Search

COVID-19 is the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 which has led to 2,643,000 deaths worldwide, a number which is rapidly increasing. Urgent studies to identify new antiviral drugs, repurpose existing drugs, or identify drugs that can target the overactive immune response are ongoing. Antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) have been tested in past human coronavirus infections, and also against SARS-CoV-2, but a trial of lopinavir and ritonavir failed to show any clinical benefit in COVID-19. However, there is limited data as to the course of COVID-19 in people living with HIV, with some studies showing a decreased mortality for those taking certain ARV regimens. We hypothesized that ARVs other than lopinavir and ritonavir might be responsible for some protection against the progression of COVID-19. Here, we used chemoinformatic analyses to predict which ARVs would bind and potentially inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) or RNA-dependent-RNA-polymerase (RdRp) enzymes in silico. The drugs predicted to bind the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro included the protease inhibitors atazanavir and indinavir. The ARVs predicted to bind the catalytic site of the RdRp included Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors, abacavir, emtricitabine, zidovudine, and tenofovir. Existing or new combinations of antiretroviral drugs could potentially prevent or ameliorate the course of COVID-19 if shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and in clinical trials. Further studies are needed to establish the activity of ARVs for treatment or prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection . Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

End-stage renal disease in the human immunodeficiency virus-positive population is increasing. Kidney transplant is the optimal therapy for this population rather than dialysis modalities if some criteria are met. These include undetectable plasma human immunodeficiency virus RNA, CD4 cell count over 200 cells/μL, and the absence of any AIDS-defining illness. Here, we describe the first living-donor kidney transplant in a human immunodeficiency virus-positive recipient in Turkey. The patient, a 52-year-old male diagnosed as human immunodeficiency virus positive, was on antiretroviral therapy, which consisted of 400 mg twice daily darunavir, 100 mg/day ritonavir, and 50 mg/day dolutegravir. He had been negative for human immunodeficiency virus RNA for the past 3 years. The patient developed renal insufficiency without any known cause and started hemodialysis. A living donor transplant from his son was performed, and the patient received ATG Fresenius-S (Neovii Biotech, Rapperswil, Switzerland) induction and a maintenance immunosuppression therapy consisting of methyl-prednisolone, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. There were no incidences of delayed graft function or acute rejection. Because of tacrolimus and ritonavir interaction, tacrolimus trough levels were too high. With tacrolimus withdrawn, tacrolimus trough level decreased to detectable levels 2 weeks later. Antiretroviral therapy was continued on the same dosage. At month 4 posttransplant, the patient's creatinine level was 1.01 mg/dL. At present, the patient has had no complications and no episodes of rejection. Kidney transplant is the most favorable replacement therapy for HIV-positive patients who are under controlled AIDS care with highly active antiretroviral therapy. However, drug interactions should be carefully evaluated.

BackgroundLopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-β-1a and hydroxychloroquine efficacy for COVID-19 have been evaluated, but detailed evaluation is lacking.ObjectiveTo determine the efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir for improving the clinical, virological outcomes in COVID-19 inpatients.DesignOpen-label, randomized, adaptive, controlled trial.SettingMulti-center trial with patients from France.Participants583 COVID-19 inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory supportInterventionStandard of care (SoC, control), SoC plus lopinavir/ritonavir (400 mg lopinavir and 100 mg ritonavir every 12h for 14 days), SoC plus lopinavir/ritonavir plus IFN-ß-1a (44 μg of subcutaneous IFN-ß-1a on days 1, 3, and 6), SoC plus hydroxychloroquine (400 mg twice on day 1 then 400 mg once daily for 9 days) or SoC plus remdesivir (200 mg intravenously on day 1 then 100 mg once-daily for hospitalization duration or 10 days).MeasurementsThe primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO 7-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included SARS-CoV-2 quantification in respiratory specimens and safety analyses.ResultsAdjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) for the WHO 7-point ordinal scale were not in favor of investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavirversuscontrol, aOR 0.83, 95%CI, 0.55 to 1.26, P=0.39; lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1aversuscontrol, aOR 0.69, 95%CI, 0.45 to 1.04, P=0.08; hydroxychloroquineversuscontrol, aOR 0.93, 95%CI, 0.62 to 1.41, P=0.75. No significant effect on SARS-CoV-2 RNA clearance in respiratory tract was evidenced. Lopinavir/ritonavir-containing treatments were significantly associated with more SAE.LimitationsNot a placebo-controlled, no anti-inflammatory agents tested.ConclusionNo improvement of the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 RNA clearance in respiratory tract specimens by studied drugs. This comforts the recent Solidarity findings.RegistrationNCT04315948.FundingPHRC 2020, Dim OneHealth, REACTing

With the gradual increase in the COVID-19 mortality rate, there is an urgent need for an effective drug/vaccine. Several drugs like Remdesivir, Azithromycin, Favirapir, Ritonavir, Darunavir, etc., are put under evaluation in more than 300 clinical trials to treat COVID-19. On the other hand, several vaccines like Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen, Sputnik V, Covishield, Covaxin, etc., also evolved from the research study. While few of them already gets approved, others show encouraging results and are still under assessment. In parallel, there are also significant developments in new drug development. But, since the approval of new molecules takes substantial time, drug repurposing studies have also gained considerable momentum. The primary agent of the disease progression of COVID-19 is SARS-CoV2/nCoV, which is believed to have ∼89% genetic resemblance with SARS-CoV, a coronavirus responsible for the massive outbreak in 2003. With this hypothesis, Human-SARS-CoV protein interactions are used to develop an in-silico Human-nCoV network by identifying potential COVID-19 human spreader proteins by applying the SIS model and fuzzy thresholding by a possible COVID-19 FDA drugs target-based validation. At first, the complete list of FDA drugs is identified for the level-1 and level-2 spreader proteins in this network, followed by applying a drug consensus scoring strategy. The same consensus strategy is involved in the second analysis but on a curated overlapping set of key genes/proteins identified from COVID-19 symptoms. Validation using subsequent docking study has also been performed on COVID-19 potential drugs with the available major COVID-19 crystal structures whose PDB IDs are: 6LU7, 6M2Q, 6W9C, 6M0J, 6M71 and 6VXX. Our computational study and docking results suggest that Fostamatinib (R406 as its active promoiety) may also be considered as one of the potential candidates for further clinical trials in pursuit to counter the spread of COVID-19.

The potential usefulness of lopinavir-ritonavir on Covid 19 infection during the first wave of contamination in France had boosted Kaletra® syrup prescription to the point of causing its national shortage. In the intensive care units of Parisian hospitals in charge of patients with life-threatening viral contamination, caregivers had to resort to lopinavir-ritonavir-based tablets, crushing them and then dispersing the powder in milk to facilitate administration by nasogastric tube. The difficulties and poor control of this degraded mode, which does not always ensure control of the amount of the drug in the prepared dose and may induce insufficient antiviral exposure, led us to develop in a very short time, while ensuring quality control proportional to the risk, a liquid form as an alternative to Kaletra® oral solution shortage. For this purpose, we describe this compounding formulation and its preparation process, while justifying the quality control strategy adapted to the risk as well as its chemical and physical stability. Based on the chemical and physical studies, the preparation was showed to be stable during at least 2 months between +2°C and +8°C and 1 week at room temperature. This has resulted in the design of kits that include multi-dose packaging and a measuring device and contain the appropriate quantities of drugs to ensure at least one week's treatment for each patient, during which time the kit in use can be stored at room temperature. The intensive care team used this treatment under conditions that they considered well adapted until the imported specialty became available.

