Search

BACKGROUND: The phase III REMoxTB study prospectively enrolled HIV-positive (with CD4+ count > 250 cells, not on anti-retroviral therapy) and HIV-negative patients. We investigated the incidence of adverse events and cure rates according to HIV status for patients receiving standard TB therapy in the trial. METHODS: Forty-two HIV-positive cases were matched to 220 HIV-negative controls by age, gender, ethnicity, and trial site using coarsened exact matching. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) were summarised by MedDRA System Organ Class. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to first grade 3 or 4 AE were constructed according to HIV status with hazard ratios calculated. Patients were considered cured if they were culture negative 18 months after commencing therapy with ≥2 consecutive negative culture results. RESULTS: Twenty of 42 (47.6%) HIV-positive and 34 of 220 (15.5%) HIV-negative patients experienced ≥1 grade 3 or 4 AE, respectively. The majority of these were hepatobiliary disorders that accounted for 12 of 40 (30.0%) events occurring in 6 of 42 (14.3%) HIV-positive patients and for 15 of 60 (25.0%) events occurring in 9 of 220 (4.1%) HIV-negative patients. The median time to first grade 3 or 4 AE was 54 days (IQR 15.5-59.0) for HIV-positive and 29.5 days (IQR 9.0-119.0) for HIV-negative patients, respectively. The hazard ratio for experiencing a grade 3 or 4 AE among HIV-positive patients was 3.25 (95% CI 1.87-5.66, p < 0.01). Cure rates were similar, with 38 of 42 (90.5%) HIV-positive and 195 of 220 (88.6%) HIV-negative patients (p = 0.73) cured at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-positive patients receiving standard TB therapy in the REMoxTB study were at greater risk of adverse events during treatment but cure rates were similar when compared to a matched sample of HIV-negative patients.

Background: Resource constraints in low and middle-income countries necessitate practical approaches to optimizing antiretroviral therapy outcomes. We hypothesised that an untimed plasma lopinavir concentration (UPLC) at week 12 would predict loss of virological response in those taking lopinavir as part of a second-line antiretroviral regimen. Methods: We measured plasma lopinavir concentration at week 12 on stored samples from the SECOND-LINE study. We characterized UPLC as: detectable and optimal (≥1000-μg/l); detectable but suboptimal (≥25 to <-1000-μg/l); and undetectable (<25-μg/l). We used Cox regression to explore the relationship between UPLC and loss of virological response over 48 weeks and backwards stepwise logistic regression to explore the relationship between UPLC and other predictors of virological failure at week 48. Results: At week 48, we observed virological failure in 15/32 (47%) and 53/485 (11%) of patients with undetectable and detectable UPLC, respectively, P-<-0.001. Both suboptimal [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54-5.62; P-=-0.001], and undetectable (adjusted HR 3.55; 95% CI 1.89-6.64; P-<-0.001) UPLC were associated with higher rates of loss of virological response over 48 weeks. In multivariate analysis, an independent association with virological failure at week 48 and undetectable UPLC was observed after adjustment (odds ratio 5.48; 95% CI 2.23-13.42; P-<-0.01). Conclusion: In low and middle-income countries implementing a public health approach to antiretroviral therapy treatment, an untimed plasma drug concentration may provide a practical method for early identification of patients with inadequate medication adherence and facilitate timely corrective interventions to prevent virological failure.

