Search results

IntroductionHuman papillomavirus (HPV) is responsible for 85% of anal cancers. Recently, anal cancer incidence has been increasing, particularly in men who have sex with men (MSM). Cytology may be a useful tool for the detection of anal precancerous lesions. We assessed the prevalence and determinants of anal HPV infection and cytologic abnormalities among HIV‐infected and ‐uninfected MSM.Materials and MethodsMSM ≥18‐year‐old attending an STI clinic in Rome (Italy) were enrolled. Anal cytologic samples were collected in PreservCyt (Hologic) using a Dacron swab. The Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test (Roche Diagnostics) was used for the detection and genotyping of 37 mucosal HPV types. Liquid‐based cytological slides were obtained using a ThinPrep2000 processor (Hologic). The morphology of the anal pap‐test was classified following the Bethesda 2001 guidelines.ResultsWe enrolled 180 HIV‐infected (median age 41 years, IQR 33–47) and 438 HIV‐uninfected MSM (median age 32 years, IQR: 27–39). Most of the individuals were Caucasian (92.2% and 97.0%, respectively). HPV prevalence, both overall (93.3% vs 72.4%, p<.001) and by high‐risk (HR) HPV types (80.5% vs 56.0%, p<.001), was significantly higher among HIV‐infected than HIV‐uninfected individuals. HPV‐multiple infections were evidenced in 48.2% of the HIV‐uninfected and 76.1% of the HIV‐infected MSM (p<.001). HPV16 was the most prevalent genotype in both groups (23.3% in HIV‐positive and 17.6% in HIV‐negative MSM). HPV6 and 84 were the most frequent low‐risk types in both cohorts. Anal cytologic abnormalities were found in a significantly higher proportion of HIV‐infected MSM (46.1% vs 27.9%, p<.001). H‐SILs (high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions) were exclusively observed among the HIV‐infected individuals, although at a low prevalence (1.2%).ConclusionsA high prevalence of anal HPV infection and cytologic abnormalities was evidenced in both populations. Nonetheless, HIV‐infected MSM showed a significantly higher rate of HPV infection and abnormal cytology, confirming that HIV‐1 infection poses a significant risk for anal HPV infection as well as for anal cellular abnormalities. Screening for anal cancer, which is currently the most frequent non‐AIDS‐defining cancer in HIV‐positive MSM, should be considered for this population. Moreover, vaccination strategies for the prevention of HPV infection should be taken into account.

IntroductionHIV/HCV coinfection is a risk factor for hepatic injury in patients receiving HAART and previous studies support a favourable effect of antiretroviral regimens including maraviroc (MVC) on the course of coinfection compared with other antiretroviral drugs. There are few observations about MVC use in simplified treatment of coinfected patients.Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and the safety of simplification to darunavir (DRV)/ritonavir (r)/maraviroc (MVC) in virologically HIV‐suppressed patients and to explore the effect of simplified treatment on coinfected patients.Material and MethodsGUSTA study is a randomized two arms trial that compares the switch to DRV/r/MVC with standard HAART with three drugs. The study enrols patients with HIV‐1 RNA<50cp/mL>6 months, R5 tropism, CD4>200 cells/mm. Survival analysis was used to analyze factors associated to time‐to a single viral load (VL) over 50cp/mL and FIB‐4>1.45.ResultsWe included 62 patients with at least the 24 week follow‐up for FIB‐4 analysis: males 75.8%, heterosexuals 48.4%, HCV+12.9% median age 48.3 years (IQR41.1;53.5), time from HIV diagnosis 11.0 years (IQR7.3;16.7), CD4 cells 659/mm (IQR478;882), nadir CD4 203/mm (IQR115;286), FPR 46 (IQR30;70), baseline (BL) FIB‐4 1.11 (IQR0.75;1.35). At BL no differences were observed in the two arms, except for platelets (−34.96 109/L, in the study arm, p=0.028) and CD4 at nadir (−70cell/µL, p0.051). After 24 weeks a significant reduction in total bilirubin (TB) (−0.55 mg/dL, p=0.025) and alkaline phosphatase(AP) (−12.96 UI/L, p=0.002) was observed in the study group. A statistically significant difference in mean change of TB (0.61 mg/dL, p=0.016) and AP (13.23 UI/L, p=0.04) at 24 week between control and study group was observed. No grade 3/4 transaminase elevation was observed for any patient even if HIV/HCV coinfected and receiving MVC. A single HCV negative patient in the control arm had grade 3 bilirubin increase. Including all patients with at least one follow‐up HCV status was not associated with an increased risk of detectable VL (n=114, 4072 person‐week‐follow‐up [IQR12;51.6]), nor with FIB‐4>1.45 (n=98, 3513 person‐week‐follow‐up [IQR11.4;50.9]).ConclusionsThe initial results from GUSTA study show that ART‐regimen including MVC did not increase the incidence of adverse events or severe laboratory liver abnormalities in HIV‐1‐infected patients with or without HCV coinfection. Coinfected patients did not show an increased risk of failure on simplification treatment with MVC/DRV/r.

