Search

Summary Background Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia can have increased inflammation and elevated cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-6, which might be deleterious. Thus, sarilumab, a high-affinity anti-IL-6 receptor antibody, might improve the outcome of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods We did a multicentric, open-label, Bayesian randomised, adaptive, phase 2/3 clinical trial, nested within the CORIMUNO-19 cohort, to test a superiority hypothesis. Patients 18 years or older hospitalised with COVID-19 in six French centres, requiring at least 3L/min of oxygen but without ventilation assistance and a WHO Clinical Progression Scale [CPS] score of 5 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, according to a randomisation list stratified on centre and with blocks randomly selected among 2 and 4, to receive usual care plus 400 mg of sarilumab intravenously on day 1 and on day 3 if clinically indicated (sarilumab group) or usual care alone (usual care group). Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with WHO-CPS scores greater than 5 on the 10-point scale on day 4 and survival without invasive or non-invasive ventilation at day 14. This completed trial is closed to new participants and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04324073 . Findings 165 patients were recruited from March 27 to April 6, 2020, and 148 patients were randomised (68 patients to the sarilumab group and 80 to the usual care group) and followed up for 90 days. Median age was 61·7 years [IQR 53·0–71·1] in the sarilumab group and 62·8 years [56·0–71·7] in the usual care group. In the sarilumab group 49 (72%) of 68 were men and in the usual care group 59 (78%) of 76 were men. Four patients in the usual care group withdrew consent and were not analysed. 18 (26%) of 68 patients in the sarilumab group had a WHO-CPS score greater than 5 at day 4 versus 20 (26%) of 76 in the usual care group (median posterior absolute risk difference 0·2%; 90% credible interval [CrI] −11·7 to 12·2), with a posterior probability of absolute risk difference greater than 0 of 48·9%. At day 14, 25 (37%) patients in the sarilumab and 26 (34%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation or died, (median posterior hazard ratio [HR] 1·10; 90% CrI 0·69–1·74) with a posterior probability HR greater than 1 of 37·4%. Serious adverse events occurred in 27 (40%) patients in the sarilumab group and 28 (37%) patients in the usual care group (p=0·73). Interpretation Sarilumab treatment did not improve early outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the effect of sarilumab on long-term survival. Funding Assistance publique—Hopitaux de Paris

OBJECTIVES To evaluate safety and immunogenicity of V114 (15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine [PCV] containing serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9 V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, 22F, 23F, and 33F), followed by 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) 8 weeks later, in adults living with HIV. DESIGN In this phase 3 study (V114-018; NCT03480802), pneumococcal vaccine-naive adults with HIV (CD4+ count ≥50 cells/μl, plasma HIV RNA

Summary Background In DISCOVER, a multinational, randomised controlled trial, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide compared with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate showed non-inferior efficacy for HIV prevention and improved bone mineral density and renal safety biomarkers at week 48. We report outcomes analysed after all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. Methods This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in Europe and North America. Adult cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV as determined by self-reported sexual behaviour or recent sexually transmitted infections, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (200/25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (200/300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection. Incidence of HIV-1 infection per 100 person-years was assessed when the last participant had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02842086 . Findings Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 participants were randomly assigned to receive emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693), contributing 10 081 person-years of follow-up. At 96 weeks of follow-up, there were eight HIV infections in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·07–0·31]) and 15 in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·30 infections per 100 person-years [0·17–0·49]). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide maintained its non-inferiority to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention (IRR 0·54 [95% CI 0·23–1·26]). Approximately 78–82% of participants reported taking study medication more than 95% of the time across all study visits. Rates of sexually transmitted infections remained high and similar across groups (21 cases per 100 person-years for rectal gonorrhoea and 28 cases per 100 person-years for rectal chlamydia). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide continued to show superiority over emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all but one of the six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarkers. There was more weight gain among participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (median weight gain 1·7 kg vs 0·5 kg, p Interpretation Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide is safe and effective for longer-term pre-exposure prophylaxis in cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men. Funding Gilead Sciences.

BACKGROUND: In patients co-infected with HIV and tuberculosis, antiretroviral therapy options are limited due to drug—drug interactions with rifampicin. A previous phase 2 trial indicated that raltegravir 400 mg twice a day or efavirenz 600 mg once a day might have similar virological efficacy in patients given rifampicin. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the non-inferiority of raltegravir to efavirenz. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at six sites in Côte d'Ivoire, Brazil, France, Mozambique, and Vietnam. We included antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed HIV-1 infection and bacteriologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed tuberculosis who had initiated rifampicin-containing tuberculosis treatment within the past 8 weeks. Using computerised random numbers, we randomly assigned participants (1:1; stratified by country) to receive raltegravir 400 mg twice daily or efavirenz 600 mg once daily, both in combination with tenofovir and lamivudine. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with virological suppression at week 48 (defined as plasma HIV RNA concentration

