Safety, pharmacodynamics, and antiviral activity of selgantolimod in viremic patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection.

Background & Aims: Novel finite therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) are needed, since lifelong treatment is usually required with current available oral antivirals. This phase II study (NCT03615066) evaluated the safety, pharmacodynamics, and antiviral activity of selgantolimod (a Toll-like receptor 8 agonist [TLR8]) with tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). Methods: Viremic patients with CHB not receiving treatment were stratified by HBeAg status and randomized 2:2:1 to TAF 25 mg/day with selgantolimod 3 mg orally once weekly (QW), selgantolimod 1.5 mg QW, or placebo. Combination therapy continued until week (W)24, followed by TAF monotherapy until W48; patients then discontinued TAF and were followed until W96 (treatment-free follow-up [TFFU] period). The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion with ≥1 log10 IU/ml HBsAg decline at W24. Results: Sixty-seven patients received study drug; 27 were followed during TFFU. Nausea, headache, vomiting, fatigue, and dizziness were the most common adverse events. Most adverse events were grade 1. Alanine aminotransferase flares were not observed up to W48. Four patients experienced alanine aminotransferase and hepatitis flares during TFFU; all had HBV DNA increases. Selgantolimod increased serum cytokines and chemokines and redistributed several circulating immune cell subsets. No patients achieved the primary efficacy endpoint. Mean HBsAg changes were -0.12, -0.16, and -0.12 log10 IU/ml in the selgantolimod 3 mg, selgantolimod 1.5 mg, and placebo groups, respectively, at W48; HBV DNA declined in all groups by ≥2 log10 IU/ml as early as W2, with all groups rebounding to baseline during TFFU. No HBsAg or HBeAg loss or seroconversion was observed throughout TFFU. Conclusions: Selgantolimod up to 3 mg was safe and well tolerated. Pharmacodynamics and antiviral activity in viremic patients support continued study of selgantolimod in combination CHB therapies. Impact and implications: Novel therapeutics for chronic HBV infection are needed to achieve a functional cure. In this study, we confirmed the safety and tolerability of selgantolimod (formerly GS-9688, a TLR8) when administered with tenofovir alafenamide over 24 weeks in viremic patients with chronic HBV infection. Overall, declines in HBsAg levels with selgantolimod treatment were modest; subgroup analysis indicated that patients with alanine aminotransferase levels greater than the upper limit of normal had significantly greater declines compared to those with normal alanine aminotransferase levels (-0.20 vs. -0.03 log10 IU/ml; p <0.001). These findings suggest a potential differential response to selgantolimod based on patients' baseline HBV-specific immune response, which should be considered in future investigations characterizing the underlying mechanisms of selgantolimod treatment and in HBV cure studies using similar immunomodulatory pathways. Clinical trial number: NCT03615066 be found at https://www.gileadclinicaltrials.com/transparency-policy/.

Capsid Inhibition with Lenacapavir in Multidrug-Resistant HIV-1 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection have limited treatment options. Lenacapavir is a first-in-class capsid inhibitor that showed substantial antiviral activity in a phase 1b study. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection in two cohorts, according to the change in the plasma HIV-1 RNA level between the screening and cohort-selection visits. In cohort 1, patients were first randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral lenacapavir or placebo in addition to their failing therapy for 14 days; during the maintenance period, starting on day 15, patients in the lenacapavir group received subcutaneous lenacapavir once every 6 months, and those in the placebo group received oral lenacapavir, followed by subcutaneous lenacapavir; both groups also received optimized background therapy. In cohort 2, all the patients received open-label oral lenacapavir with optimized background therapy on days 1 through 14; subcutaneous lenacapavir was then administered once every 6 months starting on day 15. The primary end point was the percentage of patients in cohort 1 who had a decrease of at least 0.5 log10 copies per milliliter in the viral load by day 15; a key secondary end point was a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 26. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were enrolled, with 36 in each cohort. In cohort 1, a decrease of at least 0.5 log10 copies per milliliter in the viral load by day 15 was observed in 21 of 24 patients (88%) in the lenacapavir group and in 2 of 12 patients (17%) in the placebo group (absolute difference, 71 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 35 to 90). At week 26, a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter was reported in 81% of the patients in cohort 1 and in 83% in cohort 2, with a least-squares mean increase in the CD4+ count of 75 and 104 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively. No serious adverse events related to lenacapavir were identified. In both cohorts, lenacapavir-related capsid substitutions that were associated with decreased susceptibility developed in 8 patients during the maintenance period (6 with M66I substitutions). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection, those who received lenacapavir had a greater reduction from baseline in viral load than those who received placebo. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; CAPELLA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04150068.).