BackgroundTo assess the role of drugs used in dual therapy (DT), as cART simplification, over the risk of treatment failure.Materials and MethodsPatients starting DT regimen composed by a boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r): darunavir (DRV/r), lopinavir (LPVr) or atazanavir (ATV/r) plus a second drug: raltegravir (RAL), maraviroc (MRV) etravirine (ETR), lamivudine (3TC) or tenofovir (TDF), this one generally used in HBV co‐infected patients, were included. The effect of each drug as well as other clinical and virological cofactors over treatment failure was assessed using survival analysis.ResultsOverall, 480 patients from six reference Italian centres were included: all switched to DT with HIV‐RNA <500 cp/µL, 376 of them at <50 cp/µL. Patients who switched at <50 cp/µL showed a significant lower risk of treatment failure (13.3% versus 23.3% at 1 year and 28.0% versus 44.6% at 3 years, p=0.005), thus the analysis was focused on this subgroup. Among the patients who switched at <50 cp/µL, the proportion of drug used in DT was: DRV/r 63.0%, RAL 53.7%, ETR 19.4%, ATV/r 18.4%, MRV 17.3%, LPV/r 12.8%, TDF 6.4% and 3TC 5.9%; DRV/r‐RAL was the most widely used combination: 32.5%. Treatment failure was observed in 78 patients, of whom 38 virological and 35 for toxicity/intolerance, one patient died during follow‐up and four patients interrupted for personal decision with undetectable HIV‐RNA. At Cox Model, adjusted by gender, age, non‐Italian origin, AIDS diagnosis, time on cART, number of regimens, CD4 nadir, baseline CD4, all the drugs had a positive effect on probability of failure (Figure), however the effect was significant for DRV/r (HR:0.21, 95% CI 0.07–0.59, p=0.03), ATV/r (0.30, 0.09–0.97, p=0.044) and RAL (0.37, 0.15–0.93, p=0.034); higher CD4 count at baseline was also associated with lower risk of failure while number of previous regimens with a higher risk. Moreover, ATV/r was found significant associated with significant higher risk of failure by toxicity (as well as LPV/r) but lower risk of virological failure, while both 3TC and RAL with significant lower risk of toxicity.ConclusionsOur analysis suggest that using PI/r‐based DL is highly effective if switching from HIV‐RNA <50 cp/µL; DL should be used with caution in patients with low CD4 count and longer history of treatment; DRV/r is the best compromise among PI/r, ATV/r is effective but is associate with frequent interruption by toxicity; RAL showed high tolerability so that its use is related to the lowest risk of failure as second drug.

IntroductionWe report interim 24‐weeks efficacy data of ATLAS‐M trial, a phase IV, multicentre, open‐label, randomized study designed to show 48‐weeks, non‐inferior efficacy (margin of −12%) of treatment simplification to atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r)+lamivudine (3TC) versus maintaining 3‐drugs ATV/r‐based cART.MethodsSubjects on ATV/r+2 NRTIs, without previous treatment failure (TF), with HIV‐RNA <50copies/mL for >3 months and CD4>200 cells/mm3 for >6 months were eligible. At baseline, patients were randomized to switch to ATV/r+3TC (arm one) or to maintain the original 3‐drug regimen (arm two). Primary endpoint: proportion of patients free of TF at week 48. TF was defined as treatment modification for any reason, including virological failure (VF=two consecutive HIV‐RNA>50 copies/mL or a single value >1000 copies/mL). Enrollment of 266 patients was planned.ResultsA total of 266 patients (78% males, median age 44 years, median CD4 603 cells/µL, 79% treated with a tenofovir‐containing backbone) were enrolled. At the time of analysis, 24 weeks data were available for 84 and 87 patients in arm one and two, respectively. At baseline, subjects in the two arms did not differ for the main characteristics. At 24 weeks, at the intention to treat analysis the proportion of patients free of TF was 91.7% (95% CI 85.8–97.6) and 85.1% (95% CI 77.6–92.6) in arm one and two, respectively (difference +6.6%, 95% CI −2.9/+16.1). VF was observed in two patients randomized to arm one (one at baseline, before treatment simplification) and one to arm two without resistance mutations. Clinical and laboratory adverse events occurred at similar rates in the two arms. At week 24, patients in arm one showed a greater increase in CD4 (mean change +90 vs +10 cells/µL, p=0.007). A greater increase in total cholesterol (+18 vs −2 mg/dL, p<0.001), HDL (+4 vs +0 mg/dL, p=0.001) and LDL (+12 vs +0 mg/dL, p=0.001) was also observed in arm one without differences in other lipid parameters. Renal function showed a significant improvement in arm one (mean change in eGFR +5 vs −2 mL/min/1.73m2 in arm two, p=0.001). No significant differences in bilirubin levels or other laboratory parameters were observed between the two arms.ConclusionsThis interim analysis suggests a 24‐weeks non‐inferior efficacy of treatment simplification to ATV/rit+3TC as compared to continuation of ATV/rit +2 NRTI in virologically suppressed patients. Follow‐up until 48‐weeks is scheduled to confirm these data.