Nevirapine versus efavirenz for patients co-infected with HIV and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sociobehavioral Risk Factors and Clinical Implications of Late Presentation Among People Living with HIV in the Brazilian Amazon Region

This study aimed to analyze the prevalence, sociobehavioral factors and clinical-laboratory consequences of late presentation among people living with HIV (PLHIV) in the Brazilian Amazon region. In total, 402 HIV + individuals treated at reference units in Belém city (Pará, Brazil) between 2018 and 2019 were evaluated. Late presentation was defined as a first-collection LTCD4+ count below 350 cells/µL. Sociodemographic, behavioral and clinical data were obtained from questionnaires or medical records. Th1, Th2 and Th17 cytokine profiles were evaluated by flow cytometry. Longitudinal data on viral load, T lymphocytes, and antiretroviral therapy administration were obtained from control and logistic databases. Approximately 52.73% of the participants were late presenters and sought medical care 7-12 + months after their primary HIV diagnosis. Sociobehavioral factors associated with late presentation included illicit drug use for more than 5 years, polyamory, no alcohol consumption, homosexuality, and sexual inactiveness after HIV diagnosis. Clinically, late presentation was associated with coinfection rate; polysymptomatology; high IFN-ɣ, IL-6 and IL-10 levels; nonresponse to antiretroviral therapy; and virological failure- and tuberculosis coinfection-motivated changes to therapy. In summary, the prevalence of late presentation in Pará in the Brazilian Amazon region is high. Delays in seeking specialized care after a primary HIV diagnosis cause medium/long-term changes in the life expectancy and health of PLHIV.

HLA-B*13, B*35 and B*39 Alleles Are Closely Associated With the Lack of Response to ART in HIV Infection: A Cohort Study in a Population of Northern Brazil

Introduction

Immune reconstitution failure after HIV treatment is a multifactorial phenomenon that may also be associated with a single polymorphism of human leukocyte antigen (HLA); however, few reports include patients from the Brazilian Amazon. Our objective was to evaluate the association of the immunogenic profile of the “classical” HLA-I and HLA-II loci with treatment nonresponse in a regional cohort monitored over 24 months since HIV diagnosis.

Materials and Methods

Treatment-free participants from reference centers in the state of Pará, Brazil, were enrolled. Infection screening was performed using enzyme immunoassays (Murex AG/AB Combination DiaSorin, UK) and confirmed by immunoblots (Bio-Manguinhos, FIOCRUZ). Plasma viral load was quantified by real-time PCR (ABBOTT, Chicago, Illinois, USA). CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T lymphocyte quantification was performed by immunophenotyping and flow cytometry (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA). Infection was monitored via test and logistics platforms (SISCEL and SICLOM). Therapeutic response failure was inferred based on CD4⁺ T lymphocyte quantification after 1 year of therapy. Loci A, B and DRB1 were genotyped using PCR-SSO (One Lambda Inc., Canoga Park, CA, USA). Statistical tests were applied using GENEPOP, GraphPad Prism 8.4.3 and BioEstat 5.3.

Results

Of the 270 patients monitored, 134 responded to treatment (CD4⁺ ≥ 500 cells/µL), and 136 did not respond to treatment (CD4⁺ < 500 cells/µL). The allele frequencies of the loci were similar to heterogeneous populations. The allelic profile of locus B was statistically associated with treatment nonresponse, and the B*13, B*35 and B*39 alleles had the greatest probabilistic influence. The B*13 allele had the highest risk of treatment nonresponse, and carriers of the allele had a detectable viral load and a CD4+ T lymphocyte count less than 400 cells/µL with up to 2 years of therapy. The B*13 allele was associated with a switch in treatment regimens, preferably to efavirenz (EFZ)-based regimens, and among those who switched regimens, half had a history of coinfection with tuberculosis.

Conclusions

The allelic variants of the B locus are more associated with non-response to therapy in people living with HIV (PLHIV) from a heterogeneous population in the Brazilian Amazon.

