Prolonged antiretroviral therapy is associated with fewer anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in HIV-positive MSM in a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk of anal cancer. We evaluate the risk factors for anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) (the precursor of anal cancer) in HIV-positive MSM. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study within a cohort, 320 HIV-positive MSM were screened by anal cytology followed by high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) in case of abnormal cytology. Risk factors for anal HSIL were analysed. RESULTS: Men were mostly middle-aged Caucasians with median CD4+ T lymphocytes of 638 cells/µL, 87% on combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) for a median of 5 years. 198 anal cytology samples were normal. In the 122 patients with abnormal cytology, HRA with biopsies were performed: 12% (n=15) normal, 36% (n=44) anal low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and 51% (n=63) anal HSIL. Comparing patients with or without anal HSIL (normal cytology or normal biopsy or LSIL), we found in multivariate analysis significantly fewer anal HSIL in patients with cART ≥24 months (OR 0.32 CI 95% 0.162 to 0.631, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged cART (≥24 months) is associated with fewer anal HSIL.

Occult HIV-1 drug resistance to thymidine analogues following failure of first-line tenofovir combined with a cytosine analogue and nevirapine or efavirenz in sub Saharan Africa: a retrospective multi-centre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: HIV-1 drug resistance to older thymidine analogue nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor drugs has been identified in sub-Saharan Africa in patients with virological failure of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing the modern nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and correlates of thymidine analogue mutations (TAM) in patients with virological failure of first-line tenofovir-containing ART. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed patients from 20 studies within the TenoRes collaboration who had locally defined viral failure on first-line therapy with tenofovir plus a cytosine analogue (lamivudine or emtricitabine) plus a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI; nevirapine or efavirenz) in sub-Saharan Africa. Baseline visits in these studies occurred between 2005 and 2013. To assess between-study and within-study associations, we used meta-regression and meta-analyses to compare patients with and without TAMs for the presence of resistance to tenofovir, cytosine analogue, or NNRTIs. FINDINGS: Of 712 individuals with failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens, 115 (16%) had at least one TAM. In crude comparisons, patients with TAMs had lower CD4 counts at treatment initiation than did patients without TAMs (60·5 cells per µL [IQR 21·0-128·0] in patients with TAMS vs 95·0 cells per µL [37·0-177·0] in patients without TAMs; p=0·007) and were more likely to have tenofovir resistance (93 [81%] of 115 patients with TAMs vs 352 [59%] of 597 patients without TAMs; p<0·0001), NNRTI resistance (107 [93%] vs 462 [77%]; p<0·0001), and cytosine analogue resistance (100 [87%] vs 378 [63%]; p=0·0002). We detected associations between TAMs and drug resistance mutations both between and within studies; the correlation between the study-level proportion of patients with tenofovir resistance and TAMs was 0·64 (p<0·0001), and the odds ratio for tenofovir resistance comparing patients with and without TAMs was 1·29 (1·13-1·47; p<0·0001) INTERPRETATION: TAMs are common in patients who have failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens in sub-Saharan Africa, and are associated with multidrug resistant HIV-1. Effective viral load monitoring and point-of-care resistance tests could help to mitigate the emergence and spread of such strains. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

Limited HIV-1 Reactivation in Resting CD4+ T cells from Aviremic Patients under Protease Inhibitors.

A latent viral reservoir that resides in resting CD4+ T cells represents a major barrier for eradication of HIV infection. We test here the impact of HIV protease inhibitor (PI) based combination anti-retroviral therapy (cART) over nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based cART on HIV-1 reactivation and integration in resting CD4+ T cells. This is a prospective cohort study of patients with chronic HIV-1 infection treated with conventional cART with an undetectable viremia. We performed a seven-year study of 47 patients with chronic HIV-infection treated with cART regimens and with undetectable plasma HIV-1 RNA levels for at least 1 year. Of these 47 patients treated with cART, 24 were treated with a PI-based regimen and 23 with a NNRTI-based regimen as their most recent treatment for more than one year. We evaluated the HIV-1 reservoir using reactivation assay and integrated HIV-1 DNA, respectively, in resting CD4+ T cells. Resting CD4+ T cells isolated from PI-treated patients compared to NNRTI-treated patients showed a limited HIV-1 reactivation upon T-cell stimulation (p = 0·024) and a lower level of HIV-1 integration (p = 0·024). Our study indicates that PI-based cART could be more efficient than NNRTI-based cART for limiting HIV-1 reactivation in aviremic chronically infected patients.