Summary Background Islatravir is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase translocation inhibitor in development for the treatment and prevention of HIV-1 infection. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of islatravir-based regimens for the treatment of HIV-1. Methods We did a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, comparator-controlled, dose-ranging trial at 24 clinics or hospitals in four countries (Chile, France, the UK, and the USA). Treatment-naive adults (≥18 years) with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of at least 1000 copies per mL, CD4 T-cell counts of at least 200 cells per mL, and a calculated creatinine clearance of at least 50 mL/min (all within 60 days before study treatment) were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) with a block size of four via an interactive voice and web response system to receive oral treatment with one of three doses of islatravir (0·25 mg, 0·75 mg, or 2·25 mg) plus doravirine (100 mg) and lamivudine (300 mg) or to doravirine (100 mg) plus lamivudine (300 mg) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF; 300 mg) once daily with placebo (part 1). Treatment groups were stratified according to screening HIV-1 RNA concentration (≤100 000 copies per mL or >100 000 copies per mL). After at least 24 weeks of treatment, participants taking islatravir who achieved an HIV-1 RNA concentration lower than 50 copies per mL switched to a two-drug regimen of islatravir and doravirine (part 2). All participants and study investigators were masked to treatment in part 1; in part 2, the islatravir dose was masked to all participants and investigators, but the other drugs were given open label. The primary efficacy outcomes were the proportions of participants with an HIV-1 RNA concentration lower than 50 copies per mL at weeks 24 and 48 (US Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach). The primary safety outcomes were the number of participants experiencing adverse events and the number of participants discontinuing study drug owing to adverse events. All participants who received at least one dose of any study drug were included in the analyses. This trial is ongoing, but closed to enrolment of new participants; herein, we report study findings through 48 weeks of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03272347 . Findings Between Nov 27, 2017, and April 25, 2019, 121 participants (mean age 31 years [SD 10·9], 112 [93%] male, 92 [76%] white, 27 [22%] with HIV-1 RNA concentration >100 000 copies per mL) were randomly assigned: 29 to the 0·25 mg, 30 to the 0·75 mg, and 31 to the 2·25 mg islatravir groups, and 31 to the doravirine, lamivudine, and TDF group. At week 24, 26 (90%) of 29 participants in the 0·25 mg islatravir group, 30 (100%) of 30 in the 0·75 mg islatravir group, and 27 (87%) of 31 in the 2·25 mg islatravir group achieved HIV-1 RNA concentrations lower than 50 copies per mL compared with 27 (87%) of 31 in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group (difference 2·8%, 95% CI –14·9 to 20·4, for the 0·25 mg islatravir group; 12·9%, –1·6 to 27·5, for the 0·75 mg islatravir group; and 0·3%, –17·9 to 18·5, for the 2·25 mg islatravir group). At week 48, these data were 26 (90%) of 29 in the 0·25 mg islatravir group, 27 (90%) of 30 in the 0·75 mg islatravir group, and 24 (77%) of 31 in the 2·25 mg islatravir group compared with 26 (84%) of 31 in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group (difference 6·1%, 95% CI –12·4 to 24·4, for the 0·25 mg islatravir group; 6·2%, –12·2 to 24·6, for the 0·75 mg islatravir group; and –6·1%, –27·1 to 14·8, for the 2·75 mg islatravir group). 66 (73%) of participants in the islatravir groups combined and 24 (77%) of those in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group reported at least one adverse event. Two participants in the 2·25 mg islatravir group and one participant in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group discontinued owing to an adverse event. No deaths were reported up to week 48. Interpretation Treatment regimens containing islatravir and doravirine showed antiviral efficacy and were well tolerated regardless of dose. Doravirine in combination with islatravir has the potential to be a potent two-drug regimen that warrants further clinical development. Funding Merck, Sharp, & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.

Cryptococcosis is the third most common invasive fungal infection in solid organ transplant recipients. We describe three cases of neuro-meningeal cryptococcosis occurring among kidney transplant (KT) patients, and discuss the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in this context. Median time from KT to infection was 6 months [range: 3-9]. The most common clinical manifestations at diagnosis were fever (2/3), headache (2/3), and confusion (2/3); none had extra-neurological involvement. CrAg was positive in all cases at diagnosis both in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). For two patients, analysis of previous samples showed that CrAg was detected in plasma up to 4 weeks before diagnosis. All patients received induction treatment with liposomal amphotericin-B (L-AmB) and flucytosine for a median duration of 10 days [range: 7-14], followed by fluconazole maintenance therapy. Acute kidney injury secondary to L-AmB therapy was observed in only one case, but all patients had a tacrolimus overdose following initiation of maintenance therapy due to drug-drug interactions between fluconazole and tacrolimus. Among KTR, early detection of Cryptococcus meningitis using serum CrAg is possible. Close monitoring of renal function during treatment is essential due to the nephrotoxicity of L-AmB, but also drug-drug interactions between fluconazole and calcineurin inhibitors.