Background Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a common complication of tuberculosis treatment. We utilised data from the REMoxTB clinical trial to describe the incidence of predisposing factors and the natural history in patients with liver enzyme levels elevated in response to tuberculosis treatment. Methods Patients received either standard tuberculosis treatment (2EHRZ/4HR), or a 4-month regimen in which moxifloxacin replaced either ethambutol (isoniazid arm, 2MHRZ/2MHR) or isoniazid (ethambutol arm, 2EMRZ/2MR). Hepatic enzymes were measured at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 17 weeks and as clinically indicated during reported adverse events. Patients included were those receiving at least one dose of drug and with two or more hepatic enzyme measurements. Results A total of 1928 patients were included (639 2EHRZ/4HR, 654 2MHRZ/2MHR and 635 2EMRZ/2MR). DILI was defined as peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥ 5 times the upper limit of normal (5 × ULN) or ALT ≥ 3 × ULN with total bilirubin > 2 × ULN. DILI was identified in 58 of the 1928 (3.0%) patients at a median time of 28 days (interquartile range IQR 14–56). Of 639 (6.4%) patients taking standard tuberculosis therapy, 41 experienced clinically significant enzyme elevations (peak ALT ≥ 3 × ULN). On standard therapy, 21.1% of patients aged >55 years developed a peak ALT/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≥ 3 × ULN (p = 0.01) and 15% of HIV-positive patients experienced a peak ALT/AST ≥ 3 × ULN compared to 9% of HIV-negative patients (p = 0.160). The median peak ALT/AST was higher in isoniazid-containing regimens vs no-isoniazid regimens (p < 0.05), and lower in moxifloxacin-containing arms vs no-moxifloxacin arms (p < 0.05). Patients receiving isoniazid reached a peak ALT ≥ 3 × ULN 9.5 days earlier than those on the ethambutol arm (median time of 28 days vs 18.5 days). Of the 67 Asian patients with a peak ALT/AST ≥ 3 × ULN, 57 (85.1%) were on an isoniazid-containing regimen (p = 0.008). Conclusions Our results provide evide

Background Lipoatrophy is one of the most feared complications associated with the use of nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (N[t]RTIs). We aimed to assess soft-tissue changes in participants with HIV who had virological failure of a first-line antiretroviral (ART) regimen containing a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor plus two N(t)RTIs and were randomly assigned to receive a second-line regimen containing a boosted protease inhibitor given with either N(t)RTIs or raltegravir. Methods Of the 37 sites that participated in the randomised, open-label, non-inferiority SECOND-LINE study, eight sites from five countries (Argentina, India, Malaysia, South Africa, and Thailand) participated in the body composition substudy. All sites had a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner and all participants enrolled in SECOND-LINE were eligible for inclusion in the substudy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated allocation schedule, to receive either ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir (raltegravir group) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus two or three N(t)RTIs (N[t]RTI group). Randomisation was stratified by site and screening HIV-1 RNA. Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment, but allocation was concealed until after interventions were assigned. DXA scans were done at weeks 0, 48, and 96. The primary endpoint was mean percentage and absolute change in peripheral limb fat from baseline to week 96. We did intention-to-treat analyses of available data. This substudy is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01513122. Findings Between Aug 1, 2010, and July 10, 2011, we recruited 211 participants into the substudy. The intention-to-treat population comprised 102 participants in the N(t)RTI group and 108 participants in the raltegravir group, of whom 91 and 105 participants, respectively, reached 96 weeks. Mean percentage change in limb fat from baseline to week 96 was 1

Background The week 48 primary analysis of the ENCORE1 trial established the virological non-inferiority and safety of efavirenz 400 mg compared with the standard 600 mg dose, combined with tenofovir and emtricitabine, as first-line HIV therapy. This 96-week follow-up of the trial assesses the durability of efficacy and safety of this treatment over 96 weeks. Methods ENCORE1 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial done at 38 clinical sites in 13 countries. HIV-infected adult patients (≥16 years of age) with no previous antiretroviral therapy, a CD4 cell count of 50–500 cells per μL, and plasma HIV-1 viral load of at least 1000 copies per mL were randomly assigned (1:1) by an electronic case report form to receive fixed-dose daily tenofovir 300 mg and emtricitabine 200 mg plus efavirenz either 400 mg daily or 600 mg daily. Participants, physicians, and all other trial staff were masked to treatment assignment. Randomisation was stratified by HIV-1 viral load at baseline (≤ or >100 000 copies per mL). The primary endpoint was the difference in the proportions of patients in the two treatment groups with a plasma HIV-1 viral load below 200 copies per mL at week 96. Treatment groups were deemed to be non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in viral load was above −10% by modified intention-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and non-completer=failure (NC=F) populations. Adverse events and serious adverse events were summarised by treatment group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01011413. Findings Between Aug 24, 2011, and March 19, 2012, 636 eligible participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (324 to efavirenz 400 mg and 312 to efavirenz 600 mg). The intention-to-treat population who received at least one dose of study drug comprised 630 patients: 321 in the efavirenz 400 mg group and 309 in the efavir

