8 research outputs found

    Twice neglected? Neglected diseases in neglected populations

    Get PDF
    It is unfortunately true that clinicians lack the necessary evidence to know how to use medications properly in large sections of the population and do not have optimal treatments to use for many neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). NTDs often disproportionately affect neglected populations that are left out of research efforts, such as children and pregnant women. As reliable access to safe, effective preventives and treatments can break the cycle of poverty, illness, and ensuing debility that further perpetuates poverty, it is of paramount importance to investigate and develop new medicines for neglected populations suffering from NTDs. Furthermore, there is not only a need to develop and evaluate novel therapies, but also to ensure that these are affordable, available, and adapted to the communities who need them. The NIH has proposed a “4 C\u27s” framework which is relevant for neglected diseases and populations and should be leveraged for the study of the Twice Neglected: Consider inclusion; Collect data from neglected populations with neglected conditions; Characterize differences through meaningful analysis; Communicate findings pertaining to neglected diseases and populations. With this editorial, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology hereby launches a call for high-quality articles focusing on NTDs in special populations, to facilitate and encourage the reversal of this dual neglect

    Preferences and feasibility of long-acting technologies for treatment of hepatitis C virus in low- and middle-income countries: A survey of providers and policymakers

    No full text
    Long-acting technologies (LATs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are under development as a strategy to improve linkage to care, treatment adherence and outcomes. We conducted a survey of HCV treatment prescribers and HCV policymakers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) regarding acceptability and feasibility of HCV LATs. We included one-time intramuscular injection, subdermal implant and transdermal patch as potential LAT options. We surveyed participants regarding optimal health system and patient characteristics, concerns, potential barriers, overall feasibility and preferences for HCV LAT as compared to daily oral medication. Overall, 122 providers and 50 policymakers from 42 LMICs completed the survey. Among providers, 93% (113/122) expressed willingness to prescribe LAT and 72% (88/120) of providers preferred LAT if provided at comparable efficacy, safety and cost as current oral treatments. Of providers preferring HCV LAT to daily oral medication, 67% (59/88) preferred injection, 24% (21/88) preferred patch and 9% (8/88) preferred implant. Only 20% (24/122) would prescribe LAT if it were more costly than oral treatment. In regression analysis, no provider characteristics were associated with preference for LAT over oral treatment. Policymakers reported high likelihood that LAT would be included in treatment guidelines (42/50; 84%) and national drug formularies (39/50; 78%) if efficacy, safety and cost were similar to oral treatment. HCV LATs could advance progress to HCV elimination in LMICs by diversifying treatment options to improve treatment coverage and outcomes. Provider preferences from LMICs are a critical consideration in the development of HCV LATs to ensure its early and equitable availability in LMIC

    Pharmacokinetics of tenofovir alafenamide, emtricitabine, and dolutegravir in a patient on peritoneal dialysis

    No full text
    Abstract Introduction Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective renal replacement modality in people with HIV (PWH) with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), particularly those with residual kidney function. Data on pharmacokinetics (PK) of antiretrovirals in patients on peritoneal dialysis are limited. Methods A single-participant study was performed on a 49-year-old gentleman with ESKD on PD and controlled HIV on once daily dolutegravir (DTG) 50 mg + tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 25 mg / emtricitabine (FTC) 200 mg. He underwent serial blood plasma, peripheral blood mononuclear cell, and urine PK measurements over 24 h after an observed DTG + FTC/TAF dose. Results Plasma trough (Cmin) concentrations of TAF, tenofovir (TFV), FTC, and DTG were 0.05, 164, 1,006, and 718 ng/mL, respectively. Intracellular trough concentrations of TFV-DP and FTC-TP were 1142 and 11,201 fmol/million cells, respectively. Compared to published mean trough concentrations in PWH with normal kidney function, observed TFV and FTC trough concentrations were 15.5- and 20-fold higher, while intracellular trough concentrations of TFV-DP and FTC-TP were 2.2-fold and 5.4-fold higher, respectively. TFV and FTC urine levels were 20 times lower than in people with normal GFR. Conclusions In a single ESKD PWH on PD, daily TAF was associated with plasma TFV and intracellular TFV-DP trough concentrations 15-fold and 2-fold higher than those of people with uncompromised kidney function, potentially contributing to nephrotoxicity. This suggests that TFV accumulates on PD; thus, daily TAF in PD patients may require dose adjustment or regimen change to optimize treatment, minimize toxicity, and preserve residual kidney function

    Preferences and feasibility of long-acting technologies for treatment of hepatitis C virus in low- and middle-income countries: A survey of providers and policymakers.

    No full text
    Long-acting technologies (LATs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are under development as a strategy to improve linkage to care, treatment adherence and outcomes. We conducted a survey of HCV treatment prescribers and HCV policymakers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) regarding acceptability and feasibility of HCV LATs. We included one-time intramuscular injection, subdermal implant and transdermal patch as potential LAT options. We surveyed participants regarding optimal health system and patient characteristics, concerns, potential barriers, overall feasibility and preferences for HCV LAT as compared to daily oral medication. Overall, 122 providers and 50 policymakers from 42 LMICs completed the survey. Among providers, 93% (113/122) expressed willingness to prescribe LAT and 72% (88/120) of providers preferred LAT if provided at comparable efficacy, safety and cost as current oral treatments. Of providers preferring HCV LAT to daily oral medication, 67% (59/88) preferred injection, 24% (21/88) preferred patch and 9% (8/88) preferred implant. Only 20% (24/122) would prescribe LAT if it were more costly than oral treatment. In regression analysis, no provider characteristics were associated with preference for LAT over oral treatment. Policymakers reported high likelihood that LAT would be included in treatment guidelines (42/50; 84%) and national drug formularies (39/50; 78%) if efficacy, safety and cost were similar to oral treatment. HCV LATs could advance progress to HCV elimination in LMICs by diversifying treatment options to improve treatment coverage and outcomes. Provider preferences from LMICs are a critical consideration in the development of HCV LATs to ensure its early and equitable availability in LMICs
    corecore