Search

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is thought to result in increased immune activation in people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV, PWH). Although some data have linked asymptomatic CMV infection to cardiovascular disease among PWH, it remains unknown whether CMV is associated with increased or high-risk coronary plaque. METHODS: The Randomized Trial to Prevent Vascular Events in HIV (REPRIEVE) enrolled PWH aged 40-75 years on stable antiretroviral therapy (ART) with low-to-moderate atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Among a subset of US REPRIEVE participants, coronary plaque was assessed by coronary computed tomography angiography. Here, we assessed the relationship between CMV immunoglobulin G (IgG) titer and (1) levels of immune activation, (2) inflammatory biomarkers, and (3) coronary plaque phenotypes at study entry. RESULTS: Of 672 participants, mean age was 51 years, 83% were men, median ASCVD risk score was 4.5%, and 66% had current CD4+ T-cell count ≥500 cells/mm3. Higher CMV IgG quartile group was associated with older age and lower current and nadir CD4+ T-cell counts. CMV IgG titer was associated with specific inflammatory biomarkers (sCD163, MCP-1, interleukin [IL]-6, hsCRP) in univariate analysis, but not after controlling for HIV-specific factors. In contrast, CMV IgG titer was not associated with coronary artery disease indexes, including presence of plaque, coronary artery calcium (CAC) score >0, vulnerable plaque presence, or Leaman score >5. CONCLUSIONS: No meaningful association was seen between CMV IgG titer and coronary artery disease indexes among ART-treated PWH at study enrollment. Longitudinal assessments in REPRIEVE will determine the relationship of CMV IgG titer to plaque progression and cardiovascular events. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02344290.

HIV-1 persists in a latent reservoir in resting CD4+ T cells despite antiretroviral therapy (ART). The reservoir decays slowly over the first 7 years of ART (t1/2 = 44 months). However, whether decay continues with long-term ART is unclear. Recent integration site studies indicate gradual selection against inducible, intact proviruses, raising speculation that decades of ART might allow treatment interruption without viral rebound. Therefore, we measured the reservoir in 42 people on long-term ART (mean 22 years) using a quantitative viral outgrowth assay. After 7 years of ART, there was no long-term decrease in the frequency of inducible, replication-competent proviruses but rather an increase with an estimated doubling time of 23 years. Another reservoir assay, the intact proviral DNA assay, confirmed that reservoir decay with t1/2 of 44 months did not continue with long-term ART. The lack of decay reflected proliferation of infected cells. Most inducible, replication-competent viruses (79.8%) had env sequences identical to those of other isolates from the same sample. Thus, although integration site analysis indicates changes in reservoir composition, the proliferation of CD4+ T cells counteracts decay, maintaining the frequency of inducible, replication-competent proviruses at roughly constant levels over the long term. These results reinforce the need for lifelong ART.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP), a passive polyclonal antibody therapeutic agent, has had mixed clinical results. Although antibody neutralization is the predominant approach to benchmarking CCP efficacy, CCP may also influence the evolution of the endogenous antibody response. Using systems serology to comprehensively profile severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) functional antibodies of hospitalized people with COVID-19 enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of CCP (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04397757), we find that the clinical benefits of CCP are associated with a shift toward reduced inflammatory Spike (S) responses and enhanced nucleocapsid (N) humoral responses. We find that CCP has the greatest clinical benefit in participants with low pre-existing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody function and that CCP-induced immunomodulatory Fc glycan profiles and N immunodominant profiles persist for at least 2 months. We highlight a potential mechanism of action of CCP associated with durable immunomodulation, outline optimal patient characteristics for CCP treatment, and provide guidance for development of a different class of COVID-19 hyperinflammation-targeting antibody therapeutic agents.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial).DesignACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]).Setting94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants).ParticipantsAdults hospitalized with COVID-19.InterventionSOC.Measurements28-day mortality and recovery.ResultsAlthough outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages.LimitationUnmeasured