Introducción. Muchos antivirales, como hidroxicloroquina, se han utilizado para el tratamiento de COVID-19. La prolongación del QTc es un efecto adverso preocupante, escasamente estudiado en pediatría. Pacientes y métodos. Los pacientes pediátricos con COVID-19 que recibieron tratamiento antiviral se emparejaron (1:2) con controles no infectados ni expuestos al tratamiento. Se analizaron prospectivamente los electrocardiogramas basal, en las primeras 72 horas de tratamiento y posterior a 72 horas. Resultados. Once (22,9%) de 48 pacientes pediátricos ingresados por COVID-19 (Marzo-Julio 2020) recibieron terapia antiviral. Todos presentaban patologías de base; destacando cardiopatías (4/11; 36,4%) e inmunosupresión (3/11; 27,3%); 5/11 (45,5%) recibían tratamiento de base con potencial efecto sobre el QTc. No hubo diferencias en el QTc basal entre casos y controles: 414,8ms (49,2) vs 416,5ms (29,4) (p=0,716). Se observó QTc prolongado basal en 2/11 casos y 2/22 controles. De los casos, 10/11 (90,9%) recibieron hidroxicloroquina, principalmente asociada a azitromicina (8/11; 72,7%); tres recibieron lopinavir/ritonavir, uno remdesivir. La mediana de incremento del QTc tras 72 horas fue de 28,9ms [RIC 48,7] (p=0,062); 4/11 (36,4%) presentaron un QTc largo, de los cuáles en tres ≥500ms. En uno se paró el tratamiento (QTc 510ms) pero no se documentaron arritmias ventriculares. Conclusiones. El uso de fármacos antivirales causó un incremento del QTc tras 72 horas de tratamiento, considerándose un QTc largo en el 36,4% de los pacientes, aunque no se objetivaron eventos arrítmicos. El uso de hidroxicloroquina y antivirales requiere monitorización activa del QTc y se recomienda suspender el tratamiento si el QTc >500ms.

This study aimed to characterize adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to hydroxychloroquine in the setting of Covid-19, occurring in Italy in the period March-May 2020. The analysis of the combination therapy with azithromycin or/and lopinavir/ritonavir as well as a comparison with ADRs reported throughout 2019 was performed. ADRs collected by the Italian National Network of Pharmacovigilance were analysed for their incidence, seriousness, outcome, co-administered drugs, MedDRA classification. 306 reports were gathered for the quarter of 2020: 54 % non-serious and 46 % serious, and half of the latter required either the hospitalisation or its prolongation. However most of them were either completely recovered (26 %) or in the process of recovery (45 %), except for 9 fatal cases. Throughout 2019, 38 reports were collected, 53 % non-serious and 47 % serious, but no death had been reported. Diarrhea, prolonged QT interval and hypertransaminasemia were the most frequently ADRs reported in 2020, significantly higher than 2019 and specific for COVID-19 subjects treated with hydroxychloroquine. The logistic regression analyses demonstrated that the likelihood of serious ADR, QT prolongation and diarrhea significantly increased with hydroxychloroquine dosage. Co-administration of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine showed a positive correlation with diarrhea and hypertransaminasemia and a negative relationship with the ADR seriousness. The combination therapy with azithromycin was another independent predictor of a serious ADR. Off-label use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19, alone or in combination regimens, was associated with increased incidence and/or seriousness of specific ADRs in patients with additional risk factors caused by the infection. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

ObjectivesLong-acting reversible contraceptives are effective contraceptives for women with HIV, but there are limited data on etonogestrel implant and antiretroviral therapy pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. We evaluated etonogestrel/antiretroviral therapy drug-drug interactions, and the effects of etonogestrel on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and efavirenz pharmacokinetics.Study designWe enrolled postpartum women using etonogestrel implants and receiving ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, or efavirenz-based regimens between 2012 and 2015. Etonogestrel implants were inserted 2 to 12 weeks postpartum. We performed pharmacokinetic sampling pre-etonogestrel insertion and 6 to 7 weeks postinsertion. We measured antiretroviral concentrations pre and postetonogestrel insertion, and compared etonogestrelconcentrations between antiretroviral regimens. We considered a minimum serum etonogestrelconcentration of90 pg/mLadequate for ovulation suppression.ResultsWe collected pharmacokinetic data for 74 postpartum women, 22 on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, 26 on ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and 26 on efavirenz. The median serum concentrations of etonogestrel when co-administered were highest with etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir (604 pg/mL) and etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir (428 pg/mL), and lowest with etonogestrel/efavirenz (125 pg/mL); p < 0.001. Minimum concentration (Cmin) of ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were lower after etonogestrel implant insertion, but overall exposure, predose concentrations, clearance, and half-lives were unchanged. We found no significant change in efavirenz exposure after etonogestrel insertion.ConclusionsUnlike efavirenz, ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were not associated with significant decreases in etonogestrel concentrations. Efavirenz was associated with a significant decrease in etonogestrel concentrations.ImplicationsThe findings demonstrate no interactions between etonogestrel and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir or ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, but confirm the decreased efficacy of etonogestrel with efavirenz-based antiretrovirals. This information should be used to counsel women with HIV who desire long-acting reversible contraceptives.

Contains fulltext : 291521.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVE: Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) exposure is decreased in children after crushing the tablets. Whether exposure is also decreased in adult patients is not known. This study evaluated the exposure of LPV/RTV in adult patients after administration of crushed LPV/RTV tablets. METHODS: Blood samples were drawn from patients with COVID-19 who were receiving crushed LPV/RTV 400/100 mg tablets twice daily. RESULTS: Plasma concentrations for 11 patients with COVID-19 (eight men, mean age 62.6 years) were included. The measured plasma concentrations of LPV were substantially higher than reported for patients with HIV. CONCLUSIONS: There is adequate exposure from crushed LPV/RTV tablets, but because of limited experience, therapeutic drug monitoring is still advised.