Switching to Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in Black Americans With HIV-1: A Randomized Phase 3b, Multicenter, Open-Label Study.

BACKGROUND: With the highest rates of HIV/AIDS in the United States, Black Americans are still underrepresented in HIV medical research. SETTING: BRAAVE (NCT03631732) is a randomized, phase 3b, multicenter, open-label US study. METHODS: Adults identifying as Black or African American and virologically suppressed on 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus third agent were randomized (2:1) to switch to open-label bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) once daily or stay on baseline regimen (SBR) for 24 weeks, after which SBR had delayed switch to B/F/TAF. Resistance to non-NRTIs, protease inhibitors, and/or NRTIs was permitted; integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance was exclusionary. Primary endpoint was proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL at week 24 (snapshot algorithm; noninferiority margin of 6%). RESULTS: Of 558 screened, 495 were randomized/treated (B/F/TAF n = 330; SBR n = 165). Overall, 32% were ciswomen, 2% transwomen, and 10% had an M184V/I mutation. At week 24, 0.6% on B/F/TAF vs 1.8% on SBR had HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL (difference -1.2%; 95% confidence interval -4.8% to 0.9%), demonstrating noninferiority of B/F/TAF vs SBR. Proportions with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24 were 96% B/F/TAF and 95% SBR and remained high at week 48. No participant had treatment-emergent resistance to study drug. Treatments were well tolerated. Study drug-related adverse events, mostly grade 1, occurred in 10% of participants on B/F/TAF through week 48 and led to discontinuation in 9 participants through week 48. CONCLUSIONS: For Black Americans with HIV, switching to B/F/TAF was noninferior to continuing a variety of regimens, including those with pre-existing NRTI mutations.

