Search

[Abstract] A percentage of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients fail direct acting antiviral (DAA)-based treatment regimens, often because of drug resistance-associated substitutions (RAS). The aim of this study was to characterize the resistance profile of a large cohort of patients failing DAA-based treatments, and investigate the relationship between HCV subtype and failure, as an aid to optimizing management of these patients. A new, standardized HCV-RAS testing protocol based on deep sequencing was designed and applied to 220 previously subtyped samples from patients failing DAA treatment, collected in 39 Spanish hospitals. The majority had received DAA-based interferon (IFN) α-free regimens; 79% had failed sofosbuvir-containing therapy. Genomic regions encoding the nonstructural protein (NS) 3, NS5A, and NS5B (DAA target regions) were analyzed using subtype-specific primers. Viral subtype distribution was as follows: genotype (G) 1, 62.7%; G3a, 21.4%; G4d, 12.3%; G2, 1.8%; and mixed infections 1.8%. Overall, 88.6% of patients carried at least 1 RAS, and 19% carried RAS at frequencies below 20% in the mutant spectrum. There were no differences in RAS selection between treatments with and without ribavirin. Regardless of the treatment received, each HCV subtype showed specific types of RAS. Of note, no RAS were detected in the target proteins of 18.6% of patients failing treatment, and 30.4% of patients had RAS in proteins that were not targets of the inhibitors they received. HCV patients failing DAA therapy showed a high diversity of RAS. Ribavirin use did not influence the type or number of RAS at failure. The subtype-specific pattern of RAS emergence underscores the importance of accurate HCV subtyping. The frequency of “extra-target” RAS suggests the need for RAS screening in all three DAA target regions. Ministerio de Economía y Empresa; IDI-20151125 Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades; SAF SAF 2017-87846-R

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of a once-daily regimen with didanosine, lamivudine, saquinavir, and low-dose ritonavir in antiretroviral (ARV)-naive patients with tuberculosis treated with rifampin and the influence of rifampin on plasma trough concentration (C trough ) of saquinavir. Methods: Single-arm, prospective, multicenter, open-label pilot study, including 32 adult ARV-naive subjects with HIV infection and tuberculosis under standard treatment that included rifampin (600 mg q.d.) and isoniazid (300 mg q.d.). After 2 months of tuberculosis treatment, patients were started on once-daily ARV therapy, consisting of didanosine, lamivudine, ritonavir (200 mg), and saquinavir soft gel capsules (1600 mg). HIV RNA level, CD4 cell count, clinical and laboratory toxicity, and saquinavir C trough during and after antituberculosis therapy were analyzed. Results: After 48 weeks of follow-up, 20 of 32 patients (62.5%; 95% CI: 45.8% to 79.2%) in the intent-to-treat population and 20 of 28 (71.4%; 95% CI: 54.4% to 88.4%) in the on-treatment population had an HIV RNA level

