eGFR-EPI changes among HIV patients who switch from F/TDF to F/TAF while maintaining the same third agent in the Spanish VACH cohort

Background: Evidence from clinical practice on the effects of switching from emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) to emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF)-based triple-therapy (TT) regimens on renal parameters is limited.Objective: This retrospective analysis evaluated the effects on renal function of switching from F/TDF to F/TAF-based TT regimens with no change in third agent among people living with HIV (PLWH).Methods: Data were from a multicenter Spanish PLWH cohort. Patients with a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR-EPI) measurement, ≥1 follow-up measurement, ≥30 days treatment with F/TAF, and who switched from F/TDF to F/TAF with no change in third agent were included. Multivariate mixed linear models were used to evaluate change from baseline over time in eGFR-EPI. eGFR-EPI changes before and after switch were analyzed in a matched patient subgroup.Results: Overall, 340 patients were included. Mean (95% CI) eGFR-EPI in patients with baseline eGFR-EPI <90 ml/min/1.73m² (n = 125) was 79.6 (78.0; 81.2) ml/min/1.73m² at baseline and 81.3 (79.9; 82.7) ml/min/1.73m² at 12 months after switch. In the patient-matched subgroup (n = 175), median annual eGFR-EPI declined -4.24 ml/min/1.73m² while on F/TDF and increased +0.93 ml/min/1.73m² after switch to F/TAF (P < 0.0001). In patients with baseline eGFR-EPI <90 ml/min/1.73m², median annual eGFR-EPI increased +4.19 mL/min/1.73m² after switch (P < 0.0001).Conclusion: Switching from F/TDF to F/TAF-based TT regimens while maintaining the same third agent numerically improved eGFR-EPI in PLWH with baseline eGFR-EPI <90 mL/min/1.73m². eGFR-EPI improved significantly when comparing progression while on F/TDF vs progression after switch, confirming beneficial renal effects of switching to F/TAF in a clinical practice setting.

Remdesivir Versus Standard-of-Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection: An Analysis of 28-Day Mortality

Background

Remdesivir is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been shown to shorten time to recovery and improve clinical outcomes in randomized trials.

Methods

This was the final day 28 comparative analysis of data from a phase 3, randomized, open-label study comparing 2 remdesivir regimens (5 vs 10 days, combined for this analysis [remdesivir cohort]) and a real-world retrospective longitudinal cohort study of patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (nonremdesivir cohort). Eligible patients, aged ≥18 years, had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score matching (up to 1:10 ratio) was used to ensure comparable populations. We assessed day 14 clinical recovery (determined using a 7-point ordinal scale) and day 28 all-cause mortality (coprimary endpoints).

Results

A total of 368 (remdesivir) and 1399 (nonremdesivir) patients were included in the matched analysis. The day 14 clinical recovery rate was significantly higher among the remdesivir versus the nonremdesivir cohort (65.2% vs 57.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16–1.90; P = 0.002). The day 28 mortality rate was significantly lower in the remdesivir cohort versus the nonremdesivir cohort (12.0% vs 16.2%; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47–.95; P = .03).

Conclusions

Remdesivir was associated with significantly higher rates of day 14 clinical recovery, and lower day 28 mortality, compared with standard-of-care treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These data, taken together, support the use of remdesivir to improve clinical recovery and decrease mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Real world effectiveness of standard of care triple therapy versus two-drug combinations for treatment of people living with HIV

Background

Since 1996, the standard of care (SOC) therapy for HIV treatment has consisted of a backbone of two nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) paired with a third agent. Use of two-drug combinations (2DC) has been considered for selected patients to avoid toxicities associated with the use of NRTIs. This study aimed to compare the real-world outcomes of integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-containing triple therapy (TT) to dolutegravir- (DTG) and/or boosted protease inhibitor (bPI)-based 2DC in a large Spanish cohort of HIV patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed using data from the VACH cohort, a prospective multicentre Spanish cohort of adult HIV patients. All treatment experienced patients initiating a TT of an INSTI combined with two NRTIs or a 2DC-containing DTG and/or a bPI between 01/01/2012 and 01/06/2017 were included. The unit of analysis was patient-regimens. The overall sample analysis was complemented with two sub-analyses. The first sub-analysis focused on patients treated with a backbone plus DTG compared to those treated with DTG+ one other antiretroviral. The second sub-analysis focused on patients with HIV RNA<50 copies/mL at baseline, irrespective of the regimen used. The following endpoints were assessed: time to discontinuation for any reason, time to switch due to virologic failure, and time to switch due to toxicity (reasons for discontinuation according to clinician report in the database). Time-to-event analyses were conducted using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and Cox regression models.

Results

Overall 7,481 patients were included in the analysis, contributing to 9,243 patient-regimens. Patient characteristics at baseline differed among groups, with the 2DC group being significantly older and having a higher proportion of women, a longer time on ART and a higher number of previous virologic failures. Median (95% Confidence Interval [C.I.]) time to switch was 2.5 years (2.3, 2.7) in 2DC group versus 2.9 years (2.7, 3.0) in TT. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% C.I.) for discontinuation due to any reason, virologic failure and toxicity in the 2DC vs TT group were 1.29 (1.15; 1.44), 2.06 (1.54; 2.77) and 1.18 (0.94; 1.48), respectively. Results were consistent in the two sub-analyses.