Remdesivir Versus Standard-of-Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection: An Analysis of 28-Day Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been shown to shorten time to recovery and improve clinical outcomes in randomized trials. METHODS: This was the final day 28 comparative analysis of data from a phase 3, randomized, open-label study comparing 2 remdesivir regimens (5 vs 10 days, combined for this analysis [remdesivir cohort]) and a real-world retrospective longitudinal cohort study of patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (nonremdesivir cohort). Eligible patients, aged ≥18 years, had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score matching (up to 1:10 ratio) was used to ensure comparable populations. We assessed day 14 clinical recovery (determined using a 7-point ordinal scale) and day 28 all-cause mortality (coprimary endpoints). RESULTS: A total of 368 (remdesivir) and 1399 (nonremdesivir) patients were included in the matched analysis. The day 14 clinical recovery rate was significantly higher among the remdesivir versus the nonremdesivir cohort (65.2% vs 57.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.90; P = 0.002). The day 28 mortality rate was significantly lower in the remdesivir cohort versus the nonremdesivir cohort (12.0% vs 16.2%; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-.95; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was associated with significantly higher rates of day 14 clinical recovery, and lower day 28 mortality, compared with standard-of-care treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These data, taken together, support the use of remdesivir to improve clinical recovery and decrease mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Fixed-dose combination bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in adolescents and children with HIV: week 48 results of a single-arm, open-label, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bictegravir is a potent integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI) with a high genetic barrier to resistance. Bictegravir, coformulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, is recommended by key European and US HIV treatment guidelines as the preferred single-tablet regimen for adults and adolescents. The aim of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of switching to this regimen in virologically suppressed children and adolescents with HIV. METHODS: In this single-arm, open-label trial, we enrolled virologically suppressed children and adolescents (aged 6 to <18 years) with HIV at 22 hospital clinics in South Africa, Thailand, Uganda, and the USA. Eligible participants had a bodyweight of at least 25 kg, were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) on a stable ART regimen for at least 6 months before screening, had a CD4 count of at least 200 cells per µL, and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 by the Schwartz formula at screening. All participants received the fixed-dose regimen of coformulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg once daily. Pharmacokinetic analysis was used for dosing confirmation, and results compared with adult values. The primary outcomes were area under the curve at the end of the dosing interval (AUCtau) and concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Ctau) of bictegravir, and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and laboratory abnormalities at week 24. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. We report the 48-week results. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02881320. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2016 and Feb 16, 2018, we enrolled 102 participants. 100 participants received bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (cohort 1 [adolescents aged 12 to <18 years], n=50; cohort 2 [children aged 6 to <12 years], n=50). The mean bictegravir AUCtau was 89 100 ng × h/mL (coefficient of variation 31·0%) in adolescents (cohort 1) and 128 000 ng × h/mL (27·8%) in children (cohort 2). Compared with adults, bictegravir Ctau was 35% lower in adolescents and 11% lower in children. The 90% CIs of both parameters were within the predefined pharmacokinetic equivalence boundary and within overall range of exposures observed in adults and deemed to be safe and efficacious (geometric least-squares mean ratio [GLSM] 86·3% [90% CI 80·0-93·0] for AUCtau and 65·4% [58·3-73·3] for Ctau in adolescents; GLSM 125% [90% CI 117-134] for AUCtau and 88·9% [80·6-98·0] for Ctau for children). Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was well tolerated; most adverse events were grade 2 or less in severity and no study drug-related serious adverse events were reported. One participant discontinued study drug due to adverse events (grade 2 insomnia and anxiety). Virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) was maintained by all 100 participants at week 24 and by 98 (98%) of 100 at week 48; no participants had treatment-emergent resistance. INTERPRETATION: In adolescents and children with HIV, the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide single-tablet regimen was well tolerated and maintained virological suppression. Our data support the treatment of HIV in adolescents and children with this single-tablet regimen. At present, the single-tablet regimen is recommended as first-line treatment in the USA for adolescents and as an alternative regimen in children and has the potential to represent an important regimen in the paediatric population. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Long-term safety and efficacy of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In DISCOVER, a multinational, randomised controlled trial, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide compared with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate showed non-inferior efficacy for HIV prevention and improved bone mineral density and renal safety biomarkers at week 48. We report outcomes analysed after all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. METHODS: This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in Europe and North America. Adult cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV as determined by self-reported sexual behaviour or recent sexually transmitted infections, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (200/25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (200/300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection. Incidence of HIV-1 infection per 100 person-years was assessed when the last participant had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02842086. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 participants were randomly assigned to receive emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693), contributing 10 081 person-years of follow-up. At 96 weeks of follow-up, there were eight HIV infections in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·07-0·31]) and 15 in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·30 infections per 100 person-years [0·17-0·49]). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide maintained its non-inferiority to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention (IRR 0·54 [95% CI 0·23-1·26]). Approximately 78-82% of participants reported taking study medication more than 95% of the time across all study visits. Rates of sexually transmitted infections remained high and similar across groups (21 cases per 100 person-years for rectal gonorrhoea and 28 cases per 100 person-years for rectal chlamydia). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide continued to show superiority over emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all but one of the six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarkers. There was more weight gain among participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (median weight gain 1·7 kg vs 0·5 kg, p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide is safe and effective for longer-term pre-exposure prophylaxis in cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

The TLR7 agonist vesatolimod induced a modest delay in viral rebound in HIV controllers after cessation of antiretroviral therapy.

Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) agonists, in combination with other therapies, can induce sustained control of simian-human immunodeficiency virus (SHIV) or simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) in nonhuman primates. Here, we report the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1b clinical trial of an oral TLR7 agonist, vesatolimod, in HIV-1-infected controllers on antiretroviral therapy (ART). We randomized participants 2:1 to receive vesatolimod (n = 17) or placebo (n = 8) once every other week for a total of 10 doses while continuing on ART. ART was then interrupted, and the time to viral rebound was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Vesatolimod was associated with induction of immune cell activation, decreases in intact proviral DNA during ART, and a modest increase in time to rebound after ART was interrupted. The delayed viral rebound was predicted by the lower intact proviral DNA at the end of vesatolimod treatment (13 days after the final dose). Inferred pathway analysis suggested increased dendritic cell and natural killer cell cross-talk and an increase in cytotoxicity potential after vesatolimod dosing. Larger clinical studies will be necessary to assess the efficacy of vesatolimod-based combination therapies aimed at long-term control of HIV infection.

