Search

Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) cannot cure HIV infection because of a persistent reservoir of latently infected cells. Approaches that force HIV transcription from these cells, making them susceptible to killing—termed kick and kill regimens—have been explored as a strategy towards an HIV cure. RIVER is the first randomised trial to determine the effect of ART-only versus ART plus kick and kill on markers of the HIV reservoir. Methods: This phase 2, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial was undertaken at six clinical sites in the UK. Patients aged 18–60 years who were confirmed as HIV-positive within a maximum of the past 6 months and started ART within 1 month from confirmed diagnosis were randomly assigned by a computer generated randomisation list to receive ART-only (control) or ART plus the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (the kick) and replication-deficient viral vector T-cell inducing vaccines encoding conserved HIV sequences ChAdV63. HIVconsv-prime and MVA.HIVconsv-boost (the kill; ART + V + V; intervention). The primary endpoint was total HIV DNA isolated from peripheral blood CD4+ T-cells at weeks 16 and 18 after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02336074. Findings: Between June 14, 2015 and Jul 11, 2017, 60 men with HIV were randomly assigned to receive either an ART-only (n=30) or an ART + V + V (n=30) regimen; all 60 participants completed the study, with no loss-to-follow-up. Mean total HIV DNA at weeks 16 and 18 after randomisation was 3·02 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells in the ART-only group versus 3·06 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells in ART + V + V group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (mean difference of 0·04 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells [95% CI −0·03 to 0·11; p=0·26]). There were no intervention-related serious adverse events. Interpretation: This kick and kill approach conferred no significant benefit compared with ART alone on measures of the HIV reservoir. Although this does not disprove the efficacy kick and kill strategy, for future trials enhancement of both kick and kill agents will be required.

One of the targets of antiretroviral therapy is within cells infected with HIV. In order to improve therapeutic efficacy, it is therefore important that the intracellular pharmacokinetics of drugs, such as nelfinavir mesylate and its active metabolite M8, are studied in addition to plasma pharmacokinetics. Previously, the intracellular accumulation of protease inhibitors has been reported in vivo, displaying the following hierarchy: nelfinavirsaquinavirritonavirindinavir. Multidrug resistance transporters, such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp), may result in a lower intracellular concentration of drug via an efflux mechanism, thus contributing to sanctuary site formation. The objective of this study was to determine concentrations of nelfinavir and M8 in plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells from HIV-infected patients, and to ascertain the relationship between intracellular accumulation and lymphocyte P-gp expression. Venous blood samples from 12 HIV-infected patients (viral load50 copies/ml) receiving nelfinavir (1250 mg twice daily) and dual nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy were collected over a full dosage interval (0, 2, 4, 8 and 12 h). Plasma and intracellular (cell-associated) drug concentrations were measured by HPLC-MS/MS. Drug exposure in plasma and cells was expressed as the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0-12h)), derived from non-compartmental modelling. The ratio of intracellular AUC(0-12h)/total plasma AUC(0-12h) was calculated to determine cellular drug accumulation. P-gp expression on lymphocytes was determined by flow cytometry. The median (range) AUC(0-12h) of nelfinavir in plasma and cellular compartments was 21.8 mg x h x l(-1) (5.64-50.8) and 104.6 mg x h x l(-1) (23.1-265.7), respectively. Corresponding values for M8 in plasma and cells were 6.60 mg x h x l(-1) (2.16-17.3) and 19.6 mg x h x l(-1) (5.14-60.8). A ratio of plasma M8/plasma nelfinavir (AUC(0-12h)) and intracellular M8/intracellular nelfinavir (AUC(0-12h)) gave median values of 0.32 and 0.17, respectively. The cellular accumulations [median; (range)] of nelfinavir and M8 were 5.30 (2.28-16.2) and 2.32 (1.01-10.7), respectively. A significant correlation between plasma and intracellular nelfinavir minimum concentration (Cmin) (r2=0.34; P=0.049), but not between plasma and intracellular M8 Cmin was observed. C(0h) concentrations were higher than C(12h) for both nelfinavir and M8. No relationship was observed between nelfinavir or M8 accumulation and lymphocyte cell surface expression of P-gp. This study illustrates that intracellular concentrations were higher than plasma concentrations for both nelfinavir and M8, suggesting lymphocyte accumulation. The mechanism of differential intracellular accumulation of nelfinavir and M8 remains to be elucidated. It may be that affinities for influx transporters or fundamental drug characteristics play a major role in the greater accumulation of nelfinavir than M8.

Objective To assess the occurrence of viral load greater than 50 copies/ml in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) having achieved less than 50 copies/ml and the chance of whether a viral load greater than 50 copies/ml would lead to a sustained and increasing viral load. Design A cohort of 553 patients on HAART with viral loads of less than 50 copies/ml were followed. Results Over a median of 56 weeks 35% of patients experienced a transient increase and 8% virological failure (two consecutive viral loads of > 400 copies/ml). Transient increases and virological failure were more common in those with greater drug experience, and those with initial raised viral load values of more than 400 copies/ml were more likely to have a sustained increase and become virological failures. Conclusion Transient increases in viral load are common, mainly in the 50-400 copies/ml range, and the majority of subsequent viral load estimations show a return to less than 50 copies/ml. A single raised viral load should lead to adherence support and intensified monitoring. Subsequent treatment decisions can then be based on evidence of true virological rebound and failure.