Protease inhibitors to treat hepatitis C in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study: high efficacy but low treatment uptake

OBJECTIVES Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have become the standard of care for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We aimed to assess treatment uptake and efficacy in routine clinical settings among HIV/HCV coinfected patients after the introduction of the first generation DAAs. METHODS Data on all Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) participants starting HCV protease inhibitor (PI) treatment between September 2011 and August 2013 were collected prospectively. The uptake and efficacy of HCV therapy were compared with those in the time period before the availability of PIs. RESULTS Upon approval of PI treatment in Switzerland in September 2011, 516 SHCS participants had chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. Of these, 57 (11%) started HCV treatment during the following 2 years with either telaprevir, faldaprevir or boceprevir. Twenty-seven (47%) patients were treatment-naïve, nine (16%) were patients with relapse and 21 (37%) were partial or null responders. Twenty-nine (57%) had advanced fibrosis and 15 (29%) had cirrhosis. End-of-treatment virological response was 84% in treatment-naïve patients, 88% in patients with relapse and 62% in previous nonresponders. Sustained virological response was 78%, 86% and 40% in treatment-naïve patients, patients with relapse and nonresponders, respectively. Treatment uptake was similar before (3.8 per 100 patient-years) and after (6.1 per 100 patient-years) the introduction of PIs, while treatment efficacy increased considerably after the introduction of PIs. CONCLUSIONS The introduction of PI-based HCV treatment in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients improved virological response rates, while treatment uptake remained low. Therefore, the introduction of PIs into the clinical routine was beneficial at the individual level, but had only a modest effect on the burden of HCV infection at the population level.

Long-lasting protection of activity of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors (PIs) by boosted PI containing regimens

Background The accumulation of mutations after long-lasting exposure to a failing combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is problematic and severely reduces the options for further successful treatments. Methods We studied patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study who failed cART with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and either a ritonavir-boosted PI (PI/r) or a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). The loss of genotypic activity <3, 3–6, >6 months after virological failure was analyzed with Stanford algorithm. Risk factors associated with early emergence of drug resistance mutations (<6 months after failure) were identified with multivariable logistic regression. Results Ninety-nine genotypic resistance tests from PI/r-treated and 129 from NNRTI-treated patients were analyzed. The risk of losing the activity of ≥1 NRTIs was lower among PI/r- compared to NNRTI-treated individuals <3, 3–6, and >6 months after failure: 8.8% vs. 38.2% (p = 0.009), 7.1% vs. 46.9% (p<0.001) and 18.9% vs. 60.9% (p<0.001). The percentages of patients who have lost PI/r activity were 2.9%, 3.6% and 5.4% <3, 3–6, >6 months after failure compared to 41.2%, 49.0% and 63.0% of those who have lost NNRTI activity (all p<0.001). The risk to accumulate an early NRTI mutation was strongly associated with NNRTI-containing cART (adjusted odds ratio: 13.3 (95% CI: 4.1–42.8), p<0.001). Conclusions The loss of activity of PIs and NRTIs was low among patients treated with PI/r, even after long-lasting exposure to a failing cART. Thus, more options remain for second-line therapy. This finding is potentially of high relevance, in particular for settings with poor or lacking virological monitoring.

Structural basis for the regulation of cysteine-protease activity by a new class of protease inhibitors in Plasmodium

Plasmodium cysteine proteases are essential for host-cell invasion and egress, hemoglobin degradation, and intracellular development of the parasite. The temporal, site-specific regulation of cysteine-protease activity is a prerequisite for survival and propagation of Plasmodium. Recently, a new family of inhibitors of cysteine proteases (ICPs) with homologs in at least eight Plasmodium species has been identified. Here, we report the 2.6 A X-ray crystal structure of the C-terminal, inhibitory domain of ICP from P. berghei (PbICP-C) in a 1:1 complex with falcipain-2, an important hemoglobinase of Plasmodium. The structure establishes Plasmodium ICP as a member of the I42 class of chagasin-like protease inhibitors but with large insertions and differences in the binding mode relative to other family members. Furthermore, the PbICP-C structure explains why host-cell cathepsin B-like proteases and, most likely, also the protease-like domain of Plasmodium SERA5 (serine-repeat antigen 5) are no targets for ICP.