Evaluation of hepatitis C treatment-as-prevention within Australian prisons (SToP-C): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Limited empirical evidence exists for the effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment-as-prevention. The Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with hepatitis C (SToP-C) study aimed to assess the effect of HCV treatment-as-prevention in the prison setting. METHODS: SToP-C was a prospective study, including a before-and-after analysis, within a cohort of people incarcerated in two maximum-security prisons (male) and two medium-security prisons (one male, one female) in New South Wales, Australia. All prison inmates aged at least 18 years were eligible for enrolment. After HCV testing, participants were monitored for risk behaviours and HCV infection, among three sub-populations: uninfected (HCV antibody-negative); previously infected (HCV antibody-positive, HCV RNA-negative); and infected (HCV antibody and HCV RNA-positive). Uninfected participants were followed up every 3-6 months to detect HCV primary infection and previously infected participants were followed up every 3-6 months to detect re-infection. Participants with HCV infection were assessed for treatment, initially standard-of-care treatment (administered by prison health services) from 2014 to mid-2017, then direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment scale-up from mid-2017 onwards (12 weeks of sofosbuvir plus velpatasvir, administered through SToP-C). Participants were followed up until study closure in November, 2019. The primary study outcome was HCV incidence before and after DAA treatment scale-up among participants at risk of HCV primary infection or re-infection. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02064049. FINDINGS: Between Oct 30, 2014, and Sept 30, 2019, 3691 participants were enrolled in the SToP-C study. 719 (19%) participants had detectable HCV RNA, 2240 (61%) were at risk of primary HCV infection, and 725 (20%) were at risk of re-infection at baseline. DAA treatment was initiated in 349 (70%) of 499 eligible participants during the treatment scale-up period. The HCV incidence analysis comprised 1643 participants at risk of HCV infection or re-infection during longitudinal follow-up (median age 33 years [IQR 27-42]; 1350 [82%] male). 487 (30%) of 1643 participants reported injecting drugs in prison. HCV incidence decreased from 8·31 per 100 person-years in the pre-treatment scale-up period to 4·35 per 100 person-years in the post-treatment scale-up period (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·52 [95% CI 0·36-0·78]; p=0·0007). The incidence of primary infection decreased from 6·64 per 100 person-years in the pre-treatment scale-up period to 2·85 per 100 person-years in the post-treatment scale-up period (IRR 0·43 [95% CI 0·25-0·74]; p=0·0019), whereas the incidence of re-infection decreased from 12·36 per 100 person-years to 7·27 per 100 person-years (0·59 [0·35-1·00]; p=0·050). Among participants reporting injecting drugs during their current imprisonment, the incidence of primary infection decreased from 39·08 per 100 person-years in the pre-treatment scale-up period to 14·03 per 100 person-years in the post-treatment scale-up period (IRR 0·36 [95% CI 0·16-0·80]; p=0·0091), and the incidence of re-infection decreased from 15·26 per 100 person-years to 9·34 per 100 person-years (0·61 [0·34-1·09]; p=0·093). The adjusted analysis (adjusted for age, Indigenous Australian ethnicity, duration of stay in prison, previous imprisonment, injecting drug use status, and prison site) indicated a significant reduction in the risk of HCV infection between the pre-DAA treatment scale-up and post-DAA treatment scale-up periods (adjusted hazard ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·33-0·76]; p=0·0014). INTERPRETATION: DAA treatment scale-up was associated with reduced HCV incidence in prison, indicative of a beneficial effect of HCV treatment-as-prevention in this setting. These findings support broad DAA treatment scale-up within incarcerated populations. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Partnership Project Grant and Gilead Sciences.

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir in Children With Severe COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Remdesivir shortens time to recovery in adults with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its efficacy and safety in children are unknown. We describe outcomes in children with severe COVID-19 treated with remdesivir. METHODS: Seventy-seven hospitalized patients <18 years old with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection received remdesivir through a compassionate-use program between March 21 and April 22, 2020. The intended remdesivir treatment course was 10 days (200 mg on day 1 and 100 mg daily subsequently for children ≥40 kg and 5 mg/kg on day 1 and 2.5 mg/kg daily subsequently for children <40 kg, given intravenously). Clinical data through 28 days of follow-up were collected. RESULTS: Median age was 14 years (interquartile range 7-16, range <2 months to 17 years). Seventy-nine percent of patients had ≥1 comorbid condition. At baseline, 90% of children required supplemental oxygen and 51% required invasive ventilation. By day 28 of follow-up, 88% of patients had a decreased oxygen-support requirement, 83% recovered, and 73% were discharged. Among children requiring invasive ventilation at baseline, 90% were extubated, 80% recovered, and 67% were discharged. There were 4 deaths, of which 3 were attributed to COVID-19. Remdesivir was well tolerated, with a low incidence of serious adverse events (16%). Most adverse events were related to COVID-19 or comorbid conditions. Laboratory abnormalities, including elevations in transaminase levels, were common; 61% were grades 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS: Among 77 children treated with remdesivir for severe COVID-19, most recovered and the rate of serious adverse events was low.

