Search

Analytical treatment interruption (ATI) is widely acknowledged as an essential component of studies to advance our understanding of HIV cure, but discussion has largely been focused on adults. To address this gap, we reviewed evidence related to the safety and utility of ATI in paediatric populations. Three randomised ATI trials using CD4 T-cell and clinical criteria to guide restart of antiretroviral therapy (ART) have been conducted. These trials found low risks associated with ATI in children, including reassuring findings pertaining to neurocognitive outcomes. Similar to adults treated during acute infection, infants treated early in life have shifts in virological and immunological parameters that increase their likelihood of achieving ART-free viral control. Early ART limits the size and diversity of the viral reservoir and shapes effective innate and HIV-specific humoral and cellular responses. Several cases of durable ART-free viral control in early treated children have been reported. We recommend that, where appropriate for the study question and where adequate monitoring is available, ATI should be integrated into ART-free viral control research in children living with HIV. Paediatric participants have the greatest likelihood of benefiting and potentially the most years to prospectively realise those benefits. Excluding children from ATI trials limits the evidence base and delays access to interventions., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DP reports support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), being the recipient of the 2023 Jonathan Lax Lectureship sponsored by the BEAT Martin Delaney Collaboratory and Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, and being on the scientific advisory board of ViiV Healthcare and the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation. PP reports grant support from the NIH-Pediatric Adolescent Virus Elimination project (May, 2020, to May, 2025) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ([NIAID] grant U01AI135941, Targeting HIV reservoirs in children with HIVIS-DNA and MVA-CMDR vaccines) and being a founder of Probiomics (Tor Vergata University of Rome). PRos reports consulting fees from Achilles Vaccines and being on the board of directors of the PENTA Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Currently, real-world data on doravirine are scarce. In a national prospective cohort, we assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of switching to doravirine-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) in people with HIV., Methods: We did a nationwide, matched, prospective cohort study of people with HIV without previous virological failure and stable for at least 12 months on non-doravirine-containing triple or dual ART switching to doravirine before Sept 1, 2020 (exposed group). Participants in the exposed group were matched 1:2 to individuals continuing stable non-doravirine-containing ART, on age, sex, HIV acquisition category, time since ART initiation, calendar time, pre-ART CD4-count, pre-ART plasma viral load (PVL) and anchor drug class before switching. The primary outcome was protocol-defined virological failure (PDVF; PVL of ≥200 copies per mL) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population at week 104, with participants modifying their regimen or becoming lost to follow-up considered as PDVF (non-inferiority margin +5%). In contrast, in the on-treatment population, those who modified their regimen or became lost to follow-up were censored from that moment onwards. Tolerability was a secondary outcome., Findings: In total, 590 participants in the exposed group and 1180 participants in the unexposed group (of whom 55·3% used integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based regimens) were included. In the ITT analysis, PDVF occurred in 135 (22·9%) exposed participants and in 295 (25·0%) unexposed participants (risk difference -2·12%, upper limit of the one-sided 95% CI +1·40%). In the on-treatment analysis, 10 (2·2%) of 455 non-censored exposed participants and 26 (2·9%) of 885 non-censored unexposed participants had PDVF (risk difference -0·70%, upper limit of the one-sided 95% CI +0·73%). All exposed participants with a PVL of 200 copies or more per mL resuppressed without regimen modification: no confirmed virological failure (two consecutive PVLs of ≥200 copies per mL) was observed. 104 (17·6%) exposed participants and 211 (17·9%) unexposed participants modified their regimen. 73 (12.4%) exposed participants discontinued doravirine due to adverse events: abnormal dreams (1·7%) and insomnia (1·5%) were most common., Interpretation: Switching to doravirine in well suppressed people with HIV without previous virological failure was non-inferior compared with continuing non-doravirine-containing regimens after 2 years in a real-world setting., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests FWNMW has received consultancy fees from ViiV Healthcare, all paid to his institution. BJvW has received a research grant and speaker fees from Gilead Health Sciences, and speaker and advisory board fees from ViiV Healthcare, all paid to his institution. MvdV has received research and consultancy fees from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Health Sciences, and MSD, all paid to his institution. KB has received research grants and consultancy fees from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Health Sciences, and MSD. TM has received research grants and consultancy fees from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Health Sciences, and MSD, all paid to her institution. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Small incentives could improve engagement in HIV care. We evaluated the short-term and longer-term effects of financial incentives for visit attendance on viral suppression among adults initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Tanzania., Methods: In a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study, we randomised (1:1) 32 primary care HIV clinics in four Tanzanian regions to usual care (control group) or the intervention (usual care plus ≤6 monthly incentives [22 500 Tanzanian Shillings, about US$10, each], conditional on visit attendance). Adults (aged ≥18 years) initiating ART (<30 days) who owned a mobile phone and had no plans to transfer to another facility were eligible. The primary outcome was retention on ART with viral suppression (<1000 copies per mL) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included retention on ART with viral suppression at 6 months and viral suppression at 6 months and 12 months using a lower threshold (<50 copies per mL). Intent-to-treat analysis and a cluster-based permutation test were used to evaluate the effect of financial incentives on outcomes. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04201353, and is completed., Findings: Between May 28, 2021, and March 8, 2022, 1990 participants (805 male and 1185 female) were enrolled in the study. 1059 participants were assigned to the intervention group and 931 participants were assigned to the control group. Overall, 1536 (88%) participants at 6 months and 1575 (83%) at 12 months were on ART with viral suppression. At 12 months, 6 months after the intervention ended, 866 (85%) participants in the intervention group compared with 709 (81%) in the control group had viral loads less than 1000 copies per mL (adjusted risk difference [aRD] 4·4 percentage points, 95% CI -1·4 to 10·1, permutation test p=0·35). At 6 months, 858 participants (90%) in the intervention group were on ART with viral loads less than 1000 copies per mL compared with 678 (86%) in the control group (aRD 5·1 percentage points, 95% CI 1·1 to 9·1, permutation test p=0·06). Effects were larger at 6 months and 12 months with the lower threshold for viral suppression, and there was significant effect heterogeneity by region. Adverse events included 106 deaths (56 in the control group and 50 in the intervention group), none related to study participation., Interpretation: Short-term incentives for visit attendance had modest, short term benefits on viral suppression and did not harm retention or viral suppression after discontinuation. These findings suggest the need to understand subgroups who would most benefit from incentives to support HIV care., Funding: National Institute of Mental Health., Translation: For the Swahili translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data characterising the long-term use and safety of emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate as daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) are scarce and there are uncertainties regarding the value of routine HIV-1 RNA testing during oral PrEP follow-up., Methods: The DISCOVER trial was a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in which cisgender men and transgender women aged 18 years and older with a high likelihood of acquiring HIV were recruited from 94 clinics in Europe and North America and randomly assigned to receive either emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (200/25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets, or emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide (200/300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets, for at least 96 weeks. After completion of the trial, participants were offered enrolment in this 48-week open-label extension study of emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide. In participants diagnosed with HIV during the randomised and open-label phases of the study, we characterised HIV-1 test results and measured HIV-1 RNA viral load retrospectively when available. Adherence based on tenofovir diphosphate concentrations in dried blood spots and genotypic resistance were assessed in participants diagnosed with HIV. Safety assessments included adverse events, laboratory parameters, and, in a subset of participants, bone mineral density. HIV-1 incidence in participants initially randomly assigned to receive emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide was estimated using a Poisson distribution. Changes from baseline in safety endpoints were described in participants assigned to received emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide and in those who switched from emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate during the open-label phase. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02842086, and is ongoing., Findings: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5399 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned in DISCOVER. 2699 were assigned to receive emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and 2700 were assigned to receive emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide, of whom 2693 and 2694, respectively, received at least one dose of study drug. 2115 (79%) assigned to emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate switched to emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide in the open-label phase, and 2070 (77%) continued with emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide in the open-label phase. As of data cutoff (Dec 10, 2020), after 15 817 person-years of follow-up, 27 new HIV-1 diagnoses were observed across the total study period, with three occurring during the open-label phase. In participants who were initially assigned to emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide, the incidence was 0·13 per 100 person-years (95% CI 0·061-0·23; ten of 2670). Stored plasma samples were available for 23 of 27 participants, including 22 with incident infection. In four (17%) of 23 participants, retrospective testing detected HIV-1 RNA before serological HIV-1 test positivity; one was a suspected baseline infection. Of the three incident cases, all three were non-adherent to PrEP and none developed drug resistance. Among participants taking emtricitabine plus tenofovir alafenamide for up to 144 weeks, markers of glomerular filtration and proximal renal tubule dysfunction (β2-microglobulin to creatinine ratio and retinol-binding protein to creatinine ratio) improved or remained stable at 144 weeks compared with baseline, bone mineral density in hip and lumbar spine increased or remained stable from baseline to week 144 (n=191), cholesterol and glucose concentrations remained stable, and median bodyweight increased by less than 1 kg per year. In participants who switched from emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate during the open-label phase (2115 [79%] of 2693), markers of glomerular filtration and proximal renal tubule dysfunction improved or remained stable, bone mineral density increased, cholesterol concentrations increased, glucose concentrations were similar, and median bodyweight increased more compared with those who remained on emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide., Interpretation: Routine HIV-1 RNA testing for follow-up of individuals on daily oral PrEP provides modest additional clinical benefit. Long-term use of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as daily oral PrEP is safe and well tolerated and can be an especially appropriate choice for people with bone or renal morbidities., Funding: Gilead Sciences., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DAW has received grants, consulting fees, and speaker honoraria from Gilead Sciences; grants from Merck; consulting fees and speaker honoraria from ViiV Healthcare; and consulting fees and speaker honoraria from Janssen Pharmaceuticals. CDS has received funding, grants, consulting fees, and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences; grants and speaker honoraria from AbbVie; grants and personal fees from Janssen-Cilag; grants and personal fees from MSD, ViiV Healthcare, BioNtech, and Eli Lilly; grants from Cepheid; grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from B Braun Melsungen; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; personal fees, non-financial support, and other support outside the submitted work from Apeiron Biologics; and personal fees from GSK, Formycon, Moderna, Molecular Partners, Novartis, Roche, Sobi, and Pfizer. JF, PJR, and RMG have received research funding from Gilead Sciences. CBH has received research grant support from Gilead Sciences. SD-L has received research grant support (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences and Merck. J-MM has received grants (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences and Merck; consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, Merck, and ViiV Healthcare; and payments for participation on an advisory board from AELIX Therapeutics. AM has received research funding (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, Merck, GSK, AbbVie, and TaiMed Biologics; speaker honoraria from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and EMD Serono; and payments for participation on an advisory board from Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare. CB has received funding and speaker honoraria from Gilead Sciences; speaker honoraria from ViiV Healthcare; and support for attending principal investigator meetings from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, GSK, PPD (Thermo Fisher Scientific), Merck, Viking Therapeutics, Syneos Health, Novo Nordisk, AbbVie, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, and Shionogi. MR has received funding and speaker and consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, speaker and consulting fees from ViiV Healthcare, consulting fees from MSD and Abbott, and speaker honoraria from AbbVie and Janssen. AC has received advisory boards fees from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, MSD, and Theratechnologies; funding for clinical trials (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences, MSD, GSK, ViiV Healthcare, and Pfizer; speaker fees from MSD; and support for congress attendance from Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare. GC has received research funding (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences for conducting research discussed in this manuscript. CM has received funding and speaker fees from Gilead Sciences and grants and speaker fees from ViiV Healthcare and Theratechnologies. CC, SC, JCH, YS, MD, AK, and JMB are shareholders and employees of Gilead Sciences. KMo has received funding from Gilead Sciences; speaker fees and advisory board fees from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, Janssen Therapeutics, Theratechnologies, and Epividian; and funding for clinical trials (paid to their institution) from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and Janssen Therapeutics. KMa has received research funding from Gilead Sciences, and unrestricted grants and advisory board fees from Gilead Sciences and Merck., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Ending AIDS by 2030 requires improvements across all stages of the HIV care continuum. We used a longitudinal approach to assess changes in the HIV care continuum in Spain and transition probabilities across different stages., Methods: We used data from the prospective Cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network to analyse the time from diagnosis to linkage to care, linkage to care to antiretroviral therapy (ART), and ART to viral suppression in five calendar periods defined by milestones in ART, from 2005 to 2022. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models to estimate cumulative probabilities of stage transition within 1, 3, 6, and 12 months of stage eligibility, by period., Findings: We included 18 529 participants. Comparing the initial (2005-09) and final (2020-22) periods, time to linkage to care decreased from a median of 6·0 weeks to 1·3 weeks, time to ART initiation from 15·9 weeks to 0·4 weeks, and time to viral suppression from 13·3 weeks to 7·1 weeks. Adjusted hazard ratios for the comparison between the last period and the initial period were 3·1 (95% CI 2·8-3·4) for linkage to care within 1 month, 11·4 (10·1-12·3) for ART initiation within 1 month, and 2·2 (1·2-2·4) for viral suppression within 3 months. The aggregate proportion of late diagnoses was 38·6%, increasing after 2012 to 46·4% in the 2020-22 period. Same-day ART initiation increased from 18% to 39% from 2005 to 2022. The overall incidence rate of virological failure was 1·05 failures per 1000 person-years and showed a non-significant decline throughout the study., Interpretation: The great improvement in transition times through the HIV care cascade might put Spain on the verge of achieving the UNAIDS targets for HIV elimination. However, late diagnosis remains a challenge that should be addressed., Funding: Instituto de Salud Carlos III and Spanish AIDS Research Network., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AGG-RdM reports personal fees from ViiV Healthcare and Gilead Sciences and non-financial support from ViiV Healthcare, Janssen Cilag, and Gilead Sciences outside the submitted work. JM-S reports personal fees from ViiV Healthcare, Janssen Cilag, Gilead Sciences, and MSD; non-financial support from ViiV Healthcare, Jannsen Cilag, and Gilead Sciences; and research grants from Gilead Sciences outside the submitted work. SM reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from ViiV Healthcare, MSD, and Gilead; and participation on advisory boards for Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, Janssen Cilag, and MSD, outside the submitted work. MdL reports grants from ViiV Healthcare; personal fees from ViiV Healthcare, Janssen Cilag, Gilead Sciences, and MSD; non-financial support from Janssen Cilag and ViiV Healthcare; and participation on ViiV Healthcare and Gilead Sciences advisory boards, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Randomised comparative data on efficacy and safety of second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) after failure of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) across diverse geographical settings are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate optimal second-line ART for people with HIV., Methods: D 2 EFT is a completed international, randomised, open-label, phase 3b/4 trial evaluating three second-line ART strategies in adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 for whom first-line NNRTI therapy has failed. The study was done at 28 sites across 14 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It was originally designed to compare recommended standard of care (ritonavir-boosted darunavir [800 mg darunavir plus 100 mg ritonavir once daily] plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs; dosed once or twice daily]) with a novel nucleoside sparing regimen of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with ritonavir-boosted darunavir. The study was adapted during the first year to add a third arm of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with fixed tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg once daily) plus either lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or emtricitabine (200 mg once daily). Participants were randomly assigned with a computer-generated, blocked randomisation scheme (block size of two) stratified by site, previous tenofovir disoproxil fumarate use, and HIV viral load. The trial was designed to evaluate non-inferiority of either interventional arm against standard of care for the primary outcome of virological suppression, as determined by HIV RNA load of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 12%. Comparisons were made with a modified intention-to-treat population, including all participants randomly assigned but excluding administrative withdrawals. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03017872., Findings: 1190 individuals were screened; 828 participants were enrolled between Nov 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2021. Two participants were unable to receive their assigned regimen for administrative reasons; and 826 participants were included in analyses. Median age was 39 years (IQR 33-46), and 450 (54%) participants were female. Baseline median CD4 count was 206 cells per μL (23-354) and median HIV RNA was 15 400 copies per mL (3600-65 986). The proportion of participants with HIV RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks was 194 (75%) of 257 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs group, 222 (84%) of 264 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus dolutegravir group, and 227 (78%) of 291 in the dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine group. Compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs, the difference in virological suppression was 8·6% (95% CI 1·7 to 15·5; p=0·016) for dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir and 6·7% (-1·2 to 14·4; p=0·093) for dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine. Six deaths occurred, none of which were related to treatment. 19 pregnancies (11 livebirths) occurred with no congenital defects., Interpretation: In individuals experiencing failure of an NNRTI-based first-line ART, a switch to either dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir or dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine, without universal access to genotyping, was non-inferior in achieving viral suppression compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs. These global data support the most recent WHO treatment guidelines., Funding: UNITAID; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, USA; National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia; ViiV Healthcare; and Janssen., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests GVM, AK, SE, MNP, and MHL received support for the present manuscript from Janssen and ViiV Healthcare, paid to their institution. GVM, AK, and SE received support for the present manuscript from Unitaid, paid to their institution. GVM received support for the present manuscript from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), paid to their institution. MHL received support for the present manuscript from Gilead, paid to their institution. AK received grants or contracts from the Medical Research Future Fund, NHMRC, NIH, and Biotron, paid to their institution; consulting fees from Merck, paid to their institution; support for attending meetings or travel from the HIV Netherlands Australia Thailand Research Collaboration, Keystone conferences, the New South Wales (NSW) Government, and NSW Office for Health and Medical Research, paid to their institution; patent planned issues or pending (PCT/AU2023/050918), with no renumeration; has acted as Chair of the ASCOT data and safety monitoring board, with no renumeration; and is the Director and Chair of Scientia Clinical Research Phase I Unit Board, with no renumeration. ML received fees from Certa Therapeutics for participation on a data safety monitoring board. GVM and MHL have participated on an advisory board for ViiV Healthcare and Gilead. NK received research grants from NIH, WHO, Indian Council of Medical Research, University of New South Wales, Unitaid, Massachusetts General Hospital—Harvard University, and TREAT Asia–The Foundation for AIDS Research for the conduct of research. DB is an employee of ViiV Healthcare and holds GSK stock options. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Doravirine and islatravir is an investigational, once-daily, single-tablet regimen with high antiviral potency, favourable safety and tolerability, and low propensity for resistance. We report week 48 results from a phase 3 trial evaluating switch from stable, oral antiretroviral therapy (ART) to the fixed combination of doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg)., Methods: This phase 3, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial was conducted at 77 research, community, and hospital-based clinics in 15 countries. Adults aged 18 years or older with fewer than 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL on any oral, two-drug or three-drug ART regimen for at least 3 months, and no history of previous virological failure on any past or current regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation schedule to switch to doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) or to continue their baseline ART regimen. Block randomisation was based on a block size of four, and randomisation was stratified by baseline regimen (ie, protease inhibitor, integrase inhibitor, or other). Participants in the doravirine and islatravir group were instructed to take one tablet at approximately the same time each day, and participants in the baseline ART group continued to take the medication according to the locally approved label. HIV-1 RNA and safety evaluations were done at baseline and weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48. CD4 cell counts were measured at baseline, week 24, and week 48. The primary endpoint was proportion of participants with greater than or equal to 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL at week 48 in the full analysis set (ie, all participants who received at least one dose of study drug) using the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach and prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04223778) and is completed., Findings: Between Feb 18 and Oct 2, 2020, 740 individuals were screened for eligibility, of whom 672 (90·8%) participants (249 [37·1%] women and 423 [62·9%] men; median CD4 count of 678 cells per μL [IQR 496-868]) were randomly assigned to doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg; n=336) or to continue baseline ART (n=336). The last follow-up visit occurred on Sept 8, 2021. At week 48, zero of 336 participants in the doravirine and islatravir group versus five (1·5%) of 336 participants in the baseline ART group had greater than or equal to 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL (difference -1·5, 95% CI -3·4 to -0·3). The per-protocol analysis showed consistent results. Headache was the most common adverse event in both groups (35 [10·4%] of 336 participants in the doravirine and islatravir group, 16 [4·8%] of 336 in the baseline ART group), infection rates were similar (113 [33·6%] in both groups), and discontinuations due to adverse events were low (seven [2·1%] vs one [0·3%]). 66 (19·6%) of 336 participants had treatment-related adverse events in the doravirine and islatravir group compared with 30 (8·9%) of 336 in the baseline ART group. In the islatravir and doravirine group, CD4 cell counts (mean change -30·3 cells per μL) and total lymphocyte counts (mean change -0·26 × 10 9 /L) were decreased at 48 weeks., Interpretation: Switching to single-tablet doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) maintained viral suppression up to week 48 and was non-inferior to antiretroviral combinations used in clinical practice for adults with HIV-1; however, decreases in CD4 cell and total lymphocyte counts do not support further development of once-daily doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg)., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests J-MM reports a grant to his institution from Gilead; consulting fees from Gilead, ViiV, and Merck for advisory boards; payment from Merck for expert testimony; and participation on a data safety monitoring board for Aelix. GR reports honoraria for lectures from ViiV, GSK, and MSD and support from Gilead for attending meetings or travel. CO reports payment to the Desmond Tutu Health Foundation for the current study and honoraria and travel support from MSD for attendance and presentation at Expert Input Forum. AA declares no competing interests. AC reports unrestricted educational grants with MSD, Gilead Sciences, and ViiV Healthcare. SO reports research grants from MSD, ViiV Healthcare, and Gilead Sciences and honoraria for lectures from ViiV Healthcare and Gilead Sciences. FH reports research grants from AbbVie, VIR, Merck, and GSK; payment from AbbVie, Gilead, ViiV, and Merck for Speakers Bureau; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Viiv and Gilead. PK reports grants from Merck, Gilead, GSD/ViiV, and Theratechnologies; consulting fees from Merck, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, GSK/ViiV, and Theratechnologies; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Gilead, Merck, GSK/ViiV, Theratechnologies, and Johnson & Johnson; and stock or stock options with Merck, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and GSK. PT reports a grant from Merck to the University of Pennsylvania for the current study and consulting fees from Merck, Gilead, and ViiV. SW reports funding and provision of study materials from Merck for the current study; grants from Merck, ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Sciences, and Janssen; and consulting fees and honoraria for lectures from Merck and ViiV Healthcare. AG, SK, IG, KE, TAC, MCF, and JK are current or former employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, and might own stock or stock options, or both, in the company., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Due to the low number of individuals with HIV-2, no randomised trials of HIV-2 treatment have ever been done. We hypothesised that a non-comparative study describing the outcomes of several antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens in parallel groups would improve understanding of how differences between HIV-1 and HIV-2 might lead to different therapeutic approaches., Methods: This pilot, phase 2, non-comparative, open-label, randomised controlled trial was done in Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Senegal, and Togo. Adults with HIV-2 who were ART naive with CD4 counts of 200 cells per μL or greater were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to one of three treatment groups. A computer-generated sequentially numbered block randomisation list stratified by country was used for online allocation to the next available treatment group. In all groups, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (henceforth tenofovir) was dosed at 245 mg once daily with either emtricitabine at 200 mg once daily or lamivudine at 300 mg once daily. The triple nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) group received zidovudine at 250 mg twice daily. The ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group received lopinavir at 400 mg twice daily boosted with ritonavir at 100 mg twice daily. The raltegravir group received raltegravir at 400 mg twice daily. The primary outcome was the rate of treatment success at week 96, defined as an absence of serious morbidity event during follow-up, plasma HIV-2 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 96, and a substantial increase in CD4 cells between baseline and week 96. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02150993, and is closed to new participants., Findings: Between Jan 26, 2016, and June 29, 2017, 210 participants were randomly assigned to treatment groups. Five participants died during the 96 weeks of follow-up (triple NRTI group, n=2; ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group, n=2; and raltegravir group, n=1), eight had a serious morbidity event (triple NRTI group, n=4; ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group, n=3; and raltegravir group, n=1), 17 had plasma HIV-2 RNA of 50 copies per mL or greater at least once (triple NRTI group, n=11; ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group, n=4; and raltegravir group, n=2), 32 (all in the triple NRTI group) switched to another ART regimen, and 18 permanently discontinued ART (triple NRTI group, n=5; ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group, n=7; and raltegravir group, n=6). The Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended premature termination of the triple NRTI regimen for safety reasons. The overall treatment success rate was 57% (95% CI 47-66) in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group and 59% (49-68) in the raltegravir group., Interpretation: The raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir regimens were efficient and safe in adults with HIV-2. Both regimens could be compared in future phase 3 trials. The results of this pilot study suggest a trend towards better virological and immunological efficacy in the raltegravir-based regimen., Funding: ANRS MIE., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Doravirine and islatravir is an investigational, once-daily regimen with high antiviral potency, favourable safety and tolerability, and a low propensity for resistance. We investigated a switch from bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide to doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1., Methods: We conducted a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority trial at 89 research, community, and hospital-based clinics in 11 countries. Adults aged 18 years or older with fewer than 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL for at least 3 months on bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) and no history of previous virological failure on any past or current regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation allocation schedule, with block randomisation based on a block size of four, to switch to doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) or continue bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide orally once daily, with matching placebos taken by all participants. Participants, investigators, study staff, and sponsor personnel involved in study drug administration or clinical evaluation of participants were masked to treatment assignment until week 48. Participants were instructed at each visit to take one tablet from each of the two bottles received, one of study drug and one of placebo, once daily, and participants were assessed at baseline and weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with greater than or equal to 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL at week 48 in the full analysis set (ie, all participants who received at least one dose of study drug; US Food and Drug Administration snapshot; prespecified non-inferiority margin 4%). The study is ongoing, with all remaining participants in post-treatment follow-up, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04223791., Findings: We screened 726 individuals for eligibility between Feb 18 and Sept 3, 2020, of whom 643 (88·6%) participants were randomly assigned to a treatment group (183 [28·5%] women and 460 [71·5%] men). 322 participants were switched to doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) and 321 continued bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (two participants [one with a protocol deviation and one who withdrew] assigned to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide did not receive treatment). The last follow-up visit for the week 48 analysis occurred on Aug 26, 2021. At week 48, two (0·6%) of 322 participants in the doravirine and islatravir group compared with one (0·3%) of 319 participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group had greater than or equal to 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL (difference 0·3%, 95% CI -1·2 to 2·0). The per-protocol analysis showed consistent results. 25 (7·8%) participants in the doravirine and islatravir group had headache compared with 23 [7·2%] participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group; 101 (31·4%) compared with 98 (30·7%) had infections; and eight (2·5%) participants in each group discontinued therapy due to adverse events. 32 (9·9%) participants had treatment-related adverse events in the islatravir and doravirine group comapred with 38 (11·9%) in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group. In the islatravir and doravirine group, CD4 cell counts (mean change -19·7 cells per μL) and total lymphocyte counts (mean change -0·20 × 10 9 /L) were decreased at 48 weeks., Interpretation: Switching to daily doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg) was non-inferior to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide at week 48. However, decreases in CD4 cell and total lymphocyte counts do not support the further development of once-daily doravirine (100 mg) and islatravir (0·75 mg)., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests F-HS, SOK, KE, RMP, TC (former), and MCF are or were employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, who might own stock, hold stock options, or both in the company. AMM has received research funding from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Taimed, GSK, and ViiV Healthcare; honoraria from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and EMD Serono; and served on advisory boards for Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare. GR has received honoraria from MSD, Gilead Sciences, GSK, and ViiV Healthcare and meeting or travel support from Gilead Sciences. MNR has received consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, Merck, and ViiV Healthcare and honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and ViiV Healthcare. OOO has received honoraria from Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare. JRB has received consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, MSD, Pfizer, and ViiV Healthcare and honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, MSD, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GSK, Janssen, ViiV Healthcare, and NovoNordisk. DPH has received research funding from Gilead Sciences, MSD, ViiV Healthcare, GSK, Janssen; honoraria for speakers bureau from Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare; meeting or travel support from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, GSK, and MSD; and served on advisory boards for and received consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and Janssen. RP has served on advisory boards for and received consulting fees from Pfizer, MSD, Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, GSK, Roche, Atea, and Lilly and has received research funds (awarded to institution) from MSD, Gilead Sciences, and ViiV Healthcare. JR has received honoraria from MSD, Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and Theratechnologies, outside the submitted work; meeting or travel support from Gilead Sciences; and has served on advisory boards for MSD, Gilead Sciences, and ViiV Healthcare. JKR has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer, Gilead Sciences, Merck, and ViiV Healthcare; honoraria from Gilead, Merck, Janssen, and ViiV; has served on advisory board for Abivax; and is a member of the governing board of the European AIDS Clinical Society. AC has received research funding from MSD and ViiV Healthcare; lecture and travel sponsorships from Gilead Sciences and ViiV Healthcare; and has served on advisory boards for Gilead Sciences, MSD, and ViiV Healthcare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is a single-tablet regimen and was efficacious and well tolerated in children and adolescents with HIV (aged 6 years to <18 years) in a 48-week phase 2/3 trial. In this study, we report data from children aged at least 2 years and weighing 14 kg to less than 25 kg., Methods: We conducted this open-label, multicentre, multicohort, single-arm study in South Africa, Thailand, Uganda, and the USA. Participants were virologically suppressed children with HIV, aged at least 2 years, weighing 14 kg to less than 25 kg. Participants received bictegravir (30 mg), emtricitabine (120 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (15 mg) once daily, switching to bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) upon attaining a bodyweight of at least 25 kg. The study included pharmacokinetic evaluation at week 2 to confirm the dose of coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for this weight band by comparing with previous adult data. Primary outcomes were bictegravir area under the curve over the dosing interval (AUC tau ) and concentration at the end of the dosing interval (C tau ) at week 2, and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and laboratory abnormalities until the end of week 24 in all participants who received at least one dose of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02881320., Findings: Overall, 22 participants were screened (from Nov 14, 2018, to Jan 11, 2020), completed treatment with bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (until week 48), and entered an extension phase. The geometric least squares mean (GLSM) ratio for AUC tau for bictegravir was 7·6% higher than adults (GLSM ratio 107·6%, 90% CI 96·7-119·7); C tau was 34·6% lower than adults (65·4%, 49·1-87·2). Both parameters were within the target exposure range previously found in adults, children, or both". Grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities occurred in four (18%) participants by the end week 24 and six (27%) by the end of week 48. Drug-related adverse events occurred in three participants (14%) by the end of week 24 and week 48; none were severe. No Grade 3-4 adverse events, serious adverse events, or adverse events leading to discontinuation occurred by the end of week 24 and week 48., Interpretation: Data support the use of single-tablet coformulated bictegravir (30 mg), emtricitabine (120 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (15 mg) for treatment of HIV in children aged at least 2 years and weighing 14 kg to less than 25 kg., Funding: Gilead Sciences., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CAR received grant support to their institution from Gilead, GSK, and ViiV Healthcare during the study and outside the submitted work; and support for meeting travel from Gilead outside the submitted work. RS reports grant support to their institution from Gilead, GSK, Merck, and Penta outside the submitted work; and support for meeting travel from Gilead outside the submitted work. CKC and PK report grant support to their institution from Gilead for the conduct of this study. MK, RL, JTH, VAV, and KK are employed by Gilead and hold stocks in Gilead. MFC reports grant support to their institution from Gilead for the conduct of this study. AHG reports clinical trial agreement to their institution from Gilead for the conduct of this study; and is Chair of the Data Safety and Monitoring Board for a study sponsored by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

In individuals receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), persistent low-level viraemia not attributed to suboptimal ART adherence, detrimental pharmacological interactions, or drug resistance is referred to as non-suppressible viraemia (NSV). This Review presents recent findings in the virological characterisation of NSV, revealing that it consists of one or a few identical populations of plasma viruses without signs of evolution. This finding suggests that NSV originates from virus production by expanded HIV-infected cell clones, reflecting the persistence of the HIV reservoir despite ART. We discuss knowledge gaps regarding the management and the clinical consequences of NSV. The prevalence of NSV remains to be precisely determined and there is very little understanding of its effects on virological failure, HIV transmission, secondary inflammation, morbidity, and mortality. This issue, along with the absence of specific recommendations for the management of NSV in HIV clinical guidelines, underscores the complexities involved in treating individuals with NSV., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AE-C has received payment or honoraria for presentations from Gilead Sciences. RM has received payment or honoraria for presentations, and advisory fees; has participated on advisory boards; and has received support for attending meetings from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, Janssen, Thera Technologies, GlaxoSmithKline, and Merk Sharp & Dohme. AP-M has received payment or honoraria for presentations and support for attending meetings from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Sciences, and Merk Sharp & Dohme. FP has received consulting and speaker fees and support for attending meetings from Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merk Sharp & Dohme, and ViiV Healthcare. JRA has received consulting fees and support for attending meetings from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, Aelix, Janssen, and Merk Sharp & Dohme. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: There are few data on life expectancy gains among people living with HIV in low-income and middle-income settings where antiretroviral therapy (ART) is increasingly available. We aimed to analyse life expectancy trends from 2003 to 2017 among people with HIV beginning treatment with ART within the Caribbean, central America, and South America., Methods: We did a multisite retrospective cohort study and included people with HIV who had started treatment with ART and were aged 16 years or older between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2017, from Caribbean, Central and South America network for HIV epidemiology (CCASAnet) sites in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, and Peru, who contributed person-time data from the age of 20 years until date of death, last contact, database closure, or Dec 31, 2017. We used the Chiang method of abridged life tables to estimate life expectancy at age 20 years for three eras (2003-08, 2009-12, and 2013-17) overall and by demographic and clinical characteristics at ART initiation. We used Poisson regression models to weight mortality rates to account for informative censoring., Findings: 30 688 people with HIV were included in the study; 17 491 (57·0%) were from the Haiti site and 13 197 (43·0%) were from all other sites. There were 2637 deaths during the study period: 1470 in Haiti and 1167 in other sites. Crude and weighted mortality rates decreased among all age groups over calendar eras. From 2003-08 to 2013-17, overall life expectancy for people with HIV at age 20 years increased from 13·9 years (95% CI 12·5-15·2) to 61·2 years (59·0-63·4) in Haiti and from 31·0 years (29·3-32·8) to 69·5 years (67·2-71·8) in other sites. Life expectancies at the end of the study period were within 10 years of those of the general population (69·9 years in Haiti and 78·0 years in all other sites in 2018). Disparities in life expectancy among people with HIV by sex or HIV transmission risk factor, CD4 cell count, level of education, and history of tuberculosis at or before ART initiation persisted across calendar eras., Interpretation: Life expectancy among people with HIV receiving ART has significantly improved in Latin America and the Caribbean. Persistent disparities in life expectancy among people with HIV by demographic and clinical factors at ART initiation highlight vulnerable populations in the region., Funding: National Institutes of Health., Translation: For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Option B+ marked a milestone in prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV by recommending lifelong antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all pregnant women with HIV. Nevertheless, concerns remain regarding long-term outcomes in settings with a high HIV burden. We analysed long-term virological outcomes in women enrolled on option B+ in Tanzania., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, we extracted data for pregnant women with HIV starting PMTCT care between Oct 1, 2014, and Sept 30, 2016, in routine health-care settings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, from national HIV and district health information system databases. We then excluded women who exited study sites before 6 months of ART follow-up and women who did not have a viral load test. Women were followed up until March 8, 2019. We used Poisson generalised estimating equations to examine trends in HIV viral suppression (<400 copies per mL) and virological failure (≥400 copies per mL), reporting relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs adjusted for maternal age, gestational age, and several clinical characteristics., Findings: We identified 15 586 pregnant women with HIV, of whom 10 161 were eligible for follow-up. Women were followed up for a median of 37 months (IQR 31-45) and a maximum of 53 months. The median age at PMTCT initiation was 31 years (IQR 27-35). At PMTCT enrolment, 1245 (17·0%) of 7318 women with available data were in their third trimester, 4901 (48·2%) of 10 161 women started ART at least 1 month before PMTCT enrolment, and 3380 (33·4%) of 10 131 women with available data had advanced HIV. Overall, a viral suppression rate of 88·2% (95% CI 87·8-88·7) was observed over the entire follow-up period, ranging from 85·1% (84·3-85·9) in viral load tests done at 0-11 months to 90·6% (89·7-91·4) at 36 months or longer since PMTCT enrolment. In a complete-case analysis (ie, including patients with <30% missing data; n=7306), the risk of virological failure among women who