Search

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Children with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection have limited options for effective antiretroviral treatment (ART). METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing three-drug ART based on the HIV integrase inhibitor dolutegravir with standard care (non-dolutegravir-based ART) in children and adolescents starting first- or second-line ART. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with virologic or clinical treatment failure by 96 weeks, as estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Safety was assessed. RESULTS: From September 2016 through June 2018, a total of 707 children and adolescents who weighed at least 14 kg were randomly assigned to receive dolutegravir-based ART (350 participants) or standard care (357). The median age was 12.2 years (range, 2.9 to 18.0), the median weight was 30.7 kg (range, 14.0 to 85.0), and 49% of the participants were girls. By design, 311 participants (44%) started first-line ART (with 92% of those in the standard-care group receiving efavirenz-based ART), and 396 (56%) started second-line ART (with 98% of those in the standard-care group receiving boosted protease inhibitor-based ART). The median follow-up was 142 weeks. By 96 weeks, 47 participants in the dolutegravir group and 75 in the standard-care group had treatment failure (estimated probability, 0.14 vs. 0.22; difference, -0.08; 95% confidence interval, -0.14 to -0.03; P = 0.004). Treatment effects were similar with first- and second-line therapies (P = 0.16 for heterogeneity). A total of 35 participants in the dolutegravir group and 40 in the standard-care group had at least one serious adverse event (P = 0.53), and 73 and 86, respectively, had at least one adverse event of grade 3 or higher (P = 0.24). At least one ART-modifying adverse event occurred in 5 participants in the dolutegravir group and in 17 in the standard-care group (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children and adolescents with HIV-1 infection who were starting first- or second-line treatment, dolutegravir-based ART was superior to standard care. (Funded by ViiV Healthcare; ODYSSEY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02259127; EUDRACT number, 2014-002632-14; and ISRCTN number, ISRCTN91737921.).

BACKGROUND: WHO guidelines recommend dolutegravir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line HIV therapy, with NRTI switching from first-line tenofovir to zidovudine. We aimed to examine whether dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir, the best-in-class protease inhibitor drug, and whether maintaining tenofovir in second-line therapy is non-inferior to switching to zidovudine. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial (NADIA), participants with confirmed HIV first-line treatment failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies per mL) were recruited at seven clinical sites in Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Following a 2 × 2 factorial design and stratified by site and screening HIV-1 RNA concentration, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive a 96-week regimen containing either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (800 mg of darunavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir once daily) in combination with either tenofovir (300 mg once daily) plus lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or zidovudine (300 mg twice daily) plus lamivudine (150 mg twice daily). The NRTI drugs allocated by randomisation were administered orally in fixed-dose combination pills; other drugs were administered orally as separate pills. The previously reported primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Here, we report the main secondary outcome: the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 96 weeks (non-inferiority margin 12%). We analysed this outcome and safety outcomes in the intention-to-treat population, which excluded only those who were randomly assigned in error and withdrawn before receiving trial drugs. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03988452, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between July 30 and Dec 18, 2019, we screened 783 patients and enrolled 465. One participant was randomly assigned in error and immediately withdrawn. The remaining 464 participants were randomly assigned to receive either dolutegravir (n=235) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=229) and to receive lamivudine plus either tenofovir (n=233) or zidovudine (n=231). At week 96, 211 (90%) of 235 participants in the dolutegravir group and 199 (87%) of 229 participants in the darunavir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 2·9, 95% CI -3·0 to 8·7), indicating non-inferiority. Nine (4%) participants (all in the dolutegravir group) developed dolutegravir resistance; no participants developed darunavir resistance (p=0·0023). In the other randomised comparison, 214 (92%) of 233 patients in the tenofovir group and 196 (85%) of 231 patients in the zidovudine group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 7·0, 95% CI 1·2 to 12·8), showing non-inferiority and indicating the superiority of tenofovir (p=0·019). The proportions of participants with any grade 3-4 adverse event were similar between the dolutegravir (26 [11%]) and darunavir (28 [12%]) groups and between the tenofovir (22 [9%]) and zidovudine (32 [14%]) groups. There were no deaths related to study medication. INTERPRETATION: Dolutegravir-based and darunavir-based regimens maintain good viral suppression during 96 weeks; dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir but is at greater risk of resistance in second-line therapy. Tenofovir should be continued in second-line therapy, rather than being switched to zidovudine. FUNDING: Janssen.

The article presents chronology and impacts on peoples of African descent of coronavirus pandemic in the age of social media Topics discussed include ways in which conflicting messages that make truth, difficult to find;vacuum of science-based news about COVID-19;and plentiful pieces of advice on how to prevent being infected by the virus

Background Clinical trial investigators may need to evaluate treatment effects in a specific subgroup (or subgroups) of participants in addition to reporting results of the entire study population. Such subgroups lack power to detect a treatment effect, but there may be strong justification for borrowing information from a larger patient group within the same trial, while allowing for differences between populations. Our aim was to develop methods for eliciting expert opinions about differences in treatment effect between patient populations, and to incorporate these opinions into a Bayesian analysis. Methods We used an interaction parameter to model the relationship between underlying treatment effects in two subgroups. Elicitation was used to obtain clinical opinions on the likely values of the interaction parameter, since this parameter is poorly informed by the data. Feedback was provided to experts to communicate how uncertainty about the interaction parameter corresponds with relative weights allocated to subgroups in the Bayesian analysis. The impact on the planned analysis was then determined. Results The methods were applied to an ongoing non-inferiority trial designed to compare antiretroviral therapy regimens in 707 children living with HIV and weighing ≥ 14 kg, with an additional group of 85 younger children weighing Conclusions Borrowing information from a larger subgroup or subgroups can facilitate estimation of treatment effects in small subgroups within a clinical trial, leading to improved power and precision. Informative prior distributions for interaction parameters are required to inform the degree of borrowing and can be informed by expert opinion. We demonstrated accessible methods for obtaining opinions.

Contains fulltext : 283099.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Young children living with HIV have few treatment options. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) in children weighing between 3 kg and less than 14 kg. METHODS: ODYSSEY is an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial (10% margin) comparing dolutegravir-based ART with standard of care and comprises two cohorts (children weighing ≥14 kg and

Contains fulltext : 282959.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Children with HIV-associated tuberculosis (TB) have few antiretroviral therapy (ART) options. We aimed to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of dolutegravir twice-daily dosing in children receiving rifampicin for HIV-associated TB. METHODS: We nested a two-period, fixed-order pharmacokinetic substudy within the open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority ODYSSEY trial at research centres in South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Children (aged 4 weeks to

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Excel spreadsheet illustrating the correspondence between weights allocated to the data from older children and beliefs about the uncertainty range for the treatment difference in younger children. Figure S2. Drawing materials and counters provided to help experts visualise their probability beliefs.

Background Dolutegravir (DTG)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) is highly effective and well-tolerated in adults and is rapidly being adopted globally. We describe the design of the ODYSSEY trial which evaluates the efficacy and safety of DTG-based ART compared with standard-of-care in children and adolescents. The ODYSSEY trial includes nested pharmacokinetic (PK) sub-studies which evaluated pragmatic World Health Organization (WHO) weight-band-based DTG dosing and opened recruitment to children Methods ODYSSEY (Once-daily DTG based ART in Young people vS. Standard thErapY) is an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority, basket trial comparing the efficacy and safety of DTG + 2 nucleos(t) ides (NRTIs) versus standard-of-care (SOC) in HIV-infected children Results Between September 2016 and June 2018, 707 children weighing ≥14 kg were enrolled; including 311 ART-naïve children and 396 children starting second-line. 47% of children were enrolled in Uganda, 21% Zimbabwe, 20% South Africa, 9% Thailand, 4% Europe. 362 (51%) participants were male; median age [range] at enrolment was 12.2 years [2.9–18.0]. 82 (12%) children weighed 14 to Conclusions By employing a basket design, to include ART-naïve and -experienced children, and nested PK sub-studies, the ODYSSEY trial efficiently evaluates multiple scientific questions regarding dosing and effectiveness of DTG-based ART in children. Trial registration NCT, NCT02259127, registered 7th October 2014; EUDRACT, 2014–002632-14, registered 18th June 2014 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2014-002632-14/ES); ISRCTN, ISRCTN91737921, registered 4th October 2014.

Malaria in pregnancy contributes considerably to poor pregnancy outcomes. The U.S. Agency for International Development’s Malaria Action Program for Districts project in Uganda used the Problem Tree and Results Chain tool to identify demand and supply barriers responsible for the low uptake of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (IPTp) in 52 districts of Uganda. The key supply-side barriers identified were related to leadership/governance, health financing, medicines and technologies, health information systems, human resources, service delivery, and users. The project used the results to plan and implement interventions targeting the barriers. As a result, from October 2018 to September 2019, the project reported an apparent improvement in uptake of three or more doses of IPTp (49–67%). Malaria in pregnancy cases and stock out of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) did not change considerably. The Problem Tree and Results Chain tool is a useful and complementary project management tool to identify root causes and their solutions during planning and implementation. Projects using this tool should periodically re-assess performance of IPTp policy implementation and develop appropriate solutions to address the key bottlenecks identified to increase the likelihood of sustained improvement. Further evaluation of the utility of the tool in other settings is recommended.

Background and importance ODYSSEY is an ongoing international randomised trial evaluating dolutegravir (DTG)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) versus standard-of-care in HIV-infected children starting first- or second-line ART. Pediatric DTG film-coated tablets (FCTs) of 10 mg and 25 mg are unavailable in low- and middle income countries (LMIC) were most HIV-infected children live. Adult DTG 50mg FTCs are produced by generic manufacturers at low-cost, are well-tolerated, and already available in many high- and LMICs. Aim and objectives Within ODYSSEY pharmacokinetic (PK) substudies were undertaken to assess PK and safety data for a simplified paediatric DTG dosing approach using WHO weight bands (WBs) 25 to Materials and methods Steady-state 24-hour PK curves were constructed from data in children (≥3 h fasted) observed taking current EMA-approved DTG doses of 25 mg and 35 mg (10 mg+25 mg FCTs)) in 25- Results 28 black-African children (52 PK profiles) from Uganda and Zimbabwe (61% male) with a median (range) age of 11.0(7.5–17.9) years old were included. For children weighing 25- Conclusions and relevance Adult 50 mg FCT once-daily dolutegravir provides appropriate PK profiles in children ≥25 kg, with no safety signal, allowing practical dosing and rapid access to dolutegravir. WHO has released new pediatric dosing guidelines in response to these results.

Summary Background Paediatric dolutegravir doses approved by stringent regulatory authorities (SRAs) for children weighing 20 kg to less than 40 kg until recently required 25 mg and 10 mg film-coated tablets. These tablets are not readily available in low-resource settings where the burden of HIV is highest. We did nested pharmacokinetic substudies in patients enrolled in the ODYSSEY-trial to evaluate simplified dosing in children with HIV. Methods We did pharmacokinetic and safety substudies within the open-label, multicentre, randomised ODYSSEY trial (NCT02259127) of children with HIV starting treatment in four research centres in Uganda and Zimbabwe. Eligible children were randomised to dolutegravir in ODYSSEY and weighed 20 kg to less than 40 kg. In children weighing 20 kg to less than 25 kg, we assessed dolutegravir's pharmacokinetics in children given once daily 25 mg film-coated tablets (approved by the SRAs at the time of the study) in part one of the study, and 50 mg film-coated tablets (adult dose) or 30 mg dispersible tablets in part two of the study. In children weighing 25 kg to less than 40 kg, we also assessed dolutegravir pharmacokinetics within-subject on film-coated tablet doses of 25 mg or 35 mg once daily, which were approved by the SRAs for the children's weight band; then switched to 50 mg film-coated tablets once daily. Steady-state 24 h dolutegravir plasma concentration-time pharmacokinetic profiling was done in all enrolled children at baseline and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 24 h after observed dolutegravir intake. Target dolutegravir trough concentrations (Ctrough) were based on reference adult pharmacokinetic data and safety was evaluated in all children in the corresponding weight bands who consented to pharmacokinetic studies and received the studied doses. Findings Between Sept 22, 2016, and May 31, 2018, we enrolled 62 black-African children aged from 6 years to younger than 18 years (84 pharmacokinetic-profiles). In children weighing 20 kg to less than 25 kg taking 25 mg film-coated tablets, the geometric mean (GM) Ctrough (coefficient of variation) was 0·32 mg/L (94%), which was 61% lower than the GM Ctrough of 0·83 mg/L (26%) in fasted adults on dolutegravir 50 mg once-daily; in children weighing 25 kg to less than 30 kg taking 25 mg film-coated tablets, the GM Ctrough was 0·39 mg/L (48%), which was 54% lower than the GM Ctrough in fasted adults; and in those 30 kg to less than 40 kg taking 35 mg film-coated tablets the GM Ctrough was 0·46 mg/L (63%), which was 45% lower than the GM Ctrough in fasted adults. On 50 mg film-coated tablets or 30 mg dispersible tablets, Ctrough was close to the adult reference (with similar estimates on the two formulations in children in the 20 to

Funding: Joint Global Health Trials Scheme (UK Medical Research Council, UK Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust). BACKGROUND: In sub-Saharan Africa, severely immunocompromised HIV-infected individuals have a high risk of mortality during the first few months after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). We hypothesise that universally providing ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF) would increase early weight gain, thereby reducing early mortality compared with current guidelines recommending ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) for severely malnourished individuals only. METHODS: We did a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, parallel-group trial at inpatient and outpatient facilities in eight urban or periurban regional hospitals in Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Eligible participants were ART-naive adults and children aged at least 5 years with confirmed HIV infection and a CD4 cell count of fewer than 100 cells per μL, who were initiating ART at the facilities. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to initiate ART either with (RUSF) or without (no-RUSF) 12 weeks' of peanut-based RUSF containing 1000 kcal per day and micronutrients, given as two 92 g packets per day for adults and one packet (500 kcal per day) for children aged 5-12 years, regardless of nutritional status. In both groups, individuals received supplementation with RUTF only when severely malnourished (ie, body-mass index [BMI] 0·7). Through 48 weeks, adults and adolescents aged 13 years and older in the RUSF group had significantly greater gains in weight, BMI, and MUAC than the no-RUSF group (p=0·004, 0·004, and 0·03, respectively). The most common type of serious adverse event was specific infections, occurring in 90 (10%) of 897 participants assigned RUSF and 87 (10%) of 908 assigned no-RUSF. By week 48, 205 participants had serious adverse events in both groups (p=0·81), and 181 had grade 4 adverse events in the RUSF group compared with 172 in the non-RUSF group (p=0·45). INTERPRETATION: In severely immunocompromised HIV-infected individuals, providing RUSF universally at ART initiation, compared with providing RUTF to severely malnourished individuals only, improved short-term weight gain but not mortality. A change in policy to provide nutritional supplementation to all severely immunocompromised HIV-infected individuals starting ART is therefore not warranted at present. Publisher PDF Publisher PDF

Background HIV is transmitted primarily through sexual intercourse, and the objective of this study was therefore to assess whether there is occult viral replication and resistance in genital secretions in patients on protease inhibitor (PI)-based second-line therapy. Methods HIV-infected adults taking ritonavir-boosted lopinavir with either two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), raltegravir or as monotherapy for 96 weeks, were enrolled at seven clinical sites in Uganda. Viral load (VL) was measured in cervico-vaginal secretions or semen and in a corresponding plasma sample. Genotypic resistance was assessed in genital secretion samples and plasma samples. Results were compared between compartments and with the plasma resistance profile at first-line failure. Results Of the 111 participants enrolled (91 female, 20 male), 16 (14%) and 30 (27%) had VL >1,000 and >40 copies/ml, respectively, in plasma; 3 (3%) and 23 (21%) had VL >1,000 copies/ml and >40 copies/ml, respectively, in genital secretions. There was 74% agreement between plasma and genital secretion VL classification above/below 40 copies/ml threshold (kappa-statistic =0.29; P=0.001). RT mutations (both NRTI and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor) were detected in genital secretions in four patients (similar profile to corresponding plasma sample at first-line failure) and PI mutations were detected in two (one polymorphism with no impact on resistance; one with high-level PI resistance). Conclusions High level (>1,000 copies/ml) viral replication and development of new RT or PI resistance in the genital compartment were rare. The risks of transmission arising from resistance evolution in the genital compartment are likely to be low on PI-based second-line therapy.

Background Cotrimoxazole preventive therapy (CPT) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is a World Health Organization–recommended standard of care in resource-limited settings, but the mechanism of CPT’s beneficial effects is unclear. The COSTOP trial (ISRCTN44723643) evaluated the noninferiority of discontinuing CPT in stabilized patients on antiretroviral therapy. The COSTOP immunology substudy was conducted on a subset of COSTOP participants randomized to continue CPT (n = 86) or discontinue CPT (placebo, n = 86) as daily treatment for 1 year. Methods We evaluated whether CPT reduces microbial translocation, indicated by the presence of bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and LPS control factors such as soluble CD14 (sCD14) and endotoxin core antibody (EndoCAb immunoglobulin M [IgM]) in plasma. Intestinal barrier damage as indicated by plasma intestinal fatty acid binding protein (IFABP), T-cell activation, and the inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) were also evaluated. Results We found no significant change in markers of microbial translocation (LPS, IFABP, sCD14, and T-cell activation), with decreased EndoCAb IgM. There was significant increase in inflammation markers (CRP and IL-6) after stopping CPT compared to those who continued CPT. Conclusions These results add to the evidence of immunological benefits of CPT among HIV-infected populations in resource-limited settings. However, no evidence of reducing microbial translocation was observed., Cotrimoxazole preventive therapy in antiretroviral therapy–treated adults with HIV infection reduces inflammatory markers but has no effect on markers of microbial translocation, intestinal barrier integrity, or T-cell and monocyte activation.

Background: Mapping of health-related quality-of-life measures to health utility values can facilitate cost-utility evaluation. Regression-based methods tend to lead to shrinkage of variance. This study aims to map the Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey (MOS-HIV) to EuroQoL 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D-3 L) utility index, and to characterize the performance of three mapping methods, including ordinary least squares (OLS), equi-percentile method (EPM), and a recently proposed method called Mean Rank Method (MRM). Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized HIV treatment trial. Baseline data from 421 participants were used to develop mapping functions. Follow-up data from 236 participants was used to validate the mapping functions. Results: In the training dataset, MRM and OLS, but not EPM, reproduced the observed mean utility (0.731). MRM, OLS and EPM under-estimated the standard deviation by 0.3, 26.6 and 1.7%, respectively. MRM had the lowest mean absolute error (0.143) and highest intraclass correlation coefficient (0.723) with the observed utility values, whereas OLS had the lowest mean squared error (0.038) and highest R-squared (0.542). Regressing the MRM- and OLS-mapped utility values upon body mass index and log-viral load gave covariate associations comparable to those estimated from the observed utility data (all P > 0.10). EPM did not achieve this property. Findings from the validation data were similar. Conclusions: Functions are available for mapping the MOS-HIV to the EQ-5D-3 L utility values. MRM and OLS were comparable in terms of agreement with the observed utility values at the individual level. MRM had better performance at the group level in terms of describing the utility distribution. Trial registration: NCT00988039. Registered 30 September 2009., The EARNEST trial was funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP, Grant Code: IP.2007.33011.003) with contributions from the Medical Research Council, UK; Institito de Salud Carlos III, Spain (Grant A107/90015); Irish Aid, Ireland; Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), Sweden; Instituto Superiore di Sanita (ISS), Italy; The World Health Organisation; and Merck, USA. Substantive in-kind contributions were made by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, UK [MC_UU_12023/23], CINECA, Bologna, Italy, Janssen Diagnostics, Beerse, Belgium; GSK/ViiV Healthcare Ltd., UK; Abbott Laboratories, USA. Trial medication was donated by AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer, GSK and Gilead. The Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, University of Malawi

Background In sub-Saharan Africa, individuals infected with HIV who are severely immunocompromised have high mortality (about 10%) shortly after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). This group also has the greatest risk of morbidity and mortality associated with immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), a paradoxical response to successful ART. Integrase inhibitors lead to significantly more rapid declines in HIV viral load (VL) than all other ART classes. We hypothesised that intensifying standard triple-drug ART with the integrase inhibitor, raltegravir, would reduce HIV VL faster and hence reduce early mortality, although this strategy could also risk more IRIS events. Methods and findings In a 2×2×2 factorial open-label parallel-group trial, treatment-naive adults, adolescents, and children >5 years old infected with HIV, with cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) 0.7) and despite significantly greater VL suppression with raltegravir-intensified ART at 4 weeks (343/836 [41.0%] versus 113/841 [13.4%] with standard ART, p < 0.001) and 12 weeks (567/789 [71.9%] versus 415/803 [51.7%] with standard ART, p < 0.001). Through 48 weeks, there was no evidence of differences in mortality (aHR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.76–1.28], p = 0.91); in serious (aHR = 0.99 [0.81–1.21], p = 0.88), grade-4 (aHR = 0.88 [0.71–1.09], p = 0.29), or ART-modifying (aHR = 0.90 [0.63–1.27], p = 0.54) adverse events (the latter occurring in 59 [6.5%] participants with raltegravir-intensified ART versus 66 [7.3%] with standard ART); in events judged compatible with IRIS (occurring in 89 [9.9%] participants with raltegravir-intensified ART versus 86 [9.5%] with standard ART, p = 0.79) or in hospitalisations (aHR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.76–1.17], p = 0.59). At 12 weeks, one and two raltegravir-intensified participants had predicted intermediate-level and high-level raltegravir resistance, respectively. At 48 weeks, the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutation K219E/Q (p = 0.004) and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations K101E/P (p = 0.03) and P225H (p = 0.007) were less common in virus from participants with raltegravir-intensified ART, with weak evidence of less intermediate- or high-level resistance to tenofovir (p = 0.06), abacavir (p = 0.08), and rilpivirine (p = 0.07). Limitations of the study include limited clinical, radiological, and/or microbiological information for some participants, reflecting available services at the centres, and lack of baseline genotypes. Conclusions Although 12 weeks of raltegravir intensification was well tolerated and reduced HIV viraemia significantly faster than standard triple-drug ART during the time of greatest risk for early death, this strategy did not reduce mortality or clinical events in this group and is not warranted. There was no excess of IRIS-compatible events, suggesting that integrase inhibitors can be used safely as part of standard triple-drug first-line therapy in severely immunocompromised individuals. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01825031.

PhD (Accountancy), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2018 From time to time over the last decades, the issue of accounting for exploration and production activities has been politically charged and hotly debated in the US and internationally. While there have been numerous empirical studies on this issue, the question related to which accounting method – successful efforts (SE) or full cost (FC) – provides investors and other users with more informative numbers or superior earnings quality and thus should be recommended for use by all upstream oil and gas firms, is still unresolved. The main difference between the FC and SE historical cost accounting methods lies in the treatment of costs of unsuccessful exploration activities, where such costs are capitalised under the FC method and expensed under the SE method. The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), are still undecided on which accounting method to mandate for use by all upstream oil and gas companies so that the global investment community can be served better. This thesis examines the earnings quality of two alternative accounting methods, SE and FC, used by upstream oil and gas firms in the US, with an aim of ascertaining which, if any, of the two methods provides superior earnings quality. Since there are different definitions of earnings quality, various measures of earnings quality have been used commonly in accounting research. However, in this study, seven measures of earnings quality are used to estimate the quality of earnings for SE and FC firms and form the hypotheses for the study. These include accruals quality, persistence, predictability, smoothness, value relevance, timeliness and conservatism. The study relied upon a longitudinal design to evaluate the issue of earnings quality of SE and FC firms, with the unit of analysis being at firm level, and the sample consisting of 84 US upstream oil and gas firms (43 SE firms and 41 FC firms), with data for the years 2007-2015. The required data for the empirical study were extracted from the firms’ financial statements, which were downloaded from the Osiris Financial Database. A comparative analysis approach was adapted in the data analysis and interpretation of the results, since this research sought to compare two alternative accounting methods. Microsoft Excel was used to compute the relevant research variables required for each earnings-quality measure and to generate graphs and tables, while the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to generate the descriptive statistics, regression and correlation analysis, and performing hypothesis and significance tests, among others. The results of this thesis indicate that SE firms have higher earnings quality than FC firms, based on earnings predictability, persistence, smoothness, accruals quality and timeliness. In all these cases except for smoothness, the difference between the earnings quality for SE and FC firms was statistically significant. However, based on value relevance and conservatism, FC firms have superior earnings quality than SE firms, although the difference in the earnings quality was not statistically significant for most years studied. Overall, since the results are significant for four out of the seven hypotheses tested, this study concludes that the SE method of accounting provides earnings quality superior to the FC method. The contributions of this thesis are various, including, but not limited to addressing the ongoing debate about whether the SE or FC accounting method provides investors with numbers that are more informative or higher earnings quality. This thesis is extensive, as it looked at nine years of data of 84 firms and considered seven different measures of earnings quality that have been widely used in accounting research. Based on the literature consulted, it is also a much more recent study compared to previous research on this topic. Although this study was conducted on upstream oil and gas companies in the US, the results of the research are very relevant internationally, since most upstream oil and gas companies globally have adopted the accounting methods and practices used in the US. This study also provides an international comparison of the US GAAP with the UK GAAP and IFRS, specifically in accounting for extractive activities. Lastly, this study recommends that the IASB and the FASB undertake a joint project with the objective of the team coming up with a single method of accounting for the extractives industry. Doctoral

REALITY was funded by the Joint Global Health Trials Scheme (JGHTS) of the UK Department for International Development, the Wellcome Trust, and Medical Research Council (MRC) (grant number G1100693). Additional funding support was provided by the PENTA Foundation and core support to the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London (grant numbers MC_UU_12023/23 and MC_UU_12023/26). Cipla Ltd, Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare/GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck Sharp & Dohme donated drugs for REALITY, and ready-to-use supplementary food was purchased from Valid International. A. J. P. is funded by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 108065/Z/15/Z). J. A. B. is funded by the JGHTS (grant number MR/M007367/1). The Malawi-Liverpool–Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, University of Malawi College of Medicine (grant number 101113/Z/13/Z) and the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)/Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Kilifi (grant number 203077/Z/16/Z) are supported by strategic awards from the Wellcome Trust, United Kingdom. Permission to publish was granted by the Director of KEMRI. This supplement was supported by funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Background. Severely immunocompromised human immunodefciency virus (HIV)-infected individuals have high mortality shortly afer starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). We investigated predictors of early mortality and "late presenter" phenotypes. Methods. Te Reduction of EArly MortaLITY (REALITY) trial enrolled ART-naive adults and children =5 years of age with CD4 counts .1). Results. Among 1711 included participants, 203 (12%) died. Mortality was independently higher with older age; lower CD4 count, albumin, hemoglobin, and grip strength; presence of World Health Organization stage 3/4 weight loss, fever, or vomiting; and problems with mobility or self-care at baseline (all P

BACKGROUND: Millions of HIV-infected people worldwide receive antiretroviral therapy (ART) in programmes using WHO-recommended standardised regimens. Recent WHO guidelines recommend a boosted protease inhibitor plus raltegravir as an alternative second-line combination. We assessed whether this treatment option offers any advantage over the standard protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) second-line combination after 144 weeks of follow-up in typical programme settings. METHODS: We analysed the 144-week outcomes at the completion of the EARNEST trial, a randomised controlled trial done in HIV-infected adults or adolescents in 14 sites in five sub-Saharan African countries (Uganda, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Kenya, Zambia). Participants were those who were no longer responding to non-NRTI-based first-line ART, as assessed with WHO criteria, confirmed by viral-load testing. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (lopinavir 400 mg with ritonavir 100 mg, twice per day) plus two or three clinician-selected NRTIs (protease inhibitor plus NRTI group), protease inhibitor plus raltegravir (400 mg twice per day; protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group), or protease inhibitor monotherapy (plus raltegravir induction for first 12 weeks, re-intensified to combination therapy after week 96; protease inhibitor monotherapy group). Randomisation was by computer-generated randomisation sequence, with variable block size. The primary outcome was viral load of less than 400 copies per mL at week 144, for which we assessed non-inferiority with a one-sided α of 0·025, and superiority with a two-sided α of 0·025. The EARNEST trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 37737787. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2010, and April 29, 2011, 1837 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 1277 patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group. In the primary (complete-case) analysis at 144 weeks, 317 (86%) of 367 in the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL compared with 312 (81%) of 383 in the protease inhibitor plus raltegravir group (p=0·07; lower 95% confidence limit for difference 10·2% vs specified non-inferiority margin 10%). In the protease inhibitor monotherapy group, 292 (78%) of 375 had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL; p=0·003 versus the protease inhibitor plus NRTI group at 144 weeks. There was no difference between groups in serious adverse events, grade 3 or 4 adverse events (total or ART-related), or events that resulted in treatment modification. INTERPRETATION: Protease inhibitor plus raltegravir offered no advantage over protease inhibitor plus NRTI in virological efficacy or safety. In the primary analysis, protease inhibitor plus raltegravir did not meet non-inferiority criteria. A regimen of protease inhibitor with NRTIs remains the best standardised second-line regimen for use in programmes in resource-limited settings. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), UK Medical Research Council, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Irish Aid, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Instituto Superiore di Sanita, Merck, ViiV Healthcare, WHO.