Objectives Presence of baseline hepatitis C virus (HCV) resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) can impair treatment outcome of direct-acting antivirals. We investigated the prevalence of pre-treatment HCV resistance among recently HCV-infected men who have sex with men (MSM) with high risk behaviours, either human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infected or at high risk of HIV acquisition and under pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Methods NS5A and NS3 fragments were deep sequenced on pre-treatment samples of 72 subjects using Illumina MiSeq paired-end sequencing technology. Ultra-deep sequencing data were analysed by SmartGene® platform. RASs mentioned in the literature were analysed and interpreted depending on genotype (GT) at 10% cut-off. Results HCV genotyping showed 36 (50.0%) GT1a, 31 (43.1%) GT4d and 5 (6.9%) GT3a infections. Fifty-five patients (76.4%) were co-infected with HIV and 15 (20.8%) received PrEP. In GT1a viruses, NS3 RASs were found in 4/30 viruses (13.3%; S122 G/N, R155 K and I170 V) and Q80 K polymorphism was present in 14/30 viruses (46.7%). No NS3 RASs were detected in GT4d and GT3a viruses. NS5A RASs were detected in 3/36 GT1a viruses (8.3%; Q30E/R, L31 M and H58 L). NS5A subtype-specific polymorphisms L30R and T58 P were found at high frequencies in 31/31 (100%) and 16/31 (51.6%) GT4d viruses, respectively. One RAS M31 L was also observed along with the polymorphisms L30R and T58 P. No NS5A RASs were detected in GT3a viruses. Conclusion A low level of RASs to NS3 and NS5A inhibitors in pre-treatment samples was detected in the study population. Our findings reassure the clinical management of HCV infection in this high-risk population.

Objectives Tetracyclines are widely used for the treatment of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and recently have been used successfully for post-exposure prophylaxis of STIs in MSM. We investigated the in vitro and in vivo development of tetracycline resistance in Chlamydia trachomatis and Mycoplasma genitalium and evaluated 16S rRNA mutations associated with acquired resistance in other bacteria. Methods In vitro selection of resistant mutants of reference strains of C. trachomatis and M. genitalium was undertaken by serial passage in medium containing subinhibitory concentrations of tetracycline or doxycycline, respectively. The 16S rRNA gene of the two microorganisms was amplified and sequenced at different passages, as were those of 43 C. trachomatis- and 106 M. genitalium-positive specimens collected in France from 2013 to 2019. Results No tetracycline- or doxycycline-resistant strains of C. trachomatis and M. genitalium, respectively, were obtained after 30 serial passages. The tetracycline and doxycycline MICs were unchanged and analysis of the 16S rRNA gene, the molecular target of tetracyclines, of C. trachomatis and M. genitalium revealed no mutation. No mutation in the 16S rRNA gene was detected in C. trachomatis-positive specimens. However, six M. genitalium-positive specimens harboured a mutation potentially associated with tetracycline resistance without known prior tetracycline treatment for patients. Conclusions Tetracyclines did not select in vitro-resistant mutants of C. trachomatis or M. genitalium. However, 16S rRNA mutations either responsible for or associated with tetracycline resistance in other bacteria, including mycoplasma species, were identified in several M. genitalium-positive specimens.

International audience; Objectives: The increasing incidence of fluoroquinolones (FQ) resistance may lower its efficacy in preventing UTI following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB). We assessed the efficacy and safety of FQ and fosfomycin-trometamol (FT) in patients undergoing TRUS-PB.Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted between April 2017 and June 2019 and enrolled men undergoing TRUS-PB and receiving a single-dose of FQ (FQ-arm) or FT (FT-arm) for UTI prophylaxis per physician's choice. The primary efficacy endpoint was self-reported TRUS-PB UTI. We assessed baseline factors associated with UTI with logistic regression.Results: A total of 222 men were enrolled, 141/222 (64%) received FQ, and 81/222 (36%) FT. The median age was 67.6 years [IQR, 61.4-72.1] and the Charlson score was 3 [IQR, 3-5]. The overall incidence of self-reported TRUS-PB UTI was 12% (24/197, (95%CI, 8%-17%)): 15% (17/116, (95% CI, 10%-17%)) in FQ-arm, versus 9% (7/81, 95% CI (5%-13%)) in FT-arm (RR = 0.55 (95% CI, 0.22-1.40), p-value = 0.209). No baseline characteristic was significantly associated with TRUS-PB UTI. Safety was similar between the arms: the rate of the reported adverse event was 31% (36/116, (95% CI, 25%-37%) in the FQ-arm versus 36% (28/81, (95% CI, 28%-41%)) in the FT-arm (RR = 1.17 (95% CI, 0.64-2.15), p = 0.602).Conclusions: TRUS-PB UTI prophylaxis with FT and FQ has similar efficacy and safety. A randomized comparison of these two antibiotics is warranted.

