Suchergebnisse

IntroductionAssessing virological response of four‐drugs antiretroviral regimen that include raltegravir (RAL) in naïve patients with high viral load (>500,000 copies/mL) selected from a multicentre Italian database.MethodsNaïve patients with HIV RNA>500,000 copies/mL, who began standard antiretroviral regimens either based on non‐nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) or boosted‐PI (PI/r), or a standard regimen plus RAL between 2008 and 2013 were analyzed. Observation was censored at 12 months and the percentage of patients who achieved a viral load below the limit of detection (BLD) was calculated. Virological failure was defined as two consecutive viral loads>40 copies/mL.ResultsOverall, 179 patients were included (13% with primary HIV infection (PHI), and 42.5% with AIDS diagnosis). Of them, 156 started standard three‐drugs antiretroviral regimen (75.6% PI/r‐based, 24.4% NNRTI‐based. Among patients with PHI, 23 patients (12.8%), 6 (25%) started a four‐drugs antiretroviral regimen containing both RAL and PI/r. Patients' characteristics were as follows: males 74%, median age 42 years (IQR 35–51), sexually transmission 75.1%, median CD4 count 156 cells/µL (IQR 47–368) and median HIV‐RNA 6.1 log10 copies/mL (IQR 5.8–6.4). 91 of 179 patients (50.8%) reached BLD viral load during the twelve months of observation. Three patients (1.7%) who began regimens PI/r‐based with three‐drugs had virological rebound after reaching BLD viral load. By use of survival analysis, we show that those patients who added RAL to the standard regimen have reached the primary end point faster (mean 8.4 months (95% CI 7.2–9.6) vs 11.4 (95% CI 11.0–11.8) in PI group and 10.3 (95% CI 9.4–11.1) in NNRTI group; p<0.001, Figure 1). In the adjusted analysis, the choice of a standard regimen versus a four‐drugs regimen was driven only by higher baseline viral load (OR. 9.05; 95% CI 2.41–37.41; p=0.001).ConclusionsOnly half of the naïve patients who began antiretroviral therapy having >500,000 copies/mL HIV‐RNA had virological success at 12 months. The success was reached faster using the RAL‐containing four‐drugs regimen, suggesting that strengthening the initial regimen could be an option in patients with very high viral load to improve virological response.

IntroductionSeveral genetic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in biotransformation enzymes (CYP3A4, CYP3A5) or transporter proteins (multidrug resistance MDR1 gene product, P‐gp) are involved in PI metabolism so that PI pharmacokinetics is characterized by a large inter‐individual variability. The aim of this study was: (i) to develop an in‐house PCR/direct sequencing, based on DNA purification of full‐length CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genes (SNPs) and MDR1 C3435T variant; (ii) to investigate association of CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 reported or unreported genetic polymorphisms and MDR1‐C3435T (CC homozygote, CT heterozygote, TT homozygote) with clinical outcome of HIV‐1 infected subjects treated with PI.MethodsOverall, 39 HIV‐1 infected patients receiving boosted Lopinavir (LPV/r) monotherapy after virological suppression were genotyped and analyzed through PCR and direct sequencing of full‐length CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 gene sequences [1] and MDR1 gene (C3435T). CD4+T‐cell counts and plasma viral load were analyzed before and after LPV/r initiation; LPV/r therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was determined at 12‐hours.ResultsLPV/r TDM (ng/ml) did not show significant differences among CYP3A4 or CYP3A5 SNPs, although a mean lower level of LPV/r was associated with detection of several SNPs: CYP3A5*3 rs776746; CYP3A5 rs28365088, CYP3A5 rs15524, CYP3A4 rs2687116, and a not already described polymorphism CYP3A4 nt20338. In follow‐up analysis, <90% adherence was the main factor associated with virological failure of LPV/r monotherapy (83.3% of failure vs 34.4%, p<0.001 at log‐rank test). Adjusting for adherence, the detection of a single CYP3A5*3 rs776746 and CYP3A5 rs15524 SNPs was associated with higher probability of LPV/r monotherapy failure (p<0.01), and in general, detection of any CYP3A5 SNP was associated with failure (26.2% vs 58.3%, p=0.067). No‐association with detection of any CYP3A4 SNPs was found. MDR1 TT variants showed significant lower frequency of treatment failure (0.0% vs 47.7%, p=0.026), since non‐TT homozygote patient failed LPV/r monotherapy.ConclusionsEfficacy of PI monotherapy is strongly dependent from patient adherence, but, in adherent patients, genetic factors, such as CYP3A5 and MDR1‐C3435T gene variants, may affect the response to treatment, though their role, as well of other genetic variants, need further investigation.

