Is infant exposure to antiretroviral drugs during breastfeeding quantitatively important? A systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacokinetic studies

Objectives The objectives of this study were to summarize antiretroviral drug concentrations in breast milk (BM) and exposure of breast-fed infants. Methods This was a systematic review of pharmacokinetic studies of HIV-positive women taking antiretrovirals that measured drugs in BM. The quality of pharmacokinetic and laboratory methods was assessed using pre-defined criteria. Pooled ratios and 95% CIs were calculated using the generalized inverse variance method and heterogeneity was estimated by the I2 statistic. PubMed Central, SCOPUS and LactMed databases were searched. No date or language restrictions were applied. Searches were conducted up to 10 November 2014. Clinical relevance was estimated by comparing ingested dose with the recommended therapeutic dose for each drug. Results Twenty-four studies were included. There was substantial variability in the clinical and laboratory methods used and in reported results. Relative to maternal plasma (MP), NRTIs accumulate in BM, with BM : MP ratios (95% CI estimates) from 0.89 to 1.21 (14 studies, 1159 paired BM and MP samples). NNRTI estimates were from 0.71 to 0.94 (17 studies, 965 paired samples) and PI estimates were from 0.17 to 0.21 (8 studies, 477 paired samples). Relative to the recommended paediatric doses, a breast-fed infant may ingest 8.4% (95% CI 1.9–15.0), 12.5% (95% CI 2.6–22.3) and 1.1% (95% CI 0–3.6) of lamivudine, nevirapine and efavirenz, respectively, via BM. Conclusions Transfer to untreated infants appears quantitatively important for some NRTIs and NNRTIs. The pharmacokinetic methods varied widely and we propose standards for the design, analysis and reporting of future pharmacokinetic studies of drug transfer during breastfeeding

Drv Concentrations And Viral Load In Csf In Patients On Drv/r 600/100 Or 800/100mg Once Daily Plus Two Nrti

Introduction Darunavir/r (DRV/r) is currently used at a dose of 800/100 mg once daily (OD) in a high proportion of patients. Pharmacokinetic data suggest that 600/100 OD may be effective, reducing toxicity and cost. However, drug concentrations in reservoirs such as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) might not be adequate to inhibit viral replication. We aimed to evaluate concentrations of DRV and HIV‐1 viral load (VL) in CSF patients receiving DRV 600/100 mg OD. Methods DRV600 is an ongoing randomized open study comparing DRV/r 800/100 mg (DRV800) vs 600/100 mg (DRV600) OD plus TDF/FTC or ABC/3TC in 100 virologically suppressed patients (eudraCT 2011‐006272‐39). Here we present the results of a CSF sub‐study. A lumbar puncture (LP) was performed in participating patients after at least six months of inclusion in the study, 20–28 hours after a dose of DRV/r. VL (PCR, LOD 40 copies/mL) was determined in CSF and in plasma. DRV concentrations were quantified in CSF by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) and in plasma using high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Results Sixteen patients were included (eight in each arm). All DRV600 patients and four out of eight DRV800 patients received TDF/FTC, and the other four ABC/3TC. 75% were males, median (range) age was 48 (17–71) years, CD4 cell count 532 cells/mL (190–1,394). Median total time on DRV/r was 30 (11–57) months, and since the beginning of the study 8 (6–12) months in DRV800 and 10 (7–12) months in DRV600 patients. LP was performed a median of 26 (24–28) hours after the last DRV/r+TVD or KVX dose. In DRV600 patients the median DRV plasma levels were 1,674 (326–3,742) ng/mL, CSF levels 17.08 (5.79–30.19) ng/mL and DRV CSF:plasma ratio 0.0084 (0.0028–0.0388), while in the DRV800 arm, median DRV plasma levels were 1,707 (958–3,910) ng/mL, CSF levels 13.23 (3.47–32.98) ng/mL and DRV CSF:plasma ratio 0.0104 (0.0018–0.0262). All patients had VL<40 copies/mL in plasma and 14 patients VL<40 copies/mL in CSF. Two patients (1 in each arm, and taking TDF/FTC) had detectable VL in CSF (280 and 159 c/mL). These patients had the lowest CSF DRV concentrations (5.47 and 3.47 ng/mL), with plasma DRV concentrations of 802 and 958 ng/mL respectively. Conclusions CSF DRV concentrations and CSF VL were similar between patients receiving DRV/r 800/100 mg or 600/100 mg OD. Low CSF DRV concentrations might be associated with viral escape in CNS. This may be taken into account in patients receiving OD DRV/r. Larger studies should confirm these findings