AIDS-related morbidity and mortality have declined sharply with the use of potent antiretroviral regimens. Despite the clinical benefit observed with highly active antiretroviral therapy, inevitably most regimens fail; failure rates of 20 to 50% have been reported within the first year of triple-drug therapy (4, 21, 25). Virologic failure rates increase rapidly with successive therapeutic regimens (19, 24); thus, the management of patients who have failed several previous courses of antiretroviral therapy is a major challenge in clinical practice (9). Since a conventional drug regimen cannot be offered to these patients, multiple-drug rescue therapies have been used. Sometimes these therapies have to include dual human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitor (PI) combinations at therapeutic doses (5). PIs undergo cytochrome P450-based metabolism in the gastrointestinal tract and liver, and they are subject to potentially significant drug-drug interactions. In addition, all PIs are substrates for transport by the P-glycoprotein drug transport protein (18, 27). Such interactions may be beneficial when two PIs are administered simultaneously. For example, ritonavir is a potent inhibitor of some cytochrome P450 isoenzymes and of the P-glycoprotein, and when it is coadministered with other PIs there is a considerable increase in their concentrations in plasma (14, 22). Saquinavir was the first PI available for the treatment of patients with HIV infection. The bioavailability of saquinavir is low, but when it is coadministered with ritonavir, concentrations of saquinavir in plasma increase enormously (28). The first combination of PIs used was saquinavir and ritonavir, each at doses of 400 mg (3). The combination of 1,000 mg of saquinavir and 100 mg of ritonavir, both twice daily (b.i.d.), results in higher exposure to saquinavir than that obtained with a 400-mg-400-mg b.i.d. combination of saquinavir and ritonavir (28, 31). With regard to saquinavir concentration, the boosting effects of different doses of ritonavir ranging from 100 to 400 mg b.i.d. are similar (15), and with the 100-mg dose, the toxic effects of higher doses are minimized (11). Lopinavir was the first commercially marketed PI coformulated with ritonavir to achieve good bioavailability. The usual regimen is 100 mg of ritonavir and 400 mg of lopinavir b.i.d. (6). This fixed combination of lopinavir and low-dose ritonavir (Kaletra) facilitates the simultaneous boosting of another PI. The administration of two PIs boosted with low doses of ritonavir can produce complex drug interactions with unexpected results. A decrease in the concentration of both PIs has been described when lopinavir-ritonavir is administered with amprenavir (6). This unfavorable reaction does not seem to occur when lopinavir-ritonavir is administered with saquinavir (6, 28), but there is little pharmacokinetic data to support the use of this combination. This study reports the steady-state pharmacokinetics of lopinavir, saquinavir and ritonavir administered as a dual-boosted PI combination in HIV-infected adults with multiple prior therapeutic failures and investigates whether the steady-state serum pharmacokinetics of lopinavir-ritonavir are affected by coadministration of saquinavir. (This work was presented in part at the XIV International AIDS Conference, Barcelona, Spain, 2002 [abstract TuPeB4545].)

Background Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-containing regimens may be a valid alternative to protease inhibitor-containing regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy, but to date few studies comparing these two strategies have been performed. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of nelfinavir or nevirapine associated to zidovudine/lamivudine in HIV-infected naive patients. Design Randomized, open-label, multicentre trial. Setting Twelve centres in Spain (9) and Argentina (3). Patients One hundred and forty-two HIV-infected naive patients without AIDS. Interventions Patients received combivir (zidovudine 300 mg/lamivudine 150 mg, twice-daily) plus either nelfinavir (1250 mg) twice-daily (zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir, n=70) or nevirapine (200 mg) twice-daily (zidovudine/lamivudine/nevirapine, n=72), and were followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a plasma HIV-1 RNA (pVL) of less than 200 copies/ml by PCR at 12 months. pVL of less than 20 copies/ml (PCR), changes in CD4 counts, clinical progression and adverse events were also evaluated. Efficacy was assessed using intent-to-treat (ITT) (missing=failure) and on-treatment analysis. Results At 12 months in the ITT analysis the proportion of patients with pVL below 200 copies/ml was 60% (95% CI 48.5–71.5) in the zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir arm and 75% (95% CI 65–85) in the zidovudine/lamivudine/nevirapine arm ( P=0.06), and the proportion below 20 copies/ml was 50% (95% CI 38.3–61.7) and 65% (95% CI 54.2–76.2), respectively ( P=0.06). No differences were found when comparing the subgroup of patients with baseline pVL of more than 100 000 copies/ml. A gain of +173 and +162 CD4 cells/mm3, respectively, was observed. Zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir was discontinued in 21% of patients, and zidovudine/lamivudine/ nevirapine in 25%, due to toxicity ( P>0.2). Conclusions Our results suggest that zidovudine/ lamivudine/nevirapine is at least as effective as zidovudine/lamivudine/nelfinavir as first-line therapy for HIV disease.

