Superficial parotidectomy versus extracapsular dissection: literature review and search for a gold standard technique

Benign parotid tumours usually present as a slow-growing, asymptomatic mass in the pre-auricular region. Although they are uncommon, surgical excision is the mainstay of treatment due to the risk of malignant transformation in some benign tumours. Surgical techniques have evolved over the years, with superficial parotidectomy and extracapsular dissection being the current procedures of choice. There is currently no gold standard, and it remains unclear which surgical modality is the superior option. A literature review was performed in relation to the relative merits of each technique and to evaluate the reasons underpinning the ongoing debate. A total of 16 papers comparing the main clinical outcomes of the procedures were critically reviewed using the PRISMA protocol. Overall, extracapsular dissection indicated a reduced recurrence rate, facial nerve paralysis, Frey syndrome, and operation time. The superior outcomes following extracapsular dissection could be attributed to the less radical nature of the procedure. However, there were various limitations identified within the review that may have affected the results. Selection bias was the most significant, with patients assigned to the different procedures depending on the tumour size and location. Consequently, the debate continues as to what constitutes the gold standard of care for benign parotid tumours.

Food-basket intervention to reduce micronutrient deficiencies among Maasai-pregnant women in Tanzania: a quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Micronutrients comprised of vitamin and mineral nutrients that are needed during pregnancy for foetal growth, development and maturation, as well as for reducing/preventing maternal complications. However, micronutrient-rich foods (vegetables and fruits) are lacking in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area as a result of restrictions on cultivation in conservation areas and the unavailability of vegetables and fruits in local markets. The present study introduced a food basket intervention and assessed the effectiveness of the food baskets with respect to addressing anaemia, vitamin A and iron deficiencies among pregnant Maasai women within the Ngorongoro Conservation Area.

METHODS

The quasi-experimental study included Misigiyo ward as a control group (provided education only) and Olbalbal ward as an intervention group (provided food baskets and education). The study assessed haemoglobin, serum ferritin and retinol at baseline and during follow-up. Haemoglobin, serum ferritin and retinol were quantitatively (duplicate) measured with HemoCue™ (HemoCue AB, Ängelholm, Sweden), Maglumi 800 (Snibe Diagnostic, Shenzhen, China) and vitamin A enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, respectively. Dependent and independent t-tests were used to compare the micronutrient blood levels between and within the groups.

RESULTS

The present study found a statistically significant increase in serum retinol (P < 0.001) in the intervention group compared to the control group; moreover, baseline serum retinol was positively associated with the follow-up serum retinol, whereas baseline haemoglobin and serum ferritin were negatively associated.

CONCLUSIONS

The food basket intervention holds promise with repect to reducing micronutrient deficiency, especially in communities where micronutrient-rich foods are scarce.

Bictegravir combined with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Bictegravir co-formulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination is recommended for treatment of HIV-1-infection and might be better tolerated than other integrase inhibitor-based single-tablet regimens, but long-term outcomes data are not available. We assessed the efficacy, safety and tolerability of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with co-formulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine at week 96.

METHODS

This ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial was done at 122 outpatient centres in nine countries. We enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) living with HIV who were treatment naive and HLA-B*5701 negative, did not have hepatitis B virus infection, and had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 50 mL/min. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive co-formulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the bictegravir group) or co-formulated dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg (the dolutegravir group), each with matching placebo, once daily for 144 weeks. Treatment allocation was masked to all participants and investigators. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. We previously reported the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week 96 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 96 by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607930.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 13, 2015, and July 14, 2016, we screened 739 participants, of whom 108 were excluded and 631 enrolled and randomly assigned to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=316) or dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (n=315). Two participants in the bictegravir group did not receive at least one dose of their assigned drug and were excluded from analyses. At week 96, bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, with 276 (88%) of 314 participants in the bictegravir group versus 283 (90%) of 315 participants in the dolutegravir group achieving HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (difference -1·9%; 95% CI -6·9 to 3·1). The most common adverse events were nausea (36 [11%] of 314 for the bictegravir group vs 76 [24%] of 315 for the dolutegravir group), diarrhoea (48 [15%] vs 50 [16%]), and headache (41 [13%] vs 51 [16%]). 36 (11%) participants in the bictegravir group versus 39 (12%) participants in the dolutegravir group had a serious adverse event. Two individuals died in the bictegravir group (recreational drug overdose and suicide, neither of which was treatment related) and none died in the dolutegravir group. No participants discontinued because of adverse events in the bictegravir group compared with five (2%) of 315 in the dolutegravir group. Study drug-related adverse events were reported for 89 (28%) participants in the bictegravir group and 127 (40%) in the dolutegravir group.

INTERPRETATION

These week 96 data support bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people living with HIV-1 with no emergent resistance.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Co-formulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

The single-tablet regimen consisting of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is recommended for treatment of HIV-1 infection on the basis of data from 48 weeks of treatment. Here, we examine the longer-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with dolutegravir plus co-formulated emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide at week 96.

METHODS

This ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial was done at 126 outpatient centres in ten countries. We enrolled treatment-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 infection who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 mL/min and sensitivity to emtricitabine and tenofovir. People with chronic hepatitis B or C infection, or both, and those who had used antivirals previously for prophylaxis were allowed. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive treatment with either co-formulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the bictegravir group) or dolutegravir 50 mg with co-formulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the dolutegravir group), each with matching placebo, once daily for 144 weeks. Treatment allocation was masked to all participants and investigators. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. We previously reported the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week 96 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 96 by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607956.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 13, 2015, and July 14, 2016, we screened 742 individuals, of whom 657 were enrolled. 327 participants were assigned to the bictegravir group and 330 to the dolutegravir group. Of these, 320 in the bictegravir group and 325 in the dolutegravir group received at least one dose of study drug. At week 96, HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL was achieved by 269 (84%) of 320 participants in the bictegravir group and 281 (86%) of 325 in the dolutegravir group (difference -2·3%, 95% CI -7·9 to 3·2), demonstrating non-inferiority of the bictegravir regimen compared with the dolutegravir regimen. Both treatments continued to be well tolerated through 96 weeks; 283 (88%) of 320 participants in the bictegravir group and 288 (89%) of 325 in the dolutegravir group had any adverse event and 55 (17%), and 33 (10%) had any serious adverse event. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (57 [18%] of 320 in the bictegravir group vs 51 [16%] of 325 in the dolutegravir group) and headache (51 [16%] of 320 vs 48 [15%] of 325). Deaths were reported for three (1%) individuals in each group (one cardiac arrest, one gastric adenocarcinoma, and one hypertensive heart disease and congestive cardiac failure in the bictegravir group and one unknown causes, one pulmonary embolism, and one lymphoma in the dolutegravir group); none were considered to be treatment related. Adverse events led to discontinuation in six (2%) participants in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the dolutegravir group; one of these events in the bictegravir group versus four in the dolutegravir group occurred between weeks 48 and 96. Study drug-related adverse events were reported for 64 (20%) participants in the bictegravir group and 92 (28%) in the dolutegravir group.

INTERPRETATION

These week 96 data support bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people living with chronic HIV.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Patient-Reported Symptoms Over 48 Weeks Among Participants in Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Non-inferiority Trials of Adults with HIV on Co-formulated Bictegravir, Emtricitabine, and Tenofovir Alafenamide versus Co-formulated Abacavir, Dolutegravir, and Lamivudine

Background

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are recommended for first-line antiretroviral therapy in combination with two nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Co-formulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), a novel, INSTI-based regimen, is currently approved in the US and EU for the treatment of HIV-1 infection and recommended as first-line treatment in current guidelines. In our current analysis, we aimed to determine changes in patient-reported symptoms over time among HIV-1-infected adults who initiated or switched to B/F/TAF versus another INSTI-based regimen, co-formulated abacavir, dolutegravir, and lamivudine (ABC/DTG/3TC).

Methods

A planned secondary analysis of patient-reported outcomes was conducted for two double-blind, randomized, phase III studies in HIV-1-infected adults comparing B/F/TAF with ABC/DTG/3TC: one in treatment-naïve individuals (GS-US-380-1489, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02607930) and the other in virologically suppressed participants (GS-US-380-1844, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02603120). In both studies, the HIV symptoms distress module (HIV-SI) was administered at baseline (BL) and weeks 4, 12, and 48. Responses to each of the 20 items were dichotomized as bothersome or not bothersome. Treatment differences were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models (adjusted for BL HIV-SI count, age, sex, BL Veterans Aging Cohort Study [VACS] Index, medical history of serious mental illness, BL Short Form [SF]-36 Physical Component Summary [PCS], BL SF-36 Mental Component Summary [MCS], and, for virologically suppressed participants only, years since HIV diagnosis). We conducted longitudinal modeling of bothersome symptoms using a generalized mixed model including treatment, time, time-by-treatment, and additional covariates from the adjusted logistic regression model as described above. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was administered at the same frequency as the HIV-SI, and the total score was dichotomized as good or poor sleep quality. Similar models to those used for HIV-SI were applied, using BL sleep quality and BL SF-36 MCS as covariates. Statistical significance was assessed using p < 0.05.

Results

Across both studies, bothersome symptoms were reported by fewer participants on B/F/TAF than those on ABC/DTG/3TC. In treatment-naïve adults, fatigue/loss of energy, nausea/vomiting, dizzy/lightheadedness, and difficulty sleeping were reported significantly less with B/F/TAF at two or more time points. Fatigue and nausea were also significantly less common for those receiving B/F/TAF in longitudinal models. In virologically suppressed participants, nausea/vomiting, sad/down/depressed, nervous/anxious, and poor sleep quality (from the PSQI) were reported significantly less with B/F/TAF at two or more time points, as well as in longitudinal models.

Conclusions

B/F/TAF was associated with lower prevalence of bothersome symptoms than ABC/DTG/3TC in both treatment-naïve and virologically suppressed adults.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40271-018-0322-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improvements to dispersed reference interferometry: beyond the linear approximation

Interferometric instruments with dispersion introduced in the reference arm have previously been created, as the controlled dispersion can be used to generate a signal that contains a clearly identifiable point, the location of which relates to the position of the scattering surface in the measurement arm. In the following, we illustrate that the linear approximations that have been used previously can lead to significant errors, and that second-order terms need to be included in order to correct this. These corrections are vital if these instruments are to be used for metrological applications.

LB4. A Phase 3, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Bictegravir in a Fixed-Dose Combination, B/F/TAF, vs. ABC/DTG/3TC in Treatment-Naïve Adults at Week 96

Background

Bictegravir (B), a potent INSTI with a high barrier to resistance, is coformulated with emtricitabine (F) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) as the FDA-approved single-tablet regimen B/F/TAF. We report Week 96 results from an ongoing phase 3 study comparing B/F/TAF to coformulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC) in treatment-naïve adults living with HIV-1. Primary outcome at W48 demonstrated noninferior virologic responses, similar bone and renal profiles, and no viral resistance.

Methods

We randomized 1:1 HLA-B*5701-negative adults, without HBV and with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥50 mL/minute to receive blinded B/F/TAF (50/200/25 mg) or DTG/ABC/3TC (50/600/300 mg) with matching placebos QD. Primary endpoint was proportion with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at W48 (FDA snapshot), with secondary analyses at W96. Noninferiority was assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CI) (12% margin). Other secondary endpoints were safety (adverse events [AEs], laboratory abnormalities) and predefined analyses of bone mineral density (BMD) and measures of renal function (eGFR, proteinuria).

Results

A total of 629 adults were randomized/treated (314 B/F/TAF, 315 DTG/ABC/3TC). At W96, B/F/TAF was noninferior to DTG/ABC/3TC: 87.9% vs. 89.8%, respectively, achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (difference −1.9%; 95%CI −6.9% to 3.1%, P = 0.45). In per-protocol analysis, 99.6% on B/F/TAF vs. 98.9% on DTG/ABC/3TC achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (P = 0.33). Most common AEs overall were nausea (11% B/F/TAF, 24% DTG/ABC/3TC, P < 0.001), diarrhea (15%, 16%), and headache (13%, 16%). Through W96, no participant had emergent resistance to study drugs. No participant discontinued B/F/TAF due to AEs; five (2%) discontinued DTG/ABC/3TC due to AEs (one after W48). Treatment-related AEs occurred in 28% B/F/TAF vs. 40% DTG/ABC/3TC (P = 0.002); most common was nausea (6%, 17%. P < 0.001). At W96, mean percentage changes in spine and hip BMD were small and similar between groups (table); median change in eGFR was significantly less with B/F/TAF, while median % changes in proteinuria were similar.

Conclusion

At W96, B/F/TAF was virologically noninferior to DTG/ABC/3TC, with no viral resistance or safety-related discontinuations. B/F/TAF was well tolerated with less nausea than DTG/ABC/3TC and similar bone and renal safety.

Disclosures

D. A. Wohl, Gilead: Grant Investigator and Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee and Research grant. Y. Yazdanpanah, AbbVie: Consultant, Consulting fee. Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultant, Consulting fee. Gilead: Consultant, Consulting fee. MSD: Consultant, Consulting fee. Pfizer: Consultant, Consulting fee. Johnson & Johnson: Consultant, Consulting fee. ViiV Healthcare: Consultant, Consulting fee. A. Baumgarten, AbbVie: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. BMS: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. Gilead: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. Janssen-Cilag: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. MSD: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. ViiV: Consultant and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. A. Clarke, GSK: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. Gilead: Conference attendence, Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Conference attendance support, Consulting fee and Speaker honorarium. BMS: Conference attendence, Conference attendance support. Janssen: Conference attendence, Conference attendance support. M. Thompson, Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Contractor, Research support. ViiV Healthcare: Research Contractor, Research support. C. Brinson, Gilead: Investigator, Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Research support and Speaker honorarium. Theratech: Investigator, Research support. BMS: Investigator, Research support. SlieaGen: Investigator, Research support. GSK ViiV: Consultant, Investigator and Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee, Research support and Speaker honorarium. Daiichi Sankyo: Sub Investigator, Research support. Novo Nordisk: Investigator, Research support. Sanofi: Investigator, Research support. Watson: Investigator, Research support. Salix: Investigator, Research support. Janssen: Investigator, Research support. Roche: Investigator, Research support. Colucid: Investigator, Research support. Eisai: Investigator, Research support. Shionogi: Investigator, Research support. Elcelyx: Investigator, Research support. Sangamo: Sub Investigator, Research support. D. Hagins, GlaxoSmithKline: Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Honoraria and Speaker honorarium. ViiV Healthcare: Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Honoraria and Speaker honorarium. Gilead: Scientific Advisor, Honoraria and Speaker honorarium. Bristol-Myers Squibb: Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Honoraria and Speaker honorarium. M. Ramgopal, Gilead: Grant Investigator, Research grant. A. Antinori, AbbVie: Consultant, Consulting fee. BMS: Consultant and Grant Investigator, Consulting fee and Research grant. Gilead: Consultant and Grant Investigator, Consulting fee and Research grant. Janssen-Cilag: Consultant and Grant Investigator, Consulting fee and Research grant. Merck: Consultant, Consulting fee. ViiV Healthcare: Consultant and Grant Investigator, Consulting fee and Research grant. X. Wei, Gilead: Shareholder, Salary and Stock. K. White, Gilead: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock. S. Collins, Gilead: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock. A. Cheng, Gilead: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock. E. Quirk, Gilead: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock. H. Martin, Gilead: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock.

Nanowire based bioprobes for electrical monitoring of electrogenic cells

The continuous miniaturization of electronic components and the emergence of nano-biotechnology has opened new perspectives to monitor electrical activities at the single cell level. Here, we describe the creation of very high surface-to-volume ratio passive devices (vertical nanowire probes) using large-scale fabrication process, allowing to follow the electrical activity of mammalian neurons. Based on conventional silicon processing, the silicon nanowires were silicided in platinum in order to improve their electrochemical performances and to guarantee their biocompatibility. Very high signal to noise ratio was achieved (up to 2000) when measuring spontaneous action potentials. Moreover, this bio-platform was used to record the impact of various bio-chemical and electrical stimulations on neuronal activity. To conclude, this study proposes a thorough comparison of the characteristics and performances of these new nanowire-based nanoprobes with the main alternative systems published up to now.

[Cutaneous metastases on the extremities]

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous metastases (CM) on the extremities are rare complication of cancer with poor prognosis. In general, lesions simulate an infection. Herein, we report two new cases with atypical presentation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Case no 1: a 71-year-old man consulted for suspicion of left hand pyogenic granuloma present for 3 months. His history revealed two treated squamous-cell carcinomas (tongue and lung). On physical examination, he presented three budding and foul-smelling lesions on his left hand. Histopathology showed metastasis of squamous-cell carcinoma. Radiographic examination revealed spread of pulmonary nodules with suspicion of metastasis. Case no 2: a 68-year-old man was hospitalized for indurated edema of the right leg present for several months. Six months earlier, he had undergone surgery for left pulmonary adenocarcinoma without metastasis. Physical examination revealed an indurated edema on the right foot. Histopathology showed metastasis from adenocarcinoma. A scan revealed several osteolytic lesions in the right foot as well as lymphadenopathy.

DISCUSSION

Herein, we report two original cases of CM of the extremities diagnosed as tumor progression. This is a rare complication of variable clinical presentation and impacts both cancer management and prognosis. It is important to consider the diagnosis when distal cutaneous lesions persist, particularly where there is a history of cancer.

Improving Nutritional Management of Cancer Patients in Tanzania

Background: Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide and was reported to cause 8.8 million deaths in 2015. It was long predicted that about 70% of the new cancer cases will be in low-income countries (LIC). In Tanzania, like in many LICs, the need for improved cancer care is critical because cancer rates are rising dramatically. Most cancers are detected late and hence high mortality and poor palliative care for patients. Tanzania lacks trained clinical nutritionists and dieticians to manage different conditions including cancer. Aim: The aim of this project is to build the capacity of nutritionists and other health personnel to provide nutrition care to cancer patients in hospitals. Methods: One nutritionist from Tanzania will be attached to the Kenyatta National Hospital in Kenya for one month to obtain practical experience on the nutritional management of cancer patients. The acquired knowledge will be disseminated among health care professionals in Tanzania, specifically, nutritionist and nurses in selected health care facilities. About six nutrition officers and six nurses who work in Ocean Road Cancer Institute, Bugando Hospital, KCMC hospital and Muhimbili National Hospital will be trained by the incumbent on nutrition care for cancer patients once the fellowship visit has been completed. In addition, a study to identify differences in nutritional care for cancer patients between Tanzania and Kenya will be conducted. Cancer patients visiting hospitals in Tanzania and Kenya will be asked to complete a questionnaire that will assess their nutritional care in detail. Responses from cancer patients from each country will be compared to identify differences. Results: Expected results from this project includes, the transfer of knowledge in nutritional management of cancer patients between Tanzania and Kenya, and the subsequent dissemination of this knowledge to other nutrition specialists based in the home country, Tanzania. Further results will include data obtained from a survey that will be performed on cancer patients from both countries regarding their nutritional care. This study is also expected to open up collaborative research opportunities between the universities and health facilities on best practices for nutrition care and support for cancer patients. Conclusion: This study will not only improve palliative care among cancer patients but will also create more awareness on preventive measures against cancers with emphasis on dietary habits.

Efficacy and safety of switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Switching from therapy based on a boosted protease inhibitor to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide could avoid drug interactions and unwanted side-effects in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection, while maintaining a high barrier to resistance and providing a simplified once-daily, single-tablet regimen. Here, we report 48 week results of a phase 3 study investigating this switch.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were enrolled at 121 outpatient centres in ten countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or higher, had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or more before screening, and were on a regimen consisting of boosted atazanavir or darunavir plus either emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated once-daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg), herein known as the bictegravir group, or to remain on their baseline boosted protease inhibitor regimen, herein known as the boosted protease inhibitor group, for 48 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir at screening. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting patients and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603107.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 2, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 578 participants were randomly assigned and 577 were treated (290 in the bictegravir group and 287 in the boosted protease inhibitor group). At week 48, five participants (2%) in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher (difference 0·0%, 95·002% CI -2·5 to 2·5), thus switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy. The overall incidence and severity of adverse events was similar between groups, although headache occurred more frequently in the bictegravir group than in the boosted protease inhibitor group. 233 (80%) participants in the bictegravir group and 226 (79%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had an adverse event. Only two (1%) participants in the bictegravir group and one (<1%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. 54 participants (19%) in the bictegravir group had drug-related adverse events compared with six (2%) in the protease inhibitor group.

INTERPRETATION

Fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might be a safe and efficacious alternative to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

Switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir plus abacavir and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Bictegravir, co-formulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, has shown good efficacy and tolerability, and similar bone, renal, and lipid profiles to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, in treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection, without development of treatment-emergent resistance. Here, we report 48-week results of a phase 3 study investigating switching to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, HIV-1-infected adults were enrolled at 96 outpatient centres in nine countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and on a regimen of 50 mg dolutegravir, 600 mg abacavir, and 300 mg lamivudine (fixed-dose combination or multi-tablet regimen); had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL/min or higher; and had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 3 months or more before screening. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg; herein known as the bictegravir group), or to remain on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (herein known as the dolutegravir group), once daily for 48 weeks. The investigators, participants, study staff, and individuals assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (according to the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm); the prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4%. The primary efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting participants and is in the open-label extension phase, wherein participants are given the option to receive bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for an additional 96 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603120.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 11, 2015, and July 6, 2016, 567 participants were randomly assigned and 563 were treated (282 received bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, and 281 received dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine). Switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to remaining on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for the primary outcome: three (1%) of 282 in the bictegravir group had HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 versus one (<1%) of 281 participants in the dolutegravir group (difference 0·7%, 95·002% CI -1·0 to 2·8; p=0·62). Treatment-related adverse events were recorded in 23 (8%) participants in the bictegravir group and 44 (16%) in the dolutegravir group. Treatment was discontinued because of adverse events in six (2%) participants in the bictegravir group and in two (1%) participants in the dolutegravir group.

INTERPRETATION

The fixed-dose combination of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might provide a safe and efficacious option for ongoing treatment of HIV-1 infection.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

The role of radiosurgery in the acute management of fourth ventricle compression due to brain metastases

Background:

Approximately 20–30% of all intracranial metastases are located in the posterior fossa. The clinical evolution hinges on factors such as tumor growth dynamics, local topographic conditions, performance status, and prompt intervention. Fourth ventricle (V4) compression with secondary life-threatening obstructive hydrocephalus remains a major concern, often requiring acute surgical intervention. We have previously reported on the application of adaptive hypofractionated Gamma Knife Radiosurgery in the acute management of critically located metastases, a technique known to us as rapid rescue radiosurgery (3R). We report the results of 3R in the management of posterior fossa lesions and ensuing V4 decompression.

Case Descriptions:

Four patients with V4 compression due to posterior fossa metastases were treated with 3R by three separate gamma knife radiosurgical sessions (GKRS) over a period of seven days. Mean V4 volume was 1.02 cm³ at GKRS 1, 1.13 cm³ at GKRS 2, and 1.12 cm³ at GKRS 3. Mean tumor volume during the week of treatment was 10 cm³ at both GKRS 1 and 2 and 9 cm³ at GKRS 3. On average, we achieved a tumor volume reduction of 52% and a V4 size increase of 64% at the first follow-up (4 weeks after GKRS 3). Long-term follow-up showed continued local tumor control, stable V4 volume, and absence of hydrocephalus.

Conclusion:

For this series, 3R was effective in terms of rapid tumor ablation, V4 decompression, and limited radiation-induced toxicity. This surgical procedure may become an additional tool in the management of intractable posterior fossa metastasis with V4 compression.