BackgroundWe assessed the virological response of DRV/r‐based dual therapy in drug‐experienced patients included in the Italian antiretroviral resistance database (ARCA).Materials and MethodsPatients included in the study were treated with DRV/r in association with raltegravir (RAL), etravirine (ETV) or maraviroc (MAR) following treatment failure(s) and with a resistance test and at least one follow‐up visit available. Observation was censored at last visit under dual therapy and survival analysis and proportional hazard models were used, taking virological failure (confirmed >50 c/mL HIV‐RNA) as the end‐point.ResultsOf the total 221 patients included, 149 (67.4%) started DRV/r with RAL, 45 (20.4%) with ETV, 27 (12.2%) with MAR. Patients characteristics at the start of dual regimen were as follows: mean number of previous regimens, nine (IQR: 5–13); non‐B subtype, 17 (7.7%); median CD4 count, 347 (IQR: 246–544); undetectable viral load, 74 (33.5%). Full DRV/r resistance was detected in one (0.5%, HIV‐DB interpretation system), 13 (5.9%, ANRS) and 17 patients (7.7%, Rega). 69 virological failures (31.2%) were observed during follow‐up. At survival analysis, the overall proportion of failure was 29.2% at one year and 33.8% at two years. The proportion of failure was lower in patients starting with undetectable versus detectable viral load (13.3% and 25.2% versus 37.4% and 38.8% at one and two years, respectively, p=0.001 for both analyses) and in patients treated with DRV 600 BID versus 800 QD (HR: 0, 56; 95% CI 0.31–0.99; p<0.05). By regimen, patients treated with DRV/r‐RAL showed a non‐significant lower proportion of failure (27.7% at one year, 32.0% at two years) if compared with DRV/r‐MAR (35.9%, 47.1%) and DRV/r‐ETV (34.1%, 34.1% at one and two years). In the adjusted proportional model, no significant difference among the three regimens was detected. A significant lower risk of failure was associated with higher overall GSS (HIV‐DB HR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.88, p=0.014; Rega 0.60, 0.40‐0.88, p<0.01; ANRS 0.55, 0.34–0.90, p=0.017), while a higher risk of failure was associated with detectable HIV‐RNA (3.02, 1.70–5.72, p<0.001).ConclusionsAmong experienced patients, the best candidates to dual‐therapy regimens including DRV/r are those with undetectable viral load and higher GSS. The association with RAL is the most commonly used but no clear advantage with respect to ETV or MAR was observed in our dataset, possibly due to the limited sample size.

IntroductionPI/r monotherapy has been suggested as an attainable maintenance strategy in patients achieving stable HIV suppression in plasma. The objective of trial was to compare the virological outcome of two different PI/r QD monotherapy strategies (LPV/r or DRV/r) with maintaining a triple PI/r‐based ARV regimen.Material and MethodsPhase III, open‐label, non‐inferiority (−12% margin), randomized trial of HIV adults with HIV‐RNA <50 cp/mL for at least 48 weeks while on PI/r‐based cART, CD4 nadir >100 cell/mm3, without previous PIs virological failure. Eligible patients were randomized to continue PI/r+2NRTIs (Arm A), to switch to LPV/r 800/200 mg QD monotherapy (Arm B), or to switch to DRV/r 800/100 mg QD monotherapy (Arm C). Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with plasma HIV‐1 RNA <50 cp/mL (TLOVR) at 48w by intent to treat (ITT) analysis (missing/re‐induction=failure). FDA snapshot and ITT switch‐included analysis (ITT‐SI) were also used. In ITT‐SI, patients who had <50 copies/mL at 96w were counted as successes even if they had confirmed HIV‐RNA elevations and had subsequently successfully intensified by NRTI.ResultsDue to slow recruitment, only 103 patients were included. No differences were observed between the three arms with respect to gender, age, HIV transmission, CD4 nadir and at screening. At randomization, 61 patients were receiving TDF/FTC (60%), 19 ZDV/3TC (18%), 8 ABV/3TC (8%), 75 LPV/r (73%), 13 ATV/r (13%), 4 DRV/r (4%). Differences in proportion of virological success by groups using Arm A as comparator according to FDA TLOVR were reported in Figure 1. Similar results were obtained by Snapshot analysis. Of 14 patients with virological failure, 8 patients restarted triple therapy with 2NRTI and 7/8 regained a VL <50 cp/mL over time. According to ITT‐SI analysis, 96 week differences [95% CI] were −5.7 [−29.6; +18.2] in Arm B, and +19.6 [−1.6; +40.8] in Arm C. A GRT was performed in 6/14 patients (one not amplifiable; four without mutations; one showed E138A).ConclusionsCompared to maintaining a PI/r‐based triple ARV regimen, LPV/r QD monotherapy tended to have higher rate of virological failure and of discontinuation due to adverse event. In contrast, the response rate at week 96 during DRV/r QD mono‐therapy was non‐inferior to that of triple PI/r‐based ARV therapy. A re‐induction with 2NRTI was adequate to obtain an undetectable viremia in most of patients with virological failure.