Lipoatrophy is the most stigmatizing side effect of stavudine therapy. We assessed the long-term effects of replacing stavudine with tenofovir in HIV-infected patients with lipoatrophy.Prospective switch study. Sixty-two clinically stable patients with antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing stavudine, HIV-1 RNA50 copies/mL, and lipoatrophy at least in the face on physical examination were included. All patients switched from stavudine to tenofovir without changing any other drug. Objective (malar ultasonography, bioelectrical impedance analysis) and subjective measures of lipoatrophy were assessed.Median age at baseline was 40 years, 44 patients (71%) were male, and median time on stavudine was 4.8 years. Median malar fat thickness increased 0.8 mm (25%) 24 months after switching. Total fat mass increased 3.9 kg (21%). Plasma lactate levels decreased significantly, mainly in patients with baseline hyperlactatemia (from 3.05 to 1.19 mmol/L). Significant improvement in total cholesterol (-12%), triglycerides (-31%), and total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio (-11%) was observed at Month 24.In this study, switching from stavudine to tenofovir maintained durable virologic suppression when the HAART regimen included a protease inhibitor or a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, led to a slow improvement of lipoatrophy, and improved the lipid profile and lactate levels with excellent tolerability. These results support the proactive change of stavudine to tenofovir.

Objectives To assess plasma steady-state pharmacokinetics (PK) of rifampicin, isoniazid, saquinavir and ritonavir in HIV and tuberculosis (TB) co-infected patients, and investigate potential interactions between TB drugs and protease inhibitors (PIs). Methods Open-label, single-arm, sequential PK study including 22 patients with HIV infection and TB. During the first 2 months, patients received rifampicin, isoniazid and pyrazinamide, with or without ethambutol (first PK study, n = 22). Then patients stopped pyrazinamide and ethambutol and started once-daily antiretroviral therapy (ART) with didanosine, lamivudine, ritonavir (200 mg) and saquinavir (1600 mg) (second PK study, n = 18). Patients stopped all TB drugs after 9 months continuing the same ART (third PK study, n = 15). Differences between TB drug parameters in the first and second PK studies, and between PI parameters in the second and third PK studies were used to assess interactions. Results Rifampicin and isoniazid pharmacokinetics did not change substantially with saquinavir and ritonavir. A significant 39.5%, 34.9% and 48.7% reduction in median saquinavir AUC(0-24), C(max) and C(trough), respectively, was seen with rifampicin and isoniazid. Ritonavir AUC(0-24), C(max) and C(trough) decreased 42.5%, 49.6% and 64.3%, respectively, with rifampicin and isoniazid. Conclusions There was a significant interaction between saquinavir, ritonavir and rifampicin, with reduction in median plasma concentrations of saquinavir and ritonavir. Saquinavir should be given with caution in patients receiving rifampicin. Twice-daily dosing or higher saquinavir doses in once-daily administration should be tested to obtain more appropriate plasma levels.

To assess the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of lopinavir (LPV), ritonavir (RTV) and atazanavir (ATV) as a double-boosted protease inhibitor regimen in HIV-infected adults.Sixteen patients who started LPV/RTV (400/100 mg b.i.d.) and ATV (300 mg q.d.) were enrolled in the study group (arm A). LPV pharmacokinetics were compared to those of two historical groups: arm B, 15 patients who received LPV/RTV (400/100 mg b.i.d.); and arm C, 25 patients who received LPV/RTV/saquinavir (SQV) (400/100/1000 mg b.i.d.). ATV pharmacokinetics were compared to those of 15 consecutive patients who received ATV and RTV (300/100 mg q.d.) (arm D). Drug concentrations were measured by HPLC.LPV concentrations were significantly higher in arm A than in arms B and C. Median (interquartile range) LPV area under the curve (AUC)0-12 values were 115.7 (99.8-136.5), 85.2 (68.3-109.2) and 85.1 (60.6-110.1) microg/h/ml, respectively. C(max) values were 12.2 (10.7-14.5), 9.5 (6.8-13.9) and 10.0 (6.9-13.6) microg/ml, respectively. C(min) values were 9.1 (7.1-10.4), 5.6 (4.7-8.2) and 5.5 (4.2-7.5) microg/ml, respectively. No difference was observed for ATV AUC0-24 or C(max) between arms A and D. ATV C(min) values were 1.07 (0.61-1.79) in arm A and 0.58 (0.32-0.83) in arm D (P = 0.001). Treatment was not discontinued in any patient because of adverse effects. At 24 weeks, viral load was50 copies/ml in 13 of 16 patients.The combination of ATV and LPV/RTV provided high plasma concentrations of both PI, which seemed to be appropriate for patients with multiple prior therapeutic failures, yielding good tolerability and substantial antiviral efficacy.