Tuning of AKT-pathway by Nef and its blockade by protease inhibitors results in limited recovery in latently HIV infected T-cell line.

Akt signaling plays a central role in many biological processes, which are key players in human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) pathogenesis. We found that Akt interacts with HIV-1 Nef protein. In primary T cells treated with exogenous Nef or acutely infected with Nef-expressing HIV-1 in vitro, Akt became phosphorylated on serine(473) and threonine(308). In vitro, Akt activation mediated by Nef in T-cells was blocked by HIV protease inhibitors (PI), but not by reverse transcriptase inhibitors (RTI). Ex vivo, we found that the Akt pathway is hyperactivated in peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) from cART naïve HIV-1-infected patients. PBLs isolated from PI-treated patients, but not from RTI-treated patients, exhibited decreased Akt activation, T-cell proliferation and IL-2 production. We found that PI but not RTI can block HIV-1 reactivation in latently infected J-Lat lymphoid cells stimulated with various stimuli. Using luciferase measurement, we further confirmed that Nef-mediated reactivation of HIV-1 from latency in 1G5 cells was blocked by PI parallel to decreased Akt activation. Our results indicate that PI-mediated blockade of Akt activation could impact the HIV-1 reservoir and support the need to further assess the therapeutic use of HIV-1 PI in order to curtail latently infected cells in HIV-1-infected patients.

Nonnucleoside Reverse-transcriptase Inhibitor- vs Ritonavir-boosted Protease Inhibitor-based Regimens for Initial Treatment of HIV Infection: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) cause faster virologic suppression, while ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) recover more CD4 cells. However, individual trials have not been powered to compare clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched databases to identify randomized trials that compared NNRTI- vs PI/r-based initial therapy. A metaanalysis calculated risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs), as appropriate. Primary outcome was death or progression to AIDS. Secondary outcomes were death, progression to AIDS, and treatment discontinuation. We calculated RR of virologic suppression and MD for an increase in CD4 cells at week 48. RESULTS: We included 29 trials with 9047 participants. Death or progression to AIDS occurred in 226 participants in the NNRTI arm and in 221 in the PI/r arm (RR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, .87-1.22; 12 trials; n = 3825), death in 205 participants in the NNRTI arm vs 198 in the PI/r arm (1.04; 0.86-1.25; 22 trials; n = 8311), and progression to AIDS in 140 participants in the NNRTI arm vs 144 in the PI/r arm (1.00; 0.80-1.25; 13 trials; n = 4740). Overall treatment discontinuation (1.12; 0.93-1.35; 24 trials; n = 8249) and from toxicity (1.21; 0.87-1.68; 21 trials; n = 6195) were comparable, but discontinuation due to virologic failure was more common with NNRTI (1.58; 0.91-2.74; 17 trials; n = 5371). At week 48, there was no difference between NNRTI and PI/r in virologic suppression (RR, 1.03; 0.98-1.09) or CD4(+) recovery (MD, -4.7 cells; -14.2 to 4.8). CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference in clinical and viro-immunologic outcomes between NNRTI- and PI/r-based therapy.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate given as fixed-dose combinations containing emtricitabine as backbones for treatment of HIV-1 infection in virologically suppressed adults: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is a standard-of-care nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone. However, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is associated with renal and bone toxic effects; the novel prodrug tenofovir alafenamide achieves 90% lower plasma tenofovir concentrations. We aimed to further assess safety and efficacy of fixed-dose combination emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide in patients switched from emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this controlled, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 study, we recruited virologically suppressed (HIV RNA <50 copies per mL) patients with HIV aged 18 years and older receiving regimens containing fixed-dose combination emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumartate from 78 sites in North America and Europe. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch to fixed-dose 200 mg emtricitabine with 10 mg or 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide or to continue 200 mg emtricitabine with 200 mg or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, while remaining on the same third agent for 96 weeks. Randomisation was done by a computer-generated allocation sequence and was stratified by the third agent (boosted protease inhibitor vs other agent). Investigators, patients, and study staff giving treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to treatment group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 as defined by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%. The primary efficacy endpoint was analysed with the per-protocol analysis set, whereas the safety analysis included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02121795. FINDINGS: We recruited patients between May 6, 2011, and Sept 11, 2014; 780 were screened and 668 were randomly assigned to receive either tenofovir alafenamide (n=333) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=330). Through week 48, virological success (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) was maintained in 314 (94%) of patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with 307 (93%) in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (difference 1·3%, 95% CI -2·5 to 5·1), showing non-inferiority of tenofovir alafenamide to tenofovir disproxil fumarate. Seven patients in the tenofovir alafenamide (2%) and three (1%) in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group discontinued due to adverse events. There were no cases of proximal renal tubulopathy in either group. INTERPRETATION: In patients switching from emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide, high rates of virological suppression were maintained. With its safety advantages, fixed-dose emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide has the potential to become an important NRTI backbone. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Brief Report: A Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Tenofovir Alafenamide Versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate, Each Coformulated With Elvitegravir, Cobicistat, and Emtricitabine for Initial HIV-1 Treatment: Week 96 Results.

In 2 double-blinded Phase 3 trials, 1733 antiretroviral-naive participants were randomized to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a tenofovir prodrug versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), each coformulated with elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine (E/C/F). At 96 weeks, 86.6% in the TAF arm and 85.2% in the TDF arm had HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL [difference 1.5%; (95% CI: -1.8% to 4.8%)]. With TAF, there are smaller declines in bone mineral density and more favorable changes in proteinuria, albuminuria, and tubular proteinuria, and no cases of proximal tubulopathy compared with 2 for TDF. These longer-term data support E/C/F/TAF as a safe, well-tolerated, and durable regimen for initial HIV-1 treatment.

High-risk human papillomavirus genotypes distribution in a cohort of HIV-positive women living in Europe: epidemiological implication for vaccination against human papillomavirus.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and 18 represents 70% of high-risk (HR) HPV found in cervical cancer. However HIV-positive women are more frequently infected by HRHPV other than HPV 16 or 18 (OHR). We aimed to analyse the HRHPV genotype distribution in a cohort of HIV-positive women and to estimate the potential protection offered by the different HPV vaccines. METHODS: HRHPV genotypes by PCR and cytology were assessed in cervical samples from 508 HIV-positive women prospectively followed in Brussels. RESULTS: Women characteristics were as follows: African origin (84%), median age 42 years, median CD4 T 555/µl, 89% under combined antiretroviral therapy and 73% with HIVRNA less than 20 copies/ml. HRHPV prevalence was 23% (116/508): 38% had abnormal cytology, 76% carried OHR without HPV 16 or 18 and 11% had concomitant infection by OHR and HPV 16 or 18. The most frequent HRHPV were HPV52 (19.8%), HPV18 (14.6%), HPV31/35/51/58 (12.1% each), HPV56 (9.9%) and HPV16 (9.5%). Less than 30% of women had their HRHPV genotypes included in the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccines against HRHPV 16 and 18; however, 79% had their HRHPV covered by the ninevalent vaccine against HRHPV 16/18/31/33/45/52/58. CONCLUSION: The HRHPV genotypes distribution found in these women living in Europe with a successfully treated HIV is similar to the one found in Central Africa with HRHPV other than HPV16 or 18 retrieved in 87%. In this population, the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccines could offer protection in only 30% of women; however this protection could be extended up to 80% with the ninevalent vaccine.

Sequential treatment with 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine and deacetylase inhibitors reactivates HIV-1.

Reactivation of HIV gene expression in latently infected cells together with an efficient cART has been proposed as an adjuvant therapy aimed at eliminating/decreasing the reservoir size. Results from HIV clinical trials using deacetylase inhibitors (HDACIs) question the efficiency of these latency-reversing agents (LRAs) used alone and underline the need to evaluate other LRAs in combination with HDACIs. Here, we evaluated the therapeutic potential of a demethylating agent (5-AzadC) in combination with clinically tolerable HDACIs in reactivating HIV-1 from latency first in vitro and next ex vivo. We showed that a sequential treatment with 5-AzadC and HDACIs was more effective than the corresponding simultaneous treatment both in vitro and ex vivo. Interestingly, only two of the sequential LRA combinatory treatments tested induced HIV-1 particle recovery in a higher manner than the drugs alone ex vivo and at concentrations lower than the human tolerable plasmatic concentrations. Taken together, our data reveal the benefit of using combinations of 5-AzadC with an HDACI and, for the first time, the importance of treatment time schedule for LRA combinations in order to reactivate HIV.

