Association of Virus Load, CD4 Cell Count, and Treatment with Clinical Progression in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients with Very Low CD4 Cell Counts

This study prospectively assessed the impact of treatment modality, virus load, and CD4 cell count of <50 cells/mm3 on human immunodeficiency virus disease progression. The incidence rate of new AIDS disease or death was 54.8 (95% confidence interval, 48.7-59.9) per 100 person-years of follow-up. Independent predictors related to progression were latest CD4 cell count (relative risk [RR], 0.84/10 mm3 higher; P<.0001), latest hemoglobin level (RR, 0.79/g/L higher; P<.0001), Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia prophylaxis (RR, 0.49; P<.0001), latest body mass index (RR, 0.93/kg/m2 higher; P=.002), latest virus load (RR, 1.11/log10 higher; P=.03), and intensity of treatment (RR, 1.82, P=.004; RR 2.27, P<.0001; RR 2.46, P=.0001; RR 2.33 P<.0006; 5.10, P<.0001, respectively, for 4, 3, 2, 1, or no drugs vs. ⩾5 drugs). Although reverse causality cannot be excluded, more intense antiviral treatment appears to decrease the risk of progression in immunocompromised patient

Prevalence of Drug-Resistant HIV-1 Variants in Untreated Individuals in Europe: Implications for Clinical Management

BackgroundInfection with drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) can impair the response to combination therapy. Widespread transmission of drug-resistant variants has the disturbing potential of limiting future therapy options and affecting the efficacy of postexposure prophylaxis penta increase-spacing 1>MethodsWe determined the baseline rate of drug resistance in 2208 therapy-naive patients recently and chronically infected with HIV-1 from 19 European countries during 1996-2002 ResultsIn Europe, 1 of 10 antiretroviral-naive patients carried viruses with ⩾1 drug-resistance mutation. Recently infected patients harbored resistant variants more often than did chronically infected patients (13.5% vs. 8.7%; P=.006). Non-B viruses (30%) less frequently carried resistance mutations than did subtype B viruses (4.8% vs. 12.9%; P<.01). Baseline resistance increased over time in newly diagnosed cases of non-B infection: from 2.0% (1/49) in 1996-1998 to 8.2% (16/194) in 2000-2001 ConclusionsDrug-resistant variants are frequently present in both recently and chronically infected therapy-naive patients. Drug-resistant variants are most commonly seen in patients infected with subtype B virus, probably because of longer exposure of these viruses to drugs. However, an increase in baseline resistance in non-B viruses is observed. These data argue for testing all drug-naive patients and are of relevance when guidelines for management of postexposure prophylaxis and first-line therapy are update

Long-Term Benefits from Early Antiretroviral Therapy Initiation in HIV Infection

BACKGROUND: For people with HIV and CD4+ counts >500 cells/mm3, early initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces serious AIDS and serious non-AIDS (SNA) risk compared with deferral of treatment until CD4+ counts are 500 cells/mm3, excess risk of AIDS and SNA associated with delaying treatment initiation was diminished after ART initiation, but persistent excess risk remained. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others.)

Tracing the HIV-1 subtype B mobility in Europe: a phylogeographic approach

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prevalence and the origin of HIV-1 subtype B, the most prevalent circulating clade among the long-term residents in Europe, have been studied extensively. However the spatial diffusion of the epidemic from the perspective of the virus has not previously been traced.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the current study we inferred the migration history of HIV-1 subtype B by way of a phylogeography of viral sequences sampled from 16 European countries and Israel. Migration events were inferred from viral phylogenies by character reconstruction using parsimony. With regard to the spatial dispersal of the HIV subtype B sequences across viral phylogenies, in most of the countries in Europe the epidemic was introduced by multiple sources and subsequently spread within local networks. Poland provides an exception where most of the infections were the result of a single point introduction. According to the significant migratory pathways, we show that there are considerable differences across Europe. Specifically, Greece, Portugal, Serbia and Spain, provide sources shedding HIV-1; Austria, Belgium and Luxembourg, on the other hand, are migratory targets, while for Denmark, Germany, Italy, Israel, Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK we inferred significant bidirectional migration. For Poland no significant migratory pathways were inferred.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Subtype B phylogeographies provide a new insight about the geographical distribution of viral lineages, as well as the significant pathways of virus dispersal across Europe, suggesting that intervention strategies should also address tourists, travellers and migrants.</p

To what extent can clinical characteristics be used to distinguish encephalitis from encephalopathy of other causes? Results from a prospective observational study

Background Recognizing patients with encephalitis may be challenging. The cardinal symptom, encephalopathy, has a wide array of differential diagnoses. In this prospective study we aimed to explore the etiology of encephalitis and to assess the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and clinical findings in patients with encephalitis in an encephalopathic population. Methods Patients with acute onset of encephalopathy (n = 136) were prospectively enrolled from January 2014–December 2015 at Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal. Clinical and biochemical characteristics of patients who met the case definition of encephalitis were compared to patients with encephalopathy of other causes. Results Among 136 patients with encephalopathy, 19 (14%) met the case-definition of encephalitis. For 117 patients other causes of encephalopathy were found, infection outside the CNS was the most common differential diagnosis. Etiology of encephalitis was confirmed in 53% (4 bacterial, 4 viral, 1 parasitic, and 1 autoimmune). Personality change, nausea, fever, focal neurology, recent travel history, and low inflammation markers were significantly more abundant in patients with encephalitis, but the diagnostic accuracy for individual parameters were low (area under the curve (AUC) < 0.7). The combination of fever (OR = 6.6, 95% CI, 1.6–28), nausea (OR = 8.9, 95% CI, 1.7–46) and a normal level of ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate < 17 mm/hr, OR = 6.9, 95% CI, 1.5–33) was significant in multivariate analysis with an AUC (area under the curve) of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.76–0.94). Moderately increased pleocytosis in CSF (5-100 × 106/L) further increased the diagnostic accuracy of this combination, AUC 0.90 (95% CI, 0.81–0.98). Conclusions There is a wide diversity in differential diagnoses in patients with encephalopathy, and no single symptom or finding can be used to predict encephalitis with high accuracy in this group. The combination of fever, nausea and a low ESR in an encephalopathic population, increased the diagnostic accuracy of encephalitis compared to solitary parameters. The triad could be a useful clinical tool for early diagnosis of encephalitis, and these patients should be considered for further diagnostics such as lumbar puncture (LP)

Lopinavir/ritonavir, atazanavir/ritonavir, and efavirenz in antiretroviral-na\uefve HIV-1-infected individuals over 144 weeks: An open-label randomized controlled trial.

Background: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of ritonavir boosted atazanavir versus ritonavir boosted lopinavir or efavirenz, all in combination with 2 nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), over 144 weeks in antiretroviral-na\uefve HIV-1-infected individuals. Methods: A prospective open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted at 29 sites in Sweden and Norway between April 2004 and December 2009. Patients were randomized to receive either efavirenz 600 mg once daily (EFV), or atazanavir 300 mg and ritonavir 100 mg once daily (AZV/r), or lopinavir 400 mg and ritonavir 100 mg twice daily (LPV/r). The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA 100,000 copies/ml at baseline had similar response rates in all arms. Conclusion: EFV was superior to LPV/r at week 48, but there were no significant differences between the 3 arms in the long-term (144 weeks) follow-up