remained in HIV care decreased over time (adjusted RR 0·87 [95% CI 0·80-0·95] at 12-23 months since PMTCT enrolment; 0·65 [0·59-0·72] at 24-35 months; and 0·63 [0·55-0·71] at ≥36 months vs at 0-11 months). Younger women (aged <20 years: 1·76 [1·40-2·23] vs aged 30-39 years) and those starting PMTCT late in pregnancy (third trimester: 1·28 [1·10-1·50] vs first trimester) or with advanced HIV (1·33 [1·16-1·51] vs without advanced HIV) had increased risk of virological failure. Women who attended an antenatal care facility where more than 50% of attendees received couples HIV testing had a decreased risk of virological failure (adjusted RR 0·81 [0·65-0·99] vs <50% having couples testing)., Interpretation: High rates of viral suppression among women starting option B+ who remain in HIV care are sustainable, and might increase, at least up to 53 months. This rate might be further improved by addressing challenges of adolescent mothers, late presenters, and couples HIV testing at antenatal care., Funding: Swedish International Development Agency., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a need for more convenient, less frequent treatment to help address challenges associated with daily oral HIV treatment in people living with HIV, including stigma, pill burden, drug-food interactions, and adherence. The phase 3 ATLAS and FLAIR studies showed non-inferiority of long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 4 weeks compared with standard oral therapy for the maintenance of virological suppression in adults with HIV-1 over 48 weeks. We present the 96-week findings., Methods: FLAIR is a randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study done in 11 countries investigating whether switching to long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine is non-inferior to daily dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults living with HIV-1. Antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive participants received induction therapy with daily oral dolutegravir (50 mg), abacavir (600 mg), and lamivudine (300 mg) for 20 weeks. After 16 weeks, participants with less than 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL were randomly assigned (1:1) to continue the standard of care regimen (standard care group) or switch to receive daily oral cabotegravir 30 mg and rilpivirine 25 mg for at least 4 weeks followed by long-acting cabotegravir 400 mg and rilpivirine 600 mg, administered as two 2 mL intramuscular injections, every 4 weeks for at least 96 weeks (long-acting group). Randomisation was stratified by baseline (preinduction) HIV-1 RNA (<100 000 or ≥100 000 copies per mL) and sex at birth and used GlaxoSmithKline-verified randomisation software (RandAll NG, version 1.3.3) for treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or more assessed as per the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Snapshot algorithm at week 48, which has been reported previously. Here, we report the proportion of participants with 50 or more HIV-1 RNA copies per mL using the FDA Snapshot algorithm at week 96 (intention-to-treat population; non-inferiority margin 6%). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02938520., Findings: Between Oct 27, 2016, and March 24, 2017, 809 participants were screened. 631 (78%) participants entered the induction phase and 566 (70%) were randomly assigned to either the standard care group (283 [50%] participants) or the long-acting group (283 [50%]). Median age was 34 years (IQR 29 to 43), 62 (11%) were 50 years or older, 127 (22%) were women (sex at birth), and 419 (74%) were white. At week 96, nine (3%) participants in each arm had 50 or more HIV-1 RNA copies per mL, with an adjusted difference of 0·0 (95% CI -2·9 to 2·9), consistent with non-inferiority established at week 48. Across both treatment groups, adverse events leading to withdrawal were infrequent (14 [5%] participants in the long-acting group and four [1%] in the standard care group). Injection site reactions were the most common adverse event, reported by 245 (88%) participants in the long-acting group; their frequency decreased over time. Median injection site reaction duration was 3 days (IQR 2 to 4), and 3082 (99%) of 3100 reactions were grade 1 or 2. No deaths occurred during the maintenance phase., Interpretation: The 96-week results reaffirm the 48-week results, showing long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine continued to be non-inferior compared with continuing a standard care regimen in adults with HIV-1 for the maintenance of viral suppression. These results support the durability of long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine, over an almost 2-year-long period, as a therapeutic option for virally suppressed adults with HIV-1., Funding: ViiV Healthcare and Janssen Research and Development., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The number of people on antiretroviral therapy (ART) requiring treatment monitoring in low-resource settings is rapidly increasing. Point-of-care (POC) testing for ART monitoring might alleviate burden on centralised laboratories and improve clinical outcomes, but its cost-effectiveness is unknown., Methods: We used cost and effectiveness data from the STREAM trial in South Africa (February, 2017-October, 2018), which evaluated POC testing for viral load, CD4 count, and creatinine, with task shifting from professional to lower-cadre registered nurses compared with laboratory-based testing without task shifting (standard of care). We parameterised an agent-based network model, EMOD-HIV, to project the impact of implementing this intervention in South Africa over 20 years, simulating approximately 175 000 individuals per run. We assumed POC monitoring increased viral suppression by 9 percentage points, enrolment into community-based ART delivery by 25 percentage points, and switching to second-line ART by 1 percentage point compared with standard of care, as reported in the STREAM trial. We evaluated POC implementation in varying clinic sizes (10-50 patient initiating ART per month). We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and report the mean and 90% model variability of 250 runs, using a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$500 per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted for our main analysis., Findings: POC testing at 70% coverage of patients on ART was projected to reduce HIV infections by 4·5% (90% model variability 1·6 to 7·6) and HIV-related deaths by 3·9% (2·0 to 6·0). In clinics with 30 ART initiations per month, the intervention had an ICER of $197 (90% model variability -27 to 863) per DALY averted; results remained cost-effective when varying background viral suppression, ART dropout, intervention effectiveness, and reduction in HIV transmissibility. At higher clinic volumes (≥40 ART initiations per month), POC testing was cost-saving and at lower clinic volumes (20 ART initiations per month) the ICER was $734 (93 to 2569). A scenario that assumed POC testing did not increase enrolment into community ART delivery produced ICERs that exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold for all clinic volumes., Interpretation: POC testing is a promising strategy to cost-effectively improve patient outcomes in moderately sized clinics in South Africa. Results are most sensitive to changes in intervention impact on enrolment into community-based ART delivery., Funding: National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has proven to be a highly effective and safe way to prevent HIV infection. Seroconversion and primary HIV infection are exceptional if adherence to PrEP is good. However, primary HIV infection while using PrEP can occur, albeit rarely, and HIV drug resistance might develop. Furthermore, the scope of PrEP is expected to expand, and clinicians might face potential seroconversions and primary HIV infection in patients starting or taking PrEP. The characteristics of primary HIV infection in users of PrEP are poorly described. PrEP users present a lower viral load peak during primary HIV infection and, frequently, fewer symptoms than individuals not exposed to PrEP. Additionally, PrEP prolongs the stages of seroconversion, thus potentially complicating diagnosis of primary HIV infection. Drug resistance is rare, occurring mostly when PrEP is initiated in undiagnosed patients who are at an extremely early stage of infection, in whom detection of HIV-RNA was not used to rule out HIV infection. Therefore, careful exclusion of primary HIV infection before starting PrEP is crucial. In patients presenting with primary HIV infection while on PrEP, a drug with a high genetic barrier (or even two) should be added to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine until test results for resistance are available., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030 will require addressing stigma more systematically and at a larger scale than current efforts. Existing global evidence shows that stigma is a barrier to achieving each of the 90-90-90 targets; it undermines HIV testing, linkage to care, treatment adherence, and viral load suppression. However, findings from both research studies and programmatic experience have helped to inform the growing body of knowledge regarding how to reduce stigma, leading to key principles for HIV stigma reduction. These principles include immediately addressing actionable drivers of stigma, centring groups affected by stigma at the core of the response, and engaging opinion leaders and building partnerships between affected groups and opinion leaders. Although there is still room to strengthen research on stigma measurement and reduction, in particular for intersectional stigma, the proliferation of evidence over the past several decades on how to measure and address stigma provides a solid foundation for immediate and comprehensive action., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: UNAIDS recommends integrating methadone or buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorder with HIV care to improve HIV outcomes, but buprenorphine adoption remains limited in many countries. We aimed to assess whether HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone treatment for opioid use disorder was non-inferior to referral for methadone maintenance therapy in achieving HIV viral suppression in Vietnam., Methods: In an open-label, non-inferiority trial (BRAVO), we randomly assigned people with HIV and opioid use disorder (1:1) by computer-generated random number sequence, in blocks of ten and stratified by site, to receive HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone treatment or referral for methadone maintenance therapy in six HIV clinics in Vietnam. The primary outcome was HIV viral suppression at 12 months (HIV-1 RNA ≤200 copies per mL on PCR) by intention to treat (absolute risk difference [RD] margin ≤13%), compared by use of generalised estimating equations. Research staff actively queried treatment-emergent adverse events during quarterly study visits and passively collected adverse events reported during HIV clinic visits. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01936857, and is completed., Findings: Between July 27, 2015, and Feb 12, 2018, we enrolled 281 patients. At baseline, 272 (97%) participants were male, mean age was 38·3 years (SD 6·1), and mean CD4 count was 405 cells per μL (SD 224). Viral suppression improved between baseline and 12 months for both HIV clinic-based buprenorphine plus naloxone (from 97 [69%] of 140 patients to 74 [81%] of 91 patients) and referral for methadone maintenance therapy (from 92 [66%] of 140 to 99 [93%] of 107). Buprenorphine plus naloxone did not demonstrate non-inferiority to methadone maintenance therapy in achieving viral suppression at 12 months (RD -0·11, 95% CI -0·20 to -0·02). Retention on medication at 12 months was lower for buprenorphine plus naloxone than for methadone maintenance therapy (40% vs 65%; RD -0·53, 95% CI -0·75 to -0·31). Participants assigned to buprenorphine plus naloxone more frequently experienced serious adverse events (ten [7%] of 141 vs four of 140 [3%] assigned to methadone maintenance therapy) and deaths (seven of 141 [5%] vs three of 141 [2%]). Serious adverse events and deaths typically occurred in people no longer taking ART or opioid use disorder medications., Interpretation: Although integrated buprenorphine and HIV care may potentially increase access to treatment for opioid use disorder, scale-up in middle-income countries might require enhanced support for buprenorphine adherence to improve HIV viral suppression. The strength of our study as a multisite randomised trial was offset by low retention of patients on buprenorphine., Funding: National Institute on Drug Abuse (US National Institutes of Health)., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Financial incentives promote use of HIV services and might support adherence to the sustained antiretroviral therapy (ART) necessary for viral suppression, but few studies have assessed a biomarker of adherence or evaluated optimal implementation. We sought to determine whether varying sized financial incentives for clinic attendance effected viral suppression in patients starting ART in Tanzania., Methods: In a three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at four health facilities in Shinyanga region, Tanzania, adults aged 18 years or older with HIV who had started ART within the past 30 days were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using a tablet-based application (stratified by site) to receive usual care (control group) or to receive a cash incentive for monthly clinic attendance in one of two amounts: 10 000 Tanzanian Shillings (TZS; about US$4·50) or 22 500 TZS (about $10·00). There were no formal exclusion criteria. Participants were masked to the existence of two incentive sizes. Incentives were provided for up to 6 months via mobile health technology (mHealth) that linked biometric attendance monitoring to automated mobile payments. We evaluated the primary outcome of retention in care with viral suppression (<1000 copies per mL) at 6 months using logistic regression. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03351556., Findings: Between April 24 and Dec 14, 2018, 530 participants were randomly assigned to an incentive strategy (184 in the control group, 172 in the smaller incentive group, and 174 in the larger incentive group). All participants were included in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. At 6 months, approximately 134 (73%) participants in the control group remained in care and had viral suppression, compared with 143 (83%) in the smaller incentive group (risk difference [RD] 9·8, 95% CI 1·2 to 18·5) and 150 (86%) in the larger incentive group (RD 13·0, 4·5 to 21·5); we identified a positive trend between incentive size and viral suppression (p trend=0·0032), although the incentive groups did not significantly differ (RD 3·2, -4·6 to 11·0). Adverse events included seven (4%) deaths in the control group and 11 (3%) deaths in the intervention groups, none related to study participation., Interpretation: Small financial incentives delivered using mHealth can improve retention in care and viral suppression in adults starting HIV treatment. Although further research should investigate the durability of effects from short-term incentives, these findings strengthen the evidence for implementing financial incentives within standard HIV care., Funding: National Institute of Mental Health at the US National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fostemsavir, a prodrug of the first-in-class attachment inhibitor, temsavir, is indicated for heavily treatment-experienced individuals with multidrug-resistant HIV-1. We previously reported superior efficacy of fostemsavir versus placebo in the randomised cohort of the BRIGHTE study after 8-day functional monotherapy (primary endpoint); here we report planned interim analyses through week 96., Methods: BRIGHTE (NCT02362503) is an ongoing multicentre, two-cohort, phase 3 trial, done at 108 centres in 22 countries. We enrolled heavily treatment-experienced adults (≥18 years) failing antiretroviral therapy (HIV-1 RNA ≥400 copies per mL) into two cohorts: the randomised cohort, in which patients with one or two fully active antiretrovirals remaining received oral fostemsavir (600 mg twice a day) or placebo in combination with their failing regimen for 8 days, followed by fostemsavir plus optimised background therapy; or the non-randomised cohort, in which patients with no remaining antiretroviral options received oral fostemsavir (600 mg twice a day) plus optimised background therapy from day 1. Endpoints for the week 96 interim analyses included the proportions of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 40 copies per mL, changes from baseline in CD4 cell counts, and the frequency of adverse events, adverse events leading to discontinuation, and deaths. The intention-to-treat exposed population and the safety population both included all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. The response rates (proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA <40 copies per mL) in the intention-to-treat exposed population were calculated via snapshot analysis at weeks 24, 48, and 96., Findings: Between Feb 23, 2015, and Aug 11, 2016, 371 participants were enrolled and treated, of which 272 participants were in the randomised cohort and 99 in the non-randomised cohort. 