Background To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of rilpivirine (RPV), a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), in combination with nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected patients. Methods RPV-treated HIV-infected patients from phase 2b or 3 studies rolled-over into this phase 3, open-label study and received RPV 25 mg once daily (QD) with choice of two NRTIs. Adverse events (AEs), plasma viral load, CD4+ cell count, and antiviral resistance were evaluated. Results Of the 482 patients treated, 437 (>90%) patients discontinued study treatment; 371 (77%) had switched to commercially available RPV, 14 (2.9%) discontinued due to AEs, and 6 (1.2%) had virologic failure. In this rollover study, patients were followed up to week 336, although data was limited beyond 288 weeks. Forty-five (9.3%) patients were still undergoing treatment at the time of data cut-off for the current analysis (8 February 2018). The most frequently reported AEs were pregnancy in 7 (1.5%) patients and syphilis in 5 (1.0%) patients. Grade 3–4 AEs were reported in 17 (3.5%) patients, and AEs possibly related to RPV in 23 (4.8%) patients. Over 288 weeks of treatment, 80.1% (95% CI: 74.9%; 84.3%) of patients maintained virologic suppression (HIV-1 RNA + cell count increased over time until week 192 and remained constant thereafter. Conclusions RPV 25 mg QD in combination with an investigator-selected background regimen of two NRTIs demonstrated sustained long-term virologic suppression. The treatment was well-tolerated with no new safety findings.

Background Doravirine (DOR) is a nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor. In the phase 3 DRIVE-AHEAD trial in treatment-naive adults with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, DOR demonstrated noninferior efficacy compared with efavirenz (EFV) and superior profiles for neuropsychiatric tolerability and lipids at 48 weeks. We present data through week 96. Methods DRIVE-AHEAD is a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, noninferiority trial in antiretroviral treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies/mL. Participants were randomized to a daily fixed-dose tablet of DOR (100 mg), lamivudine (3TC; 300 mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF; 300 mg) (DOR/3TC/TDF) or EFV (600 mg), emtricitabine (FTC; 200 mg) and TDF (300 mg) (EFV/FTC/TDF). The efficacy end point of interest at week 96 was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA levels, Week 96 results support noninferior efficacy of doravirine (DOR)/3TC/ tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) compared with efavirenz (EFV)/ emtricitabine (FTC)/TDF established at week 48. DOR/3TC/TDF was well tolerated, with fewer neuropsychiatric and rash events than EFV/FTC/TDF.

Background: Fostemsavir, a prodrug of the first-in-class attachment inhibitor, temsavir, is indicated for heavily treatment-experienced individuals with multidrug-resistant HIV-1. We previously reported superior efficacy of fostemsavir versus placebo in the randomised cohort of the BRIGHTE study after 8-day functional monotherapy (primary endpoint); here we report planned interim analyses through week 96. Methods: BRIGHTE (NCT02362503) is an ongoing multicentre, two-cohort, phase 3 trial, done at 108 centres in 22 countries. We enrolled heavily treatment-experienced adults (≥18 years) failing antiretroviral therapy (HIV-1 RNA ≥400 copies per mL) into two cohorts: the randomised cohort, in which patients with one or two fully active antiretrovirals remaining received oral fostemsavir (600 mg twice a day) or placebo in combination with their failing regimen for 8 days, followed by fostemsavir plus optimised background therapy; or the non-randomised cohort, in which patients with no remaining antiretroviral options received oral fostemsavir (600 mg twice a day) plus optimised background therapy from day 1. Endpoints for the week 96 interim analyses included the proportions of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 40 copies per mL, changes from baseline in CD4 cell counts, and the frequency of adverse events, adverse events leading to discontinuation, and deaths. The intention-to-treat exposed population and the safety population both included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. The response rates (proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA

Introduction The optimal management of men who have sex with men (MSM) requires active involvement of family physicians (FP). We assessed knowledge and practices of Parisian FPs related to the management of MSM for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV (PrEP). Method We conducted an observational prospective study between June 20 and July 31, 2017, with a sample of FPs practicing in Paris. The questionnaire posted via the Google Form website included 42 questions on sexual health management of MSM patients. A statistical analysis was then performed. Results One hundred and four FPs took part in the study. The median age was 34 and 68% were women. Overall, 86.5% of FPs had already heard about PrEP, but only 36% of them were familiar with the indication for therapy and 77.9% of FPs declared to be willing to renew PrEP prescription. Overall, 89.4% of respondents declared to be willing to attend additional training on sexual health of MSM patients, including 73% on PrEP. Conclusion FPs have an important role in the management of MSM patients. They showed strong interest in PrEP despite limited knowledge of indications and methods of administration. They declared to be willing to attend additional training for further involvement.

