorbidities, and drug interactions.

Minority quasispecies of drug-resistant HIV-1 that lead to early therapy failure in treatment-naive and -adherent patients.

BACKGROUND: Early virological failure of antiretroviral therapy associated with the selection of drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in treatment-naive patients is very critical, because virological failure significantly increases the risk of subsequent failures. Therefore, we evaluated the possible role of minority quasispecies of drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1, which are undetectable at baseline by population sequencing, with regard to early virological failure. METHODS: We studied 4 patients who experienced early virological failure of a first-line regimen of lamivudine, tenofovir, and either efavirenz or nevirapine and 18 control patients undergoing similar treatment without virological failure. The key mutations K65R, K103N, Y181C, M184V, and M184I in the reverse transcriptase were quantified by allele-specific real-time polymerase chain reaction performed on plasma samples before and during early virological treatment failure. RESULTS: Before treatment, none of the viruses showed any evidence of drug resistance in the standard genotype analysis. Minority quasispecies with either the M184V mutation or the M184I mutation were detected in 3 of 18 control patients. In contrast, all 4 patients whose treatment was failing had harbored drug-resistant viruses at low frequencies before treatment, with a frequency range of 0.07%-2.0%. A range of 1-4 mutations was detected in viruses from each patient. Most of the minority quasispecies were rapidly selected and represented the major virus population within weeks after the patients started antiretroviral therapy. All 4 patients showed good adherence to treatment. Nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor plasma concentrations were in normal ranges for all 4 patients at 2 separate assessment times. CONCLUSIONS: Minority quasispecies of drug-resistant viruses, detected at baseline, can rapidly outgrow and become the major virus population and subsequently lead to early therapy failure in treatment-naive patients who receive antiretroviral therapy regimens with a low genetic resistance barrier.

Sequence-Based Hepatitis B Virus Antiviral Resistance Testing in Switzerland

BACKGROUND: A growing number of patients with chronic hepatitis B is being treated for extended periods with nucleoside and/or nucleotide analogs. In this context, antiviral resistance represents an increasingly common and complex issue. METHODS: Mutations in the hepatitis B virus (HBV) reverse transcriptase (rt) gene and viral genotypes were determined by direct sequencing of PCR products and alignment with reference sequences deposited in GenBank. RESULTS: Plasma samples from 60 patients with chronic hepatitis B were analyzed since March 2009. The predominant mutation pattern identified in patients with virological breakthrough was rtM204V/I ± different compensatory mutations, conferring resistance to L-nucleosides (lamivudine, telbivudine, emtricitabine) and predisposing to entecavir resistance (n = 18). Complex mutation patterns with a potential for multidrug resistance were identified in 2 patients. Selection of a fully entecavir resistant strain was observed in a patient exposed to lamivudine alone. Novel mutations were identified in 1 patient. Wild-type HBV was identified in 9 patients with suspected virological breakthrough, raising concerns about treatment adherence. No preexisting resistance mutations were identified in treatment-naïve patients (n = 13). Viral genome amplification and sequencing failed in 16 patients, of which only 2 had a documented HBV DNA > 1000 IU/ml. HBV genotypes were D in 28, A in 6, B in 4, C in 3 and E in 3 patients. Results will be updated in August 2010 and therapeutic implications discussed. CONCLUSIONS: With expanding treatment options and a growing number of patients exposed to nucleoside and/or nucleotide analogs, sequence-based HBV antiviral resistance testing is expected to become a cornerstone in the management of chronic hepatitis B.

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.

HIV-1 reverse transcriptase connection domain mutations: dynamics of emergence and implications for success of combination antiretroviral therapy.

BACKGROUND: Factors promoting the emergence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase (RT) connection domain mutations and their effect on antiretroviral therapy (ART) are still largely undetermined. We investigated this matter by analyzing genotypic resistance tests covering 400 amino acid positions in the RT of HIV-1 subtype B viruses and corresponding treatment histories and laboratory measurements. METHODS: The emergence of connection domain mutations was studied in 334 patients receiving monotherapy or dual therapy with thymidine analogues at the time of the genotypic resistance test. Response to subsequent combination ART (cART) was analyzed using Cox regression for 291 patients receiving unboosted protease inhibitors. Response was defined by ever reaching an HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL during the first cART. RESULTS: The connection domain mutations N348I, R356K, R358K, A360V, and A371V were more frequently observed in ART-exposed than ART-naive patients, of which only N348I and A360V were nonpolymorphic (with a prevalence of <1.5% in untreated patients). N348I correlated with M184V and predominantly occurred in patients receiving lamivudine and zidovudine concomitantly. A360V was not associated with specific drug combinations and was found to emerge later than M184V or thymidine analogue mutations. Nonpolymorphic connection domain mutations were rarely detected in the absence of established drug resistance mutations in ART-exposed individuals (prevalence, <1%). None of the 5 connection domain mutations associated with treatment showed a statistically significant effect on response to cART. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their frequent emergence, connection domain mutations did not show large detrimental effects on response to cART. Currently, routine implementation of connection domain sequencing seems unnecessary for developed health care settings.

Incidence of HIV-1 drug resistance among antiretroviral treatment-naive individuals starting modern therapy combinations.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of drug resistance incidence to modern first-line combination antiretroviral therapies against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 are complicated by limited availability of genotypic drug resistance tests (GRTs) and uncertain timing of resistance emergence. METHODS: Five first-line combinations were studied (all paired with lamivudine or emtricitabine): efavirenz (EFV) plus zidovudine (AZT) (n = 524); EFV plus tenofovir (TDF) (n = 615); lopinavir (LPV) plus AZT (n = 573); LPV plus TDF (n = 301); and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATZ/r) plus TDF (n = 250). Virological treatment outcomes were classified into 3 risk strata for emergence of resistance, based on whether undetectable HIV RNA levels were maintained during therapy and, if not, whether viral loads were >500 copies/mL during treatment. Probabilities for presence of resistance mutations were estimated from GRTs (n = 2876) according to risk stratum and therapy received at time of testing. On the basis of these data, events of resistance emergence were imputed for each individual and were assessed using survival analysis. Imputation was repeated 100 times, and results were summarized by median values (2.5th-97.5th percentile range). RESULTS: Six years after treatment initiation, EFV plus AZT showed the highest cumulative resistance incidence (16%) of all regimens (<11%). Confounder-adjusted Cox regression confirmed that first-line EFV plus AZT (reference) was associated with a higher median hazard for resistance emergence, compared with other treatments: EFV plus TDF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; range, 0.42-0.76), LPV plus AZT (HR, 0.63; range, 0.45-0.89), LPV plus TDF (HR, 0.55; range, 0.33-0.83), ATZ/r plus TDF (HR, 0.43; range, 0.17-0.83). Two-thirds of resistance events were associated with detectable HIV RNA level ≤500 copies/mL during treatment, and only one-third with virological failure (HIV RNA level, >500 copies/mL). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of TDF instead of AZT and ATZ/r was correlated with lower rates of resistance emergence, most likely because of improved tolerability and pharmacokinetics resulting from a once-daily dosage.

Androgen and gonadotropin patterns differ in HIV-1-infected men who develop lipoatrophy during antiretroviral therapy: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: We compared androgen and gonadotropin values in HIV-infected men who did and did not develop lipoatrophy on combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). METHODS: From a population of 136 treatment-naïve male Caucasians under successful zidovudine/lamivudine-based cART, the 10 patients developing lipoatrophy (cases) were compared with 87 randomly chosen controls. Plasma levels of free testosterone (fT), dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone (LH) were measured at baseline and after 2 years of cART. RESULTS: At baseline, 60% of the cases and 71% of the controls showed abnormally low fT values. LH levels were normal or low in 67 and 94% of the patients, respectively, indicating a disturbance of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. fT levels did not significantly change after 2 years of cART. Cases showed a significant increase in LH levels, while controls showed a significant increase in DHEA levels. In a multivariate logistic regression model, lipoatrophy was associated with higher baseline DHEA levels (P=0.04), an increase in LH levels during cART (P=0.001), a lower body mass index and greater age. CONCLUSIONS: Hypogonadism is present in the majority of HIV-infected patients. The development of cART-related lipoatrophy is associated with an increase in LH and a lack of increase in DHEA levels.

Plasma leptin levels in men are not related to the development of lipoatrophy during antiretroviral therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the correlations between the hormone leptin and lipoatrophy in HIV-positive, treatment-naive patients on combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). DESIGN: Case-control study nested in a multicentre cohort of HIV-infected adults. Cases were patients that developed lipoatrophy and controls those who did not. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical parameters and plasma leptin determinations were studied in 97 HIV-1-infected, treatment-naive Caucasian men (10 cases and 87 controls) on an unchanged and virologically successful drug regimen with a zidovudine/lamivudine backbone at baseline and after 2 years of cART. The association of plasma leptin levels and the development of lipoatrophy was investigated. RESULTS: Two years of cART was not associated with a change in plasma leptin levels. Plasma leptin levels remained sensible to changes in body mass index. There was no difference in leptin levels between patients who developed lipoatrophy and controls, neither before nor after cART. The only predictor of development of lipoatrophy was a higher age (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Leptin as measured in plasma is unlikely to play a major role in the genesis of lipoatrophy.

Once-daily dolutegravir is superior to once-daily darunavir/ritonavir in treatment-naïve HIV-1-positive individuals: 96 week results from FLAMINGO.

INTRODUCTION: Dolutegravir (DTG) 50 mg once daily was superior to darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800 mg/100 mg once daily through Week 48, with 90% vs. 83% of participants achieving HIV RNA 50 c/mL (p=0.025) [1]. We present data through Week 96. MATERIAL AND METHODS: FLAMINGO is a multicentre, randomized, open-label, Phase IIIb non-inferiority study, in which HIV-1-positive ART-naïve adults with HIV-1 RNA≥1000 c/mL and no evidence of viral resistance were randomized 1:1 to receive DTG or DRV/r, with investigator-selected backbone NRTIs (TDF/FTC or ABC/3TC). Participants were stratified by screening HIV-1 RNA (≤100K c/mL) and NRTI backbone. RESULTS: A total of 484 adults were randomized and treated; 25% had baseline HIV RNA 100K c/mL. At Week 96, the proportion of participants with HIV RNA 50 c/mL was 80% in the DTG arm vs. 68% in the DRV/r arm (adjusted difference 12.4%; 95% CI 4.7, 20.2%; p=0.002). Secondary analyses supported primary results: per-protocol [(DTG 83% vs. DRV/r 70%), 95% CI 12.9 (5.3, 20.6)] and treatment-related discontinuation = failure [(98% vs. 95%), 95% CI 3.2 (-0.3, 6.7)]. Overall virologic non-response (DTG 8%; DRV/r 12%) and non-response due to other reasons (DTG 12%; DRV/r 21%) occurred less frequently on DTG. As at Week 48, the difference between arms was most pronounced in participants with high baseline viral load (82% vs. 52% response through Week 96) and in the TDF/FTC stratum (79% vs. 64%); consistent responses were seen in the ABC/3TC stratum (82% vs. 75%). Six participants (DTG 2, none post-Week 48; DRV/r 4, two post-Week 48) experienced protocol-defined virologic failure (PDVF; confirmed viral load 200 c/mL on or after Week 24); none had treatment-emergent resistance to study drugs. Most frequent drug-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea, nausea and headache, with diarrhoea significantly more common on DRV/r (24%) than DTG (10%). Significantly more participants had Grade 2 fasting LDL toxicities on DRV/r (22%) vs. DTG (7%), p<0.001; mean changes in creatinine for DTG (~0.18 mg/dL) observed at Week 2 were stable through Week 96. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily DTG was superior to once-daily DRV/r in treatment-naïve HIV-1-positive individuals, with no evidence of emergent resistance to DTG in virologic failure and relatively similar safety profiles for DTG and DRV/r through 96 Weeks.