Immunopathogenesis of immune reconstitution disease in HIV patients responding to antiretroviral therapy

Purpose of review: The aim of this article is to review the most recent literature regarding the immunopathogenesis of pathogen-associated immune reconstitution disease and to discuss the role of immune activation and various effector molecules and cells such as macrophages, effector and regulatory T cells, and natural killer cells in immune reconstitution disease. Recent findings: Many HIV patients receiving antiretroviral treatment develop immune reconstitution disease, which is characterized by exaggerated inflammatory immune responses to replicating or dead pathogens. In the majority of these cases, immune reconstitution disease is associated with restoration of pathogen-specific cellular immune responses involving CD4+ or CD8+ effector T cells. The precise conditions that trigger immune reconstitution disease have not yet been identified. Immune reconstitution disease patients have overt immune activation, which may be due to poor homeostatic control after the fast initial immune recovery in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy. Poor homeostatic control in immune reconstitution disease patients may be linked to unbalanced restoration of effector and regulatory T cells. Summary: Although the precise mechanism of immune reconstitution disease is not well understood, it is probably related to rapid restoration of pathogen-specific immune responses and poor homeostatic control that promote exaggerated immunopathological responses, especially if viable pathogens or pathogen debris are present at high concentrations

Steady-State Pharmacokinetics of Lamivudine in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease Receiving Chronic Dialysis

The steady-state pharmacokinetics of lamivudine were evaluated in 11 subjects with human immunodeficiency virus infection and end-stage renal disease, 9 of whom were receiving hemodialysis and 2 of whom were receiving chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). All subjects received 150 mg of lamivudine daily for at least 2 weeks prior to sampling for determination of the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine over a 24-h period on 2 consecutive days. On the first day, subjects received 150 mg of oral lamivudine and underwent dialysis (hemodialysis or CAPD). On the second day, subjects received another 150 mg of oral lamivudine but dialysis was not performed. For the subjects undergoing hemodialysis, the geometric mean predose serum lamivudine concentration was 1.14 μg/ml (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.58 μg/ml), the geometric mean maximum concentration in serum (C(max)) was 3.77 μg/ml (95% CI, 3.01 to 4.71 μg/ml), and the geometric mean area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) was 49.8 μg · h/ml (95% CI 39.1 to 63.6 μg · h/ml). Hemodialysis removed approximately 28 mg of lamivudine but had no significant effect on C(max) or AUC(0-24). In the absence of hemodialysis, the geometric mean lamivudine terminal elimination half-life was 17.2 h (95% CI, 10.5 to 28.1 h), whereas the geometric mean intradialysis half-life of lamivudine was 5.3 h (95% CI, 3.4 to 8.2 h). The pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in subjects undergoing CAPD were similar to those in subjects undergoing hemodialysis. CAPD removed 24 mg of lamivudine over a 24-h period but had no effect on C(max) or AUC(0-24). Pharmacokinetic modeling suggests that a lamivudine dose of 25 mg daily in hemodialysis subjects would provide serum exposure similar to that provided by a dose of 150 mg twice daily in patients with normal renal function