Objectives To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) using a meta-analysis method. Methods The China Knowledge Network, VIP database, WanFang database PubMed database, Embase database, and Cochrane Library were searched for a collection of comparative studies on Arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. Results The results of the systematic review indicated that Arbidol had a higher positive-to-negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on Day 7 [P=0.03], a higher positive-to-negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on Day 14 [P=0.006], a higher improvement rate of chest CT on Day 14 [P=0.02], a lower incidence of adverse reactions [P=0.002] and lower rate of mortality[P=0.007]. There was no difference in the rate of cough disappearance on Day 14 [P=0.24] or the rate of severe/critical illness [P=0.07] between the two groups. Conclusions Arbidol may be superior tolopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. However, due to the small number of included studies and the number of patients, high-quality multi-centre large-sample randomized double-blind controlled trials are still needed for verification. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Antiretroviral options for neonates (younger than 28 days) should be expanded. We evaluated the pharmacokinetics, safety, and acceptability of the "4-in-1" fixed-dose pediatric granule formulation of abacavir/lamivudine/lopinavir/ritonavir (30/15/40/10 mg) in neonates.The PETITE study is an ongoing phase I/II, open-label, single-arm, 2-stage trial conducted in South Africa. In stage 1, term neonates exposed to HIV on standard antiretroviral prophylaxis (nevirapine ± zidovudine) received single dose(s) of the 4-in-1 formulation, followed by intensive pharmacokinetic sampling and safety assessments. At each PK visit, blood was drawn after an observed dose at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours postdose. In this study, we have reported the planned interim pharmacokinetic and safety analysis after completion of the single-dose administration.Sixteen neonates, with a median (range) birth weight of 3130 g (2790-3590 g), completed 24 pharmacokinetic visits. The 4-in-1 formulation imposed relatively high doses of abacavir [8.6 mg/kg (6.6-11.4)] and lamivudine [4.3 mg/kg (3.3-5.7)] but lower doses of lopinavir [11.5 mg/kg (8.8-15.2)]. The geometric means (GM, 90% CI) AUC0-12 of abacavir, lamivudine, and lopinavir were 29.87 (26.29-33.93), 12.61 (10.72-14.83), and 3.49 (2.13-5.72) µg.h/mL, respectively. Lopinavir GM AUC0-12 was below the predefined target (20-100 µg.h/mL), and ritonavir concentrations were only detectable in 4 of the 120 (3%) samples. No adverse events were related to study drugs. No neonate had difficulty swallowing the 4-in-1 formulation.The high doses of abacavir and lamivudine (in mg/kg) and AUCs were safe, and the formulation was well tolerated; however, lopinavir/ritonavir exposures were extremely low, preventing its use in neonates use in neonates. Alternative pediatric solid antiretroviral formulations must be studied in neonates.

Background and study aims: Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has always been identified as a major health threat and a potential cause of liver cirrhosis , portal hypertension , and other associated problems. The introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has represented a paradigm shift in HCV management. In this study, we aim to observe the rate of sustained virologic response (SVR12) in a large scale of patients at a single center as well as record the post-treatment changes in the hematologic, hepatic, and renal biochemical profiles. Patients and methods In total, 1933 chronic HCV genotype 4 mono-infected non-HCC patients who completed the treatment with six different DAA regimens in the Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University Research Institute (MASRI), were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The rate of sustained virologic response after 12 weeks off-therapy (SVR12) was assessed. The baseline characteristics to predict the SVR12 were then analyzed. The post-treatment changes in many profiles were recorded and analyzed. Results The overall SVR12 rate was 96.2% (after excluding 84 cases who were lost to follow-up). It was achieved in 346/375 patients (92.3%), 466/477 patients (97.7%), 60/62 patients (96.8%), 11/11 patients (100%), 532/545 patients (97.6%), and 445/463 patients (96.1%) who received sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF/DCV), sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin (SOF/DCV/RBV), sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF/LDV), sofosbuvir/ledipasvir/ribavirin (SOF/LDV/RBV), sofosbuvir/simeprevir (SOF/SMV), and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir/ribavirin (OBV/PTV/r + RBV), respectively. In total, 73 patients (3.8%) failed to achieve SVR12. The baseline aspartate aminotransferase (AST), cirrhotic status, and treatment regimen were determined to have a significant impact on SVR12. In the overall treated population, the levels of serum AST, alanine aminotransferase , albumin , creatinine, bilirubin , and hemoglobin and platelet count improved significantly after treatment. Furthermore, sustained virologic response was strongly related to cirrhosis and its degree. Conclusion The interferon-free DAA regimens offered high SVR12 rates in Egyptian patients with chronic HCV infection. They were associated with a significant improvement in the hematologic, hepatic, and renal biochemical profiles. The baseline AST, liver cirrhosis, and treatment regimen might have an impact on achieving SVR.

Antiretroviral therapies for HIV may cause systemic toxicities when coadministered with corticosteroids. Potential drug-drug interactions may occur, leading to iatrogenic Cushing syndrome or adrenal insufficiency. This article highlights the drug-drug interactions of antiretroviral therapies with corticosteroids. Practice implications are discussed.

Objective To provide the latest evidence for the efficacy and safety of arbidol (umifenovir) in COVID‐19 treatment. Methods A literature systematic search was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and medRxiv up to May 2021. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle–Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of included studies. Meta‐analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. Results Sixteen studies were met the inclusion criteria. No significant difference was observed between arbidol and non‐antiviral treatment groups neither for primary outcomes, including the negative rate of PCR (NR‐PCR) on Day 7 (risk ratio [RR]: 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–1.14) and Day 14 (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.96–1.25), and PCR negative conversion time (PCR‐NCT; mean difference [MD]: 0.74; 95% CI: −0.87 to 2.34), nor secondary outcomes (p > .05). However, arbidol was associated with higher adverse events (RR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.06–4.73). Compared with lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol showed better efficacy for primary outcomes (p .05). No remarkable therapeutic effect was observed between arbidol and other agents (p > .05). Conclusion The present meta‐analysis showed no significant benefit of using arbidol compared with non‐antiviral treatment or other therapeutic agents against COVID‐19 disease. High‐quality studies are needed to establish the efficacy and safety of arbidol for COVID‐19., The evidence on the antivirus effect of Arbidol against COVID‐19 is controversial. The present meta‐analysis showed no significant benefit of using arbidol compared with non‐antiviral treatment or other therapeutic agents against COVID‐19 disease

The World Health Organization reports that 3-4 mil. people are newly infected with hepatitis C virus per year, of which 70% will develop chronic HCV disease. Viral hepatitis is a significant burden on the state budget due to its prevalence among the working-age population. Increase of antiviral therapy coverage for patients diagnosed with chronic hepatitis C is one of the priorities of healthcare system. The paper presents the results of the analysis of trends in the sales pattern over 2016–2020. The objects of the study were State Register of Medicinal Products (as of February 24, 2020), clinical guidelines of the Ministry of Health of Russia on the pharmacotherapy of chronic hepatitis C, information database of the DSM Group analytical company.It has been established that the sales of drugs used for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in the Russian pharmaceutical market tend to grow by 17.60% in value terms and 106.16% in physical terms during the period under consideration. At the same time, the composition of dasabuvir + ombitasvir + paritaprevir + ritonavir (in value terms) and ritonavir (in physical terms) accounts for the greatest share among international non-proprietary names. It was revealed that the products of foreign manufacturers prevail in the sales pattern. Abbvie, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are the leaders among the companies – manufacturers of drugs for the therapy of chronic hepatitis C in terms of sales. It was found that 84.62% of drugs used for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C are included into the VED list.