Periodontal pathogens affect the level of protease inhibitors in gingival crevicular fluid

In periodontitis, an effective host-response is primarily related to neutrophils loaded with serine proteases, including elastase (NE) and protease 3 (PR3), the extracellular activity of which is tightly controlled by endogenous inhibitors. In vitro these inhibitors are degraded by gingipains, cysteine proteases produced by Porphyromonas gingivalis. The purpose of this study was to determine the level of selected protease inhibitors in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) in relation to periodontal infection. The GCF collected from 31 subjects (nine healthy controls, seven with gingivitis, five with aggressive periodontitis and 10 with chronic periodontitis) was analyzed for the levels of elafin and secretory leukocyte protease inhibitor (SLPI), two main tissue-derived inhibitors of neutrophil serine proteases. In parallel, activity of NE, PR3 and arginine-specific gingipains (Rgps) in GCF was measured. Finally loads of P. gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Tannerella forsythia and Treponema denticola were determined. The highest values of elafin were found in aggressive periodontitis and the lowest in controls. The quantity of elafin correlated positively with the load of P. gingivalis, Ta. forsythia and Tr. denticola, as well as with Rgps activity. In addition, NE activity was positively associated with the counts of those bacterial species, but not with the amount of elafin. In contrast, the highest concentrations of SLPI were found in periodontally healthy subjects whereas amounts of this inhibitor were significantly decreased in patients infected with P. gingivalis. Periodontopathogenic bacteria stimulate the release of NE and PR3, which activities escape the control through degradation of locally produced inhibitors (SLPI and elafin) by host-derived and bacteria-derived proteases.

Are plasma levels valid surrogates for cellular concentrations of antiretroviral drugs in HIV-infected patients?

Total plasma concentrations are currently measured for therapeutic drug monitoring of HIV protease inhibitors (PIs) and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). However, the pharmacological target of antiretroviral drugs reside inside cells. To study the variability of their cellular accumulation, and to determine to which extent total plasma concentrations (TPC) correlate with cellular concentrations (CC), plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were simultaneously collected at single random times after drug intake from 133 HIV infected patients. TPC levels were analysed by high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection and CC by LC-MS/MS from peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The best correlations between TPC and CC were observed for nelfinavir (NFV, slope=0.93, r=0.85), saquinavir (SQV, slope=0.76, r=0.80) and lopinavir (LPV, slope=0.87, r=0.63). By contrast, TPC of efavirenz (EFV) exhibited a moderate correlation with CC (slope=0.69, r=0.58), while no correlation was found for nevirapine (NVP, slope=-0.3, r=0.1). Interindividual variability in the CC/TPC ratio was lower for protease inhibitors (coefficients of variation 76%, 61%, and 80% for SQV, NFV and LPV, respectively) than for nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (coefficients of variation 101% and 318%, for EFV and NVP). As routine CC measurement raises practical difficulties, well-correlated plasma concentrations (ie, NFV, SQV and LPV) can probably be considered as appropriate surrogates for cellular drug exposure. For drugs such as EFV or NVP, there may be room for therapeutic drug monitoring improvement using either direct CC determination or other predictive factors such as genotyping of transporters or metabolizing enzyme genes.

Treatment with the HIV protease inhibitor Nelfinavir triggers the unfolded protein response and may overcome proteasome inhibitor resistance of multiple myeloma in combination with bortezomib: a phase I trial (SAKK 65/08).

Downregulation of the unfolded protein response mediates proteasome inhibitor resistance in Multiple Myeloma.The Human Immunodeficieny Virus protease inhibitor nelfinavir activates the unfolded protein response in vitro. We determined dose limiting toxicity and recommended dose for phase II of nelfinavir in combination with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. 12 patients with advanced hematological malignancies were treated with nelfinavir (2500 - 5000 mg/d p.o., d 1-14, 3+3 dose escalation) and bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2, d 1, 4, 8, 11; 21 day cycles). A run in phase with nelfinavir monotherapy allowed pharmakokinetic/pharmakodynamic assessment of nelfinavir in the presence or absence of concomittant bortezomib. Endpoints included dose limiting toxicity, activation of the unfolded protein response, proteasome activity, toxicity and response to trial treatment. Nelfinavir 2 x 2500 mg was the recommended phase II dose identified. Nelfinavir alone significantly upregulated expression of proteins related to the unfolded protein response in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and inhibited proteasome activity. Of 10 evaluable patients in the dose escalation cohort, 3 achieved a partial response, 4 stable disease for ≥ 2 cycles, while 3 had progressive disease as best response. In an exploratory extension cohort with 6 relapsed, bortezomib-refractory, lenalidomide-resistant myeloma patients treated at the recommended phase II dose, 3 reached a partial response, 2 a minor response and one progressive disease. The combination of nelfinavir with bortezomib is safe and shows promising signals for activity in advanced, bortezomib-refractory MM. Induction of the unfolded protein response by nelfinavir may overcome the biological features of proteasome inhibitor resistance. (Trial registration NCT01164709).