Spousal intimacy, type of antiretroviral drug and antiretroviral therapy adherence among HIV patients in Bandung, Indonesia

Background

Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) has been proven effective in reducing the mortality rates among People Living With HIV/AIDS (PLWH). However, poor adherence to ART may result in treatment failure. Few studies examine the relationship between spousal intimacy, type of ART and ART adherence. This study aimed to investigate the association between spousal intimacy, type of ART and antiretroviral therapy adherence among PLWH in Bandung, Indonesia.

Design and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 115 adult PLWH who were receiving ART at least for 6 months in RSUD Kota Bandung, they were selected with a consecutive sampling. The data were analyzed using chi-square test.

Results

The majority of PLWH (61.74%) reported had high level of spousal intimacy, about 93.91% PLWH used first line of ART, and 88.69% had high adherence in consuming ART. Spousal intimacy had a significant relationship to antiretroviral adherence (p value < 0.001) and type of ART (p value: 0.031, OR: 7.35) significantly associated with antiretroviral adherence.

Conclusions

PLWH who have high levels of spousal intimacy also have high levels of antiretroviral adherence. PLWH on firstline ART were 7.3 times more adherent on ART.

Integrase inhibitors versus efavirenz combination antiretroviral therapies for TB/HIV coinfection: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Integrase inhibitors (INIs)-based antiretroviral therapies (ART) are more recommended than efavirenz (EFV)-based ART for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). Yet, the advantage of integrase inhibitors in treating TB/HIV coinfection is uncertain. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the effects and safety of INIs- versus EFV-based ART in TB/HIV coinfection, and demonstrate the feasibility of the regimens.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were systematically searched through September 2020. Fixed-effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size for all outcomes. The primary outcomes were virologic suppression and bacteriology suppression for INIs- versus EFV-based ART. Secondary outcomes included CD4+ cell counts change from baseline, adherence and safety.

RESULTS

Three trials (including 672 TB/HIV patients) were eligible. ART combining INIs and EFV had similar effects for all outcomes, with none of the point estimates argued against the INIs-based ART on TB/HIV patients. Compared to EFV-based ART as the reference group, the RR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.05) for virologic suppression, 1.00 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.05) for bacteriology suppression, 0.98 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.01) for adherence. The mean difference in CD4+ cell counts increase between the two groups was 14.23 cells/μl (95% CI 0- 6.40 to 34.86). With regard to safety (adverse events, drug-related adverse events, discontinuation for drugs, grade 3-4 adverse events, IRIS (grade 3-4), and death), INIs-based regimen was broadly similar to EFV-based regimens. The analytical results in all sub-analyses of raltegravir- (RAL) and dolutegravir (DTG) -based ART were valid.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates similar efficacy and safety of INIs-based ART compared with EFV-based ART. This finding supports INIs-based ART as a first-line treatment in TB/HIV patients. The conclusions presented here still await further validation owing to insufficient data.

OUTBREAK of novel corona virus disease (COVID-19): Antecedence and aftermath

Outbreak of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started in mid of December 2019 and spread very rapidly across the globe within a month of its outbreak. Researchers all across the globe started working to find out its possible treatments. However, most of initiatives taken were based on various hypotheses and till date no successful treatments have been achieved. Some strategies adopted by China where existing antiviral therapy was initially used to treat COVID-19 have not given very successful results. Researchers from Thailand explored the use of combination of anti-influenza drugs such as Oseltamivir, Lopinavir and Ritonavir to treat it. In some cases, combination therapy of antiviral drugs with chloroquine showed better action against COVID-19. Some of the clinical studies showed very good effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19, however, they were not recommended due to serious clinical toxicity. In some cases, use of rho kinase inhibitor, fasudil was found very effective. In some of the countries, antibody-based therapies have proved fairly successful. The use of BCG vaccines came in light; however, they were not found successful due to lack of full-proof mechanistic studies. In Israel as well as in other developed countries, pluristems allogeneic placental expanded cell therapy has been found successful. Some phytochemicals and nutraceuticals have also been explored to treat it. In a recent report, the use of dexamethasone was found very effective in patients suffering from COVID-19. Its effect was most striking among patients on ventilator. The research for vaccines that can prevent the disease is still going on. In light of the dynamic trends, present review focuses on etiopathogenesis, factors associated with spreading of the virus, and possible strategies to treat this deadly infection. In addition, it attempts to compile the recent updates on development of drugs and vaccines for the dreaded disease.

The potential of plant systems to break the HIV-TB link

Tuberculosis (TB) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) can place a major burden on healthcare systems and constitute the main challenges of diagnostic and therapeutic programmes. Infection with HIV is the most common cause of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), which can accelerate the risk of latent TB reactivation by 20-fold. Similarly, TB is considered the most relevant factor predisposing individuals to HIV infection. Thus, both pathogens can augment one another in a synergetic manner, accelerating the failure of immunological functions and resulting in subsequent death in the absence of treatment. Synergistic approaches involving the treatment of HIV as a tool to combat TB and vice versa are thus required in regions with a high burden of HIV and TB infection. In this context, plant systems are considered a promising approach for combatting HIV and TB in a resource-limited setting because plant-made drugs can be produced efficiently and inexpensively in developing countries and could be shared by the available agricultural infrastructure without the expensive requirement needed for cold chain storage and transportation. Moreover, the use of natural products from medicinal plants can eliminate the concerns associated with antiretroviral therapy (ART) and anti-TB therapy (ATT), including drug interactions, drug-related toxicity and multidrug resistance. In this review, we highlight the potential of plant system as a promising approach for the production of relevant pharmaceuticals for HIV and TB treatment. However, in the cases of HIV and TB, none of the plant-made pharmaceuticals have been approved for clinical use. Limitations in reaching these goals are discussed.

Clinical, Immunological and Virological Responses of Zidovudine-Lamivudine-Nevirapine versus Zidovudine-Lamivudine-Efavirenz Antiretroviral Treatment (ART) Among HIV-1 Infected Children: Asella Teaching and Referral Hospital, South-East Ethiopia

Background:

Antiretroviral Therapy(ART) remarkably reduced HIV-1 infection-related mortality in children. The efficacy and safety of different ART regimen in pediatric age groups remained issues of debates and available evidence were scarce especially among children taking the of one the two prototypes (NVP or EFV) Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor(NNRTI) as backbone of ART regimen.

Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare clinical, immunological and virological responses of zidovudine-lamivudine-nevirapine (AZT+3TC+ NVP) versus zidovudine-lamivudine-efavirenz (AZT+3TC+EFV) ART regimen among HIV-1 infected children.

Methods:

A retrospective cross-sectional study was done by reviewing medical records of the patients to evaluate clinical, immunological and virological outcomes of NVP+AZT+3TC versus EFV+AZT+3TC ART regimen among HIV-1 infected children. Data were entered into Epi-info version 7.2.2 for clean up and exported to SPSS version 17 for analysis. Paired and Independent t-tests were used to compare the CD4 cell count, weight and virologic level at six months with corresponding baseline value; and the mean weight, CD4 gain and viral suppression across the two ART regimens at six months of ART respectively.

Results:

Medical records of 122 patients from NVP-based regimen and 61 patients from EFV group were reviewed. After six months of NVP+AZT+3TC treatment, the mean CD4 cell count difference from baseline was 215(95% CI, 175.414-245.613, p<0.001). From EFV+AZT+3TC group, the mean CD4 cell count difference from baseline was 205(95% CI 155.404-235.623, p< 0.001). The mean CD4 count difference between the two regimens was comparable (p 0.145). Similarly, optimal viral suppression was achieved in 82% (100/122) of NVP+AZT+3TC regimen and 83% (44/61) of EFV+AZT+3TC regimen which was still comparable across the two groups.

Conclusion:

There was no difference in clinical, immunological and virological outcomes among patients taking NVP+AZT+3TC or EFV+AZT+3TC ART regimen.

Choice of initial antiretroviral drugs and treatment outcomes among HIV-infected patients in sub-Saharan Africa: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy (ART) depends on the choice of regimens during initiation. Most evidences from developed countries indicated that there is difference between efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP). However, the evidences are limited in resource poor countries particularly in Africa. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to summarize reported long-term treatment outcomes among people on first line therapy in sub-Saharan Africa.

METHODS

Observational studies that reported odds ratio, relative risk, hazard ratio, or standardized incidence ratio to compare risk of treatment failure among HIV/AIDS patients who initiated ART with EFV versus NVP were systematically searched. Searches were conducted using the MEDLINE database within PubMed, Google Scholar, HINARI, and Research Gates between 2007 and 2016. Information was extracted using standardized form. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effect, generic inverse variance method.

RESULT

A total of 6394 articles were identified, of which, 29 were eligible for review and abstraction in sub-Saharan Africa. Seventeen articles were used for the meta-analysis. Of a total of 121,092 independent study participants, 76,719 (63.36%) were females. Of these, 40,480 (33.43%) initiated with NVP containing regimen. Two studies did not report the median CD4 cell counts at initiation. Patients who have low CD4 cell counts initiated with EFV containing regimen. The pooled effect size indicated that treatment failure was reduced by 15%, 0.85 (95%CI: 0.75-0.98), and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) switch was reduced by 43%, 0.57 (95%CI: 0.37-0.89).

CONCLUSION

The risk of treatment failure and NNRTI switch were lower in patients who initiated with EFV than NVP-containing regimen. The review suggests that initiation of patients with EFV-containing regimen will reduce treatment failure and NNRTI switch.

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three-drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide-reverse transcriptase inhibitors for initial treatment of HIV infection in antiretroviral-naïve individuals

BACKGROUND

The advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) has reduced the morbidity and mortality due to HIV infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) ART guidelines focus on three classes of antiretroviral drugs, namely nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) and protease inhibitors. Two of the most common medications given as first-line treatment are the NNRTIs, efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP). It is unclear which NNRTI is more efficacious for initial therapy. This systematic review was first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, either EFV or NVP, is more effective in suppressing viral load when given in combination with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as part of initial antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We attempted to identify all relevant studies, regardless of language or publication status, in electronic databases and conference proceedings up to 12 August 2016. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to 12 August 2016. We searched LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature) and the Web of Science from 1996 to 12 August 2016. We checked the National Library of Medicine (NLM) Gateway from 1996 to 2009, as it was no longer available after 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EFV to NVP in people with HIV without prior exposure to ART, irrespective of the dosage or NRTI's given in combination.The primary outcome of interest was virological success. Other primary outcomes included mortality, clinical progression to AIDS, severe adverse events, and discontinuation of therapy for any reason. Secondary outcomes were change in CD4 count, treatment failure, development of ART drug resistance, and prevention of sexual transmission of HIV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each reference for inclusion using exclusion criteria that we had established a priori. Two review authors independently extracted data from each included trial using a standardized data extraction form. We analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We performed subgroup analyses for concurrent treatment for tuberculosis and dosage of NVP. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve RCTs, which included 3278 participants, met our inclusion criteria. None of these trials included children. The length of follow-up time, study settings, and NRTI combination drugs varied greatly. In five included trials, participants were receiving concurrent treatment for tuberculosis.There was little or no difference between EFV and NVP in virological success (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.09; 10 trials, 2438 participants; high quality evidence), probably little or no difference in mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.19; 8 trials, 2317 participants; moderate quality evidence) and progression to AIDS (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.11; 5 trials, 2005 participants; moderate quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all severe adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.18; 8 trials, 2329 participants; very low quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in discontinuation rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.25; 9 trials, 2384 participants; moderate quality evidence) and change in CD4 count (MD -3.03; 95% CI -17.41 to 11.35; 9 trials, 1829 participants; moderate quality evidence). There may be little or no difference in treatment failure (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.24; 5 trials, 737 participants; low quality evidence). Development of drug resistance is probably slightly less in the EFV arms (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.95; 4 trials, 988 participants; moderate quality evidence). No studies were found that looked at sexual transmission of HIV.When we examined the adverse events individually, EFV probably is associated with more people with impaired mental function (7 per 1000) compared to NVP (2 per 1000; RR 4.46, 95% CI 1.65 to 12.03; 6 trials, 2049 participants; moderate quality evidence) but fewer people with elevated transaminases (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.78; 3 trials, 1299 participants; high quality evidence), fewer people with neutropenia (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.82; 3 trials, 1799 participants; high quality evidence), and probably fewer people withrash (229 per 100 with NVP versus 133 per 1000 with EFV; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; 7 trials, 2277 participants; moderate quality evidence). We found that there may be little or no difference in gastrointestinal adverse events (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.21; 6 trials, 2049 participants; low quality evidence), pyrexia (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.73; 3 trials, 1799 participants; low quality evidence), raised alkaline phosphatase (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.50; 1 trial, 1007 participants; low quality evidence), raised amylase (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.73; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence) and raised triglycerides (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.13; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence). There was probably little or no difference in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT; MD 3.3, 95% CI -2.06 to 8.66; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence), serum glutamic- pyruvic transaminase (SGPT; MD 5.7, 95% CI -4.23 to 15.63; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence) and raised cholesterol (RR 6.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 48.78; 1 trial, 64 participants; moderate quality evidence).Our subgroup analyses revealed that NVP slightly increases mortality when given once daily (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.90; 3 trials, 678 participants; high quality evidence). There were little or no differences in the primary outcomes for patients who were concurrently receiving treatment for tuberculosis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs have similar benefits in initial treatment of HIV infection when combined with two NRTIs. The adverse events encountered affect different systems, with EFV more likely to cause central nervous system adverse events and NVP more likely to raise transaminases, cause neutropenia and rash.

