Difference in markers of microbial translocation and cell apoptosis in HIV monoinfected and HIV/HCV coinfected patients

Funding Information: The authors thank Valentina Sondore, MD. This study was supported by National Research Programme “Biomedicine for Public Health” (BIOMEDICINE) and by corporation “Latvijas Gâze”. Publisher Copyright: © 2019 Monta Madelane et al., published by Sciendo 2019.Immune activation in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is driven by microbial translocation and in HIV patients is one of the contributors to faster progression of liver disease along with increased cell apoptosis. The aim of the study was to compare microbial translocation and apoptosis markers in HIV monoinfected and HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfected patients, depending on HIV immune status and antiretroviral treatment (ART). We analysed data for 78 HIV monoinfected and 105 HIV/HCV coinfected patients from the Rīga East University Hospital. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS), endotoxin core antibodies (EndoCAb), cytokeratin 18 (CK18) and cyto-chrome c (Cyt-c) levels were measured. No significant difference in LPS, EndoCAb, Cyt-c levels between HIV and HIV/HCV patients was found. The CK18 level was higher in the HIV/HCV group. Correlation between CD4+ cell count and EndoCAb antibodies was found in HCV positive patients. There was a significant effect of ART on markers for EndoCAb IgA and EndoCAb IgM antibodies in the HIV monoinfected group. Correlation between CD4+ cell count and EndoCAb antibodies and LPS was found in HIV/HCV patients on ART. Coinfection with HCV can lead to more pronounced response in EndoCAb antibody production and higher levels of cell apoptosis markers, despite similar LPS levels. ART has a positive effect on immune activation.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Comparison of Changes in Bone Density and Turnover with Abacavir-Lamivudine versus Tenofovir-Emtricitabine in HIV-Infected Adults: 48-Week Results from the ASSERT Study

Background. Abacavir-lamivudine and tenofovir DF-emtricitabine fixed-dose combinations are commonly used as first-line antiretroviral therapies. However, few studies have comprehensively compared their relative safety profiles. Methods. In this European, multicenter, open-label, 96-week study, antiretroviral-naive adult subjects with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were randomized to receive either abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir- emtricitabine with efavirenz. Primary analyses were conducted after 48 weeks of treatment. Bone mineral density (BMD), a powered secondary end point, was assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Bone turnover markers (osteocalcin, procollagen 1 N-terminal propeptide, bone specific alkaline phosphatase, and type 1 collagen cross-linked C telopeptide [CTx]) were assessed in an exploratory analysis. Results. A total of 385 subjects were enrolled in the study. BMD loss was observed in both treatment groups, with a significant difference in the change from baseline in both total hip (abacavir-lamivudine group, -1.9%; tenofovir-emtricitabine group, -3.6%; P= 6% was more common in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group (13% of the tenofovir-emtricitabine group vs 3% of the abacavir-lamivudine group had a loss of >= 6% in the hip; 15% vs 5% had a loss of >= 6% in the spine). Bone turnover markers increased in both treatment groups over the first 24 weeks, stabilizing or decreasing thereafter. Increases in all markers were significantly greater in the tenofovir-emtricitabine treatment group than in the abacavir-lamivudine group at week 24. All but CTx remained significantly different at week 48 (eg, osteocalcin: abacavir-lamivudine group, +8.07 mg/L; tenofovir-emtricitabine group, +11.92 mg/L; P Conclusions. This study demonstrated the impact of first-line treatment regimens on bone. Greater increases in bone turnover and decreases in BMD were observed in subjects treated with tenofovir-emtricitabine than were observed in subjects treated with abacavir-lamivudine