Cost-Effectiveness of Genotypic Antiretroviral Resistance Testing in HIV-Infected Patients with Treatment Failure

BACKGROUND: Genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing (GRT) in HIV infection with drug resistant virus is recommended to optimize antiretroviral therapy, in particular in patients with virological failure. We estimated the clinical effect, cost and cost-effectiveness of using GRT as compared to expert opinion in patients with antiretroviral treatment failure. METHODS: We developed a mathematical model of HIV disease to describe disease progression in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure and compared the incremental impact of GRT versus expert opinion to guide antiretroviral therapy. The analysis was conducted from the health care (discount rate 4%) and societal (discount rate 2%) perspective. Outcome measures included life-expectancy, quality-adjusted life-expectancy, health care costs, productivity costs and cost-effectiveness in US Dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Clinical and economic data were extracted from the large Swiss HIV Cohort Study and clinical trials. RESULTS: Patients whose treatment was optimized with GRT versus expert opinion had an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and two weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were $US 421,000 and$US 419,000, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $US 35,000 per QALY gained. In the analysis from the societal perspective, GRT versus expert opinion led to an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and four weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were$US 551,000 and $US 549,000, respectively. When productivity changes were included in the analysis, GRT was cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: GRT for treatment optimization in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure is a cost-effective use of scarce health care resources and beneficial to the society at large

Impact of the Herbal Medicine Sophora flavescens on the Oral Pharmacokinetics of Indinavir in Rats: The Involvement of CYP3A and P-Glycoprotein

Sophora flavescens is a Chinese medicinal herb used for the treatment of gastrointestinal hemorrhage, skin diseases, pyretic stranguria and viral hepatitis. In this study the herb-drug interactions between S. flavescens and indinavir, a protease inhibitor for HIV treatment, were evaluated in rats. Concomitant oral administration of Sophora extract (0.158 g/kg or 0.63 g/kg, p.o.) and indinavir (40 mg/kg, p.o.) in rats twice a day for 7 days resulted in a dose-dependent decrease of plasma indinavir concentrations, with 55%–83% decrease in AUC0-∞ and 38%–78% reduction in Cmax. The CL (Clearance)/F (fraction of dose available in the systemic circulation) increased up to 7.4-fold in Sophora-treated rats. Oxymatrine treatment (45 mg/kg, p.o.) also decreased indinavir concentrations, while the ethyl acetate fraction of Sophora extract had no effect. Urinary indinavir (24-h) was reduced, while the fraction of indinavir in faeces was increased after Sophora treatment. Compared to the controls, multiple dosing of Sophora extract elevated both mRNA and protein levels of P-gp in the small intestine and liver. In addition, Sophora treatment increased intestinal and hepatic mRNA expression of CYP3A1, but had less effect on CYP3A2 expression. Although protein levels of CYP3A1 and CYP3A2 were not altered by Sophora treatment, hepatic CYP3A activity increased in the Sophora-treated rats. All available data demonstrated that Sophora flavescens reduced plasma indinavir concentration after multiple concomitant doses, possibly through hepatic CYP3A activity and induction of intestinal and hepatic P-gp. The animal study would be useful for predicting potential interactions between natural products and oral pharmaceutics and understanding the mechanisms prior to human studies. Results in the current study suggest that patients using indinavir might be cautioned in the use of S. flavescens extract or Sophora-derived products

HIV resistance to antiretroviral drugs: Mechanisms, genotypic and phenotypic resistance testing in clinical practice

HIV resistance to antiretroviral agents is a major contributory cause of treatment failure. The dynamics of HIV replication, together with patient-, physician-, and drug-related factors, lead to emergence of HIV resistant strains in most of the patients. Phenotypic assays look for an increase in the antiretroviral drug (ARV) concentration that inhibits 50% of the growth of the tested HIV strain (IC50), comparatively with a reference strain cultivated in parallel. Genotypic tests detect resistance mutations in the reverse transcriptase and protease genes by comparing the gene sequences of a resistant virus to those of a wildtype strain that has previously been described. The efficacy of each ARV class and each individual ARV is threatened by specific mutations and resistance mechanisms. In retrospective studies of genotypic or phenotypic resistance testing, baseline resistance tests results were correlated with virological outcomes. There is some evidence from prospective studies that resistance testing may have some benefits when used to choose salvage regimens. However, problems in the areas of test interpretation, patient compliance, availability of active drugs, and technical test performance limit the usefulness of resistance testing in clinical practice. This article reviews the mechanisms underlying HIV resistance, the principles of phenotypic and genotypic tests, and the use of these tests in clinical practice

Molecular epidemiology of an outbreak of multidrug-resistant Enterobacter aerogenes infections and in vivo emergence of imipenem resistance.

Molecular typing was used to investigate an outbreak of infection caused by multidrug-resistant Enterobacter aerogenes (MREA) susceptible only to gentamicin and imipenem in an intensive care unit (ICU). Over a 9-month period, ciprofloxacin-resistant E. aerogenes isolates were isolated from 34 patients, or 4.1% of ICU admissions, compared with a baseline rate of 0.1% in the previous period (P < 0.001). Infection developed in 15 (44%) patients. In vivo emergence of imipenem resistance (MIC, 32 micrograms/ml) of organisms causing deep-seated infection was observed in two (13%) of these patients following prolonged therapy with imipenem and gentamicin. Arbitrarily primed PCR (AP-PCR) analysis with ERIC1R and ERIC2 primers and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis of XbaI macrorestriction patterns concordantly showed that outbreak-associated MREA isolates were clonally related and distinct from epidemiologically unrelated strains. AP-PCR and PFGE showed discrimination indices of 0.88 and 0.98, respectively. Space-time clustering of cases within units suggests that the epidemic-related MREA isolates were transmitted on the hands of the health care personnel. A case-control study and repeated environmental culture surveys failed to identify a common source or procedure associated with transmission. In spite of the early implementation of isolation measures, the incidence of MREA colonization remained stable until all colonized patients were discharged. This study confirms the usefulness of AP-PCR and PFGE analyses for the epidemiological study of E. aerogenes and underscores the difficulty of controlling the spread of multiresistant clones of this organism in the ICU setting. The emergence of imipenem resistance represents a threat because virtually no therapeutic option is available for such strains