320 (86%) of 371 reported a history of AIDS. In the randomised cohort, rates of virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <40 copies per mL) increased from 53% (144 of 272) at week 24 to 60% (163 of 272) at week 96. Response rates in the non-randomised cohort were 37% (37 of 99) at week 24 and week 96. Mean increases in CD4 counts from baseline at week 96 were 205 cells per μL (SD 191) in the randomised cohort and 119 cells per μL (202) in the non-randomised cohort. Mean CD4/CD8 ratio increased from 0·20 at baseline to 0·44 at week 96 in the randomised cohort. Few adverse events led to discontinuation (26 [7%] of 371). 12 (4%) of 272 people in the randomised cohort and 17 (17%) of 99 in the non-randomised cohort died; the median baseline CD4 count for participants who died was 11 cells per μL., Interpretation: In heavily treatment-experienced individuals with advanced HIV-1 disease and limited treatment options, fostemsavir-based antiretroviral regimens were generally well tolerated and showed a distinctive trend of increasing virological and immunological response rates through 96 weeks; these findings support fostemsavir as a treatment option for this vulnerable population., Funding: ViiV Healthcare., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The first long-acting formulations of HIV drugs are undergoing regulatory review for use in maintenance of viral suppression in people with HIV. Although these novel drug formulations could contribute greatly to HIV treatment and prevention efforts, their lack of activity against hepatitis B virus (HBV) could limit their global impact, particularly in populations with high burdens of both HIV and HBV. An urgent need for greater investment in research and development of long-acting drugs with dual activity against HIV and HBV exists. Access to long-acting HIV drug formulations with dual activity against HBV would be transformative and have a great impact on efforts to prevent, treat, and eradicate both of these important global epidemics., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although antiretroviral regimens containing integrase inhibitors rapidly suppress HIV viral load in non-pregnant adults, few published data from randomised controlled trials have compared the safety and efficacy of any integrase inhibitor to efavirenz when initiated during pregnancy. We compared safety and efficacy of antiretroviral therapy with either raltegravir or efavirenz in late pregnancy., Methods: An open-label, randomised controlled trial was done at 19 hospitals and clinics in Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, and the USA. Antiretroviral-naive pregnant women (20-<37 weeks gestation) living with HIV were assigned to antiretroviral regimens containing either raltegravir (400 mg twice daily) or efavirenz (600 mg each night) plus lamivudine 150 mg and zidovudine 300 mg twice daily (or approved alternative backbone regimen), using a web-based, permuted-block randomisation stratified by gestational age and backbone regimen. The primary efficacy outcome was plasma HIV viral load below 200 copies per mL at (or near) delivery. The primary efficacy analysis included all women with a viral load measurement at (or near) delivery who had viral load of at least 200 copies per mL before treatment and no genotypic resistance to any study drugs; secondary analyses eliminated these exclusion criteria. The primary safety analyses included all women who received study drug, and their infants. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01618305., Findings: From Sep 5, 2013, to Dec 11, 2018, 408 women were enrolled (206 raltegravir, 202 efavirenz) and 394 delivered on-study (200 raltegravir, 194 efavirenz); 307 were included in the primary efficacy analysis (153 raltegravir, 154 efavirenz). 144 (94%) women in the raltegravir group and 129 (84%) in the efavirenz group met the primary efficacy outcome (absolute difference 10%, 95% CI 3-18; p=0·0015); the difference primarily occurred among women enrolling later in pregnancy (interaction p=0·040). Frequencies of severe or life-threatening adverse events were similar among mothers (30% in each group; 61 raltegravir, 59 efavirenz) and infants (25% in each group; 50 raltegravir, 48 efavirenz), with no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Our findings support major guidelines. The integrase inhibitor dolutegravir is currently a preferred regimen for the prevention of perinatal HIV transmission with raltegravir recommended as a preferred or alternative integrase inhibitor for pregnant women living with HIV., Funding: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Late initiation of HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) in pregnancy is associated with not achieving viral suppression before giving birth and increased mother-to-child transmission of HIV. We aimed to investigate virological suppression before giving birth with dolutegravir compared with efavirenz, when initiated during the third trimester., Methods: In this randomised, open-label trial, DolPHIN-2, we recruited pregnant women in South Africa and Uganda aged at least 18 years, with untreated but confirmed HIV infection and an estimated gestation of at least 28 weeks, initiating ART in third trimester. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to dolutegravir-based or efavirenz-based therapy. HIV viral load was measured 7 days and 28 days after antiretroviral initiation, at 36 weeks' gestation, and at the post-partum visit (0-14 days post partum). The primary efficacy outcome was a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL at the first post-partum visit, and the primary safety outcome was the occurrence of drug-related adverse events in mothers and infants until the post-partum visit. Longer-term follow-up of mothers and infants continues. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03249181., Findings: Between Jan 23, and Aug 15, 2018, we randomly assigned 268 mothers to dolutegravir (135) or efavirenz (133). All mothers and their infants were included in the safety analysis, and 250 mothers (125 in the dolutegravir group, 125 in the efavirenz group) and their infants in efficacy analyses, by intention-to-treat analyses. The median duration of maternal therapy at birth was 55 days (IQR 33-77). 89 (74%) of 120 in the dolutegravir group had viral loads less than 50 copies per mL, compared with 50 (43%) of 117 in the efavirenz group (risk ratio 1·64, 95% CI 1·31-2·06). 30 (22%) of 137 mothers in the dolutegravir group reported serious adverse events compared with 14 (11%) of 131 in the efavirenz group (p=0·013), particularly surrounding pregnancy and puerperium. We found no differences in births less than 37 weeks and less than 34 weeks gestation (16·4% vs 3·3%, across both groups). Three stillbirths in the dolutegravir group and one in the efavirenz group were considered unrelated to treatment. Three infant HIV infections were detected, all in the dolutegravir group, and were considered likely to be in-utero transmissions., Interpretation: Our data support the revision to WHO guidelines recommending the transition to dolutegravir in first-line ART for all adults, regardless of pregnancy or child-bearing potential., Funding: Unitaid., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Monitoring HIV treatment with laboratory testing introduces delays for providing appropriate care in resource-limited settings. The aim of our study was to determine whether point-of-care HIV viral load testing with task shifting changed treatment and care outcomes for adults on antiretroviral therapy (ART) when compared with standard laboratory viral load testing., Methods: We did an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in a public clinic in Durban, South Africa. We enrolled HIV-positive adults (aged ≥18 years) who presented for their first routine HIV viral load test 6 months after ART initiation. Individuals were randomly assigned by a random number allocation sequence to receive either point-of-care viral load testing at enrolment and after 6 months with task shifting to enrolled nurses (intervention group), or laboratory viral load testing (standard-of-care group). The primary outcome was combined viral suppression (<200 copies per mL) and retention at 12 months after enrolment. A non-inferiority margin of 10% was used. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03066128., Findings: Between Feb 24, 2017, and Aug 23, 2017, we screened 657 participants, and 390 were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=195) or standard-of-care group (n=195). 175 (90%) individuals in the intervention group and 148 (76%) individuals in the standard-of-care group had the primary outcome of retention with viral suppression, a difference of 13·9% (95% CI 6·4-21·2; p<0·00040). 182 participants (93%) in the intervention group had viral suppression compared with 162 (83%) in the standard-of-care group (difference 10·3%, 3·9-16·8; p=0·0025); 180 (92%) and 162 (85%) were retained in care (7·7%, 1·3-14·2; p=0·026). There were no adverse events related to point-of-care HIV viral load testing or task shifting., Interpretation: Point-of-care viral load testing combined with task shifting significantly improved viral suppression and retention in HIV care. Point-of-care testing can simplify treatment and improve outcomes for HIV-positive adults receiving ART in resource-limited settings., Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although experts have recommended testing for pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) before antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation, there is little evidence to support its implementation. We aimed to establish whether an inexpensive point mutation assay can improve virological suppression by identifying PDR to guide drug selection for ART in a lower-middle income country., Methods: Investigators did an open-label, randomised controlled trial at three HIV treatment sites in Kenya: two in Nairobi and one in rural Maseno. Individuals (aged ≥2 years) were eligible to participate if they were confirmed HIV-seropositive, qualified for first-line ART, planned to reside in the area for more than 1 year, and provided informed consent. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either PDR testing by oligonucleotide ligation assay (OLA) to guide selection of ART or to standard of care, which did not include OLA testing. The OLA-guided therapy group had pre-ART peripheral blood mononuclear cells evaluated for drug resistance to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) at codons Lys103Asn, Tyr181Cys, Gly190Ala, and to lamivudine at Met184Val, and when at least one drug-resistant codon was detected in a participant's pre-ART specimen, clinicians were directed to prescribe protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. Those without detected resistance and those who were randomised to standard of care received NNRTI-based first-line ART. The primary outcome was plasma HIV-1 RNA of at least 400 copies per mL at 4, 8, or 12 months after ART initiation, which defined virological failure, assessed in all participants who received treatment (data were censored for those lost-to-follow-up or who died). The study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01898754., Findings: We screened 1198 participants between May 28, 2013, and Nov 4, 2014, of whom 991 (83%) were enrolled (492 received OLA and 495 received standard of care; four did not begin treatment). 93 participants (prevalence 9·4%) had PDR (95% CI 7·7-11·4). 34 (8·5%) of 400 participants in the OLA group had virological failure at month 12 of ART (95% CI 6·0-11·7) compared with 39 (9·7%) of 402 (7·0-13·0) in the standard-of-care group (log-rank p=0·26). Among participants with PDR, virological failure was lower in the OLA-guided therapy group than in the standard-of-care group: five (14%) of 35 compared with 13 (50%) of 26; p=0·0020). Among those prescribed NNRTI-based ART, participants given efavirenz were less likely to have virological failure than were those receiving nevirapine (odds ratio 0·37, 95% CI 0·22-0·62; p<0·0001). The OLA-guided therapy group had 39 serious non-lethal adverse events and 34 deaths. The standard-of-care group had 34 severe adverse events and 43 deaths, differences that were not significant. Adverse events judged to potentially be due to ART were few and similar between groups, with 17 (16%) in the OLA-guided therapy group and 16 (16%) in the standard-of-care group (p=0·90)., Interpretation: Our finding that OLA testing for PDR reduced virological failure in only those with specific PDR mutations suggests that PDR poses less of a risk for virological failure than that predicted by past prevalence estimates, and that the value of PDR testing to reduce virological failure should be assessed for antiretroviral treatment regimens., Funding: US National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The term HIV controller refers to the small proportion of individuals infected with HIV who can spontaneously control viraemia to maintain very low viral loads. One major unresolved question is whether HIV controllers should receive antiretroviral therapy, given that international guidelines recommend treatment for all individuals who are infected with HIV. Differences in the definitions of a controller (in terms of the viral-load cutoff and the duration of viral control) and contrasting reports on CD4 T-cell decline, chronic immune activation, the cardiovascular risk, and loss of viral control in controllers have prevented the development of a consensus view., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy and its increasing availability globally means that millions of people living with HIV now have a much longer life expectancy. However, people living with HIV have disproportionately high incidence of major comorbidities and reduced health-related quality of life. Health systems must respond to this situation by pioneering care and service delivery models that promote wellness rather than mere survival. In this Series paper, we review evidence about the emerging challenges of the care of people with HIV beyond viral suppression and identify four priority areas for action: integrating HIV services and non-HIV services, reducing HIV-related discrimination in health-care settings, identifying indicators to monitor health systems' progress toward new goals, and catalysing new forms of civil society engagement in the more broadly focused HIV response that is now needed worldwide. Furthermore, in the context of an increasing burden of chronic diseases, we must consider the shift that is underway in the HIV field in relation to burgeoning policy and programmatic efforts to promote healthy ageing., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The number of South African adolescents receiving HIV care and treatment in South Africa is growing. By use of routinely collected laboratory data from South Africa's National HIV Programme, we aimed to quantify the numbers of adolescents accessing HIV care and treatment over time, characterise the role of perinatal infection in these trends, and estimate proportions of adolescents seeking HIV care and antiretroviral therapy (ART) in South Africa's public sector., Methods: We did a retrospective, descriptive cohort study of children and adolescents aged 1-19 years accessing care in South Africa's public sector HIV treatment programme from 2005 to 2016 with a CD4 cell count or viral load recorded in South Africa's National Health Laboratory Service database. We estimated the total number of children and adolescents entering HIV care with a CD4 cell count or viral load test result by calendar period, as well as the proportion in care and receiving ART with at least one viral load test result. We stratified analyses by gender and by whether the patient entered care at younger than 15 years (probably perinatally infected) or at 15-19 years (probably infected in adolescence)., Findings: We identified 730 882 patients aged 1-19 years at entry to care between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2016. 209 205 (54%) of 388 439 patients entering care younger than 15 years and 301 242 (88%) of 342 443 patients entering care aged 15-19 were female. During the study period, the number of virologically monitored patients aged 15-19 years receiving ART increased from 7949 in 2005-08 to 80 918 in 2013-16. 