BHIVA guidelines on HIV and chronic hepatitis: coinfection with HIV and hepatitis B virus infection (2005)

Evolution of HIV-1 Surveillance Drug Resistance Mutations Over 10 Years in New South Wales, Australia

New South Wales has the greatest burden of HIV in Australia, with 2012 and 2013 recording the highest rates of new diagnoses in 20 years. Concurrently, there has been significant changes in antiretroviral treatments and testing paradigms. We compiled a statewide resistance database to characterize changes in HIV-1 resistance mutations over time. Genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing (GART) was performed on request at three reference laboratories using commercial and in-house methods. In total, 7629 HIV-1 polymerase sequences obtained from GART from 2004 to 2013 were retrospectively collated, reformatted, de-identified, and analyzed using Stanford HIVdb program 7.0 and the 2009 World Health Organization (WHO) surveillance drug resistance mutations (SDRMs). Analyses were performed on subgroups of known treatment naives, treatment experienced, and seroconverters. There has been a decrease in overall rates of prevalent drug resistance mutations from 57.8% in 2004 to 21% in 2013. Dual and triple class resistance mutations have decreased from 32.7% in 2004 to 5.8% in 2013 and 16.4% to 1.2%, respectively. In treatment-naive individuals (n = 450), the frequency of protease inhibitor (PI) mutations remains low at 2.7%. In seroconverters, rates of transmitted drug resistance (TDR) are 6.6%, 3%, 3%, and 1.5% for overall, PI, non-nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitor (NNRTI), and NRTI, respectively. In treatment experienced, rates remain stable with 36.0%, 18.9%, 29.1%, and 6.4% for overall, NNRTI, NRTI, and PI mutations. The most common mutations in treatment experienced occurred at position M184, T215 (NRTI); K103 (NNRTI); I54 (PI). Apparent decreases in prevalent SDRMs can be attributed to changes in GART testing indications over time. In treatment-naive and -experienced subgroups, rates have been stable with low rates of TDR in seroconverters.

Severe vitamin D deficiency in a patient treated for hepatitis B with tenofovir

With the increasing use of tenofovir disoproxil in the management of HIV and hepatitis B, serious adverse effects, such as renal dysfunction, will inevitably increase in frequency. We describe a case of a patient presenting with hypophosphataemia suggestive of Fanconi's syndrome, but in fact explicable by simple vitamin D deficiency. This emphasizes that while monitoring for adverse effects is recommended, physicians must consider all alternative causes for biochemical abnormalities prior to discontinuing tenofovir and delaying appropriate management.

The British HIV Association national audit on the management of subjects co-infected with HIV and hepatitis B/C

The aim of this work was to survey current service provision and adherence to the British HIV Association (BHIVA) guidelines for the management of HIV and hepatitis B/C co-infected patients in the UK. Sites were invited to complete a survey of local care arrangements for co-infected patients. A case-note audit of all co-infected attendees during a six-month period in 2009 was performed. Data including demographics, clinical parameters, hepatitis disease status, antiretroviral and hepatitis B/C therapy were collected. Using BHIVA guidelines as audit standards, the proportion of sites and subjects meeting each standard was calculated. One-hundred and forty sites (75%) responded and data from 973 eligible co-infected patients were submitted. Approximately a third of sites reported not re-checking hepatitis serology or vaccination titres annually. Of all co-infected patients, 122 (13%) were neither vaccinated nor immune to hepatitis A and 26 (5%) of patients with hepatitis C were neither vaccinated nor naturally immune to hepatitis B. Of HBsAg-positive subjects, 25 (6%) were receiving lamivudine as the sole drug with antihepatitis B activity. In the UK, the management of HIV and hepatitis B/C co-infection remains highly variable. Optimizing the care of this high-risk patient group is a priority.

Management and treatment of hepatitis B virus in patients with HIV infection: A practical guide for health care professionals

The management and treatment of HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV)-coinfected patients present specific challenges for clinicians. The morbidity and mortality related to these concomitant infections are growing concerns, while the use of antiviral drugs effective against both viruses complicates therapeutic decision making. The present document provides guidelines for physicians regarding care and treatment of patients coinfected with HIV and HBV. Primary prevention of HBV in HIV-positive patients is achieved through appropriate vaccination schedules. Follow-up before treatment of HBV may include liver biopsy, screening for hepatocellular carcinoma and testing for esophageal varicies in cases of cirrhosis. In HBV-infected patients requiring treatment, recommendations regarding initiation, duration and choice of first-line drugs are made. Finally, in the case of resistance, appropriate alternative therapies are necessary.

Combination HBV therapy is linked to greater HBV DNA suppression in a cohort of lamivudine-experienced HIV/HBV coinfected individuals

OBJECTIVES

To determine if highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) with combination anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) therapy compared to HAART with HBV monotherapy leads to greater HBV DNA suppression in an HIV/HBV coinfected cohort.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis of 122 HIV/HBV coinfected patients from Australia and the United States.

METHODS

Univariate analysis and ordinal logistic regression were used to determine factors associated with an HBV DNA less than 100 IU/ml.

RESULTS

The majority of patients were on HAART (85%), had an HIV RNA less than 50 copies/ml, a median CD4 cell count of 438 cells/microl, and had prior or current lamivudine therapy (98%). The majority (89%) of those on HAART were on HBV-active drugs including 54% on tenofovir (TDF) with either lamivudine (LAM) or emtrictabine (FTC), 34% receiving LAM or FTC monotherapy, and 12% on TDF monotherapy. Only 4% of patients in the combination (TDF + LAM/FTC) group had HBV DNA greater than 20 000 IU/ml compared to 54% in the group on no HBV-active therapy, 31% in the LAM or FTC monotherapy group, and 30% in the TDF monotherapy group (P < 0.0001). In an ordinal logistic regression model, monotherapy with either TDF or LAM remained independently associated with higher HBV DNA.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that there may be an advantage to using TDF in combination with LAM or FTC in HIV/HBV coinfection, particularly in the setting of previous LAM experience. Continued prospective follow-up in this study will confirm whether the advantage is sustained longer-term.

Future directions in the treatment of HIV-HBV coinfection

Liver disease is a major cause of mortality in individuals with HIV-HBV coinfection. The pathogenesis of liver disease in this setting is unknown, but is likely to involve drug toxicity, infection of hepatic cells with both HIV and HBV, and an altered immune response to HBV. The availability of therapeutic agents that target both HIV and HBV replication enable dual viral suppression, and assessment of chronic hepatitis B is important prior to commencement of antiretroviral therapy. Greater importance is now placed on HBV DNA levels and staging of liver fibrosis, either by liver biopsy or noninvasive measurement, such as transient elastography, since significant liver fibrosis may exist in the presence of normal liver function tests. Earlier treatment of both HIV and HBV is now generally advocated and treatment is usually lifelong.

Tenofovir use in human immunodeficiency virus-1-infected children in the United kingdom and Ireland

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is neither licensed for use nor extensively studied in HIV-infected children. The only available formulation is an adult tablet, introducing the possibility of dosing errors in children. TDF interacts with other antiretrovirals and has been associated with decline in renal function and CD4 count. We describe the use of TDF in a cohort of HIV-1-infected children in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

METHODS

Children ever prescribed TDF and followed in the Collaborative HIV Pediatric Study cohort since 2001 were included in analyses of dosing, adverse events, and virologic and immunologic response. Suspected adverse drug reactions to TDF reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency during the same time were also reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-nine of 1253 children had taken TDF. They were older and had clinically more advanced disease than the rest of the cohort. Eighteen percent received >120% and 37% received <80% of the suggested pediatric dose (8 mg/kg). Thirty-seven percent of new TDF regimens contained didanosine (ddI), though few since 2005. Twelve of 159 (7.5%) children experienced serious adverse events and stopped TDF permanently, 11 taking concurrent lopinavir-ritonavir, and 10 ddI; 5 had renal toxicity. Viral load suppressed to < or =50 copies/mL at 12 months in 38% of those starting TDF. Median increase in CD4 count at 12 months was +110 cells/mL (interquartile range, 9-270), but only 3 cells/mL in those taking concurrent ddI.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF seems to be an effective antiretroviral drug in this pediatric cohort, although considerable underdosing and overdosing occurs. A small number of children experienced serious adverse events while taking TDF; half were renal toxicity, most associated with concurrent ddI and lopinavir-ritonavir use.

A randomized trial of combination hepatitis B therapy in HIV/HBV coinfected antiretroviral naïve individuals in Thailand

Coinfection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) is associated with considerable liver disease morbidity and mortality. Emerging HIV epidemics in areas of high HBV endemicity such as Asia are expanding the population with HIV/HBV coinfection. Limited randomized trial data exist to support current guidelines for HBV combination therapy in HIV/HBV coinfection. The objective of this prospective randomized clinical trial was to compare the strategy of HBV monotherapy with lamivudine (LAM) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus HBV combination therapy with LAM/TDF in antiretroviral-naïve HIV/HBV-coinfected subjects in Thailand. Thirty-six HIV/HBV-coinfected subjects initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) were randomized to either LAM (arm 1), TDF (arm 2), or LAM/TDF (arm 3) as HBV-active drugs within HAART. At week 48, time-weighted area under the curve analysis revealed that the median HBV DNA reduction from baseline was 4.07 log(10) c/mL in arm 1, 4.57 log(10) c/mL in arm 2, and 4.73 log(10) c/mL in arm 3 (P = 0.70). HBV DNA suppressed to <3 log(10) c/mL in 46% in arm 1, 92% in arm 2, and 91% in arm 3 (P = 0.013, intent-to-treat analysis). HBV-resistant changes were detected in two subjects, both in arm 1. Hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) loss was observed in 33% of HBeAg-positive subjects, and 8% experienced hepatitis B surface antigen loss. Hepatic flare was observed in 25% of subjects.

CONCLUSION

LAM monotherapy resulted in a greater proportion of subjects with HBV DNA >3 log(10) c/mL at week 48 and in early resistance development. This study confirms current treatment guidelines that recommend a TDF-based regimen as the treatment of choice for HIV/HBV coinfection, but does not demonstrate any advantage of HBV combination therapy in this short-term setting.

The use of molecular assays in the management of viral hepatitis

Molecular assays are instrumental in the clinical management of viral hepatitis. During the past years, a wide variety of molecular assays have been developed and implemented. This considerably improved the understanding of the natural history and pathogenesis of Hepatitis B virus (HBV), Hepatitis C virus (HCV) or Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) hepatitis, but also caused uncertainties in the selection of the most appropriate assays for clinical requirements. Indeed, a rational choice and application of these assays requires adequate knowledge of the performance of the single test. Moreover, the choice of the most accurate assay for patients' needs and physicians' objectives, needs to be oriented to specific contexts, such as diagnosis, management or treatment. In the past, a hurdle in the routine use of assays for hepatitis viruses nucleic acid quantification was represented by the availability of only "home brew" methods which lacked standardization. Major improvement in addressing the use of molecular assays for viral hepatitis has been derived from recent standardization procedures that allowed a comparison between different tests after results were given as International Units. In addition, it should be reminded that, before getting into the market, molecular assays should be approved by European regulation authorities and validated using internationally recognized standards. A subsequent clinical validation should address the diagnostic accuracy of the assay. These proceedings have the aim of identifying which molecular tests, among those currently available, meet clinical requirements for each specific application.

Hepatitis B Virus and HIV Coinfection: Results of a Survey on Treatment Practices and Recommendations for Therapy

BACKGROUND

The management of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection is challenged by the selection of patients for therapy, options for antiviral medications, and inconsistency in published treatment guidelines.

METHODS

A survey was sent to 161 sites in a multicenter HIV clinical trials group to assess HBV screening, criteria for initiation of therapy, and treatment choices for patients coinfected with HBV and HIV.

RESULTS

Of 161 sites, 78 completed the survey (response rate, 48.4%). Of these sites, 98.7% screened for HBV infection, 86% vaccinated HIV-infected patients who were not immune to HBV infection, and 79% made treatment decisions without referral to a hepatologist or gastroenterologist. Treatment recommendations varied; 42% of the sites initiated therapy when patients' levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were elevated and HBV DNA level was >10(5) copies/mL, whereas 49% of the sites initiated therapy in the presence of any detectable HBV DNA level. Antiviral treatment choices for patients who were not concurrently receiving antiretroviral therapy were lamivudine plus tenofovir, adefovir, or interferon. Patients concurrently receiving antiretroviral therapy received lamivudine plus tenofovir preferentially, followed by tenofovir plus emtricitabine, adefovir, or interferon. Ninety-one percent of the sites screened for hepatocellular carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of HIV-infected patients were screened and vaccinated for HBV infection and underwent surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma. Decisions regarding the performance of liver biopsy, threshold to initiate therapy, and criteria to discontinue therapy varied, reflecting inconsistencies in available treatment guidelines. Treatment decisions reflected concerns regarding future drug resistance in patients who are naive to antiretroviral therapy and the emergence of drug resistance in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy.