Importance: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is a potentially beneficial treatment for COVID-19 that requires rigorous testing. Objective: To compile individual patient data from randomized clinical trials of CCP and to monitor the data until completion or until accumulated evidence enables reliable conclusions regarding the clinical outcomes associated with CCP. Data Sources: From May to August 2020, a systematic search was performed for trials of CCP in the literature, clinical trial registry sites, and medRxiv. Domain experts at local, national, and international organizations were consulted regularly. Study Selection: Eligible trials enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, not receiving mechanical ventilation, and randomized them to CCP or control. The administered CCP was required to have measurable antibodies assessed locally. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A minimal data set was submitted regularly via a secure portal, analyzed using a prespecified bayesian statistical plan, and reviewed frequently by a collective data and safety monitoring board. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prespecified coprimary end points - the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal scale analyzed using a proportional odds model and a binary indicator of WHO score of 7 or higher capturing the most severe outcomes including mechanical ventilation through death and analyzed using a logistic model - were assessed clinically at 14 days after randomization. Results: Eight international trials collectively enrolled 2369 participants (1138 randomized to control and 1231 randomized to CCP). A total of 2341 participants (median [IQR] age, 60 [50-72] years; 845 women [35.7%]) had primary outcome data as of April 2021. The median (IQR) of the ordinal WHO scale was 3 (3-6); the cumulative OR was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.74-1.19; posterior probability of OR <1 of 71%). A total of 352 patients (15%) had WHO score greater than or equal to 7; the OR was 0.94 (

In the United States, the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently being tested in randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. Treatment of individual patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma outside such trials is also now permitted through U.S. Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization. Here, members of the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel provide their views regarding use of convalescent plasma for treating COVID-19.

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.

Clinical trials including an analytical treatment interruption (ATI) are vital for evaluating the efficacy of novel strategies for HIV remissions. We briefly describe an interactive tool for predicting viral rebound timing in ATI trials and the impact of posttreatment controller (PTC) definitions on PTC frequency estimates. A 4-week viral load threshold of 1000 cps/ml provides both high specificity and sensitivity for PTC detection. PTC frequency varies greatly based on the definition of a PTC.

Therapeutic strategies are being clinically tested either to eradicate latent HIV reservoirs or to achieve virologic control in the absence of antiretroviral therapy. Attaining this goal will require a consensus on how best to measure the numbers of persistently infected cells with the potential to cause viral rebound after antiretroviral-therapy cessation in assessing the results of cure-directed strategies in vivo. Current measurements assess various aspects of the HIV provirus and its functionality and produce divergent results. Here, we provide recommendations from the BEAT-HIV Martin Delaney Collaboratory on which viral measurements should be prioritized in HIV-cure-directed clinical trials.

Accurate characterization of the HIV reservoir is imperative to develop an effective cure. HIV was measured in antiretroviral therapy-suppressed individuals using the intact proviral DNA assay (IPDA), along with assays for total or integrated HIV DNA, and inducible HIV RNA or p24. Intact provirus correlated with total and integrated HIV.

Accurate characterization of the HIV reservoir is imperative to develop an effective cure. HIV was measured in antiretroviral therapy-suppressed individuals using the intact proviral DNA assay (IPDA), along with assays for total or integrated HIV DNA, and inducible HIV RNA or p24. Intact provirus correlated with total and integrated HIV.

Therapeutic strategies are being clinically tested either to eradicate latent HIV reservoirs or to achieve virologic control in the absence of antiretroviral therapy. Attaining this goal will require a consensus on how best to measure the numbers of persistently infected cells with the potential to cause viral rebound after antiretroviral-therapy cessation in assessing the results of cure-directed strategies in vivo. Current measurements assess various aspects of the HIV provirus and its functionality and produce divergent results. Here, we provide recommendations from the BEAT-HIV Martin Delaney Collaboratory on which viral measurements should be prioritized in HIV-cure-directed clinical trials.

Analytical antiretroviral treatment interruption (ATI) is an important feature of HIV research, seeking to achieve sustained viral suppression in the absence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) when the goal is to measure effects of novel therapeutic interventions on time to viral load rebound or altered viral setpoint. Trials with ATIs also intend to determine host, virological, and immunological markers that are predictive of sustained viral control off ART. Although ATI is increasingly incorporated into proof-of-concept trials, no consensus has been reached on strategies to maximise its utility and minimise its risks. In addition, differences in ATI trial designs hinder the ability to compare efficacy and safety of interventions across trials. Therefore, we held a meeting of stakeholders from many interest groups, including scientists, clinicians, ethicists, social scientists, regulators, people living with HIV, and advocacy groups, to discuss the main challenges concerning ATI studies and to formulate recommendations with an emphasis on strategies for risk mitigation and monitoring, ART resumption criteria, and ethical considerations. In this Review, we present the major points of discussion and consensus views achieved with the goal of informing the conduct of ATIs to maximise the knowledge gained and minimise the risk to participants in clinical HIV research.

The persistence of HIV reservoirs, including latently infected, resting CD4+ T cells, is the major obstacle to cure HIV infection. CD32a expression was recently reported to mark CD4+ T cells harboring a replication-competent HIV reservoir during antiretroviral therapy (ART) suppression. We aimed to determine whether CD32 expression marks HIV latently or transcriptionally active infected CD4+ T cells. Using peripheral blood and lymphoid tissue of ART-treated HIV+ or SIV+ subjects, we found that most of the circulating memory CD32+ CD4+ T cells expressed markers of activation, including CD69, HLA-DR, CD25, CD38, and Ki67, and bore a TH2 phenotype as defined by CXCR3, CCR4, and CCR6. CD32 expression did not selectively enrich for HIV- or SIV-infected CD4+ T cells in peripheral blood or lymphoid tissue; isolated CD32+ resting CD4+ T cells accounted for less than 3% of the total HIV DNA in CD4+ T cells. Cell-associated HIV DNA and RNA loads in CD4+ T cells positively correlated with the frequency of CD32+ CD69+ CD4+ T cells but not with CD32 expression on resting CD4+ T cells. Using RNA fluorescence in situ hybridization, CD32 coexpression with HIV RNA or p24 was detected after in vitro HIV infection (peripheral blood mononuclear cell and tissue) and in vivo within lymph node tissue from HIV-infected individuals. Together, these results indicate that CD32 is not a marker of resting CD4+ T cells or of enriched HIV DNA-positive cells after ART; rather, CD32 is predominately expressed on a subset of activated CD4+ T cells enriched for transcriptionally active HIV after long-term ART.

BackgroundHIV posttreatment controllers are rare individuals who start antiretroviral therapy (ART), but maintain HIV suppression after treatment interruption. The frequency of posttreatment control and posttreatment interruption viral dynamics have not been well characterized.MethodsPosttreatment controllers were identified from 14 studies and defined as individuals who underwent treatment interruption with viral loads ≤400 copies/mL at two-thirds or more of time points for ≥24 weeks. Viral load and CD4+ cell dynamics were compared between posttreatment controllers and noncontrollers.ResultsOf the 67 posttreatment controllers identified, 38 initiated ART during early HIV infection. Posttreatment controllers were more frequently identified in those treated during early versus chronic infection (13% vs 4%, P < .001). In posttreatment controllers with weekly viral load monitoring, 45% had a peak posttreatment interruption viral load of ≥1000 copies/mL and 33% had a peak viral load ≥10000 copies/mL. Of posttreatment controllers, 55% maintained HIV control for 2 years, with approximately 20% maintaining control for ≥5 years.ConclusionsPosttreatment control was more commonly identified amongst early treated individuals, frequently characterized by early transient viral rebound and heterogeneous durability of HIV remission. These results may provide mechanistic insights and have implications for the design of trials aimed at achieving HIV remission.