Objective: To determine the durability over 96 weeks of safety and efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) and raltegravir (RAL) which was demonstrated to have non-inferior efficacy relative to a regimen of LPV/r with nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (N(t)RTIs) (Control) in primary analysis at 48 weeks. Design: Open label, centrally randomised trial. Setting: Recruitment was from 37 primary and secondary care sites from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and Latin America. Subjects: 541 HIV-1 infected adults virologically failing first-line non-NRTI + 2N(t)RTI, with no previous exposure to protease inhibitors or integrase strand transfer inhibitors were analysed, 425 completed 96 weeks follow up on randomised therapy. Intervention: Randomisation was 1:1 to Control or RAL. Main outcome measures: Differences between the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA (VL) <200 copies/mL by intention to treat were compared with a non-inferiority margin of -12%. Differences in biochemical, haematological and metabolic changes were assessed using T-tests. Results: VL <200 copies/mL at 96 weeks was: RAL 80.4%, Control 76.0%(difference: 4.4 [95%CI -2.6, 11.3]) andmet non-inferiority criteria. The RAL arm had a significantly higher mean change (difference Control-RAL; 95%CI) in haemoglobin (-2.9; -5.7, -1.1), total lymphocytes (-0.2; -0.3, -0.0), total cholesterol (-0.5; -0.8, -0.3), HDL cholesterol (-0.1; -0.1, -0.0) and LDL cholesterol (-0.3; -0.5, -0.2). Conclusion: At 96 weeks, both RAL and Control maintained efficacy greater than 75% and continued to demonstrate similar safety profiles. These results support the use of a combination LPV/r and RAL regimen as an option following failure of 1st line NNRTI + 2N(t)RTIs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00931463.

Background: The week 48 primary analysis of the ENCORE1 trial established the virological non-inferiority and safety of efavirenz 400 mg compared with the standard 600 mg dose, combined with tenofovir and emtricitabine, as first-line HIV therapy. This 96-week follow-up of the trial assesses the durability of efficacy and safety of this treatment over 96 weeks. Methods: ENCORE1 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial done at 38 clinical sites in 13 countries. HIV-infected adult patients (≥16 years of age) with no previous antiretroviral therapy, a CD4 cell count of 50-500 cells per μL, and plasma HIV-1 viral load of at least 1000 copies per mL were randomly assigned (1:1) by an electronic case report form to receive fixed-dose daily tenofovir 300 mg and emtricitabine 200 mg plus efavirenz either 400 mg daily or 600 mg daily. Participants, physicians, and all other trial staff were masked to treatment assignment. Randomisation was stratified by HIV-1 viral load at baseline (≤ or >100 000 copies per mL). The primary endpoint was the difference in the proportions of patients in the two treatment groups with a plasma HIV-1 viral load below 200 copies per mL at week 96. Treatment groups were deemed to be non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in viral load was above -10% by modified intention-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and non-completer=failure (NC=F) populations. Adverse events and serious adverse events were summarised by treatment group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01011413. Findings: Between Aug 24, 2011, and March 19, 2012, 636 eligible participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (324 to efavirenz 400 mg and 312 to efavirenz 600 mg). The intention-to-treat population who received at least one dose of study drug comprised 630 patients: 321 in the efavirenz 400 mg group and 309 in the efa