An In-Depth Comparison of Latency-Reversing Agent Combinations in Various In Vitro and Ex Vivo HIV-1 Latency Models Identified Bryostatin-1+JQ1 and Ingenol-B+JQ1 to Potently Reactivate Viral Gene Expression.

The persistence of latently infected cells in patients under combinatory antiretroviral therapy (cART) is a major hurdle to HIV-1 eradication. Strategies to purge these reservoirs are needed and activation of viral gene expression in latently infected cells is one promising strategy. Bromodomain and Extraterminal (BET) bromodomain inhibitors (BETi) are compounds able to reactivate latent proviruses in a positive transcription elongation factor b (P-TEFb)-dependent manner. In this study, we tested the reactivation potential of protein kinase C (PKC) agonists (prostratin, bryostatin-1 and ingenol-B), which are known to activate NF-κB signaling pathway as well as P-TEFb, used alone or in combination with P-TEFb-releasing agents (HMBA and BETi (JQ1, I-BET, I-BET151)). Using in vitro HIV-1 post-integration latency model cell lines of T-lymphoid and myeloid lineages, we demonstrated that PKC agonists and P-TEFb-releasing agents alone acted as potent latency-reversing agents (LRAs) and that their combinations led to synergistic activation of HIV-1 expression at the viral mRNA and protein levels. Mechanistically, combined treatments led to higher activations of P-TEFb and NF-κB than the corresponding individual drug treatments. Importantly, we observed in ex vivo cultures of CD8+-depleted PBMCs from 35 cART-treated HIV-1+ aviremic patients that the percentage of reactivated cultures following combinatory bryostatin-1+JQ1 treatment was identical to the percentage observed with anti-CD3+anti-CD28 antibodies positive control stimulation. Remarkably, in ex vivo cultures of resting CD4+ T cells isolated from 15 HIV-1+ cART-treated aviremic patients, the combinations bryostatin-1+JQ1 and ingenol-B+JQ1 released infectious viruses to levels similar to that obtained with the positive control stimulation. The potent effects of these two combination treatments were already detected 24 hours post-stimulation. These results constitute the first demonstration of LRA combinations exhibiting such a potent effect and represent a proof-of-concept for the co-administration of two different types of LRAs as a potential strategy to reduce the size of the latent HIV-1 reservoirs.

The challenge: streamlining HIV treatment and care while improving outcomes.

ART coverage among HIV-positive population varies, depending on the countries, between 10% (e.g. Indonesia) and 65% (Botswana). Death rates and new HIV infections have been linked to ART coverage. Therefore, streamlining tasks and roles to expand treatment and care and to provide quality and equitable health is an ongoing concern globally. One concept that has been applied to improve the delivery of HIV services is that of task shifting. Defined as the systematic delegation of tasks from doctors to cadre with less training such as nurses or lay workers, task shifting has been used as an effective strategy to address the current healthcare worker shortage in many African countries. A body of literature supports the use of task shifting as a successful approach in delivering healthcare services including HIV testing, counselling and ART treatment. In addition, in a time of economic burden and scare resources, task shifting may also help to relieve the situation. This concern is highlighted in recommendation of WHO to strengthen and expand human capacity among healthcare workers. The major issues that are raised are: How can task shifting be implemented in a way that is sustainable? How can clinical care services be organized to maximize the potential of the task-shifting approach while ensuring safety, efficiency and effectiveness? What preconditions must be met, what are the country-specific factors that will guide decision-making in the implementation of task shifting? In addition, task shifting should be implemented alongside other efforts to increase the numbers of skilled health workers. Quality assurances mechanisms should provide the necessary checks balances to protect both service users and health workers.

Effects of switching to protease inhibitor monotherapy on nucleoside analogue-related adverse events.