BackgroundHIV posttreatment controllers are rare individuals who start antiretroviral therapy (ART), but maintain HIV suppression after treatment interruption. The frequency of posttreatment control and posttreatment interruption viral dynamics have not been well characterized.MethodsPosttreatment controllers were identified from 14 studies and defined as individuals who underwent treatment interruption with viral loads ≤400 copies/mL at two-thirds or more of time points for ≥24 weeks. Viral load and CD4+ cell dynamics were compared between posttreatment controllers and noncontrollers.ResultsOf the 67 posttreatment controllers identified, 38 initiated ART during early HIV infection. Posttreatment controllers were more frequently identified in those treated during early versus chronic infection (13% vs 4%, P < .001). In posttreatment controllers with weekly viral load monitoring, 45% had a peak posttreatment interruption viral load of ≥1000 copies/mL and 33% had a peak viral load ≥10000 copies/mL. Of posttreatment controllers, 55% maintained HIV control for 2 years, with approximately 20% maintaining control for ≥5 years.ConclusionsPosttreatment control was more commonly identified amongst early treated individuals, frequently characterized by early transient viral rebound and heterogeneous durability of HIV remission. These results may provide mechanistic insights and have implications for the design of trials aimed at achieving HIV remission.

BackgroundHIV posttreatment controllers are rare individuals who start antiretroviral therapy (ART), but maintain HIV suppression after treatment interruption. The frequency of posttreatment control and posttreatment interruption viral dynamics have not been well characterized.MethodsPosttreatment controllers were identified from 14 studies and defined as individuals who underwent treatment interruption with viral loads ≤400 copies/mL at two-thirds or more of time points for ≥24 weeks. Viral load and CD4+ cell dynamics were compared between posttreatment controllers and noncontrollers.ResultsOf the 67 posttreatment controllers identified, 38 initiated ART during early HIV infection. Posttreatment controllers were more frequently identified in those treated during early versus chronic infection (13% vs 4%, P < .001). In posttreatment controllers with weekly viral load monitoring, 45% had a peak posttreatment interruption viral load of ≥1000 copies/mL and 33% had a peak viral load ≥10000 copies/mL. Of posttreatment controllers, 55% maintained HIV control for 2 years, with approximately 20% maintaining control for ≥5 years.ConclusionsPosttreatment control was more commonly identified amongst early treated individuals, frequently characterized by early transient viral rebound and heterogeneous durability of HIV remission. These results may provide mechanistic insights and have implications for the design of trials aimed at achieving HIV remission.

The persistence of HIV reservoirs, including latently infected, resting CD4+ T cells, is the major obstacle to cure HIV infection. CD32a expression was recently reported to mark CD4+ T cells harboring a replication-competent HIV reservoir during antiretroviral therapy (ART) suppression. We aimed to determine whether CD32 expression marks HIV latently or transcriptionally active infected CD4+ T cells. Using peripheral blood and lymphoid tissue of ART-treated HIV+ or SIV+ subjects, we found that most of the circulating memory CD32+ CD4+ T cells expressed markers of activation, including CD69, HLA-DR, CD25, CD38, and Ki67, and bore a TH2 phenotype as defined by CXCR3, CCR4, and CCR6. CD32 expression did not selectively enrich for HIV- or SIV-infected CD4+ T cells in peripheral blood or lymphoid tissue; isolated CD32+ resting CD4+ T cells accounted for less than 3% of the total HIV DNA in CD4+ T cells. Cell-associated HIV DNA and RNA loads in CD4+ T cells positively correlated with the frequency of CD32+ CD69+ CD4+ T cells but not with CD32 expression on resting CD4+ T cells. Using RNA fluorescence in situ hybridization, CD32 coexpression with HIV RNA or p24 was detected after in vitro HIV infection (peripheral blood mononuclear cell and tissue) and in vivo within lymph node tissue from HIV-infected individuals. Together, these results indicate that CD32 is not a marker of resting CD4+ T cells or of enriched HIV DNA-positive cells after ART; rather, CD32 is predominately expressed on a subset of activated CD4+ T cells enriched for transcriptionally active HIV after long-term ART.

