Search

On November 5, 2020, a marketing authorization valid through the European Union (EU) was issued for acalabrutinib monotherapy or acalabrutinib in combination with obinutuzumab (AcalaObi) in adult patients with treatment-naïve (TN) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and also for acalabrutinib monotherapy in adult patients with relapsed or refractory (RR) CLL. Acalabrutinib inhibits the Bruton tyrosine kinase, which plays a significant role in the proliferation and survival of the disease. Acalabrutinib was evaluated in two phase III multicenter randomized trials. The first trial (ACE-CL-007) randomly allocated acalabrutinib versus AcalaObi versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (ChlObi) to elderly/unfit patients with TN CLL. The progression-free survival (PFS), as assessed by an independent review committee, was superior for both the AcalaObi (hazard ratio [HR], 0.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.17) and acalabrutinib (HR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.13-0.3) arms compared with the ChlObi arm. The second trial (ACE-CL-309) randomly allocated acalabrutinib versus rituximab plus idelalisib or bendamustine to adult patients with RR CLL. Also in this trial, the PFS was significantly longer in the acalabrutinib arm (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.20-0.49). Adverse events for patients receiving acalabrutinib varied across trials, but the most frequent were generally headache, diarrhea, neutropenia, nausea, and infections. The scientific review concluded that the benefit-risk ratio of acalabrutinib was positive for both indications. This article summarizes the scientific review of the application leading to regulatory approval in the EU. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Acalabrutinib was approved in the European Union for the treatment of adult patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who have not received treatment before and for those who have received therapy but whose disease did not respond or relapsed afterward. Acalabrutinib resulted in a clinically meaningful and significant lengthening of the time from treatment initiation to further disease relapse or patient's death compared with standard therapy. The overall safety profile was considered acceptable, and the benefit-risk ratio was determined to be positive., (© 2021 AlphaMed Press.)

On the 15 November 2018, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use adopted an extension to an existing indication for the use of nivolumab (Opdivo) in combination with ipilimumab (Yervoy) for the first-line treatment of adult patients with intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The approval was based on results from the Pivotal CA209214 study, a randomised, open-label, phase III study, comparing nivolumab +ipilimumab with sunitinib in subjects≥18 years of age with previously untreated advanced RCC (not amenable for surgery or radiotherapy) or metastatic RCC, with a clear-cell component. A total of 1096 patients were randomised in the trial, of which 847 patients had intermediate/poor-risk RCC and received either nivolumab (n=425) in combination with ipilimumab administered every 3 weeks for 4 doses followed by nivolumab monotherapy 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or sunitinib (n=422) administered orally for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks off, every cycle. A statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) was observed in the nivolumab + ipilimumab group compared with the sunitinib group in intermediate/poor-risk subjects (HR 0.63 (99.8% CI 0.44 to 0.89); stratified log-rank 2-sided p-value<0.0001). The median OS was not reached for the nivolumab + ipilimumab group and was 25.95 months for the sunitinib group. The OS rates were 89.5% and 86.2% at 6 months, and 80.1% and 72.1% at 12 months in the nivolumab +ipilimumab and the sunitinib groups, respectively. K-M curves separated after approximately 3 months, favouring nivolumab + ipilimumab. This was not mirrored in the favourable-risk patients where no statistically significant difference was observed between nivolumab + ipilimumab and sunitinib in favourable-risk patients (HR 1.45 (descriptive 99.8% CI 0.51 to 4.12), p =0.2715)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SA reports speaking fees, consulting fees and honoraria for symposiums by Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, Jazz Pharmaceuticals. BB declared an executive role in Nordic Nanovector ASA; JB declared strategic advisory role for Merck, investigator role in studies sponsored by Roche, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca and has received grants/funding from Sanofi Aventis, Amgen, Merck, Roche, Pfizer, Bayer and AstraZeneca. JC, PH, MSG, CS, BOS, MO, FJ, BK-S, NZ, EP, SdRD and FP declare no competing interests., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

The therapeutic landscape in the treatment of advanced/metastatic renal cell cancer has evolved over the last 2 years with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors. In 2018 and 2019, marketing authorisations valid throughout the European Union were issued for nivolumab and ipilimumab dual checkpoint inhibition and pembrolizumab or avelumab in combination with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor axitinib. These applications presented numerous regulatory challenges.In this paper, we summarise the main regulatory considerations, originating from the assessment of the dossiers submitted from the applicants for the three combinations. The regulatory issues are grouped in four sections: clinical pharmacology, efficacy, biomarkers and safety. In each section, we describe the issues raised during the regulatory evaluation performed by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) assessors. The CHMP assessments determine whether the medicines concerned meet the necessary quality, safety and efficacy requirements, and whether the benefit-risk balance is positive.In summary, although the overall benefit-risk was considered positive for the three combinations, the immaturity of the outcome data and the absence of long-term safety data remain issues to be addressed. Postauthorisation efficacy studies have been required to confirm the effects of the new combinations., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LM reported personal fees from Pfizer., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

On March 28, 2019, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use adopted a positive opinion recommending the marketing authorization for the medicinal product plerixafor. The marketing authorization holder for this medicinal product is Genzyme Europe B.Th. The adoption was for an extension of the existing adult indication in combination with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to pediatric patients (aged 1 year to <18 years) to enhance mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells to the peripheral blood for collection and subsequent autologous transplantation in children with lymphoma or solid malignant tumors. This treatment is indicated either preemptively, when circulating stem cell count on the predicted day of collection after adequate mobilization with G-CSF (with or without chemotherapy) is expected to be insufficient with regard to desired hematopoietic stem cells yield, or in children who previously failed to collect sufficient hematopoietic stem cells. The efficacy and safety of plerixafor were evaluated in an open label, multicenter, phase I/II, dose-ranging, and randomized controlled study (DFI12860) in pediatric patients with solid tumors, including neuroblastoma, sarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, or lymphoma, who were eligible for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Forty-five patients (aged 1 year to <18 years) were randomized, 2:1, using 0.24 mg/kg of plerixafor plus standard mobilization (G-CSF with or without chemotherapy) versus control (standard mobilization alone). The primary analysis showed that 80% of patients in the plerixafor arm experienced at least a doubling of the peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ count, observed from the morning of the day preceding the first planned apheresis to the morning prior to apheresis, versus 28.6% of patients in the control arm (p = .0019). The median increase in PB CD34+ cell counts from baseline to the day of apheresis was 3.2-fold in the plerixafor arm versus by 1.4-fold in the control arm. The observed safety profile in the pediatric population was consistent with that in adults, with adverse events mainly related to injection site reactions, hypokalemia, and increased blood bicarbonate. Importantly, plerixafor exposure did not seem to negatively affect transplant efficiency. This article summarizes the scientific review of the application leading to regulatory approval in the European Union. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This review of the marketing authorization of plerixafor will raise awareness of pediatric indication granted for this medicinal product., (© AlphaMed Press 2020.)

On November 15, 2018, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended the extension of indication for blinatumomab to include the treatment of adults with minimal residual disease (MRD) positive B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Blinatumomab was authorized to treat relapsed or refractory B-precursor ALL, and the change concerned an extension of use. On March 29, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to blinatumomab to treat both adults and children with B-cell precursor ALL who are in remission but still have MRD. On July 26, 2018, the CHMP had originally adopted a negative opinion on the extension. The reason for the initial refusal was that although blinatumomab helped to reduce the amount of residual cancer cells in many patients, there was no strong evidence that it led to improved survival. During the re-examination, the CHMP consulted the scientific advisory group. The CHMP agreed with the expert group's conclusion that, although there was no strong evidence of patients living longer, the available data from the main study (MT103-203) indicated a good durable response to blinatumomab, with an overall complete response rate for the primary endpoint full analysis set (defined as all subjects with an Ig or T-cell receptor polymerase chain reaction MRD assay with the minimum required sensitivity of 1 × 10 -4 at central lab established at baseline [n = 113]) as 79.6% (90/113; 95% confidence interval, 71.0-86.6), with a median time to complete MRD response of 29.0 days (range, 5-71). Therefore, the CHMP concluded that the benefits of blinatumomab outweigh its risks and recommended granting the change to the marketing authorization. The Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, following reassessment, considered that significant benefit continued to be met and recommended maintaining the orphan designation and thus 10 years market exclusivity (the Orphan Designation is a legal procedure that allows for the designation of a medicinal substance with therapeutic potential for a rare disease, before its first administration in humans or during its clinical development). The marketing authorization holder for this medicinal product is Amgen Europe B.V. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Immunotherapy with blinatumomab has excellent and sustainable results, offering new hope for patients with minimal residual disease-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia, a disease with poor prognosis. New recommendations and change of practice for treatment of this patient group are detailed., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

Despite advances in preventive strategies, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication in solid organ and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. CMV infection may fail to respond to commercially available antiviral therapies, with or without demonstrating genotypic mutation(s) known to be associated with resistance to these therapies. This lack of response has been termed "resistant/refractory CMV" and is a key focus of clinical trials of some investigational antiviral agents. To provide consistent criteria for future clinical trials and outcomes research, the CMV Resistance Working Group of the CMV Drug Development Forum (consisting of scientists, clinicians, regulatory officials, and industry representatives from the United States, Canada, and Europe) has undertaken establishing standardized consensus definitions of "resistant" and "refractory" CMV. These definitions have emerged from the Working Group's review of the available virologic and clinical literature and will be subject to reassessment and modification based on results of future studies., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The Swedish Medical Products Agency and the Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) have jointly published recommendations for the treatment of HIV infection on seven previous occasions (2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2014). In February 2016, an expert group under the guidance of RAV once more revised the guidelines. The most important updates in the present guidelines are as follows: Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has recently been registered. TAF has several advantages over tenofovir disoproxilfumarate (TDF) and is recommended instead of TDF in most cases. First-line treatment for previously untreated individuals includes dolutegravir, boosted darunavir or efavirenz with either abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir (TDF/TAF)/emtricitabine. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended for high-risk individuals. As in the case of the previous publication, recommendations are evidence-graded in accordance with the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine ( http://www.cebm.net/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/ ) ( Table 1 ). This document does not cover treatment of opportunistic infections and tumours. [Table: see text].

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and disease are important causes of morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients. For the purpose of developing consistent reporting of CMV outcomes in clinical trials, definitions of CMV infection and disease were developed and most recently published in 2002. Since then, there have been major developments in its diagnosis and management. Therefore, the CMV Drug Development Forum consisting of scientists, clinicians, regulators, and industry representatives has produced an updated version incorporating recent knowledge with the aim to support clinical research and drug development. The main changes compared to previous definitions are the introduction of a "probable disease" category and to incorporate quantitative nucleic acid testing in some end-organ disease categories. As the field evolves, the need for updates of these definitions is clear, and collaborative efforts between scientists, regulators, and industry can provide a platform for this work., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

In a recent expert meeting, Swedish recommendations for the treatment of HCV infection were updated. An interferon-free combination of direct-acting antiviral agents was recommended as the first line standard-of-care treatment for chronic HCV infection. Interferon-based therapy should be considered as a second line option after an individual benefit-risk assessment. Treatment is strongly recommended for HCV infected patients with bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis (Metavir stages F3-4), before and after liver transplantation, and in the presence of extra-hepatic manifestations. Additionally, patients with moderate liver fibrosis (stage F2) as well as women in need of in vitro fertilisation should be prioritised for therapeutic intervention. Treatment indications for people who inject drugs, children, chronic kidney disease and HIV co-infection are also discussed.

The modern medical treatment of HIV with antiretroviral therapy (ART) has drastically reduced the morbidity and mortality in patients infected with this virus. ART has also been shown to reduce the transmission risk from individual patients as well as the spread of the infection at the population level. This position statement from the Public Health Agency of Sweden and the Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy is based on a workshop organized in the fall of 2012. It summarizes the latest research and knowledge on the risk of HIV transmission from patients on ART, with a focus on the risk of sexual transmission. The risk of transmission via shared injection equipment among intravenous drug users is also examined, as is the risk of mother-to-child transmission. Based on current knowledge, the risk of transmission through vaginal or anal intercourse involving the use of a condom has been judged to be minimal, provided that the person infected with HIV fulfils the criteria for effective ART. This probably also applies to unprotected intercourse, provided that no other sexually transmitted infections are present, although it is not currently possible to fully support this conclusion with direct scientific evidence. ART is judged to markedly reduce the risk of blood-borne transmission between people who share injection equipment. Finally, the risk of transmission from mother to child is very low, provided that ART is started well in advance of delivery.

Prophylaxis and treatment with antiretroviral drugs and elective caesarean section delivery have resulted in very low mother-to-child transmission of HIV during recent years. Updated general treatment guidelines and increasing knowledge about mother-to-child transmission have necessitated regular revisions of the recommendations for the prophylaxis and treatment of HIV-1 infection in pregnancy. The Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) updated the recommendations from 2010 at an expert meeting on 11 September 2013. The most important revisions are the following: (1) ongoing efficient treatment at confirmed pregnancy may, with a few exceptions, be continued; (2) if treatment is initiated during pregnancy, the recommended first-line therapy is essentially the same as for non-pregnant women; (3) raltegravir may be added to achieve rapid reduction in HIV RNA; (4) vaginal delivery is recommended if at > 34 gestational weeks and HIV RNA is < 50 copies/ml and no obstetric contraindications exist; (5) if HIV RNA is < 50 copies/ml and delivery is at > 34 gestational weeks, intravenous zidovudine is not recommended regardless of the delivery mode; (6) if HIV RNA is > 50 copies/ml close to delivery, it is recommended that the mother should undergo a planned caesarean section, intravenous zidovudine, and oral nevirapine, and the infant should receive single-dose nevirapine at 48-72 h of age and post-exposure prophylaxis with 2 drugs; (7) if delivery is preterm at < 34 gestational weeks, a caesarean section delivery should if possible be performed, with intravenous zidovudine and oral nevirapine given to the mother, and single-dose nevirapine given to the infant at 48-72 h of age, as well as post-exposure prophylaxis with 2 additional drugs.

Swedish recommendations for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection were updated at a recent expert meeting. Therapy for acute HCV infection should be initiated if spontaneous resolution does not occur within 12 weeks. The recommended standard-of-care therapy for chronic HCV genotype 1 infection is an HCV protease inhibitor in combination with peginterferon (peg-IFN) and ribavirin. Treatment is strongly recommended in patients with bridging fibrosis and cirrhosis, whereas in patients with less advanced fibrosis, deferring therapy may be preferential in light of likely therapeutic improvements in the near future. Patients with chronic genotype 2/3 infection should generally be treated with peg-IFN and ribavirin for 24 weeks. In patients with a very rapid viral response (i.e. HCV RNA below 1000 IU/ml on day 7), or favourable baseline characteristics and undetectable HCV RNA week 4, treatment can be shortened to 12-16 weeks, provided that no dose reductions are needed.

The resounding success of combination antiretroviral efficacy for both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients - with 70-90% viral suppression rates in recent studies - has made registration trials for new agents challenging. With the inevitable specter of drug resistance, new agents must have a pathway to approval. The Forum for Collaborative HIV Research obtained input from concerned stakeholders including industry, clinical sciences, community advocacy, and regulatory sciences (Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency) to discuss how safety and efficacy of new agents could be demonstrated. Recognizing the shortfalls of superiority or noninferiority trials in this environment, a new trial design for treatment-experienced patients, minimizing the risk for drug resistance but allowing full assessment of safety, was proposed. The antiviral efficacy of an active investigational drug would be assessed by comparison to placebo as an add-on to a failing regimen in a short, 10-14-day study followed by institution of an optimized background regimen (OBR) in both arms with investigational drug given to all patients. The follow-on stage would assess dose response, safety, durability of initial response, and development of resistance. Additionally, a second safety trial could be conducted comparing patients randomized to the investigational agent with a new OBR to those on a new OBR and placebo. Finally, approval decisions could consider other long-term safety endpoints. Exposing treatment-naïve patients to investigational agents remains a controversial issue; stakeholders have different interpretations of risk-benefit for trials in this population that necessitate careful consideration before initiating trials in them.

Prophylaxis and treatment with antiretroviral drugs and the use of elective caesarean section have resulted in a very low mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) during recent years. The availability of new antiretroviral drugs, updated general treatment guidelines and increasing knowledge of the importance of drug resistance, have necessitated regular revisions of the "Prophylaxis and treatment of HIV-1 infection in pregnancy" recommendations. For these reasons, The Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) updated the 2007 recommendations at an expert meeting that took place on 25 March 2010. The most important revisions from the previous recommendations are: (1) it is recommended that treatment during pregnancy starts at the latest at gestational week 14-18; (2) ongoing efficient treatment at confirmed pregnancy may, with a few exceptions, be continued; (3) lopinavir/r and atazanavir/r are equally recommended protease inhibitors; (4) if maternal HIV RNA is >50 copies/ml close to delivery, a planned caesarean section, intravenous zidovudine, oral nevirapine for the mother and post-exposure prophylaxis for the infant with 3 antiretroviral drugs are recommended; (5) for delivery at <34 gestational weeks, intravenous zidovudine and oral nevirapine for the mother and at 48-72 h for the infant is recommended, in addition to other prophylaxis; (6) intravenous zidovudine is not recommended when HIV RNA is <50 copies/ml and a caesarean section is performed; (7) it is recommended that prophylaxis for the infant is started within 4 h; (8) prophylactic zidovudine for the infant may be administered twice daily instead of 4 times a day, as was the case previously; and (9) the number of sampling occasions for the infant has been decreased.

Initial viral decay rate may be useful when comparing the relative potency of antiretroviral regimens. Two hundred twenty-seven ART-naïve patients were randomized to receive efavirenz (EFV) (n = 74), lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) (n = 77), or atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) (n = 79) in combination with two NRTIs. The most frequently used NRTI combinations in the EFV and ATV/r groups were the nonthymidine analogues tenofovir and emtricitabine or lamivudine (70% and 68%, respectively) and, in the LPV/r group, lamivudine and the thymidine analogue zidovudine (89%). HIV-1 RNA was monitored during the first 28 days after treatment initiation. Phase 1 and 2 decay rate was estimated in a subset of 157 patients by RNA decrease from days 0 to 7, and days 14 to 28. One-way ANOVA and subsequent Tukey's post hoc tests were used for groupwise comparisons. Mean (95% CI) HIV-1 RNA reductions from days 0 to 28 were 2.59 (2.45-2.73), 2.42 (2.27-2.57), and 2.13 (2.01-2.25) log(10) copies/ml for the EFV-, LPV/r-, and ATV/r-based treatment groups, respectively, with a significantly larger decrease in the EFV-based group at all time points compared with ATV/r (p < 0.0001), and with LPV/r at days 7-21 (p < 0.0001-0.03). LPV/r gave a greater RNA decrease compared with ATV/r from day 14 (p = 0.02). Phase 1 decay rate was significantly higher in the EFV group compared with LPV/r (p = 0.003) or ATV/r (p < 0.0001). No difference was found in phase 2 decrease. EFV-based treatment gave a more rapid decline in HIV-1 RNA than did either of the boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens. The observed differences may reflect different inherent regimen potencies.

Purpose: The relation between treatment outcome and trough plasma concentrations of efavirenz (EFV), atazanavir (ATV) and lopinavir (LPV) was studied in a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic substudy of the NORTHIV trial-a randomised phase IV efficacy trial comparing antiretroviral-naïve human immunodeficiency virus-1-infected patients treated with (1) EFV + 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (2NRTI) once daily, (2) ritonavir-boosted ATV + 2NRTI once daily or (3) ritonavir-boosted LPV + 2NRTI twice daily. The findings were related to the generally cited minimum effective concentration levels for the respective drugs (EFV 1,000 ng/ml, ATV 150 ng/ml, LPV 1,000 ng/ml). The relation between atazanavir-induced hyperbilirubinemia and virological efficacy was also studied., Methods: Drug concentrations were sampled at weeks 4 and 48 and optionally at week 12 and analysed by high-performance liquid chromatography with UV detector. When necessary, trough values were imputed by assuming the reported average half-lives for the respective drugs. Outcomes up to week 48 are reported., Results: No relation between plasma concentrations of EFV, ATV or LPV and virological failure, treatment withdrawal due to adverse effects or antiviral potency (viral load decline from baseline to week 4) was demonstrated. Very few samples were below the suggested minimum efficacy cut-offs, and their predictive value for treatment failure could not be validated. There was a trend toward an increased risk of virological failure in patients on ATV who had an average increase of serum bilirubin from baseline of <25 micromol/l., Conclusions: The great majority of treatment-naïve and adherent patients on standard doses of EFV, ritonavir-boosted ATV and ritonavir-boosted LPV have drug concentrations above that considered to deliver the maximum effect for the respective drug. The results do not support the use of routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for efficacy optimisation in treatment-naïve patients on these drugs, although TDM may still be of value in some cases of altered pharmacokinetics, adverse events or drug interactions. Serum bilirubin may be a useful marker of adherence to ATV therapy.

In a recent expert meeting, Swedish recommendations for the treatment of HCV infection were upgraded. The panel recommends vaccination against both hepatitis A and B in patients with HCV. Therapy for symptomatic acute HCV infection should be initiated if spontaneous resolution has not occurred within 12 weeks, whereas asymptomatic acute HCV should be treated upon detection. Patients with genotype 2/3 infection should generally be treated for 24 weeks. In patients with a very rapid viral response (vRVR), i.e. HCV RNA below 1000 IU/ml on d 7, treatment can be shortened to 12-16 weeks, provided that no dose reduction has been made. For genotype 1 patients with rapid viral response (RVR), 24 weeks treatment is recommended. For patients with a complete early viral response (cEVR), 48 weeks treatment is recommended, whereas 72 weeks treatment should be considered for patients with partial early viral response (pEVR). For patients with difficult-to-treat disease and with pronounced anaemia, erythropoietin can be used to maintain the ribavirin dose. In HCV-HIV coinfected patients, combination therapy for HCV should, if possible, be initiated before anti-retroviral therapy (ART) is indicated. For liver transplant patients pre-emptive therapy is not recommended; hence, treatment should be deferred until histological recurrence.

On 4 previous occasions, in 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2007, the Swedish Medical Products Agency (Läkemedelsverket) and the Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) have jointly published recommendations for the treatment of HIV infection. In November 2008, an expert group under the guidance of RAV once more revised the guidelines, of which this is a translation into English. The most important updates in the present guidelines include the following: (a) treatment initiation is now recommended at a CD4 cell count of approximately 350/microl; (b) new recommendations for first-line therapy: abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir/emtricitabine in combination with efavirenz or a boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r); (c) an increased focus on reducing the use of antiretroviral drugs that may cause lipoatrophy; (d) an emphasis on quality assurance of HIV care through the use of InfCare HIV; (e) considerably altered recommendations for the initiation of antiretroviral therapy in children. All infants (<1 y) should start antiretroviral therapy, regardless of immune status. Also, absolute CD4+ cell counts, rather than percentage, may be used to guide treatment initiation in children above the age of 5 y.

Prophylaxis and treatment with antiretroviral drugs, a consequent low viral load, and the use of elective Caesarean section, are factors that radically decrease the risk of HIV transmission from mother to child during pregnancy and delivery. The availability of new antiretroviral drugs, updated general treatment guidelines and increasing knowledge of the importance of drug resistance, have necessitated recurrent revisions of the recommendations for 'Prophylaxis and treatment of HIV-1 infection in pregnancy'. For these reasons, The Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) has, at an expert meeting on May 4, 2007, once more updated the treatment recommendations of 1999, 2002 and 2005, which were defined in cooperation with the Swedish Medical Products Agency (Läkemedelsverket). This new text takes the recently updated general HIV treatment recommendations into account. Furthermore, the very low risk of HIV transmission when the mother is treated with combination antiretroviral therapy, has undetectable levels of viraemia and no obstetric risk factors, has been considered in the recommendations concerning the mode of delivery. Finally, the recommendations for monitoring of infants born to HIV-infected mothers have been modified. The recommendations are evidence graded in accordance with the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, 2001 (see http://www.cebm.net/levels&#95;of&#95;evidence.asp#levels).

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir monotherapy in HIV-1-infected patients with stable antiretroviral therapy (ART)., Design: Single-armed single-center pilot trial., Methods: Adult HIV-1-infected patients, without protease inhibitor (PI) experience, were eligible if they had maintained a viral load <20 copies/mL for a minimum of 12 months on conventional ART. The trial regimen was atazanavir/ritonavir at a dose of 300/100 mg once daily. The atazanavir dose could be adjusted if plasma concentrations showed a low exposure. The study was intended to recruit 30 patients to be followed over 72 weeks. If 5 cases of virologic failure occurred during this period, the study was to be terminated., Results: The study was terminated according to protocol when 15 of the planned 30 patients had been recruited, because 5 cases of virologic failure had occurred. In patients failing therapy, viral rebound was seen at weeks 12 through 16. Plasma atazanavir concentrations were not associated with the outcome. The median serum bilirubin concentration was significantly lower in the patients failing therapy, however. No PI resistance was found in samples from patients failing therapy., Conclusions: Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir as maintenance monotherapy in HIV-1 infection might not be as potent as conventional ART. Serum bilirubin should be further studied as a biomarker of adequate atazanavir exposure.

On 3 previous occasions, in 2002, 2003 and 2005, the Swedish Medical Products Agency (Läkemedelsverket) and the Swedish Reference Group for Antiviral Therapy (RAV) have jointly published recommendations for the treatment of HIV infection. An expert group, under the guidance of RAV, has now revised the text again. Since the publication of the previous treatment recommendations, 1 new drug for the treatment of HIV has been approved - the protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir (Prezista). Furthermore, 3 new drugs have become available: the integrase inhibitor raltegravir (MK-0518), the CCR5-inhibitor maraviroc (Celsentri), both of which have novel mechanisms of action, and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) etravirine (TMC-125). The new guidelines differ from the previous ones in several respects. The most important of these are that abacavir is now preferred to tenofovir and zidovudine, as a first line drug in treatment-naïve patients, and that initiation of antiretroviral treatment is now recommended before the CD4 cell count falls below 250/microl, rather than 200/microl. Furthermore, recommendations on the treatment of HIV infection in children have been added to the document. As in the case of the previous publication, recommendations are evidence-graded in accordance with the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, 2001 (see http://www.cebm.net/levels&#95;of&#95;evidence.asp#levels).

The non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor efavirenz is mainly metabolised by the polymorphic cytochrome P450 enzyme CYP2B6. Genomic DNA from four subjects in a group of 51 patients being treated with efavirenz and having surprisingly high plasma concentrations were screened by direct sequencing for mutations in the CYP2B6 gene. Four exonic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 516G > T, 714G > A, 785A > G and 983T > C, and eight intronic SNPs were identified. Haplotype analysis revealed that 983T > C was linked with 785A > G defining a novel allele, CYP2B6*16. This allele was present in totally five of the patients. The CYP2B6.16 cDNA was expressed in yeast and HEK293 cells and significantly less protein was formed compared to the wild-type cDNA, in both heterologous systems. By contrast, the catalytic activity of the enzyme variant was not different from the CYP2B6.1 enzyme, using bupropion as a probe substrate. The CYP2B6*16 allele was not found in Swedes, was present at 4% frequency among Turks, but was common among Africans. The steady-state level of efavirenz was significantly higher in the five carriers of CYP2B6*16, being of African origin, compared to the other patients. Higher efavirenz concentrations were also seen in carriers of 516G>T (CYP2B6*6 and CYP2B6*9). In conclusion, a novel CYP2B6*16 allele causing less expression of the corresponding enzyme was identified and found to influence the metabolism of efavirenz in vivo, a finding that is of potential impact for anti-HIV therapy in black populations.

Over 500 nurses in New Jersey responded to a survey on education and training in the area of developmental disabilities. Respondents provided information on their work experience, experience with patients who have developmental disabilities, and opportunities for continuing medical education. Results showed that although many nurses thought educational activities related to developmental disabilities were important, only about 10% said that they received "a lot" of training. Most respondents (almost 60%) said that they received little or no training in the area, and most received no specific training on developmental disabilities since receiving their licenses or in their current job. Implications of these findings in light of the movement of people with developmental disabilities into community-living and managed care plans are discussed.

Ethyl acetate and aqueous extracts of tannin-containing topoisomerase inhibitory plant samples were subjected to one or more of seven tannin removal procedures, and the resulting products were subsequently evaluated for topoisomerase inhibitory activity. In most of the samples investigated, the initial activity was lost after tannin removal. It was concluded that the activity initially observed was primarily due to tannins. Procedures are presented for routinely obtaining tannin-free organic and aqueous fractions., (Copyright © 1996 Gustav Fischer Verlag · Stuttgart · Jena · New York. Published by Elsevier GmbH.. All rights reserved.)