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

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.

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.

Orosomucoid (alpha1-acid glycoprotein) plasma concentration and genetic variants: effects on human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitor clearance and cellular accumulation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Protease inhibitors are highly bound to orosomucoid (ORM) (alpha1-acid glycoprotein), an acute-phase plasma protein encoded by 2 polymorphic genes, which may modulate their disposition. Our objective was to determine the influence of ORM concentration and phenotype on indinavir, lopinavir, and nelfinavir apparent clearance (CL(app)) and cellular accumulation. Efavirenz, mainly bound to albumin, was included as a control drug. METHODS: Plasma and cells samples were collected from 434 human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. Total plasma and cellular drug concentrations and ORM concentrations and phenotypes were determined. RESULTS: Indinavir CL(app) was strongly influenced by ORM concentration (n = 36) (r2 = 0.47 [P = .00004]), particularly in the presence of ritonavir (r2 = 0.54 [P = .004]). Lopinavir CL(app) was weakly influenced by ORM concentration (n = 81) (r2 = 0.18 [P = .0001]). For both drugs, the ORM1 S variant concentration mainly explained this influence (r2 = 0.55 [P = .00004] and r2 = 0.23 [P = .0002], respectively). Indinavir CL(app) was significantly higher in F1F1 individuals than in F1S and SS patients (41.3, 23.4, and 10.3 L/h [P = .0004] without ritonavir and 21.1, 13.2, and 10.1 L/h [P = .05] with ritonavir, respectively). Lopinavir cellular exposure was not influenced by ORM abundance and phenotype. Finally, ORM concentration or phenotype did not influence nelfinavir (n = 153) or efavirenz (n = 198) pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSION: ORM concentration and phenotype modulate indinavir pharmacokinetics and, to a lesser extent, lopinavir pharmacokinetics but without influencing their cellular exposure. This confounding influence of ORM should be taken into account for appropriate interpretation of therapeutic drug monitoring results. Further studies are needed to investigate whether the measure of unbound drug plasma concentration gives more meaningful information than total drug concentration for indinavir and lopinavir.

Factors associated with the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in HIV-infected participants in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected persons may be at increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes mellitus because of viral coinfection and adverse effects of treatment. METHODS: We studied associations of new-onset diabetes mellitus with hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus coinfections and antiretroviral therapy in participants in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, using Poisson regression. RESULTS: A total of 123 of 6513 persons experienced diabetes mellitus during 27,798 person-years of follow-up (PYFU), resulting in an incidence of 4.4 cases per 1000 PYFU (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-5.3 cases per 1000 PYFU). An increased incidence rate ratio (IRR) was found for male subjects (IRR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.2), older age (IRR for subjects >60 years old, 4.3; 95% CI, 2.3-8.2), black (IRR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.0) and Asian (IRR, 4.9; 95% CI, 2.2-10.9) ethnicity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention disease stage C (IRR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.04-2.4), and obesity (IRR, 4.7; 95% CI, 3.1-7.0), but results for hepatitis C virus infection or active hepatitis B virus infection were inconclusive. Strong associations were found for current treatment with nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (IRR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.11-4.45), nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors plus protease inhibitors (IRR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.42-4.31), and nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors plus protease inhibitors and nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (IRR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.59-6.67) but were not found for treatment with nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors plus nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (IRR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.77-2.82). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to traditional risk factors, current treatment with protease inhibitor- and nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-containing regimens was associated with the risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Our study did not find a significant association between viral hepatitis infection and risk of incident diabetes.

Lipid profiles for antiretroviral-naive patients starting PI- and NNRTI-based therapy in the Swiss HIV cohort study