BackgroundImmune activation persists despite suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and predicts non-Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) comorbidities including cardiovascular disease. Activated platelets play a key role in atherothrombosis and inflammation, and platelets are hyperactivated in chronic HIV infection. Aspirin is a potent inhibitor of platelet activation through the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) pathway. We hypothesized that platelet activation contributes to immune activation and that aspirin would reduce immune activation and improve endothelial function in ART-suppressed HIV-infected individuals.MethodsIn this prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 3-arm trial of 121 HIV-infected participants on suppressive ART for >48 weeks, we evaluated the effects of 12 weeks of daily aspirin 100 mg, aspirin 300 mg, or placebo on soluble and cellular immune activation markers, flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery, and serum thromboxane B2, a direct readout of platelet COX-1 inhibition.ResultsThe 300-mg and 100-mg aspirin arms did not differ from placebo in effects on soluble CD14, interleukin (IL)-6, soluble CD163, D-dimer, T-cell or monocyte activation, or the other immunologic endpoints measured. Endothelial function, as measured by FMD, also was not significantly changed when comparing the 300-mg and 100-mg aspirin arms to placebo.ConclusionsAspirin treatment for 12 weeks does not have a major impact on soluble CD14, IL-6, soluble CD163, D-dimer, T-cell or monocyte activation, or FMD, suggesting that inhibition of COX-1-mediated platelet activation does not significantly improve HIV-related immune activation and endothelial dysfunction. Although future studies are needed to further identify the causes and consequences of platelet activation in ART-treated HIV infection, interventions other than COX-1 inhibition will need to be explored to directly reduce immune activation

BackgroundImmune activation persists despite suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and predicts non-Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) comorbidities including cardiovascular disease. Activated platelets play a key role in atherothrombosis and inflammation, and platelets are hyperactivated in chronic HIV infection. Aspirin is a potent inhibitor of platelet activation through the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) pathway. We hypothesized that platelet activation contributes to immune activation and that aspirin would reduce immune activation and improve endothelial function in ART-suppressed HIV-infected individuals.MethodsIn this prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 3-arm trial of 121 HIV-infected participants on suppressive ART for >48 weeks, we evaluated the effects of 12 weeks of daily aspirin 100 mg, aspirin 300 mg, or placebo on soluble and cellular immune activation markers, flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery, and serum thromboxane B2, a direct readout of platelet COX-1 inhibition.ResultsThe 300-mg and 100-mg aspirin arms did not differ from placebo in effects on soluble CD14, interleukin (IL)-6, soluble CD163, D-dimer, T-cell or monocyte activation, or the other immunologic endpoints measured. Endothelial function, as measured by FMD, also was not significantly changed when comparing the 300-mg and 100-mg aspirin arms to placebo.ConclusionsAspirin treatment for 12 weeks does not have a major impact on soluble CD14, IL-6, soluble CD163, D-dimer, T-cell or monocyte activation, or FMD, suggesting that inhibition of COX-1-mediated platelet activation does not significantly improve HIV-related immune activation and endothelial dysfunction. Although future studies are needed to further identify the causes and consequences of platelet activation in ART-treated HIV infection, interventions other than COX-1 inhibition will need to be explored to directly reduce immune activation

BackgroundInfluenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality despite available treatments. Anecdotal reports suggest that plasma with high antibody titres to influenza might be of benefit in the treatment of severe influenza.MethodsIn this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial, 29 academic medical centres in the USA assessed the safety and efficacy of anti-influenza plasma with haemagglutination inhibition antibody titres of 1:80 or more to the infecting strain. Hospitalised children and adults (including pregnant women) with severe influenza A or B (defined as the presence of hypoxia or tachypnoea) were randomly assigned to receive either two units (or paediatric equivalent) of anti-influenza plasma plus standard care, versus standard care alone, and were followed up for 28 days. The primary endpoint was time to normalisation of patients' respiratory status (respiratory rate of ≤20 breaths per min for adults or age-defined thresholds of 20-38 breaths per min for children) and a room air oxygen saturation of 93% or more. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01052480.FindingsBetween Jan 13, 2011, and March 2, 2015, 113 participants were screened for eligibility and 98 were randomly assigned from 20 out of 29 participating sites. Of the participants with confirmed influenza (by PCR), 28 (67%) of 42 in the plasma plus standard care group normalised their respiratory status by day 28 compared with 24 (53%) of 45 participants on standard care alone (p=0·069). The hazard ratio (HR) comparing plasma plus standard care with standard care alone was 1·71 (95% CI 0·96-3·06). Six participants died, one (2%) from the plasma plus standard care group and five (10%) from the standard care group (HR 0·19 [95% CI 0·02-1·65], p=0·093). Participants in the plasma plus standard care group had non-significant reductions in days in hospital (median 6 days [IQR 4-16] vs 11 days [5-25], p=0·13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 days [IQR 0-6]