Conclusion

In this analysis, time to discontinuation and probability of remaining free of virologic failure were significantly higher in patients on INSTI-based TT compared to DTG- and/or bPI-containing 2DC, with no differences in toxicity.

Remdesivir for Severe COVID-19 versus a Cohort Receiving Standard of Care

Background

We compared the efficacy of the antiviral agent, remdesivir, versus standard-of-care treatment in adults with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using data from a phase 3 remdesivir trial and a retrospective cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with standard of care.

Methods

GS-US-540–5773 is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing two courses of remdesivir (remdesivir-cohort). GS-US-540–5807 is an ongoing real-world, retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes in patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (non-remdesivir-cohort). Inclusion criteria were similar between studies: patients had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, were hospitalized, had oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, and had pulmonary infiltrates. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the treatment effect of remdesivir versus standard of care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with recovery on day 14, dichotomized from a 7-point clinical status ordinal scale. A key secondary endpoint was mortality.

Results

After the inverse probability of treatment weighting procedure, 312 and 818 patients were counted in the remdesivir- and non-remdesivir-cohorts, respectively. At day 14, 74.4% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had recovered versus 59.0% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.03: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34–3.08, P < .001). At day 14, 7.6% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had died versus 12.5% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (aOR 0.38, 95% CI: .22–.68, P = .001).

Conclusions

In this comparative analysis, by day 14, remdesivir was associated with significantly greater recovery and 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care treatment in patients with severe COVID-19.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

Comorbidities and costs in HIV patients: A retrospective claims database analysis in Germany

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) are at high risk of developing non-HIV related comorbidities, particularly at older ages. In a retrospective claims database analysis, we compared PLHIV to a matched, non-HIV cohort to assess the prevalence of comorbidities and healthcare costs in PLHIV and the general non-HIV population in Germany. In total, 2,132 adult patients with HIV were identified in the InGef research database with HIV ICD-10 diagnosis within each year from 2011 to 2014. Of these, 1,969 could be matched to a control cohort of 3,938 individuals (1:2 ratio). Matching criteria included age, gender and socio-economic variables. The prevalence of acute renal disease (0.5% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.045), bone fractures due to osteoporosis (6.4% vs. 2.1%, p<0.001), chronic renal disease (4.3% vs. 2.4%, p<0.001), cardiovascular disease (12.8% vs. 10.4%, p = 0.006), Hepatitis B (5.9% vs. 0.3%, p<0.001) and Hepatitis C infection (8.8% vs. 0.3%, p<0.001) was significantly higher in PLHIV compared to the matched non-HIV cohort. Mean costs excluding costs for antiretroviral therapy (ART) were significantly higher in the HIV cohort (8,049€ vs. 3,658€, p<0.05). On average, PLHIV incurred excess costs of 16,441€ for ART, 2,747€ for pharmaceuticals excluding ART (p<0.05), 1,441€ for outpatient care (p<0.05) and 321€ for inpatient care (p<0.05). Devices and remedies’ costs were significantly higher in the control cohort with excess costs of 113€ (p<0.05). Considering mean total costs, excluding ART, excess costs for PLHIV amounted to 8,049€ (p<0.05). This analysis demonstrated an increased comorbidity and economic burden of PLHIV compared to matched controls. Our findings suggest that HIV remains an area of high unmet medical need. To improve patient outcomes, adequate HIV management including regular monitoring, screening for comorbidities and optimal ART selection throughout the life course of PLHIV are of key importance.

Evolution of major non-HIV-related comorbidities in HIV-infected patients in the Italian Cohort of Individuals, Naïve for Antiretrovirals (ICONA) Foundation Study cohort in the period 2004-2014

OBJECTIVES

The management of HIV disease is complicated by the incidence of a new spectrum of comorbid noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). It is important to document changes in the prevalence of NCDs over time. The aim of the study was to describe the impact of ageing on HIV markers and on the prevalence of NCDs in people living with HIV (PLWHIV) in the Italian Cohort of Individuals, Naïve for Antiretrovirals (ICONA) seen for care in 2004-2014.

METHODS

Analyses were conducted separately for a closed cohort (same people seen at both times) and an open cohort (all people under follow-up). We used the χ² test for categorical factors and the Wilcoxon test for quantitative factors to compare profiles over time.

RESULTS

The closed cohort included 1517 participants and the open cohort 3668 under follow-up in 2004 and 6679 in 2014. The median age of the open cohort was 41 [interquartile range (IQR) 37-46] years in 2004 and 44 (IQR 36-52) years in 2014. Analysis of the closed cohort showed an increase in the prevalence of some NCDs [the prevalence of dyslipidaemia increased from 75% in 2004 to 91% in 2014, that of hypertension from 67 to 84%, and that of cardiovascular disease (CVD) from 18 to 32%] and a decrease in renal function (5% with eGFR < 60 mL/min per 1.73 m² in 2004 versus 30% in 2014); the percentage of people in the high-risk group for the Framingham CHD score more than tripled (from 13 to 45%). Results in the open cohort were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of NCDs in our PLWHIV population markedly worsened over a 10-year time-span, which is likely to be a result of the effects of both ageing and HIV infection as well as their interaction. Special attention must be given to the management and prevention of NCDs.