Summary Background Tenofovir alafenamide shows high antiviral efficacy and improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate when used for HIV treatment. Here, we report primary results from a blinded phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention. Methods This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in regions of Europe and North America, where there is a high incidence of HIV or prevalence of people living with HIV, or both. We enrolled adult cisgender men who have sex with men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV on the basis of their self-reported sexual behaviour in the past 12 weeks or their recent history (within 24 weeks of enrolment) of bacterial sexually transmitted infections. Participants with current or previous use of PrEP with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate were not excluded. We used a computer-generated random allocation sequence to randomly assign (1:1) participants to receive either emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). As such, all participants were given two tablets. The trial sponsor, investigators, participants, and the study staff who provided the study drugs, assessed the outcomes, and collected the data were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection, which was assessed when all participants had completed 48 weeks of follow-up and half of all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This full analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug and had at least one post-baseline HIV test. Non-inferiority of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was established if the upper bound of the 95·003% CI of the HIV incidence rate ratio (IRR) was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62. We prespecified six secondary bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints to evaluate using the safety analysis set. This analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02842086 , and is no longer recruiting. Findings Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 (92%) of 5857 participants were randomly assigned and received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693). At the time of the primary efficacy analysis (ie, when all participants had completed 48 weeks and 50% had completed 96 weeks) emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of the IRR, was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62 (IRR 0·47 [95% CI 0·19–1·15]). After 8756 person-years of follow-up, 22 participants were diagnosed with HIV, seven participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·06–0·33]), and 15 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (0·34 infections per 100 person-years [0·19–0·56]). Both regimens were well tolerated, with a low number of participants reporting adverse events that led to discontinuation of the study drug (36 [1%] of 2694 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group vs 49 [2%] of 2693 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was superior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints. Interpretation Daily emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide shows non-inferior efficacy to daily emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, and the number of adverse events for both regimens was low. Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide had more favourable effects on bone mineral density and biomarkers of renal safety than emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Funding Gilead Sciences.

Background People living with HIV (PLHIV) are at increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and prone to statin-related adverse events from drug-drug interactions with certain antiretroviral regimens. Objectives This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of evolocumab in dyslipidemic PLHIV. Methods BEIJERINCK is a randomized, double-blind, multinational trial comparing monthly subcutaneous evolocumab 420 mg with placebo in PLHIV with hypercholesterolemia/mixed dyslipidemia taking maximally-tolerated statin therapy. The primary endpoint was the percent change (baseline to week 24) in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); secondary endpoints included achievement of LDL-C Results A total of 464 patients were analyzed (mean age of 56.4 years, 82.5% male, mean duration with HIV of 17.4 years). ASCVD was documented in 35.6% of patients, and statin intolerance/contraindications to statin use were present in 20.7% of patients. Evolocumab reduced LDL-C by 56.9% (95% CI: 61.6%, 52.3%) from baseline to week 24 versus placebo. An LDL-C level of Conclusions Evolocumab was safe and significantly reduced lipid levels in dyslipidemic PLHIV on maximally-tolerated statin therapy. Evolocumab is an effective therapy for lowering atherogenic lipoproteins in PLHIV with high cardiovascular risk.

In high-income countries, causes of death in people living with HIV (PLHIV) have changed. Three French national surveys from 2000 to 2010 showed a decrease in AIDS-related and an increase in non-AIDS-related deaths. Deaths notified in PLHIV followed between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015 in 1 of 13 participating hospitals northeast of Paris area were described. Risk factors for death were assessed, using a multivariable logistic regression model. Of 14,403 individuals, 295 died. Median age at death was 52 years (interquartile range = 47-60) and 77% were men. Sixty-seven individuals (23%) died from non-AIDS-defining nonviral hepatitis-related (NaNH) malignancy, 40 (14%) from AIDS, 34 (12%) from cardiovascular disease (CVD), 33 (11%) from non-AIDS infection, 21 (7%) from liver disease, and 12 (4%) from suicide. Men and women born in sub-Saharan Africa had a lower adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of dying than men having sex with men (MSM) born in France (0.70, 95% confidence interval = 0.45-1.09; and 0.45, 0.28-0.73, respectively). Risk factors for death were older age (aOR = 2.26, 1.36-3.77 for 40-49 years and 2.91, 1.75-4.84 for50 years vs. 18-39 years), male intravenous drug users (IVDU) transmission (2.24, 1.42-3.54 vs. MSM born in France), AIDS (2.75, 2.10-3.59), antiretroviral therapy initiation in earlier periods, time since HIV diagnosis1 year, low CD4 cell count nadir, hepatitis B virus and/or hepatitis C virus coinfection (1.69, 1.23-2.30), and psychiatric disorders (1.73, 1.27-2.38). Our study confirms the increasing frequency of non-AIDS-related deaths, mainly NaNH malignancies and CVD, in PLHIV, justifying overall and in some specific populations (psychiatric and IVDU) prevention and screening.

International audience; Background: Among some patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection who have undergone multiple antiretroviral therapies and have limited options for treatment, new classes of antiretroviral drugs with novel mechanisms of action are needed. Fostemsavir is the prodrug of temsavir, a first-in-class investigational HIV-1 attachment inhibitor.Methods: In this ongoing phase 3 trial in 23 countries, we enrolled patients with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection in two cohorts, according to their remaining treatment options. In the first cohort, we assigned (in a 3:1 ratio) patients who had the option of using at least one fully active, approved antiretroviral drug in at least one but no more than two antiretroviral classes to add either fostemsavir (at a dose of 600 mg twice daily) or placebo to their failing regimen for 8 days, followed by open-label fostemsavir plus optimized background therapy (randomized cohort). In the second cohort, patients who had no remaining antiretroviral options were started on open-label fostemsavir plus optimized background therapy on day 1 (nonrandomized cohort). The primary end point was the mean change in the HIV-1 RNA level from day 1 through day 8 in the randomized cohort.Results: A total of 371 patients were treated, including 272 in the randomized cohort and 99 in the nonrandomized cohort. At day 8, the mean decrease in the HIV-1 RNA level was 0.79 log10 copies per milliliter in the fostemsavir group and 0.17 log10 copies in the placebo group (P

Doravirine is a novel, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor that has shown non-inferior efficacy to ritonavir-boosted darunavir, with a superior lipid profile, in adults with HIV who were treatment naive at week 48 in the phase 3 DRIVE-FORWARD trial. Here we present the 96-week data for the study.This randomised, controlled, double-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 study was undertaken at 125 clinical centres in 15 countries. Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) infected with HIV-1 who were naive to antiretroviral therapy, with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of 1000 copies per mL or higher at screening, and no known resistance to any of the study drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by baseline HIV-1 RNA concentration and background nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy, to doravirine (100 mg per day) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (100 mg ritonavir and 800 mg darunavir per day), both with investigator-selected nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors: emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment assignment until week 96. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants who had a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48, which has been reported previously. Here we report the key secondary efficacy endpoint of the proportion of participants who achieved this concentration by week 96, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug, regardless of whether it was their randomly assigned treatment. We used a US Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach and a margin of 10 percentage points to define the non-inferiority of doravirine to ritonavir-boosted darunavir at 96 weeks. Key safety endpoints were change in fasting serum lipid concentrations, the incidence of adverse events, and time to discontinuation due to an adverse event, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of any study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02275780, and is closed to accrual.Between Dec 1, 2014, and Oct 20, 2015, 1027 individuals were screened, of whom 769 participants were randomly assigned to doravirine (n=385) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=384), and 383 in both groups were given at least one dose of their allocated treatment. Most participants were male (645 [84%] of 766) and white (560 [73%]), with a mean age of 35·2 years (SD 10·6). 292 participants in the doravirine group and 273 in the darunavir group completed 96 weeks of treatment. At week 96, a higher proportion of the doravirine group (277 [73%] of 383) achieved an HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL than did of the darunavir group (248 [66%] of 383; difference 7·1%, 95% CI 0·5-13·7). Responses were similar regardless of baseline characteristics. Treatment-emergent resistance to any study drug occurred in two (1%) of 383 participants in the doravirine group and one (1%) of 383 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir group. Significant differences were seen between treatment groups in mean changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol (-14·6 mg/dL, 95% CI -18·2 to -11·0) and non-HDL cholesterol (-18·4 mg/dL, -22·5 to -14·3). Frequencies of adverse events were similar between groups. No significant treatment difference (log-rank nominal p=0·063) through week 96 was observed in time to discontinuation due to an adverse event. The most common adverse events (week 0-96) were diarrhoea (65 [17%] in the doravirine group vs 91 [24%] in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir group), nausea (45 [12%] vs 52 [14%]), headache (57 [15%] vs 46 [12%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (51 [13%] vs 30 [8%]). Two participants, one in each group, died during treatment; neither death was considered to be related to study medication.These results through 96 weeks support the efficacy and safety results reported previously for doravirine at 48 weeks, supporting the use of doravirine for the long-term treatment of adults with previously untreated HIV-1 infection.Merck.

ObjectivesWe aimed to assess among men who have sex with men (MSM) risk factors for HIV infection, to identify those who require urgent pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prescription.MethodsAll participants enrolled in the placebo arm of the ANRS IPERGAY trial, or infected between screening and day 0, were included. Baseline characteristics were described and HIV incidence rate ratios (RRs) were estimated with their 95% CIs.Results203 MSM were included with a median follow-up of 9 months. During the study period, 16 participants acquired HIV infection while not receiving tenofovir disoproxil and emtricitabin (TDF/FTC) over 212.4 person-years (PYs) of follow-up (incidence rate 7.5/100 PYs, 95% CI: 4.3 to 12.2). Being enrolled in Paris was associated with a significant increased risk of HIV infection (RR: 4.1; 95% CI: 1.1 to 28.3). A high number of sexual partners in prior 2 months (≥10 vs <5) and of condomless receptive anal sex episodes in prior 12 months (>5 vs ConclusionsMSM who have frequent condomless receptive anal sex and multiple partners, or use recreational drugs should be targeted in priority for PrEP prescription especially if they live in an area with a high prevalence of HIV infection.

