Phenotypic and genotypic analyses to guide selection of reverse transcriptase inhibitors in second-line HIV therapy following extended virological failure in Uganda

Objectives We investigated phenotypic and genotypic resistance after 2 years of first-line therapy with two HIV treatment regimens in the absence of virological monitoring. Methods NORA [Nevirapine OR Abacavir study, a sub-study of the Development of AntiRetroviral Therapy in Africa (DART) trial] randomized 600 symptomatic HIV-infected Ugandan adults (CD4 cell count <200 cells/mm3) to receive zidovudine/lamivudine plus abacavir (cABC arm) or nevirapine (cNVP arm). All virological tests were performed retrospectively, including resistance tests on week 96 plasma samples with HIV RNA levels ≥1000 copies/mL. Phenotypic resistance was expressed as fold-change in IC50 (FC) relative to wild-type virus. Results HIV-1 RNA viral load ≥1000 copies/mL at week 96 was seen in 58/204 (28.4%) cABC participants and 21/159 (13.2%) cNVP participants. Resistance results were available in 35 cABC and 17 cNVP participants; 31 (89%) cABC and 16 (94%) cNVP isolates had a week 96 FC below the biological cut-off for tenofovir (2.2). In the cNVP arm, 16/17 participants had resistance mutations synonymous with high-level resistance to nevirapine and efavirenz; FC values for etravirine were above the biological cut-off in 9 (53%) isolates. In multivariate regression models, K65R, Y115F and the presence of thymidine analogue-associated mutations were associated with increased susceptibility to etravirine in the cABC arm. Conclusions Our data support the use of tenofovir following failure of a first-line zidovudine-containing regimen and shed further light on non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor hypersusceptibility

Mapping the medical outcomes study HIV health survey (MOS-HIV) to the EuroQoL 5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) utility index

10.1186/s12955-019-1135-8Health and Quality of Life Outcomes1718

The virological durability of first-line ART among HIV-positive adult patients in resource limited settings without virological monitoring: a retrospective analysis of DART trial data

Few low-income countries have virological monitoring widely available. We estimated the virological durability of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) after five years of follow-up among adult Ugandan and Zimbabwean patients in the DART study, in which virological assays were conducted retrospectively

Lopinavir plus nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, lopinavir plus raltegravir, or lopinavir monotherapy for second-line treatment of HIV (EARNEST): 144-week follow-up results from a randomised controlled trial

Background Millions of HIV-infected people worldwide receive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in programmes using WHO-recommended standardised regimens. Recent WHO guidelines recommend a boosted protease inhibitor plus raltegravir as an alternative second-line combination. We assessed whether this treatment option offers any advantage over the standard protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) second-line combination after 144 weeks of follow-up in typical programme settings. Methods We analysed the 144-week outcomes at the completion of the EARNEST trial, a randomised controlled trial done in HIV-infected adults or adolescents in 14 sites in five sub-Saharan African countries (Uganda, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Kenya, Zambia). Participants were those who were no longer responding to non-NRTI-based first-line ART, as assessed with WHO criteria, confirmed by viral-load testing. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (lopinavir 400 mg with ritonavir 100 mg, twice per day) plus two or three clinician-selected NRTIs (protease inhibitor plus NRTI group), protease inhibitor plus raltegravir (400 mg twice per day; protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group), or protease inhibitor monotherapy (plus raltegravir induction for first 12 weeks, re-intensified to combination therapy after week 96; protease inhibitor monotherapy group). Randomisation was by computer-generated randomisation sequence, with variable block size. The primary outcome was viral load of less than 400 copies per mL at week 144, for which we assessed non-inferiority with a one-sided α of 0·025, and superiority with a two-sided α of 0·025. The EARNEST trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 37737787. Findings Between April 12, 2010, and April 29, 2011, 1837 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 1277 patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group. In the primary (complete-case) analysis at 144 weeks, 317 (86%) of 367 in the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL compared with 312 (81%) of 383 in the protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group (p=0·07; lower 95% confidence limit for difference 10·2% vs specified non-inferiority margin 10%). In the protease inhibitor monotherapy group, 292 (78%) of 375 had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL; p=0·003 versus the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group at 144 weeks. There was no difference between groups in serious adverse events, grade 3 or 4 adverse events (total or ART-related), or events that resulted in treatment modification. Interpretation Protease inhibitor plus raltegravir offered no advantage over protease inhibitor plus NRTI in virological efficacy or safety. In the primary analysis, protease inhibitor plus raltegravir did not meet non-inferiority criteria. A regimen of protease inhibitor with NRTIs remains the best standardised second-line regimen for use in programmes in resource-limited settings. Funding European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UK Medical Research Council, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, Merck, ViiV Healthcare, WHO

The Impact of Different CD4 Cell-Count Monitoring and Switching Strategies on Mortality in HIV-Infected African Adults on Antiretroviral Therapy: An Application of Dynamic Marginal Structural Models

In Africa, antiretroviral therapy (ART) is delivered with limited laboratory monitoring, often none. In 2003-2004, investigators in the Development of Antiretroviral Therapy in Africa (DART) Trial randomized persons initiating ART in Uganda and Zimbabwe to either laboratory and clinical monitoring (LCM) or clinically driven monitoring (CDM). CD4 cell counts were measured every 12 weeks in both groups but were only returned to treating clinicians for management in the LCM group. Follow-up continued through 2008. In observational analyses, dynamic marginal structural models on pooled randomized groups were used to estimate survival under different monitoring-frequency and clinical/immunological switching strategies. Assumptions included no direct effect of randomized group on mortality or confounders and no unmeasured confounders which influenced treatment switch and mortality or treatment switch and time-dependent covariates. After 48 weeks of first-line ART, 2,946 individuals contributed 11,351 person-years of follow-up, 625 switches, and 179 deaths. The estimated survival probability after a further 240 weeks for post-48-week switch at the first CD4 cell count less than 100 cells/mm(3) or non-Candida World Health Organization stage 4 event (with CD4 count &lt;250) was 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.94, 0.97) with 12-weekly CD4 testing, 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95, 0.97) with 24-weekly CD4 testing, 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.96) with a single CD4 test at 48 weeks (baseline), and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.94) with no CD4 testing. Comparing randomized groups by 48-week CD4 count, the mortality risk associated with CDM versus LCM was greater in persons with CD4 counts of &lt;100 (hazard ratio = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.3, 4.3) than in those with CD4 counts of ≥100 (hazard ratio = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.8, 1.7; interaction P = 0.04). These findings support a benefit from identifying patients immunologically failing first-line ART at 48 weeks