BACKGROUND: The determination of antiretroviral drugs in hair is receiving considerable research interest to assess long-term adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Currently in China, lamivudine, zidovudine, nevirapine, efavirenz, ritonavir, and lopinavir are combined as first- and second-line free therapy regimens and are recommended for people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLWH). Simultaneous determination of the six antiretroviral drugs in human hair is important for accurately and widely assessing long-term adherence in Chinese PLWH receiving different ART regimens. METHODS: Six drugs were extracted from 10-mg hair samples incubated in methanol for 16 h at 37 °C and then analyzed by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) using a mobile phase of 95% methanol, with an electrospray ionization (ESI) source in multiple reaction monitoring and positive mode. RESULTS: The LC-ESI(+)-MS/MS method exhibited a linear range (R(2) > 0.99) within 6–5000, 10–5000, 6–50000, 12–50000, 8–5000, and 8–12500 pg/mg for lamivudine, zidovudine, nevirapine, efavirenz, ritonavir, and lopinavir. For all six drugs, the limits of quantification ranged between 6 and 12 pg/mg. The intra-day and inter-day coefficients of variation were within 15%, and the recoveries ranged from 91.1% to 113.7%. Furthermore, the other validation parameters (i.e., selectivity, matrix effect, stability, and carryover) met the acceptance criteria stipulated by guidelines of the United States Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency. Significant intergroup differences were observed between high- and low-adherence groups, with high inter-correlations in the hair content of the six drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The developed method demonstrated good reliability, to comprehensively and accurately assess adherence in PLWH receiving different ART regimens.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in December 2019 and has rapidly spread globally. As the confirmed number of cases has reached 83 million worldwide, the potential severity and the deadly complications of the disease requires urgent development of effective drugs for prevention and treatment. No proven effective treatment for this virus currently exists. Most of the antiviral discovery efforts are focused on the repurposing of approved or clinical stage drugs. This review highlights the small-molecule repurposed antiviral agents that are currently under investigation in clinical trials for COVID-19. These include viral polymerase and protease inhibitors remdesivir, galidesivir, favipiravir, ribavirin, sofosbuvir, tenofovir/emtricitabine, baloxavir marboxil, EIDD-2801, lopinavir/ritonavir; virus-/host-directed viral entry and fusion inhibitors arbidol chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, chlorpromazine, camostat mesylate, nafamostat mesylate, bromhexine and agents with diverse/unclear mechanism of actions as oseltamivir, triazavirin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, niclosamide and BLD-2660. The published preclinical and clinical data to date on these drugs as well as the mechanisms of action are reviewed.

BACKGROUND This population pharmacokinetic-pharmacogenetic study aimed to investigate the optimal dose of RTV-boosted ATV (ATV/RTV) for Thai adult HIV-infected patients. METHODS A total of 1460 concentrations of ATV and RTV from 544 patients receiving an ATV/RTV-based regimen were analyzed. The CYP3A5 6986 A > G, ABCB1 3435 C > T, ABCB1 2677 G > T, SLCO1B1 521 T > C, and NR1I2 63396 C > T were genotyped. A population pharmacokinetic model was performed using a nonlinear mixed-effect model (NONMEM®). Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to compare the percentages of patients achieving the therapeutic range of ATV through concentrations (Ctrough). RESULTS The apparent oral clearance of ATV (CL/FATV) without RTV was 7.69 L/h with interindividual variability (IIV) of 28.7%. Patients with CYP3A5 6986 GG had a 7.1% lower CL/FATV than those with AA or AG genotype. The CL/FATV decreased by 10.8% for females compared with males. Simulation results showed higher percentages (~70%) of patient receiving doses of 200/100 or 200/50 mg achieved the target ATV Ctrough, while more patients (~40%) receiving a standard dose (300/100 mg) had ATV Ctrough above this target. CONCLUSIONS Both CYP3A5 6986 A > G and female decreased CL/FATV in Thai HIV-infected patients. Simulations supported that the reduced dose of ATV/RTV was sufficient to achieve the target concentration for Thai population.

As per the World Health Organization report, around 226 844 344 confirmed positive cases and 4 666 334 deaths are reported till September 17, 2021 due to the recent viral outbreak. A novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS‐CoV‐2]) is responsible for the associated coronavirus disease (COVID‐19), which causes serious or even fatal respiratory tract infection and yet no approved therapeutics or effective treatment is currently available to combat the outbreak. Due to the emergency, the drug repurposing approach is being explored for COVID‐19. In this study, we attempt to understand the potential mechanism and also the effect of the approved antiviral drugs against the SARS‐CoV‐2 main protease (Mpro). To understand the mechanism of inhibition of the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) against SARS‐CoV‐2, we performed molecular interaction studies. The studies revealed that HCQ docked at the active site of the Human ACE2 receptor as a possible way of inhibition. Our in silico analysis revealed that the three drugs Lopinavir, Ritonavir, and Remdesivir showed interaction with the active site residues of Mpro. During molecular dynamics simulation, based on the binding free energy contributions, Lopinavir showed better results than Ritonavir and Remdesivir.

While facing potentially high morbidity from COVID-19 without known effective therapies, the off-label use of several non-specific drugs has been advocated, including re-purposed anti- viral (e.g., remdesivir or the lopinavir/ritonavir combination), biologic agents (e.g., tocilizumab), and antimalarial drugs such as chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in association with or without azithromycin. Data regarding the effectiveness of these drugs in treating COVID-19 has been shown in some trials and clinical settings, but further randomised controlled trials are still being carried out. One of the main concerns regarding their widespread use, however, is their possible effects on the QT interval and arrhythmogenic potential. Some of these drugs have been associated with QT prolongation and Torsades de Point, a potentially lethal ventricular arrhythmia. The review aims to highlight the magnitude of this problem, to quickly refresh clinically impacting cornerstones of QT interval and TdP pathophysiology, to summarize the available evidence regarding the QT and arrhythmia impact of drugs used in different clinical settings in COVID-19 patients, and to help the physicians dealing with the knowledge needed in the everyday clinical duties in case of doubts regarding QT-induced arrhythmias in this time of emergency.

Background The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel strain that causes acute respiratory illnesses known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Currently, there is limited information regarding the therapeutic management for this disease. Several studies have stated that antivirals drugs such as remdesivir, favipiravir, and lopinavir/ritonavir may potentially inhibit the virus from spreading to the host. Objective The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the clinical effectiveness and safety of remdesivir, favipiravir, and lopinavir/ritonavir on COVID-19. Methods The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to July 2021 to identify eligible experimental randomized controlled trials on remdesivir, favipiravir, and lopinavir/ritonavir for COVID-19 patients. This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Results From 158 references, 15 studies were included in the review. The results showed that remdesivir has some potential benefits for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, as seen from clinical improvements such as faster recovery time, less duration of hospitalization, and fewer respiratory side effects among COVID-19 patients. However, the impact of remdesivir in reducing mortality remains uncertain. Treatment with favipiravir has shown promising improvement in the clinical status of COVID-19 patients, although the results suggested no significant differences in some clinical parameters such as length of hospitalizations and clinical recovery. A combination of favipiravir with other supportive therapy showed more favorable outcomes for COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, the use of lopinavir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patients reported no significant clinical improvement compared to standard care with notable adverse effect reactions. Conclusion This study provides an overview of the evidence-based role of remdesivir, favipiravir, and lopinavir/ritonavir in the management of COVID-19. A thorough assessment of the benefit-risk profile in COVID-19 patients is urgently needed. The current review was based on very limited available data; therefore, further well-designed clinical trials are required.

