Search

Contains fulltext : 287854.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antiviral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) has been granted authorization or approval in several countries for the treatment of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk of progression to severe disease and with no requirement for supplemental oxygen. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir will be primarily administered outside the hospital setting as a 5-day course oral treatment. The ritonavir component boosts plasma concentrations of nirmatrelvir through the potent and rapid inhibition of the key drug-metabolizing enzyme cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Thus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, even given as a short treatment course, has a high potential to cause harm from drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with other drugs metabolized through this pathway. Options for mitigating risk from DDIs with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are limited due to the clinical illness, the short window for intervention, and the related difficulty of implementing clinical monitoring or dosage adjustment of the comedication. Pragmatic options are largely confined to preemptive or symptom-driven pausing of the comedication or managing any additional risk through counseling. This review summarizes the effects of ritonavir on drug disposition (i.e., metabolizing enzymes and transporters) and discusses factors determining the likelihood of having a clinically significant DDI. Furthermore, it provides a comprehensive list of comedications likely to be used in COVID-19 patients which are categorized according to their potential DDI risk with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. It also discusses recommendations for the management of DDIs which balance the risk of harm from DDIs with a short course of ritonavir, against unnecessary denial of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment.

Background: Long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended by WHO as an additional option for HIV prevention in sub-Saharan Africa, but there is concern that its introduction could lead to an increase in integrase-inhibitor resistance undermining treatment programmes that rely on dolutegravir. We aimed to project the health benefits and risks of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in settings in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: With HIV Synthesis, an individual-based HIV model, we simulated 1000 setting-scenarios reflecting both variability and uncertainty about HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa and compared outcomes for each with and without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction. PrEP use is assumed to be risk-informed and to be used only in 3-month periods (the time step for the model) when having condomless sex. We consider three groups at risk of integrase-inhibitor resistance emergence: people who start cabotegravir-PrEP after (unknowingly) being infected with HIV, those who seroconvert while on PrEP, and those with HIV who have residual cabotegravir drugs concentrations during the early tail period after recently stopping PrEP. We projected the outcomes of policies of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction and of no introduction in 2022 across 50 years. In 50% of setting-scenarios we considered that more sensitive nucleic-acid-based HIV diagnostic testing (NAT), rather than regular antibody-based HIV rapid testing, might be used to reduce resistance risk. For cost-effectiveness analysis we assumed in our base case a cost of cabotegravir-PrEP drug to be similar to oral PrEP, resulting in a total annual cost of USD$144 per year ($114 per year and $264 per year considered in sensitivity analyses), a cost-effectiveness threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life years averted, and a discount rate of 3% per year. Findings: Reflecting our assumptions on the appeal of cabotegravir-PrEP, its introduction is predicted to lead to a substantial increase in PrEP use with approximately 2·6% of the adult population (and 46% of those with a current indication for PrEP) receiving PrEP compared with 1·5% (28%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction across 20 years. As a result, HIV incidence is expected to be lower by 29% (90% range across setting-scenarios 6–52%) across the same period compared with no introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP. In people initiating antiretroviral therapy, the proportion with integrase-inhibitor resistance after 20 years is projected to be 1·7% (0–6·4%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction but 13·1% (4·1–30·9%) with. Cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is predicted to lower the proportion of all people on antiretroviral therapy with viral loads less than 1000 copies per mL by 0·9% (–2·5% to 0·3%) at 20 years. For an adult population of 10 million an overall decrease in number of AIDS deaths of about 4540 per year (–13 000 to –300) across 50 years is predicted, with little discernible benefit with NAT when compared with standard antibody-based rapid testing. AIDS deaths are predicted to be averted with cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in 99% of setting-scenarios. Across the 50-year time horizon, overall HIV programme costs are predicted to be similar regardless of whether cabotegravir-PrEP is introduced (total mean discounted annual HIV programme costs per year across 50 years is $151·3 million vs $150·7 million), assuming the use of standard antibody testing. With antibody-based rapid HIV testing, the introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective under an assumed threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life year averted in 82% of setting-scenarios at the cost of $144 per year, in 52% at $264, and in 87% at $114. Interpretation: Despite leading to increases in integrase-inhibitor drug resistance, cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is likely to reduce AIDS deaths in addition to HIV incidence. Long-acting cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective if delivered at similar cost to oral PrEP with antibody-based rapid HIV testing. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Although there is much discussion regarding the ethics of making payments to healthy volunteers for participating in clinical research, little data are available from the point of view of the volunteers as to what they would consider to be fair payment. The objectives of this study were to determine healthy volunteers' estimates of appropriate payments for participation in hypothetical clinical trials in order to explore the reasoning behind these estimates and to examine the association between volunteer demographics and payment expectations. Sixty participants with previous experience as healthy volunteers in research studies were presented with four hypothetical studies and interviewed about their impressions of burden and risks involved in the studies. They were also asked to estimate an appropriate payment to the volunteers for each of the studies. For each of the studies, the payment estimates made by the participants varied over a wide range. However, each individual tended to be consistent in estimate placement within this range. No demographic factor was significantly associated with the estimated study payment. Subjects frequently mentioned risk and logistical burden as factors that should determine payment levels. Healthy volunteer subjects appear to have individualized yet consistent methods of arriving at estimates of payments for participating in clinical studies. These estimates are based on each subject's perception of study burden and associated risk.

AMD070, a CXCR4 antagonist, has demonstrated antiretroviral activity in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. Since AMD070 is a substrate of cytochrome P450 3A4 and P-glycoprotein, both of which may be affected by ritonavir, we tested for a ritonavir effect on AMD070 pharmacokinetics. Subjects were given a single 200-mg dose of AMD070 on days 1, 3, and 17. Ritonavir (100 mg every 12 h) was dosed from day 3 to day 18. Blood samples to test for AMD070 concentrations were collected over 48 h after each administration of AMD070. Twenty-three male subjects were recruited. Among them, 21 completed the study, and 2 were discontinued for reasons other than safety. All adverse events were grade 2 or lower. AMD070 alone had the following pharmacokinetic features, given as medians (ranges): 3 h (0.5 to 4 h) for the time to peak blood concentration, 256 ng/ml (41 to 845 ng/ml) for the peak concentration (Cmax), 934 h·ng/ml (313 to 2,127 h·ng/ml) for the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 h to infinity (AUC0-∞), 214 liters/h (94 to 639 liters/h) for apparent body clearance, and 4,201 liters (1,996 to 9,991 liters) for the apparent volume of distribution based on the terminal phase. The initial doses of ritonavir increased the Cmax of AMD070 [geometric mean (90% confidence interval)] by 39% (3 to 89%) and the AUC0-∞ by 60% (29 to 100%). After 14 days of ritonavir dosing, the pharmacokinetic changes in AMD070 persisted. The plasma pharmacokinetics of ritonavir were consistent with previous reports. It is concluded that AMD070 concentrations were increased with concomitant ritonavir dosing for 14 days in healthy volunteers.

Contains fulltext : 50424.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 47437.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) The consensus of current international guidelines for the treatment of HIV infection is that data on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and protease inhibitors (Pls) provide a framework for the implementation of TDM in certain defined scenarios in clinical practice. However, the utility of TDM is considered to be on an individual basis until more data are obtained from large clinical trials showing the benefit of TDM. In April 2004, a panel of experts met for the second time in Rome, Italy. This was following the inaugural meeting in Perugia, Italy, in October 2000, which resulted in the manuscript published in AIDS 2002, 16(Suppl 1):S5-S37. The objectives of this second meeting were to review and update the numerous questions surrounding TDM of antiretroviral drugs and discuss the clinical utility, current concerns and future prospects of drug concentration monitoring in the care of HIV-1-infected individuals. A major focus of the meeting was to discuss and critically analyse recent and precedent clinical drug-drug interaction data to provide a clear framework of the pharmacological basis of how one drug may impact the disposition of another. This report, which has been updated to include material published or presented at international conferences up to the end of December 2004, reviews recent pivotal pharmacokinetic interaction data and provides advice to clinical care providers on how some drug-drug interactions may be prevented, avoided or managed, and, when data are available, on what dose adjustments and interventions should be performed.