IntroductionCentral nervous system (CNS) penetration‐effectiveness (CPE) rank was proposed in 2008 as an estimate of penetration of ARV regimen into the CNS, and validated as predictor of CSF HIV‐1 replication. Results on predictive role of CPE on neurocognitive and clinical outcome were conflicting.Materials and MethodsRetrospective, cross‐sectional analysis of neurocognitive profile in HIV‐infected cART‐treated patients. All patients underwent neuropsychological (NP) assessment by standardized battery of 14 tests on 5 different domains. People were classified as having NCI if they scored >1 standard deviation (SD) below the normal mean in at least two tests, or >2 SD below in one test. Linear and logistic regression analyses were fitted using as outcome Npz8 and impaired/not impaired respectively.ResultsA total of 660 HIV‐infected cART‐treated individuals from 2009 to 2014, contributing a total of 1003 tests (mean age 49 (IQR 43–56), male 82%; median current CD4 586/mm3; 18% HCV infected; HIV‐RNA <40 cp/mL in 84%). Current ARV regimen was 2NRTIs+1NNRTI 50.3%, 2NRTI+1PI/r in 32.6%, NRTI sparing in 11.1%. Mean CPE of current regimens was 6.6 (95% CI 6.5–6.7). As per test multivariable analysis, higher CPE values were associated to poor NP tasks (Beta=−0,09; 95% CI −0,14 −0,03; p=0.002 at multivariable linear regression). The association between higher CPE and increased NCI risk was confirmed at multivariable logistic regression, with a 1.24‐fold risk of NCI occurrence for each point increase of CPE of current regimen at the time of NP testing (see Table 1). In a sensitivity analysis performed only on patients at the first NP test, the association between higher CPE and poor NP tasks and enhanced NCI risk was only marginally confirmed (Beta=−0,05; [−0,12–0,02]; p=0,19; OR 1,13 [0,95–1,34]; p=0.17). Older age, longer time from HIV diagnosis, current CD4 count <350 cell/mm3 and lower education level were all associated to an increased risk of NCI.ConclusionsIn our analysis, higher CPE rank is associated to poorly performing at NP tasking. Even if selection bias could not be excluded due to retrospective cross‐sectional design, these results fitted with the direct correlation between high CPE and HIV dementia recently recorded in a large observational database. We think that CPE use to guide ART in patients neurocognitively impaired should be revised.

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.

