Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Pitolisant for Residual Sleepiness Due to OSA

BACKGROUND

In people with OSA, excessive daytime sleepiness is a prominent symptom and can persist despite adherence to CPAP, the first-line therapy for OSA. Pitolisant was effective in reducing daytime sleepiness in two 12-week randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one in patients adherent to CPAP (BF2.649 in Patients With OSA and Treated by CPAP But Still Complaining of EDS [HAROSA 1]) and the other in patients refusing or not tolerating CPAP (BF2.649 in Patients With OSA, Still Complaining of EDS and Refusing to be Treated by CPAP [HAROSA 2]).

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does the efficacy and safety of pitolisant persist when these patients take it long-term?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

All adults included in the HAROSA 1 and HAROSA 2 RCTs (both pitolisant and placebo arms) were offered pitolisant (up to 20 mg/d) after completion of the short-term double-anonymized phase (ie, from week 13) in an open-label cohort study. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in Epworth Sleepiness Scale score between baseline and week 52. Safety outcomes were treatment-emergent adverse event(s) (TEAE[s]), serious TEAEs, and special interest TEAEs.

RESULTS

Out of 512 adults included in the two RCTs, 376 completed the 1-year follow-up. The pooled mean difference in Epworth Sleepiness Scale score from baseline to 1 year for the intention-to-treat sample was -8.0 (95% CI, -8.3 to -7.5). The overall proportions of TEAEs, serious TEAEs, and TEAEs of special interest were 35.1%, 2.0%, and 11.1%, respectively, without any significant difference between patients in the initial pitolisant and placebo arms. No cardiovascular safety issues were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Pitolisant is effective in reducing daytime sleepiness over 1 year in adults with OSA, with or without CPAP treatment. Taken for 1 year, it has a good safety profile (including cardiovascular).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; Nos.: NCT01071876 and NCT01072968; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children aged 6 years or older with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Narcolepsy is a life-long disorder characterised by excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy, often arising in childhood or adolescence. Pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist, has been approved in Europe and USA for adults with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy, with a favourable safety profile. This phase 3 study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy.

METHODS

For this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multisite study, we recruited patients aged 6-17 years with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy in 11 sleep centres in five countries (Italy, France, Netherlands, Russia, and Finland). Participants were required to have a Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale score of 15 or greater and to have not received psychostimulants for at least 14 days before enrolment; participants who needed anticataplectics (including sodium oxybate) were required to have been on a stable dose for at least 1 month. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with pitolisant or placebo in a 2:1 ratio at the end of screening. Randomisation was stratified by study centre and treatment was allocated using an interactive web response system. After a 4-week screening period including a 2-week baseline period, patients entered in a 4-week individual up-titration scheme from 5 mg a day to a maximum of 40 mg a day of pitolisant or placebo; treatment was administered at a stable dose for 4 weeks, followed by a 1-week placebo period. For the primary analysis, we assessed pitolisant versus placebo using change in the Ullanlinna Narcolepsy Scale (UNS) total score from baseline to the end of double-blind period in the full analysis set, defined as all randomly allocated patients who received at least one dose of treatment and who had at least one baseline UNS value. A decrease in the UNS total score reflects a reduction in both excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. All adverse events were assessed in the safety population, defined as all participants who took at least one dose of study medication. An open-label follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02611687.

FINDINGS

Between June 6, 2016, and April 3, 2021, we screened 115 participants and 110 were randomly assigned (mean age 12·9 [SD 3·0] years, 61 [55%] male, and 90 [82%] with cataplexy; 72 assigned to pitolisant and 38 to placebo); 107 (70 receiving pitolisant and 37 receiving placebo) completed the double-blind period. The mean adjusted difference in UNS total score from baseline to the end of the double-blind period was -6·3 (SE 1·1) in the pitolisant group and -2·6 (1·4) in the placebo group (least squares mean difference -3·7; 95% CI -6·4 to -1·0, p=0·007). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 22 (31%) of 72 patients in the pitolisant group and 13 (34%) of 38 patients in the placebo group. The most frequently reported adverse events (affecting ≥5% of patients) in either group were headache (14 [19%] in the pitolisant group and three [8%] in the placebo group) and insomnia (five [7%] in the pitolisant group and one [3%] in the placebo group).