BACKGROUND: Blood lipid abnormalities in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) have been associated with exposure to protease inhibitors (PIs), particularly ritonavir. First therapy with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) leads to relatively favourable lipid profiles. We report on medium-term lipid profiles (up to 5 years) for antiretroviral-naive patients starting NNRTI- and PI-based HAART in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. METHODS: Since April 2000, blood samples taken at visits scheduled every 6 months have been analysed for cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations. For 1065 antiretroviral-naive patients starting HAART after April 2000, we estimated changes in concentration over time using multivariate linear regression with adjustment for baseline covariates, use of lipid-lowering drugs and whether the sample was taken in a fasting state. RESULTS: Non-high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels increase with increasing exposure to either PI- or NNRTI-based therapy, HDL cholesterol levels increase and triglyceride levels decrease with increasing exposure to NNRTI-based therapy, whereas triglyceride levels increase with increasing exposure to PI-based therapy. Between NNRTI-based therapies, there is a slight difference in triglyceride levels, which tend to increase with increasing exposure to efavirenz and to decrease with increasing exposure to nevirapine. Of the three common PI-based therapies, nelfinavir appears to have a relatively favourable lipid profile, with little change with increasing exposure. Of the other two PI therapies, lopinavir with ritonavir has a more favourable profile than indinavir with ritonavir, with smaller increases in both non-HDL cholesterol and triglycerides and an increase in HDL cholesterol. Increasing exposure to abacavir is associated with a decrease in the level of triglycerides. CONCLUSION: In general, NNRTI-based therapy is associated with a more favourable lipid profile than PI-based therapy, but different PI-based therapies are associated with very different lipid profiles. Nelfinavir appears to have a relatively favourable lipid profile. Of the two boosted PI therapies, lopinavir appears to have a more favourable lipid profile than indinavir.

CD4+ T cell count recovery in HIV type 1-infected patients is independent of class of antiretroviral therapy

BACKGROUND: In recent years, treatment options for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection have changed from nonboosted protease inhibitors (PIs) to nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and boosted PI-based antiretroviral drug regimens, but the impact on immunological recovery remains uncertain. METHODS: During January 1996 through December 2004 [corrected] all patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort were included if they received the first combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and had known baseline CD4(+) T cell counts and HIV-1 RNA values (n = 3293). For follow-up, we used the Swiss HIV Cohort Study database update of May 2007 [corrected] The mean (+/-SD) duration of follow-up was 26.8 +/- 20.5 months. The follow-up time was limited to the duration of the first cART. CD4(+) T cell recovery was analyzed in 3 different treatment groups: nonboosted PI, NNRTI, or boosted PI. The end point was the absolute increase of CD4(+) T cell count in the 3 treatment groups after the initiation of cART. RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred ninety individuals (78.7%) initiated a nonboosted-PI regimen, 452 (13.7%) initiated an NNRTI regimen, and 251 (7.6%) initiated a boosted-PI regimen. Absolute CD4(+) T cell count increases at 48 months were as follows: in the nonboosted-PI group, from 210 to 520 cells/muL; in the NNRTI group, from 220 to 475 cells/muL; and in the boosted-PI group, from 168 to 511 cells/muL. In a multivariate analysis, the treatment group did not affect the response of CD4(+) T cells; however, increased age, pretreatment with nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, serological tests positive for hepatitis C virus, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stage C infection, lower baseline CD4(+) T cell count, and lower baseline HIV-1 RNA level were risk factors for smaller increases in CD4(+) T cell count. CONCLUSION: CD4(+) T cell recovery was similar in patients receiving nonboosted PI-, NNRTI-, and boosted PI-based cART.

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 >or= 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.

Impact of recommendation updates in well-controlled patients on nonrecommended antiretroviral therapies: the Swiss HIV cohort study

BACKGROUND HIV treatment recommendations are updated as clinical trials are published. Whether recommendations drive clinicians to change antiretroviral therapy in well-controlled patients is unexplored. METHODS We selected patients with undetectable viral loads (VLs) on nonrecommended regimens containing double-boosted protease inhibitors (DBPIs), triple-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), or didanosine (ddI) plus stavudine (d4T) at publication of the 2006 International AIDS Society recommendations. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics with those of control patients with undetectable VL not on these regimens and examined clinical outcome and reasons for treatment modification. RESULTS At inclusion, 104 patients were in the DBPI group, 436 in the triple-NRTI group, and 19 in the ddI/d4T group. By 2010, 28 (29%), 204 (52%), and 1 (5%) patient were still on DBPIs, triple-NRTIs, and ddI plus d4T, respectively. 'Physician decision,' excluding toxicity/virological failure, drove 30% of treatment changes. Predictors of recommendation nonobservance included female sex [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1 to 7.26; P = 0.01] for DPBIs, and undetectable VL (aOR 3.53, 95% CI 1.6 to 7.8; P = 0.002) and lack of cardiovascular events (aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.23 to 6.97; P = 0.02) for triple-NRTIs. All patients on DBPIs with documented diabetes or a cardiovascular event changed treatment. Recommendation observance resulted in lower cholesterol values in the DBPI group (P = 0.06), and more patients having undetectable VL (P = 0.02) in the triple-NRTI group. CONCLUSION The physician's decision is the main factor driving change from nonrecommended to recommended regimens, whereas virological suppression is associated with not switching. Positive clinical outcomes observed postswitch underline the importance of observing recommendations, even in well-controlled patients.