BackgroundTo assess efficacy and safety of treatment simplification to co‐formulated Rilpivirine/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir (RPV/FTC/TDF) in virologically suppressed patients.Materials and MethodsEndpoints of the analysis were: (a) treatment discontinuation of RPV/FTC/TDF for any reasons and (b) occurrence of virological failure (VF) defined as confirmed HIV‐RNA >50 cp/mL).ResultsOverall, 508 patients from five Italian reference centres were included: male gender 71.9%; median age 47 years (IQR 40–52); IVDU as HIV risk 17.7%; HCV‐AB positive 23.4%; CDC‐C stage 17.5%; median CD4 cells/µL at switch 655 (IQR: 487–843); median number of previous regimens three (IQR 2–7). In a median follow‐up of 196 days (IQR: 84–287), 31 patients discontinued RPV/FTC/TDF (virological failure n=5, hypersensitivity reaction n=2, GI‐toxicity n=6, liver toxicity n=1, CNS‐toxicity n=4, kidney toxicity n=5, patient's decision/lost in follow‐up n=10). Moreover, VF occurred in eight patients (five discontinued regimen, while three remained on RPV/FTC/TDF). At survival analysis, the probabilities of treatment discontinuation or VF were 5.5% and 1.2% at 6 months, 13.2% and 2.8% at 12 months, respectively (Figure 1). At adjusted Cox model, factors associated with discontinuation were: <200 CD4 cells/µL at switch (HR 5.3, 95% CI 1.1–25.9, p=0.038), number of pre‐switch regimens (for each extra regimen: HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01–1.10, p=0.024), male gender (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.9, p=0.032). Only the number of pre‐switch regimens was associated with VF (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06–1.21, p=0.001). Type of pre‐switch regimen was not associated with discontinuation or failure, but no VF was observed if switching from co‐formulated Efavirenz/FTC/TDF or from Raltegravir containing regimens. Switching to RPV/FTC/TDF led to significant improvement in fasting lipids levels: the decrease in cholesterol, LDL and triglycerides was observed switching from any regimen, but was more marked from boosted PI. In contrast, a moderate increase in transaminase (switching from all regimens except NNRTI‐containing) and creatinine (except from TDF‐containing regimens) were observed.ConclusionsOur data suggest that switching to RPV/FTC/TDF in virologically suppressed patients could be a good strategy with low risk of virological failure or treatment discontinuation; the switch is also associated with significant improvement in lipid profile.

IntroductionReduced bone mass density (BMD) is a frequent observation in HIV‐infected persons. Relationship between body mass index (BMI), weight, height and BMD was reported for many populations. In particular, BMI has been found to be inversely related to the risk of osteoporosis.MethodsThis is a cross‐sectional, monocentric study where all HIV‐infected patients referred to first DXA scan in clinical routine during 2010–2013 were included. Osteopenia and osteoporosis were defined by T‐ score <−1 and <−2.5, respectively. Patients were categorized according to WHO BMI classification: underweight <18.5 kg/m2; normal weight 18.5–24.9 kg/m2; over weight 25–29.9 kg/m2; obese >30 kg/m2. Statistical analysis was carried using logistic regression.ResultsA total of 918 patients were included: median age 49 years (IQR, 44–55); 59.4% male; 93% Caucasian. Median anthrometric characteristics were: 68 kg (IQR, 59–78); 1.7 m (IQR, 1.6–1.75); 23.5 kg/m2 (IQR, 21.4–26.2). Underweight was found in 5%, normal weight in 61%, overweight in 26% and obesity in 8% of patients. According to T‐scores, 110 (11.2%) patients were osteoporotic and 502 (54.7%) had osteopenia. In the femoral neck area, the prevalence of osteoporosis was slightly lower (5.7%) than lumbar spine site (9.2%). Agreements between sites of T‐scores for the diagnosis of osteoporosis were 26 and 172 and 346 for osteopenia and normal BMD values, respectively. T‐scores at femoral neck or lumbar spine positively correlated with BMI (p<0.001) (Figure 1). Among predictors of osteopenia/osteoporosis, univariable analysis showed: older age (p<0.0001); lower weight (p<0.0001); increasing height (p<0.002). Patients underweight had a higher risk of osteopenia (p=0.02) as well as of osteoporosis (p=0.003). Patients with BMI above normal had a reduced risk of low BMD (osteopenia p<0.0001; osteoporosis p<0.03). Controlling for calendar year, gender, ethnicity, and age, BMI was confirmed as risk factor if below normal (AdjOR of osteopenia 2.42 [95% CI 1.16–5.07] p=0.02; AdjOR of osteoporosis 3.22 [95% CI 1.60–6.49] p=0.001).ConclusionsOur findings indicate that almost 66% of HIV‐infected patients have subnormal bone mass. Further, as in other patient populations, in the HIV infection also low BMI is an important risk factor for osteopenia/osteoporosis. This finding highlights the compelling need for standardized screening actions, particularly in patients weighting below normal.

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.