Switching from triple combination treatment to protease inhibitor monotherapy may increase the risk of elevations in HIV RNA, and is not recommended in most international treatment guidelines. However, the use of protease inhibitor monotherapy could prevent or reverse adverse events related to long-term use of nucleoside analogues, such as lipoatrophy, renal adverse events, osteopenia, and anemia. A detailed MEDLINE search was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials of triple-combination treatment versus protease inhibitor monotherapy with detailed analyses of safety. Summary results from analysis of changes in body composition, changes in lipids, renal adverse events, and anemia were evaluated for patients taking either protease inhibitor monotherapy or triple therapy. In six trials with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry data available, the percentage of patients with lipoatrophy was significantly lower in the protease inhibitor monotherapy arms than the triple therapy arms (p = 0.03). In these trials there was also no significant difference in the risk of lipohypertrophy between protease inhibitor monotherapy and triple therapy arms. In one trial there was a higher risk of renal adverse events for patients taking tenofovir in the triple therapy arm. In two trials there were rises in total cholesterol when patients stopped taking tenofovir in the protease inhibitor monotherapy arms. In conclusion, there is a mixed pattern of changes in nucleoside analogue-related adverse events after switching from triple therapy to protease inhibitor therapy. The potential for safety benefits of stopping nucleoside analogues needs to be set against a higher risk of HIV RNA elevations during protease inhibitor monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of maraviroc vs. efavirenz in treatment-naive patients with HIV-1: 5-year findings.

OBJECTIVE: Maraviroc, a chemokine co-receptor type 5 (CCR5) antagonist, has demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to efavirenz, each in combination with zidovudine/lamivudine, over 96 weeks in the Maraviroc vs. Efavirenz Regimens as Initial Therapy (MERIT) study. Here we report 5-year findings. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase IIb/III study with an open-label extension phase. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 infection (Trofile) received maraviroc 300 mg twice daily or efavirenz 600 mg once daily, and zidovudine/lamivudine 300 mg/150 mg twice daily. After the last patient's week 96 visit, the study was unblinded and patients could enter a nominal 3-year open-label phase. Endpoints at the 5-year nominal visit (week 240) included proportion of patients (CCR5 tropism re-confirmed by enhanced sensitivity Trofile) with viral load (plasma HIV-1 RNA) below 50 and 400 copies/ml, and change from baseline in CD4(+) cell count, as well as safety. RESULTS: The proportion of patients maintaining viral load below 50 copies/ml was similar between treatment arms throughout the study and at week 240 (maraviroc 50.8% vs. efavirenz 45.9%). Maraviroc-treated patients had a greater increase from baseline in mean CD4(+) cell count than efavirenz-treated patients at week 240 (293 vs. 271 cells/µl, respectively). Fewer patients on maraviroc vs. efavirenz experienced treatment-related adverse events (68.9 vs. 81.7%) and discontinued as a result of any adverse event (10.6 vs. 21.3%). CONCLUSION: Maraviroc maintained similar long-term antiviral efficacy to efavirenz over 5 years in treatment-naive patients with CCR5-tropic HIV-1. Maraviroc was generally well tolerated with no unexpected safety findings or evidence of long-term safety concerns.

First-line antiretroviral therapy with nevirapine versus lopinavir-ritonavir based regimens in a resource-limited setting.

OBJECTIVE: To compare WHO first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) with nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI)-based regimen with a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) regimen in a resource-limited setting regarding treatment outcome and emergence of drug resistance mutations (DRMs). METHODS: Treatment-naive adults were randomized to nevirapine (NVP) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) regimens each in combination with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) or zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine (3TC). Primary endpoint was the incidence of therapeutical (clinical and/or virologic) failure at week 48 with follow-up till week 96. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-five patients (120 men; 305 women) received at least one dose of the study drug. mITT analysis showed no difference in proportion of therapeutical failure between treatment arms [67/209 (32%) in NVP vs. 63/216 (29%) LPV/r at week 48 (P = 0.53); 88/209 (42%) in NVP vs. 83/216 (38%) in LPV/r at week 96 (P = 0.49)]. Per-protocol analysis demonstrated significantly more virologic failure with NVP than with LPV/r regimens [at week 48: 19/167 (11%) vs. 7/166 (4%), P = 0.014; at week 96: 27/158 (17%) vs. 13/159 (8%), P =  0.019)]. Drug resistance mutations to NNRTI were detected in 19 out of 22 (86.3%) and dual-class resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) and NNRTI in 15 out of 27 (68.2%) of NVP failing patients. K65R mutation was present in seven out of 14 patients failing NVP-TDF/FTC regimen. No major protease inhibitor-DRM was detected among LPV/r failing patients. Discontinuation for adverse events was similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In resource-limited settings, first-line NNRTI-NRTI regimen as compared with bPI-based regimen provides similar outcome but is associated with a significantly higher number of virologic failure and resistance mutations in both classes that jeopardize future options for second-line therapy.

Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: Dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572), a once-daily, unboosted integrase inhibitor, was recently approved in the United States for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in combination with other antiretroviral agents. Dolutegravir, in combination with abacavir-lamivudine, may provide a simplified regimen. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study involving adult participants who had not received previous therapy for HIV-1 infection and who had an HIV-1 RNA level of 1000 copies per milliliter or more. Participants were randomly assigned to dolutegravir at a dose of 50 mg plus abacavir-lamivudine once daily (DTG-ABC-3TC group) or combination therapy with efavirenz-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)-emtricitabine once daily (EFV-TDF-FTC group). The primary end point was the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 48. Secondary end points included the time to viral suppression, the change from baseline in CD4+ T-cell count, safety, and viral resistance. RESULTS: A total of 833 participants received at least one dose of study drug. At week 48, the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter was significantly higher in the DTG-ABC-3TC group than in the EFV-TDF-FTC group (88% vs. 81%, P=0.003), thus meeting the criterion for superiority. The DTG-ABC-3TC group had a shorter median time to viral suppression than did the EFV-TDF-FTC group (28 vs. 84 days, P<0.001), as well as greater increases in CD4+ T-cell count (267 vs. 208 per cubic millimeter, P<0.001). The proportion of participants who discontinued therapy owing to adverse events was lower in the DTG-ABC-3TC group than in the EFV-TDF-FTC group (2% vs. 10%); rash and neuropsychiatric events (including abnormal dreams, anxiety, dizziness, and somnolence) were significantly more common in the EFV-TDF-FTC group, whereas insomnia was reported more frequently in the DTG-ABC-3TC group. No participants in the DTG-ABC-3TC group had detectable antiviral resistance; one tenofovir DF-associated mutation and four efavirenz-associated mutations were detected in participants with virologic failure in the EFV-TDF-FTC group. CONCLUSIONS: Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine had a better safety profile and was more effective through 48 weeks than the regimen with efavirenz-tenofovir DF-emtricitabine. (Funded by ViiV Healthcare; SINGLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01263015 .).

Resistance at virological failure using boosted protease inhibitors versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as first-line antiretroviral therapy--implications for sustained efficacy of ART in resource-limited settings.

BACKGROUND: Increases in the prevalence of resistance to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) have been observed among previously untreated individuals in all areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to examine whether first-line use of 2 NRTIs plus a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) could protect against emergence of NRTI resistance mutations, compared to the use of 2 NRTIs plus 1 NNRTI. METHODS: We carried out a weighted meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing bPI- with NNRTI-based first-line antiretroviral therapy regimens using random effects modeling. RESULTS: In intention to treat analyses, there was no difference in the risk of viral failure at week 48 between NNRTI and bPI (P = .19). At week 48, the overall difference between NNRTI- and PI-based regimens in selection of any major NRTI resistance mutation (crude unweighted prevalence 3.3% vs 1.6%) was 1.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4-3.0; P = .00927). There was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of K65R when comparing NNRTI (1.3%) with PI (0.67%); absolute weighted difference 1.0% (95% CI, .3-1.7; P = .00447). There was also a significant difference in prevalence of M184V/I between NNRTI and PI (crude unweighted prevalence 3.2% vs 1.4%); difference 1.6% (95% CI 0.1-3.1; P = .0368). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the equivalent efficacy and more favorable resistance implications of PI- versus NNRTI-based first line therapy, widespread use of PI-based first-line therapy is not warranted at this time, due to resource limitations and predicted increased risk of resistance-related failure of NNRTI/NRTI second-line regimens. PI-based first-line therapy could be reconsidered when antiretroviral agents from other classes become available for second-line regimens in resource-limited settings.

Sustained viral suppression and higher CD4+ T-cell count reduces the risk of persistent cervical high-risk human papillomavirus infection in HIV-positive women.