To determine whether rifampicin reduces serum concentrations of nevirapine and whether nevirapine modifies serum concentrations of rifampicin, levels of these agents were determined at steady state by high-performance liquid chromatography in 10 HIV-infected patients with tuberculosis. The median area under the curve (AUC) 0-12h of nevirapine before and after rifampicin was 56.2 and 32.8 microg/ml per hour, respectively ( p =.04). This represents a 31% reduction in serum nevirapine concentrations. The C(max) decreased from 5.6 to 4.5 microg/ml ( p =.04), which represented a 36% reduction. A 21% decrease in the C(min) was not statistically significant. Exposure to rifampicin did not significantly differ between those patients who were receiving and were not receiving nevirapine. However, our study shows that rifampicin reduces serum exposure to nevirapine. The clinical implications for this reduction remain to be established. Given that the lowest trough serum concentration of nevirapine exceeded by more than 40 times the protein binding adjusted median infective dose (IC(50)) of wild-type HIV in all patients, we suggest that there is no need to increase nevirapine dosage when it is given with rifampicin.

To evaluate the influence of the dose of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis on the risk of toxoplasmosis in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients, we performed a nested case-control study of 32 patients with toxoplasmosis (case patients) and 64 patients without toxoplasmosis (control patients) who were matched by CD4 cell count and Toxoplasma gondii serostatus; these patients were from a cohort of 521 HIV-infected patients who underwent a diagnostic neuroimaging study between March 1993 and January 1997. Twenty-seven (84.4%) of 32 case patients and 33 (51.6%) of 64 control patients received low doses of co-trimoxazole, a finding associated with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 9.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.05-42.75) and indicating 89% protective efficacy for high doses. Fifteen (46.9%) of 32 case patients and 16 (25%) of 64 control patients were exposed to rifampin (adjusted OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.08-10.61). These results indicate that high doses of co-trimoxazole appear to be more effective than low doses for lowering the risk of toxoplasmosis in HIV-infected patients and that rifampin therapy may reduce the efficacy of co-trimoxazole.

Background It is often difficult to administer extended antibiotic therapy in the hospital for right-sided Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Although the effectiveness of single-drug therapy given for 4 to 6 weeks and that of two-drug therapy given for 2 weeks have been shown, no data are available on the effectiveness of short-course single-drug therapy. Objective To compare the efficacy of cloxacillin alone with that of cloxacillin plus gentamicin for the 2-week treatment of right-sided S. aureus endocarditis in intravenous drug users. Design Open, randomized study. Setting An academic tertiary care hospital in Barcelona, Spain. Patients 90 consecutive intravenous drug users who had isolated tricuspid valve endocarditis caused by methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, had no allergy to study medications, and had no systemic infectious complications that required prolonged therapy. An efficacy subset consisted of 74 of these patients who did not meet an exclusion criterion. Intervention Cloxacillin (2 g intravenously every 4 hours for 14 days) alone or combined with gentamicin (1 mg/kg of body weight intravenously every 8 hours for 7 days). Measurements Clinical or microbiological evidence of active infection after 2 weeks of therapy, relapse of staphylococcal infection, or death. Results In an analysis of the efficacy subset, treatment was successful in 34 of the 38 patients who received cloxacillin alone (89% [95% CI, 75% to 97%]) and 31 of the 36 patients who received cloxacillin plus gentamicin (86% [CI, 71% to 95%]). Three patients died: one in the cloxacillin group and two in the combination therapy group. Of the 37 patients who completed 2-week treatment with cloxacillin, 34 (92%) were cured, and 3 (8%) needed prolonged treatment to cure the infection. Of the 34 patients who completed 2-week treatment with cloxacillin plus gentamicin, 32 (94%) were cured and 2 (6%) required treatment for 4 weeks. One patient in the combination group had relapse. Conclusions A penicillinase-resistant penicillin used as single-agent therapy for 2 weeks was effective for most patients with isolated tricuspid endocarditis caused by methicillin-susceptible S. aureus. Adding gentamicin did not appear to provide any therapeutic advantages. Additional studies to confirm the therapeutic equivalence of short-course therapy with penicillinase-resistant penicillin alone and therapy with combined regimens are warranted.