Background: The optimum dose of key antiretroviral drugs is often overlooked during product development. The ENCORE1 study compared the efficacy and safety of reduced dose efavirenz with standard dose efavirenz in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine as first-line treatment for HIV infection. An effective and safe reduced dose could yield meaningful cost savings. Methods: ENCORE1 is a continuing non-inferiority trial in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive adults in 38 clinical sites in 13 countries. Participants (plasma HIV-RNA >1000 log10 copies per mL, CD4 T-cell count 50-500 cells per μL) were randomly assigned by a computer-generated sequence with a blocking factor of four (stratified by clinical site and by screening viral load) to receive tenofovir plus emtricitabine with either a reduced daily dose (400 mg) or a standard dose (600 mg) of efavirenz. Participants, physicians, and all other trial staffwere masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the difference in proportions of participants with plasma HIV-RNA of less than 200 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Treatment groups were regarded as non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in viral load was less than-10% by modified intention-to-treat analysis. Adverse events were summarised by treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01011413. Findings: The modified intention-to-treat analysis consisted of 630 patients (efavirenz 400=321; efavirenz 600=309). 32% were women; 37% were African, 33% were Asian, and 30% were white. The mean baseline CD4 cell count was 273 cells per μL (SD 99) and median plasma HIV-RNA was 4.75 log 10 copies per mL (IQR 0.88). The proportion of participants with a viral load below 200 copies per mL at week 48 was 94.1% for efavirenz 400 mg and 92.2% for 600 mg (difference 1.85%, 95% CI-2.1 to 5.79). CD4 T-cell counts at week 48 were significantly higher for the 400 mg group than for the 600 mg group (mean difference 25 cell

Background Uncertainty exists about the best treatment for people with HIV-1 who have virological failure with first-line combination antiretroviral therapy of a non-nucleoside analogue (NNRTI) plus two nucleoside or nucleotide analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NtRTI). We compared a second-line regimen combining two new classes of drug with a WHO-recommended regimen. Methods We did this 96-week, phase 3b/4, randomised, open-label non-inferiority trial at 37 sites worldwide. Adults with HIV-1 who had confirmed virological failure (plasma viral load >500 copies per mL) after 24 weeks or more of first-line treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus two or three NtRTIs (control group) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir (raltegravir group). The randomisation sequence was computer generated with block randomisation (block size four). Neither participants nor investigators were masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma viral load less than 200 copies per mL at 48 weeks in the modified intention-to-treat population, with a non-inferiority margin of 12%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00931463. Findings We enrolled 558 patients, of whom 541 (271 in the control group, 270 in the raltegravir group) were included in the primary analysis. At 48 weeks, 219 (81%) patients in the control group compared with 223 (83%) in the raltegravir group met the primary endpoint (difference 1·8%, 95% CI −4·7 to 8·3), fulfilling the criterion for non-inferiority. 993 adverse events occurred in 271 participants in the control group versus 895 in 270 participants in the raltegravir group, the most common being gastrointestinal. Interpretation The raltegravir regimen was no less efficacious than the standard of care and was safe and well tolerated. This simple NtRTI-free treatment strategy might extend the successful public health approach to management of HIV b

Background Uncertainty exists about the best treatment for people with HIV-1 who have virological failure with first-line combination antiretroviral therapy of a non-nucleoside analogue (NNRTI) plus two nucleoside or nucleotide analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NtRTI). We compared a second-line regimen combining two new classes of drug with a WHO-recommended regimen. Methods We did this 96-week, phase 3b/4, randomised, open-label non-inferiority trial at 37 sites worldwide. Adults with HIV-1 who had confirmed virological failure (plasma viral load >500 copies per mL) after 24 weeks or more of first-line treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus two or three NtRTIs (control group) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir (raltegravir group). The randomisation sequence was computer generated with block randomisation (block size four). Neither participants nor investigators were masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma viral load less than 200 copies per mL at 48 weeks in the modified intention-to-treat population, with a non-inferiority margin of 12%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00931463. Findings We enrolled 558 patients, of whom 541 (271 in the control group, 270 in the raltegravir group) were included in the primary analysis. At 48 weeks, 219 (81%) patients in the control group compared with 223 (83%) in the raltegravir group met the primary endpoint (difference 1·8%, 95% CI −4·7 to 8·3), fulfilling the criterion for non-inferiority. 993 adverse events occurred in 271 participants in the control group versus 895 in 270 participants in the raltegravir group, the most common being gastrointestinal. Interpretation The raltegravir regimen was no less efficacious than the standard of care and was safe and well tolerated. This simple NtRTI-free treatment strategy might extend the successful public health approach to management of HIV b