BACKGROUND: Studies analyzing the impact of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) on cervical infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) have generated conflicting results. We assessed the long-term impact of cART on persistent cervical HR-HPV infection in a very large cohort of 652 women who underwent follow-up of HIV infection for a median duration of 104 months. METHODS: Prospective cohort of HIV-infected women undergoing HIV infection follow-up who had HR-HPV screening and cytology by Papanicolaou smear performed yearly between 2002 and 2011. RESULTS: At baseline, the median age was 38 years, the race/ethnic origin was sub-Sarahan Africa for 84%, the median CD4(+) T-cell count was 426 cells/µL, 79% were receiving cART, and the HR-HPV prevalence was 43%. The median interval of having had an HIV load of <50 copies/mL was 40.6 months at the time of a HR-HPV-negative test result, compared with 17 months at the time of a HR-HPV-positive test result (P < .0001, by univariate analysis). The median interval of having had a CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL was 18.4 months at the time of a HR-HPV-negative test result, compared with 4.45 months at the time of a HR-HPV-positive test result (P < .0001). In multivariate analysis, having had an HIV load of <50 copies/mL for >40 months (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], .76-.86; P < .0001) and having had a CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL for >18 months (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, .82-.94; P = .0002) were associated with a significantly decreased risk of HR-HPV infection. CONCLUSION: Sustained HIV suppression for >40 months and a sustained CD4(+) T-cell count of >500 cells/µL for >18 months are independently and significantly associated with a decreased risk of persistent cervical HR-HPV infection.

High-risk human papillomavirus infection in HIV-positive African women living in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HRHPV) induces cervical cancer and is present in 14% of women in Europe. We assessed the prevalence and incidence of cervical HRHPV in a cohort of HIV-positive women living in Belgium. METHODS: Prospective observational program of screening and follow up of HRHPV cervical infection performed by Hybrid Capture in 825 HIV-positive women between 2002 and 2011. Women without normal cervix at baseline were excluded. RESULTS: The final analysis included 652 women: median age 38 years, African origin (81%), median HIV follow-up (66 months), median CD4 count (426 cells/µL) and 79% on antiretroviral therapy (cART). At baseline, HRHPV prevalence was 43% and decreased significantly as both age and CD4 cell count increased: highest prevalence (100%) in women <30 years and <200 CD4/µL and lowest (19%) in women >40 years and >500 CD4/µL (p<0.0001, multivariate analysis). The relative risk (RR) to carry HRHPV at baseline decreases proportionally by 11% for each 5 years-age increase and by 11% for each 100 CD4 cells/µL rise (RR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.85-0.93; p<0.0001, Poisson regression for both). During follow-up, incidence rate of HRHPV was 13.4 per 100 women-years. CONCLUSION: We found a high HRHPV prevalence of 43% and an incidence rate of 13 per 100 women-years in this cohort of HIV-positive women living in Europe and on cART. Women under 40 years-age had the highest prevalence even with CD4 count >350 cells/µL. The magnitude of HRHPV epidemiology should prompt to evaluate the clinical efficacy of vaccines against HPV in HIV-infected women.

Feasibility and effectiveness of indicator condition-guided testing for HIV: results from HIDES I (HIV indicator diseases across Europe study).

Improved methods for targeting HIV testing among patients most likely to be infected are required; HIDES I aimed to define the methodology of a European wide study of HIV prevalence in individuals presenting with one of eight indicator conditions/diseases (ID); sexually transmitted infection, lymphoma, cervical or anal cancer/dysplasia, herpes zoster, hepatitis B/C, mononucleosis-like illness, unexplained leukocytopenia/thrombocytopenia and seborrheic dermatitis/exanthema, and to identify those with an HIV prevalence of >0.1%, a level determined to be cost effective. A staff questionnaire was performed. From October 2009- February 2011, individuals, not known to be HIV positive, presenting with one of the ID were offered an HIV test; additional information was collected on previous HIV testing behaviour and recent medical history. A total of 3588 individuals from 16 centres were included. Sixty-six tested positive for HIV, giving an HIV prevalence of 1.8% [95% CI: 1.42-2.34]; all eight ID exceeded 0.1% prevalence. Of those testing HIV positive, 83% were male, 58% identified as MSM and 9% were injecting drug users. Twenty percent reported previously having potentially HIV-related symptoms and 52% had previously tested HIV negative (median time since last test: 1.58 years); which together with the median CD4 count at diagnosis (400 cell/uL) adds weight to this strategy being effective in diagnosing HIV at an earlier stage. A positive test was more likely for non-white individuals, MSM, injecting drug users and those testing in non-Northern regions. HIDES I describes an effective strategy to detect undiagnosed HIV infection. All eight ID fulfilled the >0.1% criterion for cost effectiveness. All individuals presenting to any health care setting with one of these ID should be strongly recommended an HIV test. A strategy is being developed in collaboration with ECDC and WHO Europe to guide the implementation of this novel public health initiative across Europe.