Management and treatment of hepatitis C virus in patients with HIV and hepatitis C virus coinfection: A practical guide for health care professionals

Concomitant HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common yet complex coinfection. The present document is a practical guide for treating HCV infection in people coinfected with HIV. Effective antiretroviral therapies have prolonged survival rates for HIV-infected people over the past decade, which have made latent complications of HCV major causes of morbidity and mortality in these patients. Advances in the treatment of HCV (eg, combined pegylated interferon and ribavirin) offer the possibility of eradicating HCV infection in coinfected persons. The treatment of HCV must be considered in all cases. Intensive management of the adverse effects of HCV treatment is one of the factors for the success of these therapies. HCV eradication is predicted to decrease the mortality associated with coinfection and reduce the toxicity of HIV treatment.

Do HIV care providers appropriately manage hepatitis B in coinfected patients treated with antiretroviral therapy?

BACKGROUND

The common occurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients who carry the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) demands that both viruses be recognized, evaluated, and treated when appropriate.

METHODS

We identified 357 HIV- and hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients who underwent testing from 1999 to 2003; 155 patients who were new to our clinic and who initiated therapy for HIV and HBV coinfection were considered for inclusion in the study. The frequency of HIV testing (to determine HIV load and CD4+ cell count) performed during the first year of therapy was compared with the frequency of HBV measurements (to determine hepatitis B e antigen, antibody to hepatitis B e antigen, and HBV load), abdominal ultrasound examination, and measurement of levels of alpha-fetoprotein in serum.

RESULTS

HBV load data were obtained for only 16% of patients before initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART), whereas HIV load was determined for 99% of patients before initiation of ART. The total number of HIV load measurements obtained during the first year after ART initiation was 497 (median number of HIV load measurements per patient, 3.0), compared with 85 measurements of HBV load (median number of HBV load measurements per patient, <1; P<.001). The percentage of patients who received any level of HBV monitoring (i.e., tests to determine hepatitis B e antigen, antibody to hepatitis B e antigen, and HBV load) after ART initiation increased from 7% in 1999 to 52% in 2001 (P<.001), whereas the percentage of patients who underwent HIV load testing remained at 80%-90% during the same period.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care providers treating patients with HIV infection during the period 1999-2003 infrequently monitored HBV response in coinfected patients, but they systematically monitored HIV response after ART initiation. Improved physician adherence to guidelines that better delineate HBV treatment and monitoring for patients with HIV-HBV coinfection is needed.

Management of chronic hepatitis B and C in HIV-coinfected patients

One-third of HIV-infected individuals worldwide suffer from chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, but chronic hepatitis C affects more than 75% of HIV-positive subjects infected parenterally, such as haemophiliacs and intravenous drug users. Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, on the other hand, occurs in 10% of HIV-infected persons, coinfection being more prevalent in Southeast Asia. There are two main reasons for considering HCV and HBV therapy as a priority in HIV-coinfected patients: first, the more rapid liver disease progression seen in this population, leading to end-stage liver disease complications, including hepatocellular carcinoma, at younger ages; and second, the higher risk of developing hepatotoxicity following the initiation of antiretroviral therapy in subjects with underlying chronic hepatitis than in HIV-monoinfected individuals. As highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has dramatically improved the prognosis of those with HIV disease, the consequences of associated illnesses such as hepatitis B and C, which are currently among the leading causes of hospital admission and death in the HIV-infected population, have become more relevant. Therefore, the adequate management of viral hepatitis should now be considered a priority in HIV-coinfected patients. Several guidelines have recently been released in response to this demand. In this article, we discuss the most critical issues highlighted in these documents.