International audience; Background: Intravenous benzylpenicillin is the gold-standard treatment for neurosyphilis, but it requires prolonged hospitalisation. Ceftriaxone is a possible alternative treatment, the effectiveness of which remains unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of ceftriaxone compared with benzylpenicillin in the treatment of neurosyphilis. Methods: We did a retrospective multicentre study including patients with neurosyphilis who were treated at one of eight tertiary care centres in France, from Jan 1, 1997, to Dec 31, 2017. We defined neurosyphilis as positive treponemal and non-treponemal tests and at least one of otic syphilis, ocular syphilis, either neurological symptom with a positive result on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-VDRL or CSF-PCR tests, or more than five leukocytes in a CSF cell count. Patients with neurosyphilis were identified from the medical information department database of each centre and assigned to one of two groups on the basis of the initial treatment received (ie, benzylpenicillin group or ceftriaxone group). The primary outcome was the overall clinical response (ie, proportion of patients with a complete or partial response) 1 month after treatment initiation. The secondary endpoints were proportions of patients with a complete response at 1 month and serological response at 6 months, and length of hospital stay. Findings: Of 365 patients with a coded diagnosis of neurosyphilis in one of the eight care centres during 1997–2017, 208 were included in this study (42 in the ceftriaxone group and 166 in the benzylpenicillin group). The mean age of patients was 44·4 years (SD 13·4), and 193 (93%) were men. We observed 41 instances of overall clinical response (98%) in the ceftriaxone group versus 125 (76%) in the benzylpenicillin group (crude odds ratio [OR] 13·02 [95% CI 1·73–97·66], p=0·017). After propensity score weighting, overall clinical response rates remained different between the groups (OR 1·22 [95% CI 1·12–1·33], p

Summary Background The antiviral efficacy of remdesivir against SARS-CoV-2 is still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of remdesivir plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, with indication of oxygen or ventilator support. Methods DisCoVeRy was a phase 3, open-label, adaptive, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted in 48 sites in Europe (France, Belgium, Austria, Portugal, Luxembourg). Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness of any duration were eligible if they had clinical evidence of hypoxaemic pneumonia, or required oxygen supplementation. Exclusion criteria included elevated liver enzymes, severe chronic kidney disease, any contraindication to one of the studied treatments or their use in the 29 days before random assignment, or use of ribavirin, as well as pregnancy or breastfeeding. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) to receive standard of care alone or in combination with remdesivir, lopinavir–ritonavir, lopinavir–ritonavir and interferon beta-1a, or hydroxychloroquine. Randomisation used computer-generated blocks of various sizes; it was stratified on severity of disease at inclusion and on European administrative region. Remdesivir was administered as 200 mg intravenous infusion on day 1, followed by once daily, 1-h infusions of 100 mg up to 9 days, for a total duration of 10 days. It could be stopped after 5 days if the participant was discharged. The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15 measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population and was one of the secondary outcomes. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT2020-000936-23, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04315948. Findings Between March 22, 2020, and Jan 21, 2021, 857 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to remdesivir plus standard of care (n=429) or standard of care only (n=428). 15 participants were excluded from analysis in the remdesivir group, and ten in the control group. At day 15, the distribution of the WHO ordinal scale was: (1) not hospitalised, no limitations on activities (61 [15%] of 414 in the remdesivir group vs 73 [17%] of 418 in the control group); (2) not hospitalised, limitation on activities (129 [31%] vs 132 [32%]); (3) hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen (50 [12%] vs 29 [7%]); (4) hospitalised, requiring supplemental oxygen (76 [18%] vs 67 [16%]); (5) hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices (15 [4%] vs 14 [3%]); (6) hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (62 [15%] vs 79 [19%]); (7) death (21 [5%] vs 24 [6%]). The difference between treatment groups was not significant (odds ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·77–1·25]; p=0·85). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events between treatment groups (remdesivir, 135 [33%] of 406 vs control, 130 [31%] of 418; p=0·48). Three deaths (acute respiratory distress syndrome, bacterial infection, and hepatorenal syndrome) were considered related to remdesivir by the investigators, but only one by the sponsor's safety team (hepatorenal syndrome). Interpretation No clinical benefit was observed from the use of remdesivir in patients who were admitted to hospital for COVID-19, were symptomatic for more than 7 days, and required oxygen support. Funding European Union Commission, French Ministry of Health, Domaine d'interet majeur One Health Ile-de-France, REACTing, Fonds Erasme-COVID-Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre, Austrian Group Medical Tumor, European Regional Development Fund, Portugal Ministry of Health, Portugal Agency for Clinical Research and Biomedical Innovation. Translation For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Background: Raltegravir (RAL) has favorable tolerability and safety profile, with few and manageable drug interactions. The use of RAL 1200 mg once daily (qd) for first-line therapy is well established. We assessed efficacy and safety of RAL 1200 mg qd, as part of triple cART, for maintenance strategy.Methods: The QDISS trial (NCT03195452) was a 48-week multicenter, single-arm, open-label study designed to evaluate the ability of 2 NRTIs + RAL 1200 mg qd to maintain virological suppression in HIV-1 infected subjects on a stable cART with 2 NRTIs and a third agent for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA p=0.023) and LDL-cholesterol (p=0.009) decreased, lifestyle and ease subscale significantly improved (p=0.04). The quality of life and Patients Reported Outcomes (PROs) also improved at W12 (p=0.007). Conclusion: RAL 1200 mg qd as part of a maintenance triple therapy showed a high efficacy in virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected subjects, with good safety profile and improved lipid profile and patient reported outcomes.Trial registration = clinical trials.gov NCT03195452 and EudraCT 2016-003702-13