Vesatolimod, a Toll-like Receptor 7 Agonist, Induces Immune Activation in Virally Suppressed Adults Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with vesatolimod, an investigational, oral, toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) agonist, leads to sustained viral remission in some non-human primates when combined with anti-envelope antibodies or therapeutic vaccines. We report results of a Phase Ib study evaluating safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of vesatolimod in adults living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1. METHODS: In this double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial, participants on antiretroviral therapy with screening plasma HIV-1 RNA levels <50 copies/mL were randomized (6:2) to receive 6-10 doses of vesatolimod (1-12 mg) or matching placebo orally every other week in sequential dose-escalation cohorts. The primary study objectives included establishing the safety and virologic effects of vesatolimod (change from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA). Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic/immunologic activity were assessed as secondary objectives. RESULTS: A total of 48 individuals were randomly assigned to vesatolimod (n = 36) or placebo (n = 12). Vesatolimod was generally well tolerated, with no study drug-related serious adverse events or adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation. There were no statistically significant changes from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA in the vesatolimod groups, compared to placebo.Vesatolimod plasma exposures increased dose proportionally; consistent responses in cytokines, interferon-stimulated gene expression, and lymphocyte activation were observed with increasing dose levels above 4 mg. Peak elevations 24 hours after receipt of a 6 mg dose were >3.9-fold higher for interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), interferon-inducible T-cell alpha chemoattractant (ITAC) when compared to baseline values. CONCLUSIONS: Vesatolimod was well tolerated at doses ranging from 1 to 12 mg. Immune stimulation was observed at doses above 4 mg, providing rationale for future combination trials in people living with HIV. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02858401.

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir in Pregnant Women With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is efficacious for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adults, but data in pregnant women are limited. We describe outcomes in the first 86 pregnant women with severe COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir. METHODS: The reported data span 21 March to 16 June 2020 for hospitalized pregnant women with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and room air oxygen saturation ≤94% whose clinicians requested remdesivir through the compassionate use program. The intended remdesivir treatment course was 10 days (200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg for days 2-10, given intravenously). RESULTS: Nineteen of 86 women delivered before their first dose and were reclassified as immediate "postpartum" (median postpartum day 1 [range, 0-3]). At baseline, 40% of pregnant women (median gestational age, 28 weeks) required invasive ventilation, in contrast to 95% of postpartum women (median gestational age at delivery 30 weeks). By day 28 of follow-up, the level of oxygen requirement decreased in 96% and 89% of pregnant and postpartum women, respectively. Among pregnant women, 93% of those on mechanical ventilation were extubated, 93% recovered, and 90% were discharged. Among postpartum women, 89% were extubated, 89% recovered, and 84% were discharged. Remdesivir was well tolerated, with a low incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) (16%). Most AEs were related to pregnancy and underlying disease; most laboratory abnormalities were grade 1 or 2. There was 1 maternal death attributed to underlying disease and no neonatal deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Among 86 pregnant and postpartum women with severe COVID-19 who received compassionate-use remdesivir, recovery rates were high, with a low rate of serious AEs.

Switching to Bictegravir, Emtricitabine, and Tenofovir Alafenamide in Virologically Suppressed Adults With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

BACKGROUND: Bictegravir (B)/emtricitabine (F)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is guideline-recommended treatment for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). We evaluated whether people receiving dolutegravir (DTG) plus F/TAF or F/TDF (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) with viral suppression can switch to B/F/TAF without compromising safety or efficacy, regardless of preexisting nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) resistance. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, active-controlled, noninferiority trial, we enrolled adults who were virologically suppressed for ≥6 months before screening (with documented/suspected NRTI resistance) or ≥3 months before screening (with no documented/suspected NRTI resistance) on DTG plus either F/TDF or F/TAF. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to switch to B/F/TAF or DTG + F/TAF once daily for 48 weeks, each with matching placebo. The primary endpoint was proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL at week 48 (snapshot algorithm); the prespecified noninferiority margin was 4%. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-seven adults were randomized; 565 were treated (284 B/F/TAF, 281 DTG + F/TAF). At week 48, B/F/TAF was noninferior to DTG + F/TAF, as 0.4% (1/284) vs 1.1% (3/281) had HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL (difference, -0.7% [95.001% confidence interval {CI}, -2.8% to 1.0%]). There were no significant differences in efficacy among participants with suspected or confirmed prior NRTI resistance (n = 138). No participant had treatment-emergent drug resistance. Median weight change from baseline at week 48 was +1.3 kg (B/F/TAF) vs +1.1 kg (DTG + F/TAF) (P = .46). Weight change differed by baseline NRTIs (+2.2 kg [F/TDF] and +0.6 kg [F/TAF], P < .001), with no differences between B/F/TAF and DTG + F/TAF. CONCLUSIONS: The single-tablet regimen B/F/TAF is a safe, effective option for people virologically suppressed on DTG plus either F/TDF or F/TAF, including in individuals with preexisting resistance to NRTIs. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03110380.