Background Treatment failure continues to be an impediment to the efficacy of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HART) in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection (HIV-1). The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends third-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) for patients who have failed second-line ART. Darunavir (DRV) boosted with ritonavir (DRV/r) has a higher genetic barrier to resistance, is active against multidrug-resistant HIV isolates, retaining virological activity even when multiple protease mutations are present, and has been shown to be cost-effective when compared to other boosted protease inhibitors (PIs). Case Summary This is a case of a 40-year-old female known HIV/AIDS patient who has been on ART for the last 14 years with good adherence and regular follow-up, and who is now on 3rd line ART medication with TLD (tenofovir/lamivudine/dolutegravir)+DRV/r (in her 11th month) after being diagnosed with second-line treatment failure. After 6 months and 1 week of therapy, the viral load (VL) was sent, and the result was undetectable. The patient's clinical conditions had greatly improved. Conclusion Third-line ART therapy, which was once thought to be a salvageable treatment, is now the primary option for second-line ART failure. TLD in combination with ritonavir-boosted darunavir is found to be effective at lowering viral loads in the blood below detectable limits. Despite a lack of data on the use of third-line ART in Ethiopia, access to third-line ART containing ritonavir-boosted darunavir is recommended because it has been shown to be an effective alternative for patients who have failed second-line ART. We recommend that more research be done with a larger sample size, and that the findings in this paper be used with caution.

The purpose of this survey is to explore changes in the management of COVID-19 during the first versus the second wave, with particular emphasis on therapies, antibiotic prescriptions, and elderly care. An internet-based questionnaire survey was distributed to European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) members. Therapeutic approach to patients with mild-to-moderate (PiO2/FiO2 200–350) and severe (PiO2/FiO2

Background Remdesivir is a novel broad-spectrum antiviral therapeutic with activity against several viruses that cause emerging infectious diseases. The purpose of this study is to explore how commonly utilized antiretroviral therapy (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine [TDF/3TC] and atazanavir/ritonavir [ATV/r]) influence plasma and intracellular concentrations of remdesivir. Methods This is an open-label, randomized, fixed sequence single intravenous dosing study to assess pharmacokinetic interactions between remdesivir and TDF/3TC (Study A, crossover design) or TDF/3TC plus ATV/r (Study B). Healthy volunteers satisfying study entry criteria will be enrolled in the study and randomized to either Study A; N=16 (Sequence 1 or Sequence 2) or Study B; N=8. Participants will receive standard adult doses of antiretroviral therapy for 7 days and a single 200mg remdesivir infusion administered over 60 min. Pharmacokinetic blood sampling will be performed relative to the start of remdesivir infusion; predose (before the start of remdesivir infusion) and 30 min after the start of remdesivir infusion. Additional blood samples will be taken at 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h after the end of remdesivir infusion. Discussion This study will characterize the pharmacokinetics of remdesivir from a typical African population in whom clinical use is anticipated. Furthermore, this study will deliver pharmacokinetic datasets for remdesivir drug concentrations and demographic characteristics which could support pharmacometric approaches for simulation of remdesivir treatment regimens in patients concurrently using tenofovir/lamivudine and/or atazanavir/ritonavir. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04385719. Registered 13 May 2020.

BACKGROUND As a consequence of the improved availability of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) in resource-limited countries, an emergence of HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) has been observed. We assessed the prevalence and spectrum of HIVDR in patients with failure of second-line cART at two HIV clinics in central Ethiopia. METHODS HIV drug resistance was analysed in HIV-1-infected patients with virological failure of second-line cART using the geno2pheno application. RESULTS Among 714 patients receiving second-line cART, 44 (6.2%) fulfilled the criteria for treatment failure and 37 were eligible for study inclusion. Median age was 42 years [interquartile range (IQR): 20-45] and 62.2% were male. At initiation of first-line cART, 23 (62.2%) were WHO stage III, mean CD4 cell count was 170.6 (range: 16-496) cells/µL and median (IQR) HIV-1 viral load was 30 220 (7963-82 598) copies/mL. Most common second-line cART regimens at the time of failure were tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-lamivudine (3TC)-ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) (19/37, 51.4%) and zidovudine (ZDV)-3TC-ATV/r (9/37, 24.3%). Genotypic HIV-1 resistance testing was successful in 35 (94.6%) participants. We found at least one resistance mutation in 80% of patients and 40% carried a protease inhibitor (PI)-associated mutation. Most common mutations were M184V (57.1%), Y188C (25.7%), M46I/L (25.7%) and V82A/M (25.7%). High-level resistance against the PI ATV (10/35, 28.6%) and lopinavir (LPV) (5/35, 14.3%) was reported. As expected, no resistance mutations conferring integrase inhibitor resistance were detected. CONCLUSIONS We found a high prevalence of resistance mutations, also against PIs (40%), as the national standard second-line cART components. Resistance testing before switching to second- or third-line cART is warranted.

BACKGROUND Suboptimal adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) is responsible for most virologic failure among adolescents with HIV. Methods for objectively measuring adherence to ART are limited. This study assessed the association between ritonavir concentrations in hair and self-reported adherence and modified directly administered ART on virologic outcomes among HIV-infected adolescents who were virologically failing second-line ART in Harare, Zimbabwe. METHODS HIV-infected adolescents on atazanavir-based or ritonavir-based second-line treatment for >6 months with viral load ≥1000 copies/mL were randomized to either modified directly administered ART (mDAART) plus standard of care (intervention) or standard of care alone (control). Questionnaires were administered; viral load and hair samples were collected at baseline and after 90 days. Virological suppression was defned as

Despite aggressive efforts on containment measures for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic around the world, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is continuously spreading. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an effective antiviral agent. To date, considerable research has been conducted to develop different approaches to COVID-19 therapy. In addition to early observational studies, which could be limited by study design, small sample size, non-randomized design, or different timings of treatment, an increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the clinical efficacy and safety of antiviral agents are being carried out. This study reviews the updated findings of RCTs regarding the clinical efficacy of eight antiviral agents against COVID-19, including remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, darunavir/cobicistat, and their combinations. Treatment with remdesivir could accelerate clinical improvement; however, it lacked additional survival benefits. Moreover, 5-day regimen of remdesivir might show adequate effectiveness in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Favipiravir was only marginally effective regarding clinical improvement and virological assessment based on the results of small RCTs. The present evidence suggests that sofosbuvir/daclatasvir may improve survival and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, the sample sizes for analysis were relatively small, and all studies were exclusively conducted in Iran. Further larger RCTs in other countries are warranted to support these findings. In contrast, the present findings of limited RCTs did not indicate the use of lopinavir/ritonavir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, and darunavir/cobicistat in the treatment of patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Introduction: An outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has occurred in different parts of the world. Although a large piece of information regarding the epidemiology, clinical features, and management of COVID-19 has been reported in the general population, there is very limited data regarding organ transplant recipients, particularly regarding the management of maintenance immunosuppressive agents during infection. Methodology: We described a case of kidney transplant recipient from Thailand who had COVID-19 pneumonia and severe acute kidney injury. Results: The patient’s serum creatinine peaked at 7.0 mg/dL on day 15 of illness and returned to baseline value of 2.0 mg/dL on day 26 of illness. We have shown how we modified tacrolimus, mycophenolate, and steroids in the patient who had received favipiravir and lopinavir/ritonavir for COVID-19 pneumonia. Conclusions: In this case, successful modification of this immunosuppressive regimen was accomplished to reduce drug interaction complications, aiming to avoid calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity while maintaining appropriate levels of immunosuppression to prevent organ rejection and to promote the patient’s recovery from infection.