Background Tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) concentration in dried blood spots (DBSs) is a reliable pharmacokinetics biomarker of adherence to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). We aimed to use DBSs to estimate pill intake among participants using on-demand pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and to identify predictive factors associated with higher TFV-DP concentrations. Methods DBSs were collected at the last study visit of the open-label phase of the ANRS IPERGAY study, assessing on-demand oral TDF/emtricitabine for PrEP among MSM and transgender female participants. We quantified TFV-DP in DBSs centrally. We assessed correlation between pill count and TFV-DP concentration by Spearman correlation and explored associations between participant demographics, sexual behaviour and PrEP use during sexual intercourse (SI) with TFV-DP concentrations by univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results The median age of the 245 participants included in this study was 40 years, with a median body weight of 73 kg. Median (IQR) TFV-DP concentration reached 517 (128–868) fmol/punch, corresponding to an estimated intake of 8–12 tablets per month (2–3 doses per week). Only 39% of participants had a TFV-DP concentration above 700 fmol/punch. TFV-DP concentrations were moderately correlated with pill count (r: 0.59; P This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy following peer review. The version of record [Estimated pill intake with on-demand PrEP with oral TDF/FTC using TFV-DP concentration in dried blood spots in the ANRS IPERGAY trial. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (2021)] is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkab253. Deposited by shareyourpaper.org and openaccessbutton.org. We've taken reasonable steps to ensure this content doesn't violate copyright. However, if you think it does you can request a takedown by emailing help@openaccessbutton.org.

Background: Antiretroviral treatment (ART) reduces HIV infectiousness but the effect of early ART on sexual behaviour is unclear. Methods: We assessed, within the START randomized trial that enrolled HIV-positive adults with CD4+ cell count greater than 500 cells/μl, the effect of early (immediate) versus deferred ART on: condomless sex with HIV-serodifferent partners (CLS-D); all condomless sex (CLS); HIV transmission-risk sex (CLS-D-HIV risk, defined as CLS-D and: not on ART or started ART

Background Tenofovir alafenamide is associated with less renal and bone toxicity than tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and might improve the long-term safety of antiretroviral therapy. We aimed to investigate the effect on bone mineral density of switching from a regimen containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to one containing tenofovir alafenamide in participants aged 60 years and older. Methods We did a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial in 36 European centres. Participants were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA

Background Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg is a once-daily, single-tablet regimen for treatment of HIV-1 infection. The efficacy/safety of switching to D/C/F/TAF versus continuing boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (control) were demonstrated in a phase 3, randomized study (EMERALD) of treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed adults through week 48. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate EMERALD outcomes across subgroups of patients based on demographic characteristics, prior treatment experience, and baseline antiretroviral regimen. Methods EMERALD patients were virologically suppressed (viral load [VL] 50 years), gender, race (black/non-black), prior number of antiretrovirals used (4/5/6/7/> 7), prior VF (0/≥ 1), baseline bPI (darunavir/atazanavir or lopinavir), and baseline boosting agent (ritonavir/cobicistat). Results Among 1141 patients in the D/C/F/TAF (n = 763) and control (n = 378) arms, virologic rebound rates (2.5% and 2.1%, respectively) were similar, and this was consistent across all subgroups. Virologic response rates ranged from 91 to 97% (D/C/F/TAF) and 89 to 99% (control) across all subgroups, with differences between treatment arms of 0 and 6%. Adverse event rates were low in both arms and across subgroups. Improvements in renal and bone parameters were observed with D/C/F/TAF across demographic subgroups. Conclusions For treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed patients, switching to D/C/F/TAF was highly effective and safe, regardless of demographic characteristics, prior treatment experience, or pre-switch bPI. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02269917. Registered 21 October 2014. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02269917

The clinical trial ANRS-IPERGAY investigated the efficacy of sexual activity-based (i.e. on demand) HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Using a qualitative method, we analysed the role of adherence as one of the main elements for PrEP effectiveness and its associated determinants. Data were collected in various French ANRS-IPERGAY sites during the double-blind (2012-2014) and open-label study (2015-2016) phases, through two individual interviews per participant, collective interviews and focus groups. A total of 83 participants participated in the present study. Our analysis included 32 individual interviews (with 16 participants), 13 collective interviews (