To assess the effectiveness of two regimens with allopurinol or pentavalent antimony as secondary prophylaxis for visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients.Retrospective, nonrandomized, open trial.A 1,000-bed academic tertiary institutional hospital in Barcelona.Forty-six individuals over 14 years old with HIV infection, who recovered from an episode of VL between January 1988 and February 1995.Twenty patients did not receive any prophylaxis, nine received 300 mg/8 h of allopurinol, and 17 received 850 mg once-a-month of pentavalent antimony. Patients were followed-up every 3 months, and the endpoint of study was relapse of VL.Twenty-one patients had recurrent VL: 13 of 20 in the control group (65%), 5 of 9 in the allopurinol group (56%), and 3 of 17 in the antimonial group (18%). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the probability of remaining relapse-free at 12 months were 9% without prophylaxis (95% CI, 0-22%), 21% with allopurinol (95% CI, 0-51%), and 93% with antimonials (95% CI, 82-100%) (P0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the only significant variables related to relapsing course of VL were assignment to the antimonial group, and the fact that the patient had experienced a previous episode of VL.Pentavalent antimony given once a month is effective in the prevention of VL relapses in HIV-infected individuals. It is a low-cost treatment that proved to be well tolerated. Therefore, pentavalent antimony should be considered a suitable agent for secondary prophylaxis against VL.

Background Immunosuppression caused by human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV) infection appears to modify the clinical characteristics and to increase the severity of several bacterial infections. The impact of HIV infection and the degree of immunosuppression on the clinical characteristics and outcome of infective endocarditis (IE) in intravenous (IV) drug users has not been well characterized. Methods Prospective cohort study among 292 consecutive IV drug users with IE diagnosed in 2 academic institutional hospitals in Barcelona, Spain, from January 1, 1984, to October 31, 1995. Serostatus of HIV infection was documented in 283 patients. We measured demographics, clinical and biological data, cause, echocardiographic findings, HIV serostatus and classification, CD4 cell count, complications, and mortality. Results Among the 283 episodes of IE, 216 (76.3%) were in HIV-infected patients and 67 (23.7%) in non–HIV-infected patients. Rate of IE per 1000 admissions ranged from 0.17 to 0.82 per year, peaking in 1989. Characteristics of IE independently associated with HIV infection were right-side involvement (odds ratio [OR], 7.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5-16.7), a micro-organism different from viridans streptococci (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.9), duration of drug abuse longer than 5 years (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 2.4-10.3), and white blood cell count of no more than 10×10 9 /L (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1-4.2). There were no significant differences in mortality due to IE according to HIV serostatus. Among the 216 patients with HIV infection, the variables independently associated with worse outcome were CD4 cell count lower than 0.200×10 9 /L and left-sided or mixed IE. Conclusions Although there is a difference in clinical presentation in IE in IV drug users, outcome was similar according to their HIV status. However, among HIV-infected patients, severe immunosuppression and mixed or left-side valvular involvement were strong risk factors for mortality.

BackgroundSimplified antiretroviral regimens are needed to improve patient adherence and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a once-daily regimen consisting of didanosine (ddI), lamivudine (3TC) and nevirapine (NVP) for adult antiretroviral-naive patients with HIV-1 infection.MethodsThis was a prospective, one-arm, multicentre pilot study. Daily drug dosage was 250 or 400 mg didanosine, 300 mg lamivudine and 400 mg nevirapine. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients with a plasma HIV-RNA level ResultsSeventy patients were enrolled in the study. At baseline, mean plasma HIV-1 RNA was 5.10 log10copies/ml, and mean CD4 cell count was 262 cells/μl. At month 12, 67% (95% CI: 56–78) of patients maintained a viral load of 100 cells/μl than in those with a poorer immunological status at baseline, although the number of patients with CD4 counts ConclusionA once-daily combination of ddI, 3TC and NVP seems to be an effective, safe and easy-to-take regimen in antiretroviral-naive patients, at least in those who do not have severe immunodepression at baseline.