Remdesivir for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Versus a Cohort Receiving Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy of the antiviral agent, remdesivir, versus standard-of-care treatment in adults with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using data from a phase 3 remdesivir trial and a retrospective cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with standard of care. METHODS: GS-US-540-5773 is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing two courses of remdesivir (remdesivir-cohort). GS-US-540-5807 is an ongoing real-world, retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes in patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (non-remdesivir-cohort). Inclusion criteria were similar between studies: patients had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, were hospitalized, had oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, and had pulmonary infiltrates. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the treatment effect of remdesivir versus standard of care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with recovery on day 14, dichotomized from a 7-point clinical status ordinal scale. A key secondary endpoint was mortality. RESULTS: After the inverse probability of treatment weighting procedure, 312 and 818 patients were counted in the remdesivir- and non-remdesivir-cohorts, respectively. At day 14, 74.4% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had recovered versus 59.0% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.03: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-3.08, P < .001). At day 14, 7.6% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had died versus 12.5% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (aOR 0.38, 95% CI: .22-.68, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, by day 14, remdesivir was associated with significantly greater recovery and 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care treatment in patients with severe COVID-19. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

Effect of Remdesivir vs Standard Care on Clinical Status at 11 Days in Patients With Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Remdesivir demonstrated clinical benefit in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its effect in patients with moderate disease is unknown. Objective: To determine the efficacy of 5 or 10 days of remdesivir treatment compared with standard care on clinical status on day 11 after initiation of treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label trial of hospitalized patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and moderate COVID-19 pneumonia (pulmonary infiltrates and room-air oxygen saturation >94%) enrolled from March 15 through April 18, 2020, at 105 hospitals in the United States, Europe, and Asia. The date of final follow-up was May 20, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a 10-day course of remdesivir (n = 197), a 5-day course of remdesivir (n = 199), or standard care (n = 200). Remdesivir was dosed intravenously at 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg/d. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was clinical status on day 11 on a 7-point ordinal scale ranging from death (category 1) to discharged (category 7). Differences between remdesivir treatment groups and standard care were calculated using proportional odds models and expressed as odds ratios. An odds ratio greater than 1 indicates difference in clinical status distribution toward category 7 for the remdesivir group vs the standard care group. Results: Among 596 patients who were randomized, 584 began the study and received remdesivir or continued standard care (median age, 57 [interquartile range, 46-66] years; 227 [39%] women; 56% had cardiovascular disease, 42% hypertension, and 40% diabetes), and 533 (91%) completed the trial. Median length of treatment was 5 days for patients in the 5-day remdesivir group and 6 days for patients in the 10-day remdesivir group. On day 11, patients in the 5-day remdesivir group had statistically significantly higher odds of a better clinical status distribution than those receiving standard care (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.09-2.48; P = .02). The clinical status distribution on day 11 between the 10-day remdesivir and standard care groups was not significantly different (P = .18 by Wilcoxon rank sum test). By day 28, 9 patients had died: 2 (1%) in the 5-day remdesivir group, 3 (2%) in the 10-day remdesivir group, and 4 (2%) in the standard care group. Nausea (10% vs 3%), hypokalemia (6% vs 2%), and headache (5% vs 3%) were more frequent among remdesivir-treated patients compared with standard care. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with moderate COVID-19, those randomized to a 10-day course of remdesivir did not have a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care at 11 days after initiation of treatment. Patients randomized to a 5-day course of remdesivir had a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care, but the difference was of uncertain clinical importance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04292730.

Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (DISCOVER): primary results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide shows high antiviral efficacy and improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate when used for HIV treatment. Here, we report primary results from a blinded phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention. METHODS: This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in regions of Europe and North America, where there is a high incidence of HIV or prevalence of people living with HIV, or both. We enrolled adult cisgender men who have sex with men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV on the basis of their self-reported sexual behaviour in the past 12 weeks or their recent history (within 24 weeks of enrolment) of bacterial sexually transmitted infections. Participants with current or previous use of PrEP with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate were not excluded. We used a computer-generated random allocation sequence to randomly assign (1:1) participants to receive either emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). As such, all participants were given two tablets. The trial sponsor, investigators, participants, and the study staff who provided the study drugs, assessed the outcomes, and collected the data were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection, which was assessed when all participants had completed 48 weeks of follow-up and half of all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This full analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug and had at least one post-baseline HIV test. Non-inferiority of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was established if the upper bound of the 95·003% CI of the HIV incidence rate ratio (IRR) was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62. We prespecified six secondary bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints to evaluate using the safety analysis set. This analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02842086, and is no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 (92%) of 5857 participants were randomly assigned and received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693). At the time of the primary efficacy analysis (ie, when all participants had completed 48 weeks and 50% had completed 96 weeks) emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of the IRR, was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62 (IRR 0·47 [95% CI 0·19-1·15]). After 8756 person-years of follow-up, 22 participants were diagnosed with HIV, seven participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·06-0·33]), and 15 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (0·34 infections per 100 person-years [0·19-0·56]). Both regimens were well tolerated, with a low number of participants reporting adverse events that led to discontinuation of the study drug (36 [1%] of 2694 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group vs 49 [2%] of 2693 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was superior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints. INTERPRETATION: Daily emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide shows non-inferior efficacy to daily emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, and the number of adverse events for both regimens was low. Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide had more favourable effects on bone mineral density and biomarkers of renal safety than emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Fixed-dose combination bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir-containing regimens for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 144 results from two randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

BACKGROUND: In the primary week-48 analyses of two phase 3 studies, coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to a dolutegravir-containing regimen in treatment-naive people with HIV. We report week-144 efficacy and safety results from these studies. METHODS: We did two double-blind, active-controlled studies (now in open-label extension phase). Study 1 randomly assigned (1:1) HLA-B*5701-negative adults without hepatitis B virus co-infection to receive coformulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg, or coformulated dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg once daily. Study 2 randomly assigned (1:1) adults to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, or dolutegravir 50 mg given with coformulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg. We previously reported non-inferiority at the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week-144 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 144, by US Food and Drug Administration Snapshot algorithm, analysed in the same manner. These studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02607930 and NCT02607956. FINDINGS: 629 participants were randomly assigned and treated in study 1 (314 to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, and 315 to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine) and 645 in study 2 (327 to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, 325 to dolutegravir, emtricitabine, tenofovir alafenamide). At week 144, bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to both dolutegravir-containing regimens for efficacy. In study 1, 256 (82%) of 314 participants had plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 265 (84%) of 315 in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (difference -2·6%, 95% CI -8·5 to 3·4). In study 2, 262 (82%) of 320 participants had plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 273 (84%) of 325 in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group (difference -1·9%, -7·8 to 3·9). In both studies, no participant had treatment-emergent resistance to study drugs up to week 144. All treatment regimens were well tolerated with additional exposure. Adverse events that led to study drug discontinuation were reported for no participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group versus five (2%) of 315 in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (study 1), and six (2%) of 320 in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus six (2%) of 325 in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group (study 2). In study 1, statistically significant differences were observed in median changes from baseline in fasting total cholesterol (14 mg/dL vs 10 mg/dL; p=0·034), direct LDL (21 mg/dL vs 14 mg/dL; p=0·004), and total cholesterol to HDL ratio (-0·1 vs -0·3; p=0·007) at week 144; no differences were observed between groups in study 2. Weight gain was seen across all treatment groups in both studies, with no differences in median changes from baseline in weight at week 144 for either study. INTERPRETATION: These long-term data support the use of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people with HIV, with no emergent resistance. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin and sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir in patients with genotype 1 or 3 hepatitis C virus and severe renal impairment: a multicentre, phase 2b, non-randomised, open-label study.

