DAS-28-based EULAR response and HAQ improvement in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching between TNF antagonists

INTRODUCTION No definitive data are available regarding the value of switching to an alternative TNF antagonist in rheumatoid arthritis patients who fail to respond to the first one. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment response in a clinical setting based on HAQ improvement and EULAR response criteria in RA patients who were switched to a second or a third TNF antagonist due to failure with the first one. METHODS This was an observational, prospective study of a cohort of 417 RA patients treated with TNF antagonists in three university hospitals in Spain between January 1999 and December 2005. A database was created at the participating centres, with well-defined operational instructions. The main outcome variables were analyzed using parametric or non-parametric tests depending on the level of measurement and distribution of each variable. RESULTS Mean (+/- SD) DAS-28 on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 5.9 (+/- 2.0), 5.1 (+/- 1.5) and 6.1 (+/- 1.1). At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 3.3 (+/- 1.6; Delta = -2.6; p > 0.0001), 4.2 (+/- 1.5; Delta = -1.1; p = 0.0001) and 5.4 (+/- 1.7; Delta = -0.7; p = 0.06). For the first TNF antagonist, DAS-28-based EULAR response level was good in 42% and moderate in 33% of patients. The second TNF antagonist yielded a good response in 20% and no response in 53% of patients, while the third one yielded a good response in 28% and no response in 72%. Mean baseline HAQ on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 1.61, 1.52 and 1.87, respectively. At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 1.12 (Delta = -0.49; p < 0.0001), 1.31 (Delta = -0.21, p = 0.004) and 1.75 (Delta = -0.12; p = 0.1), respectively. Sixty four percent of patients had a clinically important improvement in HAQ (defined as > or = -0.22) with the first TNF antagonist and 46% with the second. CONCLUSION A clinically significant effect size was seen in less than half of RA patients cycling to a second TNF antagonist.

CNS safety at 48-week of switching to ATV/r plus 3TC or two nucleos(t)ides in HIV-suppressed patients on stable ART: the SALT neurocognitive sub-study.

INTRODUCTION Due to their low CNS penetrance, there are concerns about the capacity of non-conventional PI-based ART (monotherapy and dual therapies) to preserve neurocognitive performance (NP). METHODS We evaluated the NP change of aviremic participants of the SALT clinical trial (1) switching therapy to dual therapy (DT: ATV/r+3TC) or triple therapy (TT: ATV/r+2NRTI) who agreed to perform an NP assessment (NPZ-5) at baseline and W48. Neurocognitive impairment and NP were assessed using AAN-2007 criteria (2) and global deficit scores (GDS) (3). Neurocognitive change (GDS change: W48 - baseline) and the effect of DT on NP evolution crude and adjusted by significant confounders were determined using ANCOVA. RESULTS A total of 158 patients were included (Table 1). They had shorter times because HIV diagnosis, ART initiation and HIV-suppression and their virologic outcome at W48 by snapshot was higher (79.1% vs 72.7%; p=0.04) compared to the 128 patients not included in the sub-study. By AAN-2007 criteria, 51 patients in each ART group (68% vs 63%) were neurocognitively impaired at baseline (p=0.61). Forty-seven patients were not reassessed at W48: 30 lost of follow-up (16 DT-14 TT) and 17 had non-evaluable data (6 DT-11 TT). Patients retested were more likely to be men (78.9% vs 61.4%) and had neurological cofounders (9.6% vs 0%) than patients non-retested. At W48, 3 out of 16 (5.7%) patients on DT and 6 out of 21 (10.5%) on TT who were non-impaired at baseline became impaired (p=0.49) while 10 out of 37 (18.9%) on DT and 7 out of 36 (12.3%) on TT who were neurocognitively impaired at baseline became non-impaired (p=0.44). Mean GDS changes (95% CI) were: Overall -0.2 (-0.3 to -0.04): DT -0.26 (-0.4 to -0.07) and TT -0.08 (-0.2 to 0.07). NP was similar between DT and TT (0.15). This absence of differences was also observed in all cognitive tests. Effect of DT: -0.16 [-0.38 to 0.06]) (r(2)=0.16) on NP evolution was similar to TT (reference), even after adjusting (DT: -0.11 [-0.33 to 0.1], TT: reference) by significant confounders (geographical origin, previous ATV use and CD4 cell count) (r(2)=0.25). CONCLUSIONS NP stability was observed after 48 weeks of follow up in the majority of patients whether DT or TT was used to maintain HIV-suppression. Incidence rates of NP impairment or NP impairment recovery were also similar between DT and TT.

Lipid changes in HIV-patients switching to the coformulated single tablet FTC/RPV/TDF (Eviplera®). Efficacy and safety analysis. GeSida Study 8114.

INTRODUCTION Rilpivirine (RPV) has a better lipid profile than efavirenz (EFV) in naïve patients (1). Switching to RPV may be convenient for many patients, while maintaining a good immunovirological control (2). The aim of this study was to analyze lipid changes in HIV-patients at 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera® (emtricitabine/RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate [FTC/RPV/TDF]). MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective, multicentre study of a cohort of asymptomatic HIV-patients who switched from a regimen based on 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI)+protease inhibitor (PI)/non nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or ritonavir boosted PI monotherapy to Eviplera® during February-December, 2013; all had undetectable HIV viral load for ≥3 months prior to switching. Patients with previous failures on antiretroviral therapy (ART) including TDF and/or FTC/3TC, with genotype tests showing resistance to components of Eviplera®, or who had changed the third drug of the ART during the study period were excluded. Changes in lipid profile and cardiovascular risk (CVR), and efficacy and safety at 24 weeks were analyzed. RESULTS Among 305 patients included in the study, 298 were analyzed (7 cases were excluded due to lack of data). Men 81.2%, mean age 44.5 years, 75.8% of HIV sexually transmitted. 233 (78.2%) patients switched from a regimen based on 2 NRTI+NNRTI (90.5% EFV/FTC/TDF). The most frequent reasons for switching were central nervous system (CNS) adverse events (31.0%), convenience (27.6%) and metabolic disorders (23.2%). At this time, 293 patients have reached 24 weeks: 281 (95.9%) have continued Eviplera®, 6 stopped it (3 adverse events, 2 virologic failures, 1 discontinuation) and 6 have been lost to follow up. Lipid profiles of 283 cases were available at 24 weeks and mean (mg/dL) baseline vs 24 weeks are: total cholesterol (193 vs 169; p=0.0001), HDL-c (49 vs 45; p=0.0001), LDL-c (114 vs 103; p=0.001), tryglycerides (158 vs 115; p=0.0001), total cholesterol to HDL-c ratio (4.2 vs 4.1; p=0.3). CVR decreased (8.7 vs 7.5%; p= 0.0001). CD4 counts were similar to baseline (653 vs 674 cells/µL; p=0.08), and 274 (96.8%) patients maintained viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS At 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera®, lipid profile and CVR improved while maintaining a good immunovirological control. Most subjects switched to Eviplera® from a regimen based on NNRTI, mainly EFV/FTC/TDF. CNS adverse events, convenience and metabolic disorders were the most frequent reasons for switching.