Search

Standard‐of‐care HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly efficacious, but uptake of and persistence on a daily oral pill is low in many settings. Evaluation of alternate PrEP products will require innovation to avoid the unpractically large sample sizes in noninferiority trials. We propose estimating HIV incidence in people not on PrEP as an external counterfactual to which on‐PrEP incidence in trial subjects can be compared. HIV recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs), such as the limiting antigen avidity assay plus viral load used on specimens from untreated HIV positive people identified during screening, is one possible approach. Its feasibility is partly dependent on the sample size needed to ensure adequate power, which is impacted by RITA performance, the number of recent infections identified, the expected efficacy of the intervention, and other factors. Screening sample sizes to support detection of an 80% reduction in incidence for 3 key populations are more modest, and comparable to the number of participants in recent phase III PrEP trials. Sample sizes would be significantly larger in populations with lower incidence, where the false recency rate is higher or if PrEP efficacy is expected to be lower. Our proposed counterfactual approach appears to be feasible, offers high statistical power, and is nearly contemporaneous with the on‐PrEP population. It will be important to monitor the performance of this approach during new product development for HIV prevention. If successful, it could be a model for preventive HIV vaccines and prevention of other infectious diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ruzasvir (MK‐8408, an NS5A inhibitor) and uprifosbuvir (MK‐3682, a nonstructural protein 5B nucleotide inhibitor) are highly potent direct‐acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. A phase III clinical trial evaluating the two‐drug combination of ruzasvir 60 mg plus  uprifosbuvir 450 mg suggested suboptimal efficacy in certain HCV genotypes (C‐BREEZE 1; NCT02759315). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruzasvir in combination with uprifosbuvir administered at a higher dose than that assessed in the earlier study (C‐BREEZE 2: NCT02956629/Merck protocol PN041). Treatment‐naïve or interferon (with or without ribavirin)‐experienced participants with or without compensated cirrhosis were enrolled. All participants received ruzasvir 180 mg plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary objectives were the proportion of participants with HCV RNA <15 lU/mL at 12 weeks after the end of study therapy (SVR12), and safety and tolerability of the study drug. Overall, 282 participants were enrolled. SVR12 (n/N) was 91.3% (42/46) in participants infected with HCV genotype (GT) 1a; GT1b, 96.7% (29/30); GT2, 91.5% (43/47); GT3, 73.8% (45/61); GT4, 98.2% (55/56); GT5, 100.0% (18/18); and GT6, 90.9% (20/22). Adverse events (AEs) were reported by 61.3% of participants; drug‐related AEs were reported by 33.3%. The most frequent (≥5% of participants) drug‐related AEs in all participants were fatigue (7.8%) and headache (7.4%). In conclusion, the two‐drug combination of ruzasvir 180 mg plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg for 12 weeks was highly effective and well tolerated in participants infected with HCV GT1, GT2, GT4, GT5 and GT6, with a lower efficacy in GT3‐infected persons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Although treatment with direct‐acting antivirals has dramatically improved morbidity and mortality attributable to chronic hepatitis C virus infection, universal access to these medicines has been slow in the Asia–Pacific region and Russia. This study evaluated efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir in participants with hepatitis C virus infection from Asia–Pacific countries and Russia (C‐CORAL). Methods: C‐CORAL was a phase 3, randomized, placebo‐controlled study (NCT02251990). Treatment‐naive, HIV‐negative, cirrhotic and non‐cirrhotic participants with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection were randomized to elbasvir 50 mg/grazoprevir 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks (immediate‐treatment group) or placebo followed by deferred treatment with elbasvir/grazoprevir (deferred‐treatment group). The primary efficacy outcome was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks, and the primary safety outcome was a comparison between the immediate‐treatment group and placebo phase of the deferred‐treatment group. Results: A total of 489 participants were randomized (immediate‐treatment group, n = 366; deferred‐treatment group, n = 123). Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks in the combined immediate/deferred‐treatment groups was 94.4% (459/486; 95% confidence interval = 92.4–96.5%). Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks was 98.2% in participants with genotype 1b, 91.9% with genotype 1a, and 66.7% with genotype 6 infection. Similar rates of adverse events and drug‐related adverse events were seen in the immediate‐treatment group versus placebo phase of the deferred‐treatment group (51.0% vs 50.4% and 21.4% vs 21.1%). Conclusions: Elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks represents an effective and well‐tolerated treatment option for treatment‐naive people with genotype 1 infection from Asia–Pacific countries and Russia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: We have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests to declare: Forum for Collaborative Research, as an organization, receives grants from the pharmaceutical industry but these are unrestricted and not specific to the work described in this article. KHM has received unrestricted research grants from Gilead Sciences, Merck & Co., Inc., and ViiV Healthcare. JM is a paid consultant for both Gilead Sciences in the area of HIV prevention. BSP, as an inventor of the LAg-Avidity EIA at CDC, receives a portion of the royalties from the sale of the test kits, as per policy of the U.S. government. MNR received consulting fees from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Merck, the Forum for Collaborative research, and the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative in 2024. VV is a full-time employee of ViiV Healthcare and owns GSK stock. HYL received NIH NIAID grant support for genomic HIV incidence assay research. All other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Islatravir (MK-8591) is a deoxyadenosine analog in development for the treatment and prevention of HIV-1 infection. An islatravir-eluting implant could provide an additional option for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)., Setting: Previous data support a threshold islatravir triphosphate concentration for PrEP of 0.05 pmol/10 6 cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Prototype islatravir-eluting implants were previously studied to establish general tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of islatravir relative to the threshold level., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial, a next-generation radiopaque islatravir-eluting implant (48 mg, 52 mg, or 56 mg) or placebo implant was placed for a duration of 12 weeks in participants at low risk of HIV infection. Safety and tolerability, as well as PK for islatravir parent and islatravir triphosphate from plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells, were assessed throughout placement and 8 weeks after removal., Results: In total, 36 participants (8 active and 4 placebo per dose arm) were enrolled and completed this study. Implants were generally well tolerated, with no discontinuations due to an adverse event, and no clear dose-dependence in implant-related adverse events. No clinically meaningful relationships were observed for changes in laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiogram assessments. Mean islatravir triphosphate levels at day 85 (0.101-0.561 pmol/10 6  cells) were above the PK threshold for all dose levels., Conclusion: Islatravir administered using a subdermal implant has the potential to be an effective and well-tolerated method for administering PrEP to individuals at risk of acquiring HIV-1., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Islatravir (MK-8591) is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase translocation inhibitor in development for treatment and prevention of HIV-1. We present efficacy and safety data for islatravir and doravirine (DOR) through 96 weeks of the phase 2b trial (NCT03272347)., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging trial, participants initially received islatravir (0.25, 0.75, or 2.25 mg) with doravirine (100 mg) and lamivudine (3TC, 300 mg) or a fixed-dose combination of doravirine, 3TC, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) daily. Beginning at week 24, participants receiving islatravir stopped 3TC if HIV-1 RNA from the prior visit was <50 copies per milliliter and continued taking the assigned islatravir dose (still blinded) with doravirine. All islatravir groups transitioned to open-label use of 0.75 mg between weeks 60 and 84. Efficacy end points at week 96 included the proportion of participants maintaining HIV-1 RNA of <50 copies per milliliter (FDA Snapshot). Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting., Results: One hundred twenty-one treatment-naive participants received the study drugs and were included in the analyses. Through week 96, HIV-1 RNA<50 copies per milliliter was maintained in 86.2% (25/29), 90.0% (27/30), and 67.7% (21/31) of participants in the 0.25-, 0.75-, and 2.25-mg islatravir groups, respectively, 81.1% (73/90) of the combined islatravir group, and 80.6% (25/31) of the DOR/3TC/TDF group. One participant in the 2.25-mg islatravir group had Protocol-Defined Virologic Failure after week 48. Drug-related AE rates were higher for DOR/3TC/TDF participants (22.6%) compared with islatravir (combined 7.8%). Two participants (2.2%) receiving islatravir with doravirine and one (3.2%) receiving DOR/3TC/TDF discontinued because of an AE., Conclusions: Treatment regimens containing islatravir and doravirine maintained viral suppression through week 96 and were well tolerated regardless of dose., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Purpose: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major healthcare concern in Russia, where almost 5 million individuals are viremic. Elbasvir/grazoprevir is a fixed-dose combination therapy for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 and genotype 4 infection. The present analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir in individuals with HCV infection enrolled at Russian study sites in the C-CORAL study., Patients and Methods: C-CORAL (Protocol PN-5172-067; NCT02251990) was a Phase 3, placebo-controlled, double-blind study conducted throughout Asia and Russia. Treatment-naive participants with chronic HCV infection were randomly assigned to receive immediate or deferred treatment with elbasvir 50 mg/grazoprevir 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Participants in the immediate-treatment group received elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, and those in the deferred-treatment group received placebo for 12 weeks, followed by open-label elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12)., Results: One hundred and nineteen Russian participants were randomized (immediate-treatment group, n=88; deferred-treatment group, n=31). Most participants were white (99%) with HCV genotype 1b infection (97%) and mild-to-moderate (F0-F2) fibrosis (70%). SVR12 was achieved by 98.9% participants in the immediate-treatment group and by 100% of those receiving deferred elbasvir/grazoprevir in the deferred-treatment group. One participant relapsed with nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) L28M and Y93H resistance-associated substitutions at baseline and at time of failure. Drug-related adverse events were reported by 19% of participants receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir in the immediate-treatment group and by 16% of those receiving placebo in the deferred-treatment group. No serious adverse event or deaths occurred, and no participant discontinued treatment owing to an adverse event., Conclusion: Elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks was highly effective in treatment-naive Russian individuals with HCV genotype 1b infection., Competing Interests: Konstantin Zhdanov, Eduard Burnevich, Svetlana Kizhlo, Igor Bakulin, and Vadim Pokrovsky have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Vasily Isakov reports personal fees from Merck, AbbVie, Gilead, Echosens, and R-pharm. Liwen Liang, Peggy Hwang, Barbara A Haber, and Michael N Robertson are employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, and hold stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Rohit Talwani is an ex-employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, and holds stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2020 Zhdanov et al.)

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in persons who inject drugs (PWID)., Objective: To evaluate elbasvir-grazoprevir in treating HCV infection in PWID., Design: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105688)., Setting: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States., Patients: 301 treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection who were at least 80% adherent to visits for opioid agonist therapy (OAT)., Intervention: The immediate-treatment group (ITG) received elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks; the deferred-treatment group (DTG) received placebo for 12 weeks, no treatment for 4 weeks, then open-label elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks., Measurements: The primary outcome was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12), evaluated separately in the ITG and DTG. Other outcomes included SVR24, viral recurrence or reinfection, and adverse events., Results: The SVR12 was 91.5% (95% CI, 86.8% to 95.0%) in the ITG and 89.5% (95% CI, 81.5% to 94.8%) in the active phase of the DTG. Drug use at baseline and during treatment did not affect SVR12 or adherence to HCV therapy. Among 18 patients with posttreatment viral recurrence through 24-week follow-up, 6 had probable reinfection. If the probable reinfections were assumed to be responses, SVR12 was 94.0% (CI, 89.8% to 96.9%) in the ITG. One patient in the ITG (1 of 201) and 1 in the placebo-phase DTG (1 of 100) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event., Limitation: These findings may not be generalizable to PWID who are not receiving OAT, nor do they apply to persons with genotype 3 infection, a common strain in PWID., Conclusion: Patients with HCV infection who were receiving OAT and treated with elbasvir-grazoprevir had high rates of SVR12, regardless of ongoing drug use. These results support the removal of drug use as a barrier to interferon-free HCV treatment for patients receiving OAT., Primary Funding Source: Merck & Co.