We retrospectively studied nasopharyngeal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients who were hospitalized between January 13 and April 1, 2020. Quantitative real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was conducted using primers and probes targeting the ORF1ab and N genes. All patients were classified in the following groups: Group 1: received favipiravir + chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir for 5-10 days, Group 2: received chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir for 5-10 days, and Group 3: no antiviral medication. Among the 115 patients, 38 (33%), 54 (47%), and 23 (20%) were in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The median (IQR) baseline viral loads on day 0 of Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 7.2 (6.0-8.1), 6.9 (5.8-7.8), and 6.9 (5.8-7.6) log10 copies/mL, respectively. The reductions of mean viral loads on day 3 from baseline were 2.41, 1.38, and 2.19 log10 copies/mL in the corresponding groups (P 0.05). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that receiving favipiravir was associated with nasopharyngeal viral load reduction at three days (P = 0.001). Significant nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral load reduction was achieved in COVID-19 patients who received a favipiravir-containing regimen.

BackgroundIntranasal corticosteroids are widely used for management of many upper airway diseases because of their ability to effectively deliver local relief of inflammation.Case reportThis paper presents the case of a 51-year-old man with human immunodeficiency virus treated with ritonavir who was started on fluticasone intranasal spray for presumed chronic rhinosinusitis. Months after starting this therapy, he developed symptoms of Cushing's syndrome and avascular necrosis of the shoulder due to the pharmacological interactions between fluticasone and ritonavir.ConclusionAlthough intranasal corticosteroids are deemed a low-risk route of drug administration, clinicians need to be vigilant in appropriately prescribing corticosteroids in the setting of drug potentiators, particularly in these high-risk patients. Alternative corticosteroids such as beclomethasone dipropionate should be considered in such cases.

Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Ovid, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, and VIP databases were searched to obtain the clinical studies of LPV/r in the treatment of COVID-19 from December 2019 to July 2020. The literatures were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Their qualities were evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 688 patients were included in five studies, involving China and France. Compared with patients in the control group, who was only treated with routine treatment, there were no significant differences of the 7-day nucleic acid negative conversion rate and 14-day nucleic acid negative conversion rate in the treatment group. However, the use of LPV/r increased the incidence of adverse reactions in the treatment group compared to the control group. Conclusion: There is no available evidence to support the use of Lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19.

Due to current advances and growing experience in the management of coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19), the outcome of COVID‐19 patients with severe/critical illness would be expected to be better in the second wave compared with the first wave. As our hospitalization criteria changed in the second wave, we aimed to investigate whether a favorable outcome occurred in hospitalized COVID‐19 patients with only severe/critical illness. Among 642 laboratory‐confirmed hospitalized COVID‐19 patients in the first wave and 1121 in the second wave, those who met World Health Organization (WHO) definitions for severe or critical illness on admission or during follow‐up were surveyed. Data on demographics, comorbidities, C‐reactive protein (CRP) levels on admission, and outcomes were obtained from an electronic hospital database. Univariate analysis was performed to compare the characteristics of patients in the first and second waves. There were 228 (35.5%) patients with severe/critical illness in the first wave and 681 (60.7%) in the second wave. Both groups were similar in terms of age, gender, and comorbidities, other than chronic kidney disease. Median serum CRP levels were significantly higher in patients in the second wave compared with those in the first wave [109 mg/L (interquartile range [IQR]: 65–157) vs. 87 mg/L (IQR: 39–140); p, Highlights Even though a lower mortality rate in the second wave has been reported in previous studies, including all hospitalized COVID‐19 patients, we found similar AQ4demographics and outcomes among hospitalized COVID‐19 patients with severe/critical illness in the first and second wave.

Hepatitis C is an urgent problem today because of the low efficiency and a significant number of side effects of conventional therapy. The problem of the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 1 and 4 is particularly acute, as they are the most resistant to traditional treatment regimens. The solution to this problem, apparently, is the use of a relatively new group of direct-acting antiviral drugs (DAAD). This article discusses the various schemes of treatment with these products, their mechanism of action and effectiveness, as well as compares two of the most effective and promising DAAD available on the global market — Harvoni (sofosbuvir/ledipasvir) and Viekira Pak (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir). Current guidelines of the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the Canadian Association for the Study of the Liver (CASL) on the treatment of patients with HCV genotypes 1 and 4 are also compared.

Introduction. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is used in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients, to suppress viral replication and slow disease progression. The side effects of ART, milder or more serious, frequently occur, thus the main challenge for specialists is to find a balance between the benefits of long-term viremia suppression and the risks of toxicity. The objective of the study was to compare the frequency of mild side effects after administration of a regimen containing darunavir (DRV) boosted with ritonavir (RTV) (DRV/r 600 mg/100 mg, twice daily), vs DRV boosted with cobicistat (COBI) (DRV/c – 800 mg/150 mg, once a day) and perform a profile of the patient at risk of developing these types of adverse reactions during ARV treatment. Materials and methods. 462 patients were enrolled in the study and divided into two groups: 384 received DRV/r, and 78 DRV/c. This was a retrospective, non-interventional study using the database of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases “Prof. Dr. Matei Bals”, Bucharest, Romania. The self-declared mild side effects were collected from patients’ medical files and a comparison between the frequency of these in the two groups have been made. The main self-declared mild side effect was statistically correlated with the characteristic parameters of the cohort. Results. The statistical description of the most frequent self-declared mild side effects in the two groups showed that all parameters were found in a greater proportion in DRV/r group than in DRV/c group, with a statistically significant difference of p

BACKGROUND Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is increasingly used in HIV treatment, with or without agents that require pharmacologic boosters such as ritonavir/cobicistat. Boosters increase TAF levels, so the TAF dose is lowered in single-pill combinations. We hypothesized that individuals on dose-adjusted boosted TAF would have similar urine tenofovir (TFV) concentrations to those on unboosted TAF. SETTING/METHODS We collected urine samples from patients with HIV on TAF, with evidence of virologic suppression and high self-reported adherence at 2 San Francisco clinics from June 2019 to January 2020. We measured urine TFV levels by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry and used linear regression to compare natural log-transformed urine TFV levels for patients on boosted versus unboosted TAF. RESULTS Our analysis included 30 patients on unboosted TAF (25 mg daily TAF) and 15 on boosted TAF (12 on 10 mg daily TAF and 3 on 25 mg daily TAF). Patients on unboosted vs. boosted TAF had similar baseline age, weight, sex, and creatinine. In unadjusted univariate linear regression, there were no significant differences in urine TFV levels based on presence/absence of boosting after TAF dose reduction to 10 mg (geometric mean ratio 1.07; 95% confidence interval: 0.53 to 2.16). This finding was unchanged in adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS No significant differences in urine TFV levels were seen for patients on unboosted vs. boosted dose-reduced TAF. These results have important implications for our forthcoming point-of-care urine immunoassay for TAF, implying that separate adherence cutoffs will not be necessary for patients on boosters and dose-reduced TAF. A single POC TAF immunoassay will, thus, support monitoring on most TAF-based antiretroviral therapy.

Darunavir is a nonpeptidic inhibitor of protease and is primarily metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) isoenzymes. It is usually coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (Darunavir/r). Ritonavir is an inhibitor of CYP3A isoenzymes and pharmacologically enhances Darunavir which leads to increased plasma concentrations of darunavir and allows for daily lower dose. Here, we have developed combination SR formulation of Darunavir and Ritonavir and evaluated. In vitro drug release of all formulations was carried out in dissolution medium 900ml of pH 3.0, 0.05 M Sodium Phosphate Buffer + 2% Tween 20 for 75 RPM USP II apparatus (paddle). The results shown that, all the formulations of matrix tablets shown the good release of drug from trialed formulations however all formulations were not releasing the drug in enough amount. In matrix tablets F6, the release of drug shows NLT 80%. So, the formulation F6 have been considered as suitable for the SR tablet of Darunavir and Ritonavir. Tablets were also evaluated though Quality by Design (QbD) method.

Toxoplasmosis is a zoonotic disease of major significant perspectives in public health and veterinary medicine. So far, the available drugs control only the active infection, once the parasite encysts in the tissues, they lose their efficacy. Cytokines; IFN-γ and IL-10, play a critical role in the modulation of toxoplasmic encephalitis and neuro-inflammation in chronic toxoplasmosis. Antiretroviral protease inhibitors applied in the treatment of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, revealed activity against multiple parasites. Aluvia (lopinavir/ritonavir) (L/R); an aspartyl protease inhibitor, had efficiently treated T. gondii RH strain infection. We investigated the potential activity of L/R against experimental T. gondii infection with a cystogenic Me49 strain in mice, considering the role of IFN-γ and IL-10 in the neuropathology versus pyrimethamine-sulfadiazine combination therapy. Three aluvia regimens were applied; starting on the day of infection (acute phase), 2-week PI (early chronic phase) and eight weeks PI (late chronic phase). L/R reduced the brain-tissue cyst burden significantly in all treatment regimens. It impaired the parasite infectivity markedly in the late chronic phase. Ultrastructural changes were detected in Toxoplasma cyst membrane and wall, bradyzoite membrane and nuclear envelope. The signs of bradyzoite paraptosis and cytoplasmic lipid droplets were observed. L/R had significantly reduced the brain-homogenate levels of IFN-γ and IL-10 in its three regimens however, they could not reach the normal level in chronic phases. Cerebral hypercellularity, perivascular inflammatory response, lymphoplasmacytic infiltrates and glial cellular reaction were ameliorated by L/R treatment. Herein, L/R was proved to possess promising preventive and therapeutic perspectives in chronic cerebral toxoplasmosis.

At present, over 180 million people have been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) worldwide and there have been more than 3.8 million deaths due to the virus. However, specific effective antiviral treatment for this infectious disease is absent. At the beginning of the epidemic, relevant cellular and animal experiments of antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 were conducted based on the prior studies of SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Some antivirals were preliminarily validated to be potentially effective in the clinical settings. But as the epidemic continued and more studies were carried out, the efficacy of these antiviral drugs became controversial. This paper reviews the pharmacology and application of interferon, lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, chloroquine, arbidol, favipiravir, remdesivir, and thymosin α1 in coronavirus disease 2019. The actual effect of these drugs remains controversial. Meanwhile, the efficacy and safety of these drugs for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 still need to be explored.

Purpose The present digital world’s challenging issue is COVID-19. This paper is related to the process of the COVID-19 treatment based on age, gender, symptoms and previous health issues. This paper gives the deep discussion about the prevention, symptoms, tests and treatment process. In this research work, the discussion is about vaccine invention and the side effects of the consumed medication. Design/methodology/approach This paper gives a clear explanation of the types of vaccine, which are lopinavir, ritonavir, remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine and plasma therapy. Thereafter, the discussion is prolonged to Indian vaccine for COVID-19. Findings This paper examines some of the COVID-19 treatment processes and difficulties, and finally, this paper aims to summarize and give an overview of the present preclinical research and clinical trials of potential candidates for COVID-19 treatments and vaccines. Originality/value The required information has been taken from online databases such as PubMed, Science, Nature, PNAS and Cell. Papers included were published between December 2019 and July 2020. The current results indicate the most promising outcomes for dexamethasone as a treatment and vaccine. Further research is needed to identify safe and effective treatments and vaccines for COVID-19.

The rapid expansion of access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) has led to the emergence of multi-class drug resistance (MDR) in people living with HIV (PLWH). However, the viral evolutionary dynamics of the development of MDR has not been well documented. For this study, plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were longitudinally collected at different time points from a PLWH who suffered several periods of ART failure. Next generation sequencing (NGS) was used to analyze the distribution and percent of drug resistance mutations in PBMC and plasma. The results showed the gradual replacement of the wild type protease and integrase genotype by protease inhibitors (PI) and integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) drug resistant mutations when patient’s ART regimen was changed – driving the increase of genetic variability in HIV DNA. Sampling for this study was initiated after the patient was first diagnosed with ART failure, five years after ART treatment was first initiated. By that time, mutants resistant to the reverse transcriptase inhibitor nevirapine (NVP) had already replaced almost 100% of wild type. After the introduction of the protease inhibitor lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) to the patient’s ART, resistant protease inhibitor (PI) mutants developed slowly. After one month, none were found in PMBC DNA; after sixteen months, less than 20% were mutants; and after three years (two months prior to the patient’s death) PI mutants were still under 50%. However, integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) mutations evolved much more quickly, replacing approximately 75% of the wild genotype in HIV DNA one year after addition of the integrase inhibitor raltegravir to the patient’s ART, and almost 100% after two years. In summary, our dataset provides the first analysis of the distribution and percent of drug resistance mutations in PBMC and plasma during the development of a four-class drug resistant HIV-1 CRF01_AE virion. The study also showed that months before drug resistant mutants could be found in plasma, NGS identified them in HIV DNA, demonstrating that this can be a very effective tool for early detection of the development of drug resistance.

Background Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a novel prodrug of tenofovir (TFV), has become the preferred drug for the treatment of HIV-1 and chronic hepatitis B infection in clinical practice. Results from clinical trials showed that it had better renal and bone mineral outcomes compared to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). However, as we have seen with TDF, side effects from the new medication can be more prevalent and recognized after extensive use in real world situations. Sporadic cases of acute kidney injury in patients using TAF have started to emerge. Case presentation We report a case of 49-year-old Thai, HIV treatment-experienced female with hypertension presented with worsening renal function after switching her antiretroviral regimen from TDF, emtricitabine (FTC), and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) to TAF, FTC and dolutegravir (DTG) for 3 months. Kidney biopsy showed distinctive picture of tenofovir nephrotoxicity with acute tubular injury and mitochondrial injury. The possible causes of acute kidney injury and nephrotoxicity from TAF for this patient were discussed. We have extensively reviewed all published case reports of TAF-associated nephrotoxicity and summarized the essential information in this article. Conclusion Although TAF has less nephrotoxicity compared with TDF; renal function should always be monitored after the initiation of both drugs. Future large cohort studies are required to identify the risk factors of TAF-associated nephrotoxicity and to design an effective preventive strategy.

Gene therapy in its current design is an irreversible process. It cannot be stopped in case of unwanted side effects, nor can expression levels of therapeutics be adjusted to individual patient’s needs. Thus, the Gene-Switch (GS) system for pharmacologically regulable neurotrophic factor expression was established for treatment of parkinsonian patients. Mifepristone, the synthetic steroid used to control transgene expression of the GS vector, is an approved clinical drug. However, pharmacokinetics and -dynamics of mifepristone vary considerably between different experimental animal species and depend on age and gender. In humans, but not in any other species, mifepristone binds to a high-affinity plasma carrier protein. We now demonstrate that the formulation of mifepristone can have robust impact on its ability to activate the GS system. Furthermore, we show that a pharmacological booster, ritonavir (Rtv), robustly enhances the pharmacological effect of mifepristone, and allows it to overcome gender- and species-specific pharmacokinetic and -dynamic issues. Most importantly, we demonstrate that the GS vector can be efficiently controlled by mifepristone in the presence of its human plasma carrier protein, α1-acid glycoprotein, in a “humanized” rat model. Thus, we have substantially improved the applicability of the GS vector toward therapeutic use in patients., Graphical abstract, Regulable gene therapy may enable personalized genetic medicines. We demonstrate optimized pharmacological control over expression of the neurotrophic factor GDNF from an AAV-Gene-Switch vector. This work substantially advances our understanding of how to gain external control over a regulable vector for treatment of Parkinson’s disease.

Background/Aims: Recent data indicate the presence of liver enzyme abnormalities in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to evaluate the clinical features and treatment outcomes of COVID-19 patients with abnormal liver enzymes. Methods: We performed a retrospective, multicenter study of 874 COVID-19 patients admitted to five tertiary hospitals from February 20 to April 14, 2020. Data on clinical features, laboratory parameters, medications, and treatment outcomes were collected until April 30, 2020, and compared between patients with normal and abnormal aminotransferases. Results: Abnormal aminotransferase levels were observed in 362 patients (41.1%), of which 94 out of 130 (72.3%) and 268 out of 744 (36.0%) belonged to the severe and non-severe COVID- 19 categories, respectively. The odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for male patients, patients with a higher body mass index, patients with severe COVID-19 status, and patients with lower platelet counts were 1.500 (1.029 to 2.184, p=0.035), 1.097 (1.012 to 1.189, p=0.024), 2.377 (1.458 to 3.875, p=0.001), and 0.995 (0.993 to 0.998, p>0.001), respectively, indicating an independent association of these variables with elevated aminotransferase levels. Lopinavir/ ritonavir and antibiotic use increased the odds ratio of abnormal aminotransferase levels after admission (1.832 and 2.646, respectively, both p

Introduction: Currently, there is no approved therapeutic entity for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and clinicians are primarily relying on drug repurposing. However, findings across studies are widely disparate, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Since clinicians need accurate evidence to treat COVID-19, this manuscript systematically analyzed the published and ongoing studies evaluating the pharmacological interventions for COVID-19.Areas Covered: A systematic search of observational studies and Clinical Trials on the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 was performed by using various databases from inception to 2 December 2020.Expert Opinion: A total of 460 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 were research studies, 386 were ongoing trials, and 37 were completed trials. Anti-virals, steroids, anti-malarial, plasma exchange, and monoclonal antibodies were the most common treatment modalities used alone or in combination in these studies. However, tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids have shown significant improvements in patient's clinical and radiological status. Tocilizumab reported minimum hospital stay of 2 days along with maximum recovery and patient's stability rate. Existing literature demonstrate promising results of tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids among COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, these studies are accompanied by several methodological disparities which should be considered while interpreting the results.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Tenofovir exposure is increased in non-pregnant adults when tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is co-administered with lopinavir/ritonavir. In pregnant women, tenofovir exposure is decreased. Our objective is to describe the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir on tenofovir pharmacokinetics during pregnancy. METHODS: Data were collected through the International Maternal Pediatric and Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials (IMPAACT) Network P1026s protocol. This was a nonrandomized, open-label, parallel-group, multi-center phase-IV prospective study in pregnant women with HIV. Intensive steady-state 24-hour pharmacokinetic profiles were collected during the third trimester of pregnancy and postpartum. Tenofovir was measured in plasma using validated liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method (quantification limit: 10 ng/mL). Statistical tests compared paired and between group pharmacokinetic data. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In women not receiving lopinavir/ritonavir (n=28), tenofovir AUC(0–24) was 27% lower (2.2 mcg*hr/mL vs 2.8 mcg*hr/mL, p = 0.002) and oral clearance was 27% higher (61 L/hr vs 48 L/hr, p = 0.001) during the third trimester compared to paired postpartum data. In women receiving lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 10), tenofovir AUC(0–24) and oral clearance were not different antepartum compared to postpartum. Women with and women without concomitant lopinavir/ritonavir displayed no significant differences in postpartum tenofovir pharmacokinetics. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Tenofovir exposure during the third trimester was reduced compared to postpartum in pregnant women not receiving lopinavir/ritonavir, but not in pregnant women also receiving lopinavir/ritonavir. Our findings suggest that pregnancy confounds the expected decrease in tenofovir exposure with concomitant lopinavir/ritonavir in non-pregnant adults. These findings illustrate the need for drug-drug interaction studies in pregnant women as drug disposition differs significantly in pregnant women compared to non-pregnant adults.

Background: No specific drug treatment is available for the COVID-19. Various drugs are being used and repurposed as COVID-19 treatment. Summary: COVID-19 has no defined treatment course because it has no precedent. Various drugs are tried and tested to be used upon patients to treat particular symptom. Hydroxycholoroquine, lopinavir, ritonavir and so on are the famous drugs being repurposed as COVID-19 treatment drugs. Prophylactics are not widely listed but supplements and drugs which contain anti-inflammatory properties and anti-oxidants should be inculcated in the diet so that innate immune response can fight off the external pathogenic invasion all by itself. Conclusion: Drugs listed for repurposing method must be tried and tested before administered it to a severely ill patients or to a large chunk of population. Proper study needs to be done before administered and starting full-fledged usage of any existing drug not meant for the treatment of COVID-19.

Antiviral drugs (AvDs) are the primary resource in the global battle against viruses, including the recent fight against corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most AvDs require multiple medications, and their use frequently leads to drug resistance, since they have poor oral bioavailability and low efficacy due to their low solubility/low permeability. Characterizing the in vivo metabolism and pharmacokinetic characteristics of AvDs may help to solve the problems associated with AvDs and enhance their efficacy. In this review of AvDs, we systematically investigated their structure-based metabolic reactions and related enzymes, their cellular pharmacology, and the effects of metabolism on AvD pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. We further assessed how delivery systems achieve better metabolism and pharmacology of AvDs. This review suggests that suitable nanosystems may help to achieve better pharmacological activity and pharmacokinetic behavior of AvDs by altering drug metabolism through the utilization of advanced nanotechnology and appropriate administration routes. Notably, such AvDs as ribavirin, remdesivir, favipiravir, chloroquine, lopinavir and ritonavir have been confirmed to bind to the severe acute respiratory syndrome-like coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) receptor and thus may represent anti-COVID-19 treatments. Elucidating the metabolic and pharmacokinetic characteristics of AvDs may help pharmacologists to identify new formulations with high bioavailability and efficacy and help physicians to better treat virus-related diseases, including COVID-19., Graphical Abstract