Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
HIV Med ; 2022 Mar 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1764940

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS) Guidelines were revised in 2021 for the 17th time with updates on all aspects of HIV care. KEY POINTS OF THE GUIDELINES UPDATE: Version 11.0 of the Guidelines recommend six first-line treatment options for antiretroviral treatment (ART)-naïve adults: tenofovir-based backbone plus an unboosted integrase inhibitor or plus doravirine; abacavir/lamivudine plus dolutegravir; or dual therapy with lamivudine or emtricitabine plus dolutegravir. Recommendations on preferred and alternative first-line combinations from birth to adolescence were included in the new paediatric section made with Penta. Long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine was included as a switch option and, along with fostemsavir, was added to all drug-drug interaction (DDI) tables. Four new DDI tables for anti-tuberculosis drugs, anxiolytics, hormone replacement therapy and COVID-19 therapies were introduced, as well as guidance on screening and management of anxiety disorders, transgender health, sexual health for women and menopause. The sections on frailty, obesity and cancer were expanded, and recommendations for the management of people with diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk were revised extensively. Treatment of recently acquired hepatitis C is recommended with ongoing risk behaviour to reduce transmission. Bulevirtide was included as a treatment option for the hepatitis Delta virus. Drug-resistant tuberculosis guidance was adjusted in accordance with the 2020 World Health Organization recommendations. Finally, there is new guidance on COVID-19 management with a focus on continuance of HIV care. CONCLUSIONS: In 2021, the EACS Guidelines were updated extensively and broadened to include new sections. The recommendations are available as a free app, in interactive web format and as an online pdf.

2.
JCI Insight ; 7(7)2022 04 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1702851

ABSTRACT

Duration of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection in people living with HIV (PWH) following vaccination is unclear. In a substudy of the phase II/III the COV002 trial (NCT04400838), 54 HIV+ male participants on antiretroviral therapy (undetectable viral loads, CD4+ T cells > 350 cells/µL) received 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) 4-6 weeks apart and were followed for 6 months. Responses to vaccination were determined by serology (IgG ELISA and Meso Scale Discovery [MSD]), neutralization, ACE-2 inhibition, IFN-γ ELISpot, activation-induced marker (AIM) assay and T cell proliferation. We show that, 6 months after vaccination, the majority of measurable immune responses were greater than prevaccination baseline but with evidence of a decline in both humoral and cell-mediated immunity. There was, however, no significant difference compared with a cohort of HIV-uninfected individuals vaccinated with the same regimen. Responses to the variants of concern were detectable, although they were lower than WT. Preexisting cross-reactive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike were associated with greater postvaccine immunity and correlated with prior exposure to beta coronaviruses. These data support the ongoing policy to vaccinate PWH against SARS-CoV-2, and they underpin the need for long-term monitoring of responses after vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , COVID-19/prevention & control , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
3.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-319221

ABSTRACT

Summary: Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is a novel technology formulated as a low dose vaccine against COVID-19.Methods: A phase I first-in-human dose-ranging trial of a saRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and participating centres in London, UK. Participants received two intramuscular (IM) injections of LNP-nCoVsaRNA at six different dose levels, 0·1-10·0mg, given four weeks apart. An open-label dose escalation was followed by a dose evaluation. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week from enrolment, with follow-up at regular intervals (1-8 weeks). The binding and neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, immunoblot, SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation and wild type neutralisation assays.Findings: 192 healthy individuals with no history or serological evidence of COVID-19, aged 18-45 years were enrolled. The vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to vaccination. Seroconversion at week six whether measured by ELISA or immunoblot was related to dose (both p<0·001), ranging from 8% to 61% in ELISA and 46% to 87% in the immunoblot assay.Concurrent anti-S IgG ranged from GM concentration (95% CI) 74 (45-119) at 0·1mg to 1023 (468-2236) ng/ml at 5·0mg (p<0·001) and was not higher at 10·0mg. Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 by participant sera was measurable in 15-48% depending on dose level received.Interpretation: Encapsulated saRNA is safe for clinical development and is immunogenic at low dose levels. Modifications to optimise humoral responses are required to realise its potential as an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.Trial Registration: (ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20)Funding Statement: Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076 and MC_UU_12023/23), National Institute for Health Research, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust.Declaration of Interests: P.F.M. and R.J.S. are co-inventors on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 saRNA vaccine. All other authors have nothing to declare. Ethics Approval Statement: This study was approved in the UK by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and the North East - York Research Ethics Committee (reference 20/SC/0145).