With the advent and stunning success of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) to prolong and improve quality of life for persons with HIV infection, HIV research has been afforded the opportunity to pivot towards studies aimed at finding "a cure." The mere idea that cure of HIV might be possible has energized researchers and the community towards achieving this goal. Funding agencies, both governmental and private, have targeted HIV cure as a high priority; many in the field have responded to these initiatives and the cure research agenda is robust. In this "salon" two editors of Pathogens and Immunity, Michael Lederman and Daniel Douek ask whether curing HIV is a realistic, scalable objective. We start with an overview perspective and have asked a number of prominent HIV researchers to add to the discussion.

With the advent and stunning success of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) to prolong and improve quality of life for persons with HIV infection, HIV research has been afforded the opportunity to pivot towards studies aimed at finding "a cure." The mere idea that cure of HIV might be possible has energized researchers and the community towards achieving this goal. Funding agencies, both governmental and private, have targeted HIV cure as a high priority; many in the field have responded to these initiatives and the cure research agenda is robust. In this "salon" two editors of Pathogens and Immunity, Michael Lederman and Daniel Douek ask whether curing HIV is a realistic, scalable objective. We start with an overview perspective and have asked a number of prominent HIV researchers to add to the discussion.

In 2 double-blinded Phase 3 trials, 1733 antiretroviralnaive participants were randomized to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a tenofovir prodrug versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), each coformulated with elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine (E/C/F). At 96 weeks, 86.6% in the TAF arm and 85.2% in the TDF arm had HIV-1 RNA<50 c/mL [difference 1.5%; (95% CI: 21.8% to 4.8%)]. With TAF, there are smaller declines in bone mineral density and more favorable changes in proteinuria, albuminuria, and tubular proteinuria, and no cases of proximal tubulopathy compared with 2 for TDF. These longer-term data support E/C/F/TAF as a safe, welltolerated, and durable regimen for initial HIV-1 treatment., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

BackgroundWe hypothesized that nitazoxanide (NTZ) added to pegylated interferon alfa-2a (PEG-IFN) and weight-based ribavirin (WBR) would improve hepatitis C virus (HCV) virologic responses in HCV treatment-naïve HIV-1/HCV genotype 1 coinfected persons.MethodsProspective, single-arm study in which subjects received 4-week lead-in (NTZ 500 mg twice daily) followed by 48 weeks of NTZ, PEG-IFN, and WBR. We compared the HCV virologic responses of these subjects to historical controls from the completed ACTG study A5178 who received PEG-IFN and WBR and had similar subject characteristics. Primary endpoints were early virologic response and complete early virologic response (EVR and cEVR).ResultsAmong 67 subjects (78% male; 48% Black; median age, 50 years), EVR was achieved in 65.7% (90% CI, 55.0%-75.3%), cEVR in 38.8% (28.8%-49.6%). and SVR in 32.8% (23.4%-43.5%). EVR was higher with NTZ (51.4% in A5178; P = .03), but the sustained virologic response (SVR) proportion was similar (27.3% in A5178; P = .24). In contrast to A5178, SVR was similar across IL28B genotypes. Overall, NTZ was safe and well-tolerated.ConclusionWhereas EVR proportion improved significantly in this pilot study, the addition of NTZ to PEG-IFN/WBR did not significantly improve SVR compared to historical controls. NTZ may be associated with an attenuation of the effect of IL28B on HCV treatment response.

Objectives: The efficacy and hepatic safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz were compared in treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults with concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the pooled week 48 analysis of the Phase III, double-blind, randomized ECHO (NCT00540449) and THRIVE (NCT00543725) trials. Methods: Patients received 25 mg of rilpivirine once daily or 600 mg of efavirenz once daily, plus two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. At screening, patients had alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase levels ≤5× the upper limit of normal. HBV and HCV status was determined at baseline by HBV surface antigen, HCV antibody and HCV RNA testing. Results: HBV/HCV coinfection status was known for 670 patients in the rilpivirine group and 665 in the efavirenz group. At baseline, 49 rilpivirine and 63 efavirenz patients [112/1335 (8.4%)] were coinfected with either HBV [55/1357 (4.1%)] or HCV [57/1333 (4.3%)]. The safety analysis included all available data, including beyond week 48. Eight patients seroconverted during the study (rilpivirine: five; efavirenz: three). A higher proportion of patients achieved viral load <50 copies/mL (intent to treat, time to loss of virological response) in the subgroup without HBV/HCV coinfection (rilpivirine: 85.0%; efavirenz: 82.6%) than in the coinfected subgroup (rilpivirine: 73.5%; efavirenz: 79.4%) (rilpivirine, P = 0.04 and efavirenz, P = 0.49, Fisher's exact test). The incidence of hepatic adverse events (AEs) was low in both groups in the overall population (rilpivirine: 5.5% versus efavirenz: 6.6%) and was higher in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients than in those not coinfected (26.7% versus 4.1%, respectively). Conclusions: Hepatic AEs were more common and response rates lower in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients treated with rilpivirine or efavirenz than in those who were not coinfected. © The Author 2012. Published b, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Objectives: The efficacy and hepatic safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz were compared in treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults with concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the pooled week 48 analysis of the Phase III, double-blind, randomized ECHO (NCT00540449) and THRIVE (NCT00543725) trials. Methods: Patients received 25 mg of rilpivirine once daily or 600 mg of efavirenz once daily, plus two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. At screening, patients had alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase levels ≤5× the upper limit of normal. HBV and HCV status was determined at baseline by HBV surface antigen, HCV antibody and HCV RNA testing. Results: HBV/HCV coinfection status was known for 670 patients in the rilpivirine group and 665 in the efavirenz group. At baseline, 49 rilpivirine and 63 efavirenz patients [112/1335 (8.4%)] were coinfected with either HBV [55/1357 (4.1%)] or HCV [57/1333 (4.3%)]. The safety analysis included all available data, including beyond week 48. Eight patients seroconverted during the study (rilpivirine: five; efavirenz: three). A higher proportion of patients achieved viral load <50 copies/mL (intent to treat, time to loss of virological response) in the subgroup without HBV/HCV coinfection (rilpivirine: 85.0%; efavirenz: 82.6%) than in the coinfected subgroup (rilpivirine: 73.5%; efavirenz: 79.4%) (rilpivirine, P = 0.04 and efavirenz, P = 0.49, Fisher's exact test). The incidence of hepatic adverse events (AEs) was low in both groups in the overall population (rilpivirine: 5.5% versus efavirenz: 6.6%) and was higher in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients than in those not coinfected (26.7% versus 4.1%, respectively). Conclusions: Hepatic AEs were more common and response rates lower in HBV/HCV-coinfected patients treated with rilpivirine or efavirenz than in those who were not coinfected. © The Author 2012. Published b, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

The efficacy and hepatic safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz were compared in treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults with concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the pooled week 48 analysis of the Phase III, double-blind, randomized ECHO (NCT00540449) and THRIVE (NCT00543725) trials.

The efficacy and hepatic safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz were compared in treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults with concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the pooled week 48 analysis of the Phase III, double-blind, randomized ECHO (NCT00540449) and THRIVE (NCT00543725) trials.

We conducted subanalyses of the combined results of the Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2 studies to better characterize the efficacy and safety of maraviroc in key subgroups of patients.