92 783 (66%) of 140 028 patients aged 15-19 years seeking care started ART by 2016, well below UNAID's target of ART for 90% of those diagnosed. We project that the number of adolescents on ART will continue to rise., Interpretation: The many adolescents aged 15-19 years receiving ART reflect the ageing of children entering care at ages 1-14 years, and increases in care-seeking among horizontally infected adolescents aged 15-19 years. However, many adolescents seeking care do not start ART, suggesting an urgent need for interventions to increase uptake of ART and improve services for this population., Funding: US National Institutes of Health, and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief through the US Agency for International Development., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The decision about whether to switch to third-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in patients with treatment failure on second-line therapy is difficult in settings with little access to genotypic resistance testing. In this study, we used a standardised algorithm including a wide range of adherence-enhancing interventions followed by a new viral load measurement to decide whether to switch to third-line therapy in this situation. The decision, made on the basis of effectiveness of the adherence reinforcement to drive viral resuppression, did not use genotypic resistance testing., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, adults in four west African countries with treatment failure of a boosted protease inhibitor ART regimen were offered nine adherence reinforcement interventions, and followed up for 64 weeks. We measured viral load at week 12 and used the results to decide ART treatment at week 16: if successful resuppression (plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 copies per mL or had decreased by ≥2 log 10 copies per mL compared with baseline), patients continued the same second-line regimen; otherwise they switched to a third-line regimen based on ritonavir-boosted darunavir and raltegravir. The primary endpoint was virological success at week 64 (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL). After study termination we did genotypic resistance testing on frozen plasma samples collected at baseline, and retrospectively determined the appropriateness of the week 16 decision on the basis of the baseline genotypic susceptibility score., Findings: Between March 28, 2013, and May 11, 2015, of the 198 eligible participants, five died before week 16. Of the 193 remaining, 130 (67%) reached viral resuppression and continued with second-line ART, and 63 (33%) switched to third-line ART at week 16. Post-study genotypic resistance testing showed that the baseline genotypic susceptibility score was calculable in 166 patients, of whom 57 (34%) had a score less than 2. We retrospectively concluded that the week 16 decision was appropriate in 145 (75%) patients. At week 64, four patients (2%) were lost to follow-up, ten (5%) had died, and 101 (52%) had a viral load less than 50 copies per mL., Interpretation: Poor adherence is the first problem to tackle in patients for whom second-line ART is failing when resistance tests are not routinely available and is effectively a manageable problem. Lack of access to genotypic resistance testing should not be an obstacle to the prescription of third-line ART in patients who do not achieve viral resuppression after adherence reinforcement., Funding: French Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-drug interactions between orally administered antiretroviral therapy (ART) and hormones released from an intravaginal ring are not known. We hypothesised that ART containing either efavirenz or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir would alter plasma concentrations of vaginally administered etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol but that ART concentrations would be unchanged during use of an intravaginal ring., Methods: We did a parallel, three-group, pharmacokinetic evaluation at HIV clinics in Asia (two sites), South America (five), sub-Saharan Africa (three), and the USA (11) between Dec 30, 2014, and Sept 12, 2016. We enrolled women with HIV who were either ART-naive (control group; n=25), receiving efavirenz-based ART (n=25), or receiving atazanavir-ritonavir-based ART (n=24). Women receiving ART were required to be on the same regimen for at least 30 days, with 400 copies or less per mL of plasma HIV-1 RNA; women not receiving ART had CD4 counts of 350 cells per μL or less. We excluded participants who had a bilateral oophorectomy or conditions that were contraindicated in the intravaginal ring product labelling. An intravaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol was inserted at entry (day 0). Single plasma samples for hormone concentrations were collected on days 7, 14, and 21 after intravaginal ring insertion. The primary outcome was the plasma concentration of etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol on day 21. Etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol concentrations were compared between each ART group and the control group by geometric mean ratio (GMR) with 90% CIs and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. As secondary outcomes, efavirenz or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir concentrations were assessed by 8-h intensive pharmacokinetic sampling at entry before intravaginal ring insertion and before intravaginal ring removal on day 21. Antiretroviral areas under the concentration-time curve (AUC 0-8 h ) were compared before and after intravaginal ring insertion by GMR (90% CI) and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01903031., Findings: Between Dec 30, 2014, and Sept 12, 2016, we enrolled 84 participants in the study; ten participants were excluded from the primary hormone analysis. 74 participants met the primary endpoint: 25 in the control group, 25 in the efavirenz group, and 24 in the atazanavir group. On day 21 of intravaginal ring use, participants receiving efavirenz had 79% lower etonogestrel (GMR 0·21, 90% CI 0·16-0·28; p<0·0001) and 59% lower ethinylestradiol (0·41, 0·32-0·52; p<0·0001) concentrations compared with the control group. By contrast, participants receiving ritonavir-boosted atazanavir had 71% higher etonogestrel (1·71, 1·37-2·14; p<0·0001), yet 38% lower ethinylestradiol (0·62, 0·49-0·79; p=0·0037) compared with the control group. The AUC 0-8 h of efavirenz or atazanavir did not differ between the groups., Interpretation: Hormone exposure was significantly lower when an intravaginal ring contraceptive was combined with efavirenz-based ART. Further studies designed to examine pharmacodynamic endpoints, such as ovulation, when intravaginal ring hormones are combined with efavirenz are warranted., Funding: National Institutes of Health, through the AIDS Clinical Trials Group and the International Maternal Pediatric Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials Network, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the National Institute of Mental Health., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Primary analyses of the SWORD-1 and SWORD-2 trials at 48 weeks showed that switching to a two-drug regimen of dolutegravir plus rilpivirine was non-inferior to continuing a standard three-drug or four-drug antiretroviral regimen for maintenance of virological suppression in people with HIV-1. Here, we present efficacy and safety data from the 100-week analysis of the trials., Methods: SWORD-1 and SWORD-2 are identically designed, randomised, open-label phase 3 studies at 65 centres in 13 countries and 60 centres in 11 countries, respectively. Adults aged 18 years or older who were on a standard three-drug or four-drug antiretroviral therapy (ART) and had had fewer than 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL of plasma for at least 6 months were randomly assigned (1:1) to 50 mg dolutegravir plus 25 mg rilpivirine orally once daily (early-switch group) or to continue their standard regimen for 52 weeks before switching to the dolutegravir plus rilpivirine combination (ie, the late-switch group). In this analysis of week 100 data, the efficacy endpoint of interest was the proportion of participants with fewer than 50 copies of HIV-1 RNA per mL of plasma (per the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm). This outcome was assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Data were analysed after the last participant completed week 100 (Sept 15, 2017) and verified through the data cutoff (Nov 21, 2017). SWORD-1 and SWORD-2 are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02429791 and NCT02422797, respectively., Findings: 513 participants were randomly assigned to dolutegravir plus rilpivirine (ie, the early-switch group) and 511 to continue their standard ART regimen, 477 of whom then switched to dolutegravir plus rilpivirine at week 52 (ie, the late-switch group). At week 100, 456 (89% [95% CI 86-92]) of 513 participants in the early-switch group and 444 (93% [91-95]) of 477 in the late-switch group had fewer than 50 HIV-1 RNA copies per mL. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 103 (20%) participants in the early-switch group and 58 (12%) in the late-switch group. The most common drug-related adverse events were headache (11 participants in the early-switch group [2%] vs eight [2%] in the late-switch group) and nausea (eight [2%] vs five [1%])., Interpretation: The combination of dolutegravir plus rilpivirine sustained virological suppression of HIV-1, was associated with a low frequency of virological failure, and had a favourable safety profile, which support its use as a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing and protease inhibitor-sparing alternative to three-drug regimens that reduces overall exposure to ART., Funding: ViiV Healthcare and Janssen Pharmaceutica., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) management is challenging for individuals in resource-limited settings presenting for third-line treatment because of complex resistance patterns, partly due to reduced access to viral load monitoring. We aimed to evaluate use of newer antiretroviral drugs and contemporary management approaches, including population-based sequencing, to select appropriate antiretrovirals, plasma viral load monitoring, and interventions to improve adherence in individuals presenting with second-line viral failure., Methods: A5288 was a phase 4, third-line ART strategy study done at 19 urban sites in ten countries that enrolled adult participants with confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA (viral load) of 1000 copies per mL or more after more than 24 weeks of protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. The primary objective was to use antiretrovirals (raltegravir, etravirine, and ritonavir-boosted darunavir) and diagnostic monitoring technologies, including viral load, genotyping, and adherence support to achieve viral load suppression (defined as ≤200 copies per mL) in 65% or more of participants. ART history and real-time drug resistance genotypes were used to assign participants to one of four cohorts: cohort A (no lopinavir resistance) stayed on second-line ART and cohorts B (B1, best available nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs] plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir; B2, ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus etravirine; B3, ritonavir-boosted darunavir, raltegravir, and either tenofovir plus emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), C (ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus tenofovir-emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), and D (best available NRTIs plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir) were defined by increasing levels of resistance and received appropriate regimens, including new antiretrovirals. Participants in Cohort B without detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned by blocked randomisation to cohorts B1 and B2, and those with detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned to cohort B3. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01641367., Findings: From Jan 10, 2013, to Sept 10, 2015, 545 participants were enrolled. 287 (53%) were assigned to cohort A, 74 (14%) to B1, 72 (13%) to B2, eight (1%) to B3, 70 (13%) to C, and 34 (6%) to D. Overall, 349 (64%, 95% CI 60-68) participants achieved viral suppression at week 48, with proportions varying from 125 (44%) of 287 in cohort A to 65 (88%) of 74 in cohort B1, 63 (88%) of 72 in B2, eight (100%) of eight in B3, 63 (90%) of 70 in C, and 25 (74%) of 34 in D. Participants in cohort A remained on their second-line protease inhibitor, and had the most participants with grade 3 or higher adverse events (147 [51%])., Interpretation: Targeted real-time genotyping to select third-line ART can appropriately allocate more costly antiretrovirals to those with greater levels of HIV drug resistance., Funding: National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bictegravir, co-formulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, has shown good efficacy and tolerability, and similar bone, renal, and lipid profiles to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, in treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection, without development of treatment-emergent resistance. Here, we report 48-week results of a phase 3 study investigating switching to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection., Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, HIV-1-infected adults were enrolled at 96 outpatient centres in nine countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and on a regimen of 50 mg dolutegravir, 600 mg abacavir, and 300 mg lamivudine (fixed-dose combination or multi-tablet regimen); had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL/min or higher; and had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 3 months or more before screening. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg; herein known as the bictegravir group), or to remain on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (herein known as the dolutegravir group), once daily for 48 weeks. The investigators, participants, study staff, and individuals assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (according to the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm); the prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4%. The primary efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting participants and is in the open-label extension phase, wherein participants are given the option to receive bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for an additional 96 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603120., Findings: Between Nov 11, 2015, and July 6, 2016, 567 participants were randomly assigned and 563 were treated (282 received bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, and 281 received dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine). Switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to remaining on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for the primary outcome: three (1%) of 282 in the bictegravir group had HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 versus one (<1%) of 281 participants in the dolutegravir group (difference 0·7%, 95·002% CI -1·0 to 2·8; p=0·62). Treatment-related adverse events were recorded in 23 (8%) participants in the bictegravir group and 44 (16%) in the dolutegravir group. Treatment was discontinued because of adverse events in six (2%) participants in the bictegravir group and in two (1%) participants in the dolutegravir group., Interpretation: The fixed-dose combination of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might provide a safe and efficacious option for ongoing treatment of HIV-1 infection., Funding: Gilead Sciences., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A new first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen containing dolutegravir is being rolled out in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In studies from predominantly high-income settings, dolutegravir-based regimens had superior efficacy, tolerability, and durability compared with existing first-line regimens. However, several questions remain about the roll out of dolutegravir in LMICs, where most people with HIV are women of reproductive age, tuberculosis prevalence can be high, and access to viral load and HIV drug resistance testing is limited. Findings from cohort studies suggest that dolutegravir is safe when initiated in pregnancy, but more data are needed to determine the risk of adverse birth outcomes when dolutegravir-based regimens are initiated before conception. Increasing access to viral load testing to monitor the effectiveness of dolutegravir remains crucial, but the best strategy to manage patients with viraemia is unclear. Furthermore, evidence to support the effectiveness of dolutegravir when given with tuberculosis treatment is scarce, particularly in programmatic settings in LMICs. Lastly, whether nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance will affect the long-term efficacy of dolutegravir-based regimens in first-line, and potentially second-line, ART is unknown. Clinical trials, cohorts, and surveillance of HIV drug resistance will be necessary to answer these questions and to maximise the benefits of this new regimen., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Switching from therapy based on a boosted protease inhibitor to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide could avoid drug interactions and unwanted side-effects in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection, while maintaining a high barrier to resistance and providing a simplified once-daily, single-tablet regimen. Here, we report 48 week results of a phase 3 study investigating this switch., Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were enrolled at 121 outpatient centres in ten countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or higher, had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or more before screening, and were on a regimen consisting of boosted atazanavir or darunavir plus either emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated once-daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg), herein known as the bictegravir group, or to remain on their baseline boosted protease inhibitor regimen, herein known as the boosted protease inhibitor group, for 48 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir at screening. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting patients and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603107., Findings: Between Dec 2, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 578 participants were randomly assigned and 577 were treated (290 in the bictegravir group and 287 in the boosted protease inhibitor group). At week 48, five participants (2%) in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher (difference 0·0%, 95·002% CI -2·5 to 2·5), thus switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy. The overall incidence and severity of adverse events was similar between groups, although headache occurred more frequently in the bictegravir group than in the boosted protease inhibitor group. 233 (80%) participants in the bictegravir group and 226 (79%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had an adverse event. Only two (1%) participants in the bictegravir group and one (<1%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. 54 participants (19%) in the bictegravir group had drug-related adverse events compared with six (2%) in the protease inhibitor group., Interpretation: Fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might be a safe and efficacious alternative to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection., Funding: Gilead Sciences., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Simplified regimens with reduced pill burden and fewer side-effects are desirable for people living with HIV. We investigated the efficacy and safety of switching to a single-tablet regimen of darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus continuing a regimen of boosted protease inhibitor, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate., Methods: EMERALD was a phase-3, randomised, active-controlled, open-label, international, multicentre trial, done at 106 sites across nine countries in North America and Europe. HIV-1-infected adults were eligible to participate if they were treatment-experienced and virologically suppressed (viral load <50 copies per mL for ≥2 months; one viral load of 50-200 copies per mL was allowed within 12 months before screening), and patients with a history of virological failure on non-darunavir regimens were allowed. Randomisation was by computer-generated interactive web-response system and stratified by boosted protease inhibitor use at baseline. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to switch to the open-label study regimen or continue the control regimen. The study regimen consisted of a fixed-dose tablet containing darunavir 800 mg, cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg, which was taken once per day for 48 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with virological rebound (confirmed viral load ≥50 copies per mL or premature discontinuations, with last viral load ≥50 copies per mL) cumulative through week 48; we tested non-inferiority (4% margin) of the study regimen versus the control regimen in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02269917., Findings: The study began on April 1, 2015, and the cutoff date for the week 48 primary analysis was Feb 24, 2017. Of 1141 patients (763 in the study group and 378 in the control group), 664 (58%) had previously received five or more antiretrovirals, including screening antiretrovirals, and 169 (15%) had previous virological failure on a non-darunavir regimen. The study regimen was non-inferior to the control for virological rebound cumulative through week 48 (19 [2·5%] of 763 patients in the study group vs eight (2·1%) of 378 patients in the control group; difference 0·4%, 95% CI -1·5 to 2·2; p<0·0001). No resistance to any study drug was observed. Numbers of discontinuations related to adverse events (11 [1%] of 763 patients in the study group vs four [1%] of 378 patients in the control group) and grade 3-4 adverse events (52 [7%] patients vs 31 [8%] patients) were similar between the two groups. There was a small non-clinically relevant but statistically significant (0·2 [SD 1·1] vs 0·1 [1·1], p=0.010) difference between the two groups in change from baseline in total cholesterol to HDL-cholesterol ratio. Only one serious adverse event (pancreatitis in the study group) was deemed as possibly related to the study regimen., Interpretation: Our findings show the safety and efficacy of single-tablet darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a potential switch option for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults with viral suppression., Funding: Janssen., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The high genetic barrier to resistance of dolutegravir might allow for its use as maintenance monotherapy in patients with HIV. We investigated whether dolutegravir monotherapy was non-inferior to combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) for maintaining virological suppression in patients with HIV-1 infection successfully treated with combination ART., Methods: We did this open-label, phase 2, randomised non-inferiority trial at two medical centres in the Netherlands. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) were on combination ART, had been virologically suppressed (HIV RNA <50 copies per mL) for at least 6 months, and had CD4 nadirs of 200 cells per μL or higher, HIV RNA zeniths of 100 000 copies per mL or less, and no history of virological failure. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), via a web-based block randomisation method (variable block sizes of 4 and 6), to switch to dolutegravir monotherapy (50 mg once a day) either immediately or after a delay of 24 weeks of continued combination ART. Randomisation was stratified by HIV RNA zenith (<50 000 copies per mL vs 50 000-99 999 copies per mL). Investigators and patients were not masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with plasma HIV RNA viral loads of less than 200 copies per mL at week 24, with a non-inferiority margin of 12%. We did analyses in the on-treatment and intention-to-treat populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02401828., Findings: Between March 10, 2015, and Feb 4, 2016, we randomly assigned 51 patients to the immediate switch group and 53 patients to the delayed switch group. One patient who received immediate monotherapy discontinued treatment at week 12 because of disturbed sleep. At week 24, dolutegravir monotherapy was non-inferior to combination ART, with plasma HIV RNA loads of 200 copies per mL or higher observed in 2% (1/50) of patients in the immediate switch group and in no patients in the delayed switch group (difference 2%, 95% CI -5 to 12). Of patients assigned to the delayed switch group, 47 (89%) switched to dolutegravir monotherapy at week 24, two (4%) of whom subsequently discontinued monotherapy because of headache (n=1) and disturbed sleep (n=1). Eight (8%) of the 95 patients who remained on dolutegravir monotherapy had virological failure; all had therapeutic plasma concentrations of dolutegravir. In three (38%) of the eight patients, mutations associated with resistance were detected in the integrase gene. According to a predefined stopping rule, detection of these mutations led to premature study discontinuation., Interpretation: Dolutegravir monotherapy was non-inferior to combination ART at 24 weeks. However, virological failure continued to occur thereafter and led to dolutegravir resistance. Dolutegravir should not be used as maintenance monotherapy., Funding: Erasmus Trustfonds., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Once daily regimens are preferred for HIV-1 treatment, to facilitate adherence and improve quality of life. We compared a new once daily formulation of raltegravir to the currently marketed twice daily formulation., Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3, non-inferiority study, we enrolled participants aged 18 years or older with HIV-1 RNA of 1000 or more copies per mL and no previous antiretroviral treatment at 139 sites worldwide. We randomly assigned participants (2:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to raltegravir 1200 mg (two 600 mg tablets) orally once daily or raltegravir 400 mg (one tablet) orally twice daily, each with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine orally once daily, for up to 96 weeks. A computer-generated allocation schedule stratified randomisation by screening HIV-1 RNA value and co-infection with hepatitis B or C. Participants, sponsor personnel, investigators, and study site personnel involved in the treatment or evaluation of the participants were unaware of the treatment group assignments. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 40 copies per mL at week 48 assessed with the US Food and Drug Administration Snapshot algorithm. Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI was greater than -10%. We assessed efficacy and safety in all participants who received one dose or more of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02131233., Findings: Between May 26, 2014, and Dec 5, 2014, 802 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned, 533 to once daily treatment and 269 to twice daily; 797 received study therapy, 531 once daily and 266 twice daily. At week 48, 472 (89%) of 531 once daily recipients and 235 (88%) of 266 twice daily recipients achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 40 copies per mL (treatment difference 0·5%, 95% CI -4·2 to 5·2). Drug-related adverse events occurred in 130 (24%) of 531 participants in the once daily group (one of which was serious; none led to treatment discontinuation) and 68 (26%) of 266 participants in the twice daily group (two of which were serious; two led to treatment discontinuation). The most common drug-related adverse events were nausea (39 [7%] vs 18 [7%]), headache (16 [3%] vs 12 [5%]), and dizziness (12 [2%] vs eight [3%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported., Interpretation: A once daily raltegravir 1200 mg regimen was non-inferior compared with raltegravir 400 mg twice daily for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. These results support the use of raltegravir 1200 mg once daily for first-line therapy., Funding: Merck & Co, Inc., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite satisfactory efficacy of WHO-recommended second-line antiretroviral treatment for patients with HIV in low-income countries, the need for simplified, low-cost, and less-toxic maintenance strategies remains high. We compared boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy with dual therapy with boosted protease inhibitor plus lamivudine in patients on second-line antiretrovial therapy (ART)., Methods: We did a multicentre, randomised, parallel, open-label, superiority, trial in the HIV services of five hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa (Yaoundé, Cameroon; Dakar, Senegal; and Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso). We recruited patients from the long-term, post-trial cohort of the ANRS 12169/2LADY study that compared the efficacy of three second-line combinations based on boosted protease inhibitors. Participants for our study were HIV-1 infected with multiple mutations including M184V, at first-line failure, aged 18 years and older, on boosted protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) for at least 48 weeks with at least 48 weeks follow-up in the 2LADY trial, with two viral load measurements of less than 200 copies per mL in the previous 6 months, CD4 counts of more than 100 cells per μL, adherence of at least 90%, and no change to ART in the past 3 months. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive either monotherapy with their boosted protease inhibitor (once-daily darunavir 800 mg [two 400 mg tablets] boosted with ritonavir 100 mg [one tablet] or coformulation of lopinavir 200 mg with ritonavir 50 mg [two tablets taken twice per day]) or to boosted protease inhibitor plus once-daily lamivudine 300 mg (one 300 mg tablet or two 150 mg tablets). Computer-generated randomisation was stratified by study site and viral load at screening (< 50 copies per mL, and 50-200 copies per mL), and concealed from study personnel throughout the inclusion period. After randomisation, treatment allocation was not masked from clinicians or patients]. Patients had follow-up visits at weeks 4 and 12, and every 3 months until 96 weeks; if viral load exceeded 500 copies per mL at any visit, NRTI (tenofovir and lamivudine) were reintroduced into treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who had treatment failure at 96 weeks in the intention-to-treat analysis, where treatment failure was defined as one of the following: a confirmed viral load of more than 500 copies per mL, reintroduction of NRTI, or interruption of boosted protease inhibitor. We designed the study to detect a difference of 12% between groups in the primary outcome, with an expected 20% of patients having treatment failure in the monotherapy group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01905059., Findings: Between March 5, 2014, and Jan 26, 2015, 265 participants were assigned to receive monotherapy (133) or boosted protease inhibitor plus lamivudine (132). At week 48, an independent data safety monitoring board reviewed data, and advised discontinuation of the monotherapy group because the number of failures had exceeded the expected 20%; therefore results here are for week 48. At this point, treatment failure occurred in four (3·0%; 95% CI 0·8-7·6) of 132 participants on dual therapy and 33 (24·8%; 17·7-33·0) of 133 participants on monotherapy (relative risk 8·2, 95% CI 3·0-22·5; odds ratio 10·6, 95% CI 3·6-42·1). The difference between groups (21·8%, 95% CI 13·9-29·7; p<0·0001) showed superiority of dual therapy compared with monotherapy. We recorded 46 severe adverse events of grade 3 or 4 (29 in the monotherapy group, 17 in the boosted protease inhibitor plus lamivudine group); one event in the montherapy group (intoxication resulting from co-administration of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir with an ergotamine derivate) was deemed related to study drug. Two participants in the monotherapy group and one in the dual therapy group died, all from causes not related to study drugs or procedures (one from complications from gastric cancer surgery, one in a work accident, and one from a lung disease of unknown cause)., Interpretation: After viral suppression with boosted protease inhibitor plus NRTI in second-line ART, maintenance therapy with boosted protease inhibitor plus lamivudine was associated with a high rate of success, despite the presence of M184V mutations at first-line treatment failure. Results indicated that boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy cannot be recommended for these patients., Funding: Agence National de Recherche sur le Sida et les hépatites and Janssen Pharmaceutica., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Health care for people living with HIV has improved substantially in the past two decades. Robust estimates of how these improvements have affected prognosis and life expectancy are of utmost importance to patients, clinicians, and health-care planners. We examined changes in 3 year survival and life expectancy of patients starting combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) between 1996 and 2013., Methods: We analysed data from 18 European and North American HIV-1 cohorts. Patients (aged ≥16 years) were eligible for this analysis if they had started ART with three or more