BACKGROUND: There is a medical need for highly effective, safe, and well tolerated treatments for patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) with severe renal impairment. We investigated the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir with ribavirin or ledipasvir combined with sofosbuvir in a prospective study of patients with genotype 1 or 3 HCV infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease (creatinine clearance by Cockcroft-Gault ≤30 mL/min) who were not on dialysis. METHODS: This phase 2b, open-label, non-randomised, multicentre study in the USA and New Zealand investigated three sequentially enrolled cohorts of patients. Patients were recruited from ten hospitals and clinical research centres and were included if they had genotype 1 or 3 HCV infection, a creatinine clearance less than or equal to 30 mL/min, and were not on dialysis. In cohorts 1 and 2, patients received sofosbuvir (200 mg in cohort 1 and 400 mg in cohort 2) plus ribavirin 200 mg once per day for 24 weeks. In cohort 3, 18 patients received ledipasvir combined with sofosbuvir (90 mg ledipasvir and 400 mg sofosbuvir) once per day for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). Safety and pharmacokinetic data were also collected. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01958281, and is completed. FINDINGS: This study was done between Oct 7, 2013, and Oct 29, 2017. In the sofosbuvir plus ribavirin cohorts, 32 patients were screened, of whom 20 were enrolled and assessed for efficacy and safety (ten patients in each cohort). In the ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir cohort, 33 patients were screened, of whom 18 were enrolled and assessed for treatment efficacy and safety. Four (40%, 95% CI 12-74) of ten patients in cohort 1 and six (60%, 26-88) of ten patients in cohort 2 achieved SVR12. All 18 (100%, 82-100) patients in cohort 3 achieved SVR12. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. The most commonly reported adverse events overall were headache (eight [21%] of 38 patients), anaemia (seven [18%] of 38 patients), and fatigue (six [16%] of 38 patients). Eight patients had serious adverse events, none of which were treatment related. There were no treatment-related cardiac events or clinically significant changes in echocardiographic parameters or creatinine clearance by Cockcroft-Gault. INTERPRETATION: In this phase 2b study, ledipasvir combined with sofosbuvir for 12 weeks was safe and effective in patients with genotype 1 HCV infection and stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease who were not on dialysis. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air, and radiologic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous remdesivir for either 5 days or 10 days. All patients received 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg once daily on subsequent days. The primary end point was clinical status on day 14, assessed on a 7-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: In total, 397 patients underwent randomization and began treatment (200 patients for 5 days and 197 for 10 days). The median duration of treatment was 5 days (interquartile range, 5 to 5) in the 5-day group and 9 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10) in the 10-day group. At baseline, patients randomly assigned to the 10-day group had significantly worse clinical status than those assigned to the 5-day group (P = 0.02). By day 14, a clinical improvement of 2 points or more on the ordinal scale occurred in 64% of patients in the 5-day group and in 54% in the 10-day group. After adjustment for baseline clinical status, patients in the 10-day group had a distribution in clinical status at day 14 that was similar to that among patients in the 5-day group (P = 0.14). The most common adverse events were nausea (9% of patients), worsening respiratory failure (8%), elevated alanine aminotransferase level (7%), and constipation (7%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe Covid-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation, our trial did not show a significant difference between a 5-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir. With no placebo control, however, the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; GS-US-540-5773 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04292899.).

Ledipasvir-Sofosbuvir for 12 Weeks in Children 3 to <6 Years Old With Chronic Hepatitis C.

For children under 12 years of age who have chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, there are currently no approved treatments with direct-acting antiviral agents. We therefore evaluated the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir in HCV-infected children aged 3 to <6 years. In an open-label study, patients 3 to <6 years old chronically infected with HCV genotype 1 (n = 33) or 4 (n = 1) received weight-based doses of combined ledipasvir-sofosbuvir as granules (33.75 mg/150 mg for weights <17 kg or 45 mg/200 mg for weights ≥17 kg) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12). For the first 14 patients, intensive pharmacokinetic sampling was done on day 10 of treatment. All patients had been infected through perinatal transmission and were treatment naïve. No patients had known cirrhosis. Ten patients (29%) weighed <17 kg. SVR12 was achieved in 97% of patients (33 of 34); the patient who did not achieve SVR12 was 3 years old and discontinued treatment after 5 days because of an adverse event "abnormal drug taste." The most common adverse events were vomiting (24% of patients), cough (21%), and pyrexia (21%). No patients experienced a serious adverse event. Intensive pharmacokinetic analysis of 13 patients for whom data were evaluable confirmed that the doses selected were appropriate. Conclusion: Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir was well tolerated and highly effective in children 3 to <6 years old with chronic HCV infection.