Triple or dual therapy for HCV-1 naive patients? Optimizing selection tools

n/

Sofosbuvir-based therapies in genotype 2 hepatitis C virus cirrhosis: A real-life experience with focus on ribavirin dose

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based therapies for the treatment of cirrhosis from hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 infection. Data of all consecutive HCV genotype 2 cirrhotic patients who started sofosbuvir-based treatments between January 2015 and March 2017 in eight Italian tertiary hospitals were collected retrospectively. Overall, 273 patients (Child A: 94.5%) were enrolled. In the 194 subjects treated with sofosbuvir/ribavirin, median initial ribavirin dosage was 13.9 mg/kg/day, and therapy duration was 16 weeks. Sustained virological response (SVR) rates were 93.8% in intention-to-treat (ITT) and 95.3% in per-protocol (PP) analyses for the 129 treatment-naïve patients, and 96.9% (ITT) and 98.4% (PP) for the 65 treatment-experienced subjects. Adverse events were reported in 142 patients (73.2%), but only 1.5% discontinued treatment. Eighty-eight subjects with treatment-induced anemia (mild: 34.5%, moderate: 7.7%, severe: 3.1%) had to reduce ribavirin dosage, but SVR rates were comparable to the weight-based dose group, both in ITT (95.4% and 94.3%) and PP (97.7% and 95.2%) analyses, respectively. Moreover, ITT and PP SVR rates were similar between shorter (<20 weeks) (94.1% and 96.0%, respectively) and prolonged (≥20 weeks) regimens (95.7% and 96.7%, respectively). SVR rates in the 79 subjects treated with sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (without ribavirin) were similar (ITT: 96.2%; PP: 97.4%, respectively), without de novo/worsening anemia. In conclusion, in a real-life study centered on genotype 2 patients with well-compensated cirrhosis, sofosbuvir-based regimens were associated with good SVR and tolerability rates, regardless of previous antiviral treatments, without a significant impact of on treatment ribavirin dose reductions

Marked increase in etravirine and saquinavir plasma concentrations during atovaquone/proguanil prophylaxis

The case of a 32-year-old Caucasian female with multi-drug resistant HIV-1 subtype B infection treated with a salvage regimen including maraviroc, raltegravir, etravirine and unboosted saquinavir who started atovaquone/proguanil prophylaxis, is reported. The potential interactions between atovaquone/proguanil and these anti-retroviral drugs are investigated. Pharmacokinetic analyses documented a marked increase in etravirine and saquinavir plasma concentrations (+55% and +274%, respectively), but not in raltegravir and maraviroc plasma concentrations. The evidence that atovaquone/proguanil significantly interacts with etravirine and saquinavir, but not with raltegravir and maraviroc, suggests that the mechanism of interaction is related to cytochrome P450

Steady-state Pharmacokinetic Comparison of Generic and Branded Formulations of Lamivudine, Stavudine, and Nevirapine in HIV-infected Ugandan Adults

n/

Analytical validation and clinical application of rapid serological tests for sars-cov-2 suitable for large-scale screening

Recently, large-scale screening for COVID-19 has presented a major challenge, limiting timely countermeasures. Therefore, the application of suitable rapid serological tests could provide useful information, however, little evidence regarding their robustness is currently available. In this work, we evaluated and compared the analytical performance of a rapid lateral-flow test (LFA) and a fast semiquantitative fluorescent immunoassay (FIA) for anti-nucleocapsid (anti-NC) antibodies, with the reverse transcriptase real-time PCR assay as the reference. In 222 patients, LFA showed poor sensitivity (55.9%) within two weeks from PCR, while later testing was more reliable (sensitivity of 85.7% and specificity of 93.1%). Moreover, in a subset of 100 patients, FIA showed high sensitivity (89.1%) and specificity (94.1%) after two weeks from PCR. The coupled application for the screening of 183 patients showed satisfactory concordance (K = 0.858). In conclusion, rapid serological tests were largely not useful for early diagnosis, but they showed good performance in later stages of infection. These could be useful for back-tracing and/or to identify potentially immune subjects