Background: Nevirapine (NVP) is widely used in antiretroviral treatment (ART) of HIV-1 globally. The primary objective of the AA5208/OCTANE trial was to compare the efficacy of NVP-based versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based initial ART. Methods and Findings: In seven African countries (Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), 500 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected women with CD4<200 cells/mm3 were enrolled into a two-arm randomized trial to initiate open-label ART with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) once/day plus either NVP (n = 249) or LPV/r (n = 251) twice/day, and followed for ≥48 weeks. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to death or confirmed virologic failure ([VF]) (plasma HIV RNA<1 log10 below baseline 12 weeks after treatment initiation, or ≥400 copies/ml at or after 24 weeks), with comparison between treatments based on hazard ratios (HRs) in intention-to-treat analysis. Equivalence of randomized treatments was defined as finding the 95% CI for HR for virological failure or death in the range 0.5 to 2.0. Baseline characteristics were (median): age = 34 years, CD4 = 121 cells/mm3, HIV RNA = 5.2 log10copies/ml. Median follow-up = 118 weeks; 29 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. 42 women (37 VFs, five deaths; 17%) in the NVP and 50 (43 VFs, seven deaths; 20%) in the LPV/r arm reached the primary endpoint (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.29). During initial assigned treatment, 14% and 16% of women receiving NVP and LPV/r experienced grade 3/4 signs/symptoms and 26% and 22% experienced grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities. However, 35 (14%) women discontinued NVP because of adverse events, most in the first 8 weeks, versus none for LPV/r (p<0.001). VF, death, or permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 80 (32%) of NVP and 54 (22%) of LPV/r arms (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4), with the difference primarily due to more treatment discontinuation in the NVP arm. 13 (45%) of 29 women tested in the NVP versus six (15%) of 40

Background: Nevirapine (NVP) is widely used in antiretroviral treatment (ART) of HIV-1 globally. The primary objective of the AA5208/OCTANE trial was to compare the efficacy of NVP-based versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based initial ART. Methods and Findings: In seven African countries (Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), 500 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected women with CD4<200 cells/mm3 were enrolled into a two-arm randomized trial to initiate open-label ART with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) once/day plus either NVP (n = 249) or LPV/r (n = 251) twice/day, and followed for ≥48 weeks. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to death or confirmed virologic failure ([VF]) (plasma HIV RNA<1 log10 below baseline 12 weeks after treatment initiation, or ≥400 copies/ml at or after 24 weeks), with comparison between treatments based on hazard ratios (HRs) in intention-to-treat analysis. Equivalence of randomized treatments was defined as finding the 95% CI for HR for virological failure or death in the range 0.5 to 2.0. Baseline characteristics were (median): age = 34 years, CD4 = 121 cells/mm3, HIV RNA = 5.2 log10copies/ml. Median follow-up = 118 weeks; 29 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. 42 women (37 VFs, five deaths; 17%) in the NVP and 50 (43 VFs, seven deaths; 20%) in the LPV/r arm reached the primary endpoint (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.29). During initial assigned treatment, 14% and 16% of women receiving NVP and LPV/r experienced grade 3/4 signs/symptoms and 26% and 22% experienced grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities. However, 35 (14%) women discontinued NVP because of adverse events, most in the first 8 weeks, versus none for LPV/r (p<0.001). VF, death, or permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 80 (32%) of NVP and 54 (22%) of LPV/r arms (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4), with the difference primarily due to more treatment discontinuation in the NVP arm. 13 (45%) of 29 women tested in the NVP versus six (15%) of 40