Basic science232. Certolizumab pegol prevents pro-inflammatory alterations in endothelial cell function

Background: Cardiovascular disease is a major comorbidity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and a leading cause of death. Chronic systemic inflammation involving tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF) could contribute to endothelial activation and atherogenesis. A number of anti-TNF therapies are in current use for the treatment of RA, including certolizumab pegol (CZP), (Cimzia ®; UCB, Belgium). Anti-TNF therapy has been associated with reduced clinical cardiovascular disease risk and ameliorated vascular function in RA patients. However, the specific effects of TNF inhibitors on endothelial cell function are largely unknown. Our aim was to investigate the mechanisms underpinning CZP effects on TNF-activated human endothelial cells. Methods: Human aortic endothelial cells (HAoECs) were cultured in vitro and exposed to a) TNF alone, b) TNF plus CZP, or c) neither agent. Microarray analysis was used to examine the transcriptional profile of cells treated for 6 hrs and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysed gene expression at 1, 3, 6 and 24 hrs. NF-κB localization and IκB degradation were investigated using immunocytochemistry, high content analysis and western blotting. Flow cytometry was conducted to detect microparticle release from HAoECs. Results: Transcriptional profiling revealed that while TNF alone had strong effects on endothelial gene expression, TNF and CZP in combination produced a global gene expression pattern similar to untreated control. The two most highly up-regulated genes in response to TNF treatment were adhesion molecules E-selectin and VCAM-1 (q 0.2 compared to control; p > 0.05 compared to TNF alone). The NF-κB pathway was confirmed as a downstream target of TNF-induced HAoEC activation, via nuclear translocation of NF-κB and degradation of IκB, effects which were abolished by treatment with CZP. In addition, flow cytometry detected an increased production of endothelial microparticles in TNF-activated HAoECs, which was prevented by treatment with CZP. Conclusions: We have found at a cellular level that a clinically available TNF inhibitor, CZP reduces the expression of adhesion molecule expression, and prevents TNF-induced activation of the NF-κB pathway. Furthermore, CZP prevents the production of microparticles by activated endothelial cells. This could be central to the prevention of inflammatory environments underlying these conditions and measurement of microparticles has potential as a novel prognostic marker for future cardiovascular events in this patient group. Disclosure statement: Y.A. received a research grant from UCB. I.B. received a research grant from UCB. S.H. received a research grant from UCB. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR): a multicentre, prospective observational study

Background Results from retrospective studies suggest that use of neuromuscular blocking agents during general anaesthesia might be linked to postoperative pulmonary complications. We therefore aimed to assess whether the use of neuromuscular blocking agents is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study. Patients were recruited from 211 hospitals in 28 European countries. We included patients (aged ≥18 years) who received general anaesthesia for any in-hospital procedure except cardiac surgery. Patient characteristics, surgical and anaesthetic details, and chart review at discharge were prospectively collected over 2 weeks. Additionally, each patient underwent postoperative physical examination within 3 days of surgery to check for adverse pulmonary events. The study outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications from the end of surgery up to postoperative day 28. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for surgical factors and patients’ preoperative physical status, providing adjusted odds ratios (ORadj) and adjusted absolute risk reduction (ARRadj). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865513. Findings Between June 16, 2014, and April 29, 2015, data from 22803 patients were collected. The use of neuromuscular blocking agents was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients who had undergone general anaesthesia (1658 [7·6%] of 21694); ORadj 1·86, 95% CI 1·53–2·26; ARRadj –4·4%, 95% CI –5·5 to –3·2). Only 2·3% of high-risk surgical patients and those with adverse respiratory profiles were anaesthetised without neuromuscular blocking agents. The use of neuromuscular monitoring (ORadj 1·31, 95% CI 1·15–1·49; ARRadj –2·6%, 95% CI –3·9 to –1·4) and the administration of reversal agents (1·23, 1·07–1·41; –1·9%, –3·2 to –0·7) were not associated with a decreased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Neither the choice of sugammadex instead of neostigmine for reversal (ORadj 1·03, 95% CI 0·85–1·25; ARRadj –0·3%, 95% CI –2·4 to 1·5) nor extubation at a train-of-four ratio of 0·9 or more (1·03, 0·82–1·31; –0·4%, –3·5 to 2·2) was associated with better pulmonary outcomes. Interpretation We showed that the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs in general anaesthesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Anaesthetists must balance the potential benefits of neuromuscular blockade against the increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications