Maraviroc 150 mg daily plus lopinavir/ritonavir, a nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimen for HIV-infected naive patients: 48-week final results of VEMAN study

Effectiveness and Safety Analysis of PIs/r Based Dual Therapy in Treatment-Naïve, HIV/AIDS Patients: A Network Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Dual anti-retroviral therapy is the main proven valuable intervention type for treating naïve HIV/AIDS. Currently, no high-quality evidence is available regarding the best dual schemes.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PIs/r-based dual therapy in treatment-naïve HIV/AIDS patients by using network meta-analysis.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials of PIs/r-based dual therapy in treatment-naïve HIV/AIDS were searched based on Embase, PubMed and Cochrane library database from January 2006 to June 2021. Taking viral suppression rate, CD4+T cell count changes from baseline as the primary indicator and adverse events rate as secondary indicator, the network meta-analysis was performed on Review Manager and STATA software. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q statistic and I2. We registered our protocol in Prospero with ID CRD42021275466.

Results: Among 15 randomized controlled trials (3,497 patients and 7 PIs/r-based dual therapy) were reviewed in this study. According to the forest map, DRV/r + INSTIs was more effective compared to triple therapy (TT) in viral suppression [OR 0.82, 95% CI (0.61–1.11)], in CD4+T cell count changes from baseline [MD 1.9, 95% CI (0.7, 3.1), I2 86%], in adverse events [OR 0.98, 95% CI (0.68–1.39)]. Furthermore, SUCRA ranking analysis indicated that DRV/r + INSTIs was superior to TT in viral suppression (DRV/r + INSTIs 75.5% > TT 41.2%) and in immune construction (DRV/r + INSTIs 67% > TT 42%). In addition, DRV/r + INSTIs was similar to TT in adverse events (DRV/r + INSTIs 54.9% ≈ TT 54.7%).

Conclusion: DRV/r + INSTIs was obviously superior to TT in viral suppression and immune reconstruction, and was not higher than TT in adverse events.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021275466

Risk of failure in dual therapy versus triple therapy in naïve HIV patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Several attempts have been made to test different drug-sparing strategies to reduce the drug-burden and drug-related toxicities. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the relative risk (RR) of failure of dual therapies compared to triple therapies in HIV-naïve patients.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. The following criteria were used: present data from original articles comparing the two treatment regimens; published from January 2007 up to January, 2020. No language or study design restriction was applied. Subjects were HIV-positive naïve patients treated with dual or triple antiretroviral therapy (ART). A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Treatment failure (TF) was the primary outcome evaluated; heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I².

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included, allowing a meta-analysis on 5205 patients. The meta-analysis performed on studies that presented data at 48 weeks showed that the RR of TF (RR > 1 favouring triple therapy) in 10 studies was 1.20 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-1.59, I²: 49.2%); the RR of virological failure (VF) in eight studies was 1.54 (95% CI: 0.84-2.86, I²: 54%); the RR of adverse drug reaction leading to discontinuation of the regimen at 48 weeks in eight studies was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.43-1.33, I²: 17.7%). In patients with less than 200 CD4+, the RR of TF in two studies without maraviroc was 2.09 (95% CI: 1.05-4.17, I²: 0.0%). Regarding the studies at 96 weeks there was no difference except in rate of development of resistance, RR 1.94 (95% CI: 1.06-3.53, I²: 6.2%).

CONCLUSION

Dual therapies are as effective as those with three drugs, showing no difference according to the different dual therapies, except in patients with less than 200 CD4; however, they are associated with a higher selection of resistance-associated mutations at 96 weeks of therapy.

Two's a Company, Three's a Crowd: A Review of Initiating or Switching to a Two-Drug Antiretroviral Regimen in Treatment-Naïve and Treatment-Experienced Patients Living with HIV-1

INTRODUCTION

As HIV has become a manageable chronic condition, a renewed and increased interest in challenging traditional three-drug HIV therapies and moving toward two-drug regimens (2DR) for initial or maintenance treatment in people living with HIV (PLWH) has developed. As PLWH are living longer, continual advancements in antiretroviral regimens have been a focus to provide optimal life-long therapy options. Although early studies may have shown poor outcomes in virologic suppression with 2DR, newer studies and treatment options have emerged to show promise in the management of HIV. The purpose of this review is to evaluate current literature and assess the efficacy of two-drug (2DR) antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naïve and -experienced people living with HIV.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed between January 2009 to January 2020, using EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and bibliographies. Combinations of the following search terms were used: HIV-1 infection, antiretroviral therapy, dual therapy, two-drug regimen, two-drug therapy, two-drug regimen, and 2DR. Included studies were those in the adult population with at least one active comparator, outcomes assessing HIV-1 RNA viral load while on treatment, and written in English.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included, 13 where 2DRs were evaluated as initial therapy (3 studies with extension data) and 15 where 2DRs were evaluated as maintenance or switch therapy (2 studies with extension data).

CONCLUSION

Although 2DRs may not be appropriate in all patient populations, they are being utilized more frequently and have the potential to reduce costs, adverse effects, and drug interactions.

High Virologic Failure Rates with Maraviroc-Based Salvage Regimens Among Indian Patients: A Preliminary Analysis-Maraviroc Effectiveness in HIV-1 Subtype C

BACKGROUND

There is no information on the clinical effectiveness of Maraviroc (MVC) amongst People Living with HIV (PLHIV) in India infected with HIV-1 Subtype C viruses.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult PLHIV on MVC based Antiretroviral (ARV) regimens for at least 6 months. Maraviroc was initiated amongst PLHIV with documented R5 tropic viruses (determined by in-house population sequencing of the V3 loop in triplicate and interpreted using the Geno2Pheno algorithm) in combination with an Optimized Background regimen (designed using genotypic resistance testing and past ARV history). Plasma viral loads (PVL) are performed 6 months post-initiation and annually thereafter. Primary outcome d. Median duration on MVC treatment was 1.8 years (range 1-2.9 years) while median duration of ART prior to switching to MVC was 13 years. Maraviroc was combined with Darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) (n=10), Atazanavir/r (ATV/r) (n=2) and Lopinavir/r (LPV/r) (n=1). All PLHIV were infected with HIV-1 Subtype C. Only 23.3% PLHIV achieved virologic suppression at 6 months and sustained it for 2.3 years. Median CD4 count change from baseline was +117 (n=13), +228 (n=10), +253 (n=9), and +331 (n=4) at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months respectively. Repeat tropism among patients with virologic failure demonstrated R5 virus.

CONCLUSIONS

High rates of virologic failure was seen when MVC was used amongst treatment experienced PLHIV infected with HIV-1 Subtype C in India. was the proportion of PLHIV with virologic success (PVL<50 copies/ml) at last follow up visit.

RESULTS

Data on 13 PLHIV were analyze.

New Strategies of ARV: the Road to Simplification

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Simplification of antiretroviral therapy is a strategy aiming to reduce pill burden, drug interactions, and toxicity. This review focuses on the most recent and important studies evaluating a reduction on the number of drugs for HIV treatment, both in naive and virologically suppressed patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Interesting studies have been performed in the past years testing dual therapy and monotherapy, with variable rates of virological control. Novel therapeutics like immunotherapy or long-acting antiretrovirals can also be considered for simplification. Reducing the number of drugs for HIV treatment can be an option for selected patients. Current available evidence favors dual therapy over monotherapy. Future research should seek to identify the best candidates for simplification.

Clinical impact of tropism testing in a real-life cohort of HIV infected patients: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The circumstances of prescription of tropism tests clinically relevant in treatment-experienced patients are unclear.

METHODS

We performed a monocentric retrospective analysis of all tropism tests performed between 2006 and 2015 in HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) without MVC. The motivation of tropism determination was collected. Factors associated with MVC prescription were determined using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-three tests were performed in experienced patients not receiving MVC. Reasons for tropism performance were: virological failure (44%), side effects or drug-interactions (37%), simplification or sparing strategies (11%), immunological failure (5%), and improvement of neurological diffusion (3%). MVC was prescribed in 110 cases (20%), though 366 tests (65%) revealed a tropism CCR5. MVC was more often prescribed before 2011 (OR 3.65, 95% CI 2.17-6.13) and in patients with multiple previous ART regimens (less than 4 ART regimens compare to more than 10 ART regimens (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.74)).

CONCLUSIONS

In experienced patients not receiving MVC, tropism test prescription should be restricted to patients with virological failure and limited therapeutic options such as patients already treated with a wide range of ART regimens.

Two-drug regimens for treatment of naïve HIV-1 infection and as maintenance therapy

As people live longer with HIV infection, there has been a resurgence of interest in challenging the use of three-drug therapy, including two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus a third drug, as initial treatment of HIV infection or for maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed individuals. Although initial studies showed poor efficacy and/or substantial toxicity, more recent regimens have held greater promise. The SWORD-1 and -2 studies were pivotal trials of dolutegravir plus rilpivirine as maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed patients with no history of drug resistance, leading to the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the regimen as a small, single tablet. More recently, the GEMINI-1 and -2 studies demonstrated that dolutegravir plus lamivudine is as safe and effective as the same regimen when combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve individuals. Together, these and other studies of novel two-drug regimens offer the potential for improved tolerability and simplicity, as well as a reduction in cost. We will review historical and recent trials of two-drug therapy for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.

No Clinical Impact of CYP3A5 Gene Polymorphisms on the Pharmacokinetics and/or Efficacy of Maraviroc in Healthy Volunteers and HIV-1-Infected Subjects

Maraviroc is a C-C chemokine receptor type-5 antagonist approved for the treatment of HIV-1. Previous studies show that cytochrome P450 3A5 (CYP3A5) plays a role in maraviroc metabolism. CYP3A5 is subject to a genetic polymorphism. The presence of 2 functional alleles (CYP3A5*1/*1) confers the extensive metabolism phenotype, which is rare in whites but common in blacks. The effect of CYP3A5 genotype on maraviroc and/or metabolite pharmacokinetics was evaluated in 2 clinical studies: a post hoc analysis from a phase 2b/3 study (NCT00098293) conducted in 494 HIV-1-infected subjects (study 1) in which the impact on maraviroc efficacy in 303 subjects was also assessed, and a study conducted in 47 healthy volunteers (study 2). In study 2 (NCT02625207), extensive metabolizers had 26% to 37% lower mean area under the concentration-time curve compared with poor metabolizers (no CYP3A5*1 alleles). This effect diminished to 17% in the presence of potent CYP3A inhibition. The effect of CYP3A5 genotype was greatest in the formation of the metabolite (1S,2S)-2-hydroxymaraviroc. In study 1, the CYP3A5*1/*1 genotype unexpectedly had higher maraviroc area under the curve predictions (20%) compared with those with no CYP3A5*1 alleles. The reason for this disparity remains unclear. The proportions of subjects with viral loads <50 and <400 copies/mL for maraviroc were comparable among all 3 CYP3A5 genotypes. In both studies maraviroc exposures were in the range of near-maximal viral inhibition in the majority of subjects. These results demonstrate that although CYP3A5 contributes to the metabolism of maraviroc, CYP3A5 genotype does not affect the clinical response to maraviroc in combination treatment of HIV-1 infection at approved doses.

Current and emerging two-drug approaches for HIV-1 therapy in ART-naïve and ART-experienced, virologically suppressed patients

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend a 2-drug antiretroviral regimen as an alternative to triple antiretroviral therapy (ART) in selected patients to reduce long-term toxicity and costs.

AREAS COVERED

This review is intended to provide insight into the efficacy, safety and tolerability of 2-drug versus 3-drug ART in naïve and in treatment-experienced virologically-suppressed patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Dual therapy regimens are not feasible in HBV-coinfected individuals and should not be applied during pregnancy. Positive data on 2-drug ART in drug naïve patients are still limited, while, in virologically-suppressed individuals, several regimens have shown non-inferiority as compared to 3-drug regimens. The strongest evidence of efficacy applies to ritonavir-boosted PI regimens combined with lamivudine and to dolutegravir with rilpivirine. Dual therapies showed improved renal function and bone mineral density over tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based 3-drug regimens. There are also great expectations for ongoing phase 3 trials testing dolutegravir with lamivudine. New and future single tablet co-formulations of dual regimens are expected to improve their suitability. Despite the lack of comparison with tenofovir alafenamide-based 3-drug regimens, the 2-drug regimens showing consistent non-inferiority and safety versus 3-drug regimens will challenge the current paradigm of 3-drug ART.

Analysis of Clinical HIV-1 Strains with Resistance to Maraviroc Reveals Strain-Specific Resistance Mutations, Variable Degrees of Resistance, and Minimal Cross-Resistance to Other CCR5 Antagonists

Maraviroc (MVC) is an allosteric inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) entry, and is the only CCR5 antagonist licensed for use as an anti-HIV-1 therapeutic. It acts by altering the conformation of the CCR5 extracellular loops, rendering CCR5 unrecognizable by the HIV-1 envelope (Env) glycoproteins. This study aimed to understand the mechanisms underlying the development of MVC resistance in HIV-1-infected patients. To do this, we obtained longitudinal plasma samples from eight subjects who experienced treatment failure with phenotypically verified, CCR5-tropic MVC resistance. We then cloned and characterized HIV-1 Envs (n = 77) from plasma of pretreatment (n = 36) and treatment failure (n = 41) samples. Our results showed variation in the magnitude of MVC resistance as measured by reductions in maximal percent inhibition of Env-pseudotyped viruses, which was more pronounced in 293-Affinofile cells compared to other cells with similar levels of CCR5 expression. Amino acid determinants of MVC resistance localized to the V3 Env region and were strain specific. We also observed minimal cross-resistance to other CCR5 antagonists by MVC-resistant strains. We conclude that 293-Affinofile cells are highly sensitive for detecting and measuring MVC resistance through a mechanism that is CCR5-dependent yet independent of CCR5 expression levels. The strain-specific nature of resistance mutations suggests that sequence-based diagnostics and prognostics will need to be more sophisticated than simple position scoring to be useful for managing resistance in subjects taking MVC. Finally, the minimal levels of cross-resistance suggests that recognition of the MVC-modified form of CCR5 does not necessarily lead to recognition of other antagonist-modified forms of CCR5.

Dual antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection

INTRODUCTION

For two decades, triple combinations of antiretrovirals have been the standard treatment for HIV infection. The challenges of such lifelong therapy include long-term side effects, high costs and reduced drug adherence. The recent advent of more potent and safer antiretrovirals has renewed the interest for simpler HIV regimens. Areas covered: We discuss the pros and cons of dual antiretroviral therapies in both drug-naïve and in treatment-experienced patients with viral suppression (switch strategy). Expert opinion: Some dual antiretroviral regimens are safe and efficacious, particularly as maintenance therapy. At this time, combinations of dolutegravir plus rilpivirine represent the best dual regimen. Longer follow-up and larger study populations are needed before supporting dolutegravir plus lamivudine. In contrast, dual therapy based on maraviroc is less effective. Although dual regimens with boosted protease inhibitors plus either lamivudine or raltegravir may be effective, they are penalized by metabolic side effects and risk for drug interactions. The newest dual regimens could save money, reduce toxicity and spare drug options for the future. For the first time in HIV therapeutics, less can be more. Dual therapy switching has set up a new paradigm in HIV treatment that uses induction-maintenance.

Immunovirological Efficacy of Once-Daily Maraviroc Plus Ritonavir-Boosted Atazanavir After 48 Weeks in Naive HIV-Infected Patients

Toxicities related to the use of nucleoside analogues have increased the interest in developing nucleoside-sparing regimens, mainly combining protease inhibitors with raltegravir. However, data regarding the use of CCR5-antagonists in this setting and in the naive scenario are scarce. The main objective was to analyze the immunovirological efficacy and tolerability of a low-dose, once-daily, maraviroc (MVC)-containing, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing dual therapy compared with standard triple therapy after 48 weeks for naive HIV-infected patients in the routine clinical practice setting. All naive HIV-infected patients with stable clinical condition that started antiretroviral treatment since February 1, 2008 to May 30,h 2012 were included. MVC clinical test was used to select candidate subjects to MVC therapy. Thirty-two subjects with MVC + atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) and 66 with standard triple therapy were analyzed. A comparable virological efficacy between groups was found after 48 weeks (87.5% vs. 80.3% of HIV undetectability, p = 0.37, MVC + ATV/r and triple therapy groups, respectively). The CD4 recovery after 48 weeks was similar and more than 200 cells/mm³ in both groups. No need of therapy changes or treatment discontinuations was observed in the MVC + ATV/r group. Effect on lipid profile, high-sensitivity C reactive protein, and β2-microglobulin was similar for both groups. Noteworthy, a significant increase of erythrocyte mean corpuscular volume was observed only in the triple therapy group. A nucleoside-sparing MVC-containing dual therapy showed similar immunovirological efficacy and tolerability than standard triple therapy in naive HIV-infected patients.

Identification of Vimentin as a Potential Therapeutic Target against HIV Infection

A combination of antiviral drugs known as antiretroviral therapy (ART) has shown effectiveness against the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). ART has markedly decreased mortality and morbidity among HIV-infected patients, having even reduced HIV transmission. However, an important current disadvantage, resistance development, remains to be solved. Hope is focused on developing drugs against cellular targets. This strategy is expected to prevent the emergence of viral resistance. In this study, using a comparative proteomic approach in MT4 cells treated with an anti-HIV leukocyte extract, we identified vimentin, a molecule forming intermediate filaments in the cell, as a possible target against HIV infection. We demonstrated a strong reduction of an HIV-1 based lentivirus expressing the enhanced green fluorescent protein (eGFP) in vimentin knockdown cells, and a noteworthy decrease of HIV-1 capsid protein antigen (CAp24) in those cells using a multiround infectivity assay. Electron micrographs showed changes in the structure of intermediate filaments when MT4 cells were treated with an anti-HIV leukocyte extract. Changes in the structure of intermediate filaments were also observed in vimentin knockdown MT4 cells. A synthetic peptide derived from a cytoskeleton protein showed potent inhibitory activity on HIV-1 infection, and low cytotoxicity. Our data suggest that vimentin can be a suitable target to inhibit HIV-1.

Once-daily maraviroc versus tenofovir/emtricitabine each combined with darunavir/ritonavir for initial HIV-1 treatment

Objective:

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of maraviroc along with darunavir/ritonavir, all once daily, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 infected individuals.

Design:

MODERN was a multicentre, double-blind, noninferiority, phase III study in HIV-1 infected, antiretroviral-naive adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA at least 1000 copies/ml and no evidence of reduced susceptibility to study drugs.

Methods:

At screening, participants were randomized 1 : 1 to undergo either genotypic or phenotypic tropism testing. Participants with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 were randomized 1 : 1 to receive maraviroc 150 mg once daily or tenofovir/emtricitabine once daily each with darunavir/ritonavir once daily for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml (Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm) at Week 48. A substudy evaluated bone mineral density, body fat distribution and serum bone turnover markers.

Results:

Seven hundred and ninety-seven participants were dosed (maraviroc, n = 396; tenofovir/emtricitabine, n = 401). The Data Monitoring Committee recommended early study termination due to inferior efficacy in the maraviroc group. At Week 48, the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml was 77.3% for maraviroc and 86.8% for tenofovir/emtricitabine [difference of −9.54% (95% confidence interval: −14.83 to −4.24)]. More maraviroc participants discontinued for lack of efficacy, which was not associated with non-R5 tropism or resistance. Discontinuations for adverse events, Category C events, Grade 3/4 adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were similar between groups.

Conclusion:

A once-daily nucleos(t)ide-sparing two-drug regimen of maraviroc and darunavir/ritonavir was inferior to a three-drug regimen of tenofovir/emtricitabine and darunavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral-naive adults.

Durability and Effectiveness of Maraviroc-Containing Regimens in HIV-1-Infected Individuals with Virological Failure in Routine Clinical Practice

INTRODUCTION

Limited data are available on the durability and effectiveness of maraviroc in routine clinical practice. We assessed the durability of maraviroc-containing regimens during a 30-month period, as well as their immunovirological and clinical efficacy, according to viral tropism in treatment-experienced individuals with viral load (VL) >50 copies/ml in the French Hospital Database on HIV.

METHODS

Virological success was defined as VL<50 copies/ml, immunological success as a confirmed increase of at least 100 CD4 cells/mm3 measured twice at least one month apart, and clinical failure as hospitalization for a non-AIDS event, an AIDS event, or death. Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for potential confounders were used to assess the influence of viral tropism on durability, the immunovirological responses, and clinical outcome.

RESULTS

356 individuals started maraviroc with VL>50 copies/ml of whom 223 harbored R5 viruses, 44 non-R5 viruses and 89 viruses of unknown tropism. Individuals with non-R5 viruses were more likely than individuals with R5 viruses to discontinue maraviroc (75% vs 34%, p<0.0001). At 30 months, the estimated rates of virological and immunological success were respectively 89% and 51% in individuals with R5 viruses and 48% and 23% in individuals with non-R5 viruses. In multivariable analysis, non-R5 viruses were associated with a lower likelihood of both virological success (hazard ratio (HR): 0.42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25-0.70) and immunological success (HR: 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18-0.77). No difference in clinical outcome was found between individuals with R5 and non-R5 viruses. The effectiveness of maraviroc-containing regimens in individuals with unknown viral tropism was not significantly different from that in individuals with R5 viruses. A limitation of the study is the absence of genotypic susceptibility score.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, maraviroc-containing regimens yielded high rates of viral suppression and immunological responses in individuals with R5 viruses in whom prior regimens had failed.

Maraviroc: a review of its use in HIV infection and beyond

The human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) enters target cells by binding its envelope glycoprotein gp120 to the CD4 receptor and/or coreceptors such as C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5; R5) and C-X-C chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4; X4), and R5-tropic viruses predominate during the early stages of infection. CCR5 antagonists bind to CCR5 to prevent viral entry. Maraviroc (MVC) is the only CCR5 antagonist currently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, the European Commission, Health Canada, and several other countries for the treatment of patients infected with R5-tropic HIV-1. MVC has been shown to be effective at inhibiting HIV-1 entry into cells and is well tolerated. With expanding MVC use by HIV-1-infected humans, different clinical outcomes post-approval have been observed with MVC monotherapy or combination therapy with other antiretroviral drugs, with MVC use in humans infected with dual-R5- and X4-tropic HIV-1, infected with different HIV-1 genotype or infected with HIV-2. This review discuss the role of CCR5 in HIV-1 infection, the development of the CCR5 antagonist MVC, its pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug–drug interactions, and the implications of these interactions on treatment outcomes, including viral mutations and drug resistance, and the mechanisms associated with the development of resistance to MVC. This review also discusses available studies investigating the use of MVC in the treatment of other diseases such as cancer, graft-versus-host disease, and inflammatory diseases.

Ageing with HIV: a multidisciplinary review

INTRODUCTION

After the introduction of highly active antiretroviral treatment, the course of HIV infection turned into a chronic disease and most of HIV-positive patients will soon be over 50 years old.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This paper reviews the multiple aspects that physicians have to face while taking care of HIV-positive ageing patients including the definitions of frailty and the prevalence and risk factors of concomitant diseases. From a therapeutic point of view pharmacokinetic changes and antiretroviral-specific toxicities associated with ageing are discussed; finally therapeutic approaches to frailty are reviewed both in HIV-positive and negative patients.

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

We conclude by suggesting that the combined use of drugs with the least toxicity potential and the promotion of healthy behaviours (including appropriate nutrition and exercise) might be the best practice for ageing HIV-positive subjects.