Official American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines: Treatment of Drug-Susceptible Tuberculosis

The American Thoracic Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Infectious Diseases Society of America jointly sponsored the development of this guideline for the treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis, which is also endorsed by the European Respiratory Society and the US National Tuberculosis Controllers Association. Representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Canadian Thoracic Society, the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, and the World Health Organization also participated in the development of the guideline. This guideline provides recommendations on the clinical and public health management of tuberculosis in children and adults in settings in which mycobacterial cultures, molecular and phenotypic drug susceptibility tests, and radiographic studies, among other diagnostic tools, are available on a routine basis. For all recommendations, literature reviews were performed, followed by discussion by an expert committee according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Given the public health implications of prompt diagnosis and effective management of tuberculosis, empiric multidrug treatment is initiated in almost all situations in which active tuberculosis is suspected. Additional characteristics such as presence of comorbidities, severity of disease, and response to treatment influence management decisions. Specific recommendations on the use of case management strategies (including directly observed therapy), regimen and dosing selection in adults and children (daily vs intermittent), treatment of tuberculosis in the presence of HIV infection (duration of tuberculosis treatment and timing of initiation of antiretroviral therapy), as well as treatment of extrapulmonary disease (central nervous system, pericardial among other sites) are provided. The development of more potent and better-tolerated drug regimens, optimization of drug exposure for the component drugs, optimal management of tuberculosis in special populations, identification of accurate biomarkers of treatment effect, and the assessment of new strategies for implementing regimens in the field remain key priority areas for research. See the full-text online version of the document for detailed discussion of the management of tuberculosis and recommendations for practice.

HIV treatment cascade in tuberculosis patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Globally, the number of deaths associated with tuberculosis (TB) and HIV coinfection remains unacceptably high. We review the evidence around the impact of strengthening the HIV treatment cascade in TB patients and explore recent findings about how best to deliver integrated TB/HIV services.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is clear evidence that the timely provision of antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces mortality in TB/HIV coinfected adults. Despite this, globally in 2013, only around a third of known HIV-positive TB cases were treated with ART. Although there is some recent evidence exploring the barriers to achieve high coverage of HIV testing and ART initiation in TB patients, our understanding of which factors are most important and how best to address these within different health systems remains incomplete. There are some examples of good practice in the delivery of integrated TB/HIV services to improve the HIV treatment cascade. However, evidence of the impact of such strategies is of relatively low quality for informing integrated TB/HIV programming more broadly. In most settings, there remain barriers to higher-level organizational and functional integration.

SUMMARY

There remains a need for commitment to patient-centred integrated TB/HIV care in countries affected by the dual epidemic. There is a need for better quality evidence around how best to deliver integrated services to strengthen the HIV treatment cascade in TB patients, both at primary healthcare level and within community settings.