4.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-310655

ABSTRACT

Background: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine is immunogenic and protects against COVID-19. However, data on vaccine immunogenicity are needed for the 40 million people living with HIV (PWH), who may have less functional immunity and more associated co-morbidities than the general population. Methods: Between the 5th and 24th November 2020, 54 adults with HIV, aged 18-55 years, were enrolled into a single arm open label vaccination study within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 COV002 trial. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses (5 × 1010 vp) was given 4-6 weeks apart. All participants were on antiretroviral therapy (ART) with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads and CD4+ T cell counts >350 cells/µl at enrolment. Data were captured on adverse events. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with a HIV uninfected group from the main COV002 study.Findings: 54 participants with HIV (median age 42.5 years (IQR 37.2-49.8)) received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4+ T cell count at enrolment was 694 cells/µl (IQR 562-864). Results are reported for 56 days of follow-up. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (49%), fatigue (47%), headache (47%), malaise (34%), chills (23%), and muscle or (36%) joint pain (9%), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. There were no serious adverse events. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at Day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units, IQR 704-2728) and were sustained out to Day 56. There was no correlation with CD4+ T cell count or age and the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at Day 56 (P>0.05 for both). ELISpot and T cell proliferative responses peaked between Day 14 and 28 after prime and were sustained through to Day 56. When compared to participants without HIV there was no statistical difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (P>0.05 for all analyses).Interpretation: In this study of PWH, vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was well tolerated and there was no difference in humoral and cell-mediated immune responses compared to an adult cohort without HIV who received the same vaccination regime. Trial Registration: Trial Registration number is NCT04400838. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Declaration of Interest: Oxford University has entered into a partnership with AstraZeneca for further development of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222). AstraZeneca reviewed the data from the study and the final manuscript before 474 submission, but the authors retained editorial control. SCG is cofounder of Vaccitech (a collaborator in the early development of this vaccine candidate) and named as an inventor on a patent covering use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/000467) and a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. TL is named as an inventor on a patent application covering this SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and was consultant to Vaccitech. PMF is a consultant to Vaccitech. AJP is Chair of the UK Department of Health and Social Care’s JCVI, but does not participate in policy advice on coronavirus vaccines, and is a member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE). AVSH is a cofounder of and consultant to Vaccitech and is named as an inventor on a patent covering design and use of ChAdOx1-vectored vaccines (PCT/GB2012/0004 7).Ethical Approval: Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, and the trial was done in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. This study was approved in the UK by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (reference 21584/0424/001-0001) and the South Central Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference 20/SC/0145). Vaccine use was authorised by Genetically Modified Organisms Safety Committees at each participating site.

5.
EClinicalMedicine ; 44: 101262, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1620636

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) encapsulated self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) is a novel technology formulated as a low dose vaccine against COVID-19. METHODS: A phase I first-in-human dose-ranging trial of a saRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate LNP-nCoVsaRNA, was conducted at Imperial Clinical Research Facility, and participating centres in London, UK, between 19th June to 28th October 2020. Participants received two intramuscular (IM) injections of LNP-nCoVsaRNA at six different dose levels, 0.1-10.0µg, given four weeks apart. An open-label dose escalation was followed by a dose evaluation. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for one week from enrolment, with follow-up at regular intervals (1-8 weeks). The binding and neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody raised in participant sera was measured by means of an anti-Spike (S) IgG ELISA, immunoblot, SARS-CoV-2 pseudoneutralisation and wild type neutralisation assays. (The trial is registered: ISRCTN17072692, EudraCT 2020-001646-20). FINDINGS: 192 healthy individuals with no history or serological evidence of COVID-19, aged 18-45 years were enrolled. The vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to vaccination. Seroconversion at week six whether measured by ELISA or immunoblot was related to dose (both p<0.001), ranging from 8% (3/39; 0.1µg) to 61% (14/23; 10.0µg) in ELISA and 46% (18/39; 0.3µg) to 87% (20/23; 5.0µg and 10.0µg) in a post-hoc immunoblot assay. Geometric mean (GM) anti-S IgG concentrations ranged from 74 (95% CI, 45-119) at 0.1µg to 1023 (468-2236) ng/mL at 5.0µg (p<0.001) and was not higher at 10.0µg. Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 by participant sera was measurable in 15% (6/39; 0.1µg) to 48% (11/23; 5.0µg) depending on dose level received. INTERPRETATION: Encapsulated saRNA is safe for clinical development, is immunogenic at low dose levels but failed to induce 100% seroconversion. Modifications to optimise humoral responses are required to realise its potential as an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: This study was co-funded by grants and gifts from the Medical Research Council UKRI (MC_PC_19076), and the National Institute Health Research/Vaccine Task Force, Partners of Citadel and Citadel Securities, Sir Joseph Hotung Charitable Settlement, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Pierre Andurand, Restore the Earth.

6.
AIDS ; 34(12): 1795-1800, 2020 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-860218

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine comorbidity indices in people with HIV (PWH) and lifestyle-similar HIV-negative controls. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the Pharmacokinetic and clinical Observations in PeoPle over fiftY cohort study in the United Kingdom and Ireland. METHODS: The Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI), Charlson Comorbidity Index and the Comorbidity Burden Index were compared between older PWH and HIV-negative controls using the Mann-Whitney U test; the magnitude of the difference between groups was quantified using the r effect size. RESULTS: The 699 PWH and 304 HIV-negative controls were predominantly male (87.5% vs. 64.0%), white (86.3% vs. 90.0%) and had median ages of 57 and 58 years, respectively. Among PWH, the median (interquartile range) CD4 T-cell count was 624 (475, 811) cells/µl; 98.7% were on antiretroviral therapy. The median (interquartile range) ECI was 0 (0, 8) and 0 (-3, 1), Charlson Comorbidity Index was 2 (1, 5) and 1 (0, 1) and Comorbidity Burden Index 8.6 (2.2, 16.8) and 5.9 (0.6, 10.8), respectively. While all three indices were significantly higher in PWH than in controls (P < 0.001 for each), the magnitude of the differences between the two groups were small to medium, with effect sizes (95% confidence interval) of 0.21 (0.16, 0.27), 0.38 (0.32, 0.42) and 0.18 (0.11, 0.23), respectively. CONCLUSION: These three comorbidity indices are higher in PWH compared with HIV-negative controls, although the magnitude of differences between groups were small. Differences in the ECI, reportedly associated with poorer coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes, were driven by more individuals with HIV being within the higher end of the range.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Severity of Illness Index , United Kingdom/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL