Search

Background International Maternal Pediatric Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials (IMPAACT) P1078, a randomized noninferiority study designed to compare the safety of starting isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) in women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) either during pregnancy or after delivery, showed that IPT during pregnancy increased the risk of composite adverse pregnancy outcomes, but not individual outcomes. Many known factors are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes: these factors’ associations and effect modifications with IPT and pregnancy outcomes were examined. Methods Pregnant women living with HIV from 8 countries with tuberculosis incidences >60/100 000 were randomly assigned to initiate 28 weeks of IPT either during pregnancy or at 12 weeks after delivery. Using univariable and multivariable logistic regression and adjusting for factors associated with pregnancy outcomes, composite and individual adverse pregnancy outcome measures were analyzed. Results This secondary analysis included 925 mother-infant pairs. All mothers were receiving antiretrovirals. The adjusted odds of fetal demise, preterm delivery (PTD), low birth weight (LBW), or a congenital anomaly (composite outcome 1) were 1.63 times higher among women on immediate compared to deferred IPT (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15–2.31). The odds of fetal demise, PTD, LBW, or neonatal death within 28 days (composite outcome 2) were 1.62 times higher among women on immediate IPT (95% CI, 1.14–2.30). The odds of early neonatal death within 7 days, fetal demise, PTD, or LBW (composite outcome 3) were 1.74 times higher among women on immediate IPT (95% CI, 1.22–2.49). Conclusions We confirmed higher risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with the initiation of IPT during pregnancy, after adjusting for known risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes., After adjusting for known risk factors, we compared composite and individual adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with human immunodeficiency virus initiating isoniazid preventive therapy during or after pregnancy, and found higher risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes with initiation during pregnancy.

BackgroundPregnancy is accompanied by immune suppression. We hypothesized that Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific inflammatory responses used to identify latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) lose positivity during pregnancy. We also hypothesized that isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) may revert LTBI diagnoses because of its sterilizing activity.Methods944 women with human immunodeficiency virus infection (HIV) participating in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing 28 weeks of IPT antepartum versus postpartum, were tested by QuantiFERON-gold-in-tube (QGIT) antepartum and by QGIT and tuberculin skin test (TST) at delivery and postpartum. Serial QGIT positivity was assessed by logistic regression using generalized estimating equations.ResultsFrom entry to delivery, 68 (24%) of 284 QGIT-positive women reverted to QGIT-negative or indeterminate. Of these, 42 (62%) recovered QGIT positivity postpartum. The loss of QGIT positivity during pregnancy was explained by decreased interferon gamma (IFNγ) production in response to TB antigen and/or mitogen. At delivery, LTBI was identified by QGIT in 205 women and by TST in 113 women. Corresponding numbers postpartum were 229 and 122 women. QGIT and TST kappa agreement coefficients were 0.4 and 0.5, respectively. Among QGIT-positive women antepartum or at delivery, 34 (12%) reverted to QGIT-negative after IPT. There were no differences between women who initiated IPT antepartum or postpartum.ConclusionsDecreased IFNγ responses in pregnancy reduced QGIT positivity, suggesting that this test cannot reliably rule out LTBI during pregnancy. TST was less affected by pregnancy, but had lower positivity compared to QGIT at all time points. IPT was associated with loss of QGIT positivity, the potential clinical consequences of which need to be investigated.

The PROMISE trial enrolled asymptomatic HIV-infected pregnant and postpartum women not eligible for antiretroviral treatment (ART) per local guidelines and randomly assigned proven antiretroviral strategies to assess relative efficacy for perinatal prevention plus maternal/infant safety and maternal health. The START study subsequently demonstrated clear benefit in initiating ART regardless of CD4 count. Active PROMISE participants were informed of results and women not receiving ART were strongly recommended to immediately initiate treatment to optimize their own health. We recorded their decision and the primary reason given for accepting or rejecting the universal ART offer after receiving the START information. One-third of participants did not initiate ART after the initial session, wanting more time to consider. Six sessions were required to attain 95% uptake. The slow uptake of universal ART highlights the need to prepare individuals and sensitize communities regarding the personal and population benefits of the "Treat All" strategy.

BackgroundAntiretroviral therapy (ART) during pregnancy is important for both maternal health and prevention of perinatal HIV-1 transmission; however adequate data on the safety and efficacy of different ART regimens that are likely to be used by pregnant women are scarce. In this trial we compared the safety and efficacy of three antiretroviral regimens started in pregnancy: dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate; dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; and efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.MethodsThis multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 22 clinical research sites in nine countries (Botswana, Brazil, India, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, the USA, and Zimbabwe). Pregnant women (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed HIV-1 infection and at 14-28 weeks' gestation were eligible. Women who had previously taken antiretrovirals in the past were excluded (up to 14 days of ART during the current pregnancy was permitted), as were women known to be pregnant with multiple fetuses, or those with known fetal anomaly or a history of psychiatric illness. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using a central computerised randomisation system. Randomisation was done using permuted blocks (size six) stratified by gestational age (14-18, 19-23, and 24-28 weeks' gestation) and country. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg, and once-daily oral fixed-dose combination emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate 25 mg; once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg, and once-daily oral fixed-dose combination emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg; or once-daily oral fixed-dose combination of efavirenz 600 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of participants with viral suppression, defined as an HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 200 copies per mL, at or within 14 days of delivery, assessed in all participants with an HIV-1 RNA result available from the delivery visit, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -10% in the combined dolutegravir-containing groups versus the efavirenz-containing group (superiority was tested in a pre-planned secondary analysis). Primary safety outcomes, compared pairwise among treatment groups, were the occurrence of a composite adverse pregnancy outcome (ie, either preterm delivery, the infant being born small for gestational age, stillbirth, or spontaneous abortion) in all participants with a pregnancy outcome, and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher maternal and infant adverse events in all randomised participants. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03048422.FindingsBetween Jan 19, 2018, and Feb 8, 2019, we enrolled and randomly assigned 643 pregnant women: 217 to the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate group, 215 to the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group, and 211 to the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. At enrolment, median gestational age was 21·9 weeks (IQR 18·3-25·3), the median HIV-1 RNA concentration among participants was 902·5 copies per mL (152·0-5182·5; 181 [28%] of 643 participants had HIV-1 RNA concentrations of

The World Health Organization guidelines recommend that individuals living with HIV receive ≥ 6 months of isoniazid preventive therapy, including pregnant women. Yet, plasma isoniazid exposure during pregnancy, in the antiretroviral therapy era, has not been well-described. We investigated pregnancy-induced and pharmacogenetic-associated pharmacokinetic changes and drug-drug interactions between isoniazid and efavirenz in pregnant women. Eight hundred forty-seven women received isoniazid for 28 weeks, either during pregnancy or at 12 weeks postpartum, and 786 women received efavirenz. After adjusting for NAT2 and CYP2B6 genotype and weight, pregnancy increased isoniazid and efavirenz clearance by 26% and 15%, respectively. Isoniazid decreased efavirenz clearance by 7% in CYP2B6 normal metabolizers and 13% in slow and intermediate metabolizers. Overall, both isoniazid and efavirenz exposures were reduced during pregnancy, but the main determinants of drug concentration were NAT2 and CYP2B6 genotypes, which resulted in a five-fold difference for both drugs between rapid and slow metabolizers.

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text., Background: HIV-infected, postpartum women on antiretroviral therapy (ART) have high rates of viremia. We examined predictors of postpartum viremia in the PROMISE study. Methods: Women with pre-ART CD4+ T-cell counts ≥400 cells/mm3 who started ART during pregnancy were randomized postpartum to continue ART (CTART) or discontinue ART (DCART). Viral load and self-reported adherence were collected every 12 weeks, up to 144 weeks. Women in DCART reinitiated therapy when clinically indicated. Viremia was defined as 2 consecutive viral loads >1000 copies/mL after 24 weeks on ART. Adherence was dichotomized as missing versus not missing ART doses in the past 4 weeks. Predictors of viremia were examined using Cox proportional hazards regression with adherence as a time-varying covariate. Results: Among 802 women in the CTART arm, median age at entry was 27 years and median CD4+ T-cell count 696 cells/mm3. Of 175 women in CTART with viremia (22%), 141 had resistance data, and 12% had resistance to their current regimen. There was an estimated 0.12 probability of viremia by week 48 and 0.25 by week 144. Predictors of viremia included missed ART doses within the past 4 weeks, younger age, shorter duration of pre-entry ART, and being from the South American/Caribbean region. Of 137 women in DCART who reinitiated therapy, probability of viremia was similar to CTART (0.24 by week 96; 0.27 by week 144). Conclusions: Rates of postpartum viremia are high and viremia is more likely in younger postpartum women who start ART later in pregnancy. Interventions should target these higher-risk women.

Objective Compare the safety and efficacy of topical gentian violet with that of nystatin oral suspension (NYS) for the treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis in HIV-1-infected adults in resource-limited settings. Design Multicenter, open-label, evaluator-blinded, randomized clinical trial at eight international sites, within the AIDS Clinical Trials Group. Study participants and intervention Adult HIV-infected participants with oropharyngeal candidiasis, stratified by CD4 cell counts and antiretroviral therapy status at study entry, were randomized to receive either gentian violet (0.00165%, BID) or NYS (500 000 units, QID) for 14 days. Main outcome measure(s) Cure or improvement after 14 days of treatment. Signs and symptoms of oropharyngeal candidiasis were evaluated in an evaluator-blinded manner. Results The study was closed early per Data Safety Monitoring Board after enrolling 221 participants (target = 494). Among the 182 participants eligible for efficacy analysis, 63 (68.5%) in the gentian violet arm had cure or improvement of oropharyngeal candidiasis versus 61 (67.8%) in the NYS arm, resulting in a nonsizable difference of 0.007 (95% confidence interval: -0.129, 0.143). There was no sizable difference in cure rates between the two arms (-0.0007; 95% confidence interval: -0.146, 0.131). No gentian violet-related adverse events were noted. No sizable differences were identified in tolerance, adherence, quality of life, or acceptability of study drugs. In gentian violet arm, 61 and 39% of participants reported 'no' and 'mild-to-moderate' staining, respectively. Cost for medication procurement was significantly lower for gentian violet versus NYS (median $2.51 and 19.42, respectively, P = 0.01). Conclusion Efficacy of gentian violet was not statistically different than NYS, was well tolerated, and its procurement cost was substantially less than NYS.