drugs between 1996 and 2010 and had at least 3 years of potential follow-up. We estimated adjusted (for age, sex, AIDS, risk group, CD4 cell count, and HIV-1 RNA at start of ART) all-cause and cause-specific mortality hazard ratios (HRs) for the first year after ART initiation and the second and third years after ART initiation in four calendar periods (1996-99, 2000-03 [comparator], 2004-07, 2008-10). We estimated life expectancy by calendar period of initiation of ART., Findings: 88 504 patients were included in our analyses, of whom 2106 died during the first year of ART and 2302 died during the second or third year of ART. Patients starting ART in 2008-10 had lower all-cause mortality in the first year after ART initiation than did patients starting ART in 2000-03 (adjusted HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·61-0·83). All-cause mortality in the second and third years after initiation of ART was also lower in patients who started ART in 2008-10 than in those who started in 2000-03 (0·57, 0·49-0·67); this decrease was not fully explained by viral load and CD4 cell count at 1 year. Rates of non-AIDS deaths were lower in patients who started ART in 2008-10 (vs 2000-03) in the first year (0·48, 0·34-0·67) and second and third years (0·29, 0·21-0·40) after initiation of ART. Between 1996 and 2010, life expectancy in 20-year-old patients starting ART increased by about 9 years in women and 10 years in men., Interpretation: Even in the late ART era, survival during the first 3 years of ART continues to improve, which probably reflects transition to less toxic antiretroviral drugs, improved adherence, prophylactic measures, and management of comorbidity. Prognostic models and life expectancy estimates should be updated to account for these improvements., Funding: UK Medical Research Council, UK Department for International Development, EU EDCTP2 programme., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cross-resistance after first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure is expected to impair activity of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in second-line therapy for patients with HIV, but evidence for the effect of cross-resistance on virological outcomes is limited. We aimed to assess the association between the activity, predicted by resistance testing, of the NRTIs used in second-line therapy and treatment outcomes for patients infected with HIV., Methods: We did an observational analysis of additional data from a published open-label, randomised trial of second-line ART (EARNEST) in sub-Saharan Africa. 1277 adults or adolescents infected with HIV in whom first-line ART had failed (assessed by WHO criteria with virological confirmation) were randomly assigned to a boosted protease inhibitor (standardised to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir) with two to three NRTIs (clinician-selected, without resistance testing); or with raltegravir; or alone as protease inhibitor monotherapy (discontinued after week 96). We tested genotypic resistance on stored baseline samples in patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group and calculated the predicted activity of prescribed second-line NRTIs. We measured viral load in stored samples for all patients obtained every 12-16 weeks. This trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com (number ISRCTN 37737787) and ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00988039)., Findings: Baseline genotypes were available in 391 (92%) of 426 patients in the protease inhibitor and NRTI group. 176 (89%) of 198 patients prescribed a protease inhibitor with no predicted-active NRTIs had viral suppression (viral load <400 copies per mL) at week 144, compared with 312 (81%) of 383 patients in the protease inhibitor and raltegravir group at week 144 (p=0·02) and 233 (61%) of 280 patients in the protease inhibitor monotherapy group at week 96 (p<0·0001). Compared with results with no active NRTIs, 95 (85%) of 112 patients with one predicted-active NRTI had viral suppression (p=0·3) and 20 (77%) of 26 patients with two or three active NRTIs had viral suppression (p=0·08). Over all follow-up, greater predicted NRTI activity was associated with worse viral load suppression (global p=0·0004)., Interpretation: Genotypic resistance testing might not accurately predict NRTI activity in protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. Our results do not support the introduction of routine resistance testing in ART programmes in low-income settings for the purpose of selecting second-line NRTIs., Funding: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, UK Medical Research Council, Institito de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, WHO, Merck., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: New antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens for HIV could improve clinical outcomes for patients. To inform global guidelines, we aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of recommended ART regimens for HIV in ART-naive patients., Methods: For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched for randomised clinical trials published up to July 5, 2015, comparing recommended antiretroviral regimens in treatment-naive adults and adolescents (aged 12 years or older) with HIV. We extracted data on trial and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: viral suppression, mortality, AIDS defining illnesses, discontinuations, discontinuations due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. We synthesised data using network meta-analyses in a Bayesian framework and included older treatments, such as indinavir, to serve as connecting nodes. We defined network nodes in terms of specific antivirals rather than specific ART regimens. We categorised backbone regimens and adjusted for them through group-specific meta-regression. We used the GRADE framework to interpret the strength of inference., Findings: We identified 5865 citations through database searches and other sources, of which, 126 articles related to 71 unique trials were included in the network analysis, including 34 032 patients randomly assigned to 161 treatment groups. For viral suppression at 48 weeks, compared with efavirenz, the odds ratio (OR) for viral suppression was 1·87 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·34-2·64) with dolutegravir and 1·40 (1·02-1·96) with raltegravir; with respect to viral suppression, low-dose efavirenz was similar to all other treatments. Both low-dose efavirenz and integrase strand transfer inhibitors tended to be protective of discontinuations due to adverse events relative to normal-dose efavirenz. The most protective effect relative to efavirenz in network meta-analyses was that of dolutegravir (OR 0·26, 95% CrI 0·14-0·47), followed by low-dose efavirenz (0·39, 0·16-0·92). Owing to insufficient data, we could make no conclusions about serious adverse events. Low event rates also limited the quality of evidence with regard to mortality and AIDS defining illnesses., Interpretation: The efficacy and safety of ART has substantially improved with the introduction of newer drug classes of antiretrovirals that are now available to patients and HIV care providers. Their improved tolerance could be part of a larger solution to improve retention, which is a challenge, particularly in low-income and middle-income country settings., Funding: The World Health Organization., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In Africa, up to 30% of HIV-infected patients who are clinically eligible for antiretroviral therapy (ART) do not start timely treatment. We assessed the effects of an intervention targeting prevalent health systems barriers to ART initiation on timing and completeness of treatment initiation., Methods: In this stepped-wedge, non-blinded, cluster-randomised controlled trial, 20 clinics in southwestern Uganda were randomly assigned in groups of five clinics every 6 months to the intervention by a computerised random number generator. This procedure continued until all clinics had crossed over from control (standard of care) to the intervention, which consisted of opinion-leader-led training and coaching of front-line health workers, a point-of-care CD4 cell count testing platform, a revised counselling approach without mandatory multiple pre-initiation sessions, and feedback to the facilities on their ART initiation rates and how they compared with other facilities. Treatment-naive, HIV-infected adults (aged ≥18 years) who were clinically eligible for ART during the study period were included in the study population. The primary outcome was ART initiation 14 days after first clinical eligibility for ART. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01810289., Findings: Between April 11, 2013, and Feb 2, 2015, 12 024 eligible patients visited one of the 20 participating clinics. Median CD4 count was 310 cells per μL (IQR 179-424). 3753 of 4747 patients (weighted proportion 80%) in the intervention group had started ART by 2 weeks after eligibility compared with 2585 of 7066 patients (38%) in the control group (risk difference 41·9%, 95% CI 40·1-43·8). Vital status was ascertained in a random sample of 208 patients in the intervention group and 199 patients in the control group. Four deaths (2%) occurred in the intervention group and five (3%) occurred in the control group., Interpretation: A multicomponent intervention targeting health-care worker behaviour increased the probability of ART initiation 14 days after eligibility. This intervention consists of widely accessible components and has been tested in a real-world setting, and is therefore well positioned for use at scale., Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the President's Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: HIV programmes face challenges achieving high rates of HIV testing and treatment needed to optimise health and to reduce transmission. We used data from the Botswana Combination Prevention Project study survey to assess Botswana's progress toward achieving UNAIDS targets for 2020: 90% of all people living with HIV knowing their status, 90% of these receiving sustained antiretroviral therapy (ART), and 90% of those having virological suppression (90-90-90)., Methods: A population-based sample of individuals was recruited and interviewed in 30 rural and periurban communities from Oct 30, 2013, to Nov 24, 2015, as part of a large, ongoing community-randomised trial designed to assess the effect of a combination prevention package on HIV incidence. A random sample of about 20% of households in each community was selected. Consenting household residents aged 16-64 years who were Botswana citizens or spouses of citizens responded to a questionnaire and had blood drawn for HIV testing in the absence of documentation of positive HIV status. Viral load testing was done in all HIV-infected participants, irrespective of treatment status. We used modified Poisson generalised estimating equations to obtain prevalence ratios, corresponding Huber robust SEs, and 95% Wald CIs to examine associations between individual sociodemographic factors and a binary outcome indicating achievement of the three individual and combined overall 90-90-90 targets. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01965470., Findings: 81% of enumerated eligible household members took part in the survey (10% refused and 9% were absent). Among 12 610 participants surveyed, 3596 (29%) were infected with HIV, and 2995 (83·3%, 95% CI 81·4-85·2) of these individuals already knew their HIV status. Among those who knew their HIV status, 2617 (87·4%, 95% CI 85·8-89·0) were receiving ART (95% of those eligible by national guidelines, and 73% of all infected people). Of the 2609 individuals receiving ART with a viral load measurement, 2517 (96·5%, 95% CI 96·0-97·0) had viral load of 400 copies per mL or less. Overall, 70·2% (95% CI 67·5-73·0) of HIV-infected people had virological suppression, close to the UNAIDS target of 73%., Interpretation: UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets are achievable even in resource-constrained settings with high HIV burden., Funding: US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A clinical decision support system (CDSS) is a computer program that applies a set of rules to data stored in electronic health records to offer actionable recommendations. We aimed to establish whether a CDSS that supports detection of immunological treatment failure among patients with HIV taking antiretroviral therapy (ART) would improve appropriate and timely action., Methods: We did this prospective, cluster randomised controlled trial in adults and children (aged ≥18 months) who were eligible for, and receiving, ART at HIV clinics in Siaya County, western Kenya. Health facilities were randomly assigned (1:1), via block randomisation (block size of two) with a computer-generated random number sequence, to use electronic health records either alone (control) or with CDSS (intervention). Facilities were matched by type and by number of patients enrolled in HIV care. The primary outcome measure was the difference between groups in the proportion of patients who experienced immunological treatment failure and had a documented clinical action. We used generalised linear mixed models with random effects to analyse clustered data. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01634802., Findings: Between Sept 1, 2012, and Jan 31, 2014, 13 clinics, comprising 41,062 patients, were randomly assigned to the control group (n=6) or the intervention group (n=7). Data collection at each site took 12 months. Among patients eligible for ART, 10,358 (99%) of 10,478 patients were receiving ART at control sites and 10,991 (99%) of 11,028 patients were receiving ART at intervention sites. Of these patients, 1125 (11%) in the control group and 1342 (12%) in the intervention group had immunological treatment failure, of whom 332 (30%) and 727 (54%), respectively, received appropriate action. The likelihood of clinicians taking appropriate action on treatment failure was higher with CDSS alerts than with no decision support system (adjusted odds ratio 3·18, 95% CI 1·02-9·87)., Interpretation: CDSS significantly improved the likelihood of appropriate and timely action on immunological treatment failure. We expect our findings will be generalisable to virological monitoring of patients with HIV receiving ART once countries implement the 2015 WHO recommendation to scale up viral load monitoring., Funding: US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), through the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In vitro, disulfiram activated HIV transcription in a primary T-cell model of HIV latency and in a pilot clinical study increased plasma HIV RNA in individuals with adequate drug exposure. We assessed the effect of disulfiram on HIV transcription in a dose-escalation study., Methods: In this prospective dose-escalation study, to optimise disulfiram exposure we included adults with HIV on suppressive antiretroviral therapy, with plasma HIV RNA of less than 50 copies per mL and a CD4 cell count greater than 350 cells per μL. Participants were allocated sequentially to one of three dosing groups (500 mg, 1000 mg, and 2000 mg) and received disulfiram daily for 3 days. Only the staff who did laboratory assays were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was change in cell-associated unspliced HIV RNA in CD4 cells. The primary analysis method was a negative binomial regression, with the number of copies as the outcome variable and the input total RNA or plasma volume as an exposure variable, which is equivalent to modelling copies or input. We used these models to estimate changes from before disulfiram to timepoints during and after disulfiram administration. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01944371., Findings: Of 34 participants screened for eligibility at The Alfred Hospital (Melbourne, VIC, Australia), and San Francisco General Hospital (San Francisco, CA, USA), 30 people were enrolled between Sept 24, 2013, and March 31, 2014. The estimated fold increases in cell-associated unspliced HIV RNA from baseline were 1·7 (95% CI 1·3-2·2; p<0·0001) to the timepoint during disulfiram treatment and 2·1 (1·5-2·9; p<0·0001) to the timepoint after disulfiram in the 500 mg group; 1·9 (1·6-2·4; p<0·0001) and 2·5 (1·9-3·3; p<0·0001) in the 1000 mg group; and 1·6 (1·2-2·1; p=0·0026) and 2·1 (1·5-3·1; p=0·0001) in the 2000 mg group. No deaths occurred, and no serious adverse events were noted. Disulfiram was well tolerated at all doses., Interpretation: Short-term administration of disulfiram resulted in increases in cell-associated unspliced HIV RNA at all doses, consistent with activating HIV latency. Disulfiram may be suited for future studies of combination and prolonged therapy to activate latent HIV., Funding: The Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR); National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)