INTERPRETATION

Pitolisant treatment resulted in an improvement in narcolepsy symptoms in children, although the UNS was not validated for use in children with narcolepsy when our study began. The safety profile was similar to that reported in adults but further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety.

FUNDING

Bioprojet.

Pitolisant for Residual Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in OSA Patients Adhering to CPAP: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in individuals with OSA syndrome persisting despite good adherence to CPAP is a disabling condition. Pitolisant is a selective histamine H3-receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is pitolisant effective and safe for reducing daytime sleepiness in individuals with moderate to severe OSA adhering to CPAP treatment but experiencing residual EDS?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was titrated individually at up to 20 mg/day and taken over 12 weeks. The primary end point was change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary end points were maintenance of wakefulness assessed by the Oxford Sleep Resistance Test, Clinical Global Impressions scale of severity, the patient's global opinion, EuroQoL quality-of-life questionnaire score, Pichot fatigue questionnaire score, and safety.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-four OSA participants (82.8% men; mean age, 53.1 years; mean Apnea Hypopnea Index with CPAP, 4.2/h; baseline ESS score, 14.7) were randomized to pitolisant (n = 183) or placebo (n = 61). ESS significantly decreased with pitolisant compared with placebo (-2.6; 95% CI, -3.9 to -1.4; P < .001), and the rate of responders to therapy (ESS ≤ 10 or change in ESS ≥ 3) was significantly higher with pitolisant (71.0% vs 54.1%; P = .013). Adverse event occurrence (mainly headache and insomnia) was higher in the pitolisant group compared with the placebo group (47.0% and 32.8%, respectively; P = .03). No cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Pitolisant used as adjunct to CPAP therapy for OSA with residual sleepiness despite good CPAP adherence significantly reduced subjective and objective sleepiness and improved participant-reported outcomes and physician-reported disease severity.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01071876; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov; EudraCT N°: 2009-017248-14; URL: eudract.ema.europa.eu.

Pitolisant for Daytime Sleepiness in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Who Refuse Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Treatment. A Randomized Trial

Rationale: Excessive daytime sleepiness is a common disabling symptom in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects, for the treatment of daytime sleepiness in patients with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea refusing continuous positive airway pressure treatment.

Methods: In an international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was individually titrated at up to 20 mg/d over 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score. Key secondary endpoints were maintenance of wakefulness assessed on the basis of the Oxford Sleep Resistance test, safety, Clinical Global Impression of severity, patient’s global opinion, EuroQol quality-of-life questionnaire, and Pichot fatigue questionnaire.

Measurements and Main Results: A total of 268 patients with obstructive sleep apnea (75% male; mean age, 52 yr; apnea–hypopnea index, 49/h; baseline sleepiness score, 15.7) were randomized (200 to pitolisant and 68 to placebo) and analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale score was reduced more with pitolisant than with placebo (−2.8; 95% confidence interval, −4.0 to −1.5; P < 0.001). Wake maintenance tests were not improved. The Pichot fatigue score was reduced with pitolisant. The overall impact of pitolisant was confirmed by both physicians’ and patients’ questionnaires. Adverse event incidence, mainly headache, insomnia, nausea, and vertigo, was similar in the pitolisant and placebo groups (29.5% and 25.4%, respectively), with no cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns.

Conclusions: Pitolisant significantly reduced self-reported daytime sleepiness and fatigue and improved patient-reported outcomes and physician disease severity assessment in sleepy patients with obstructive sleep apnea refusing or nonadherent to continuous positive airway pressure.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01072968) and EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2009-017251-94).

Long-term use of pitolisant to treat patients with narcolepsy: Harmony III Study

Study Objectives

To asses the long-term safety and efficacy of pitolisant, an histamine H3-receptor antagonist, on narcolepsy.

Methods

This open-label, single-arm, pragmatic study, recruited adult patients with narcolepsy and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score ≥12. After a titration period, patients were treated for up to 1 year with oral pitolisant once-a-day at up to 40 mg. Concomitant stimulants and anti-cataplectic agents were allowed. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included ESS, cataplexy, and other diary parameters.

Results

Patients (n = 102, 75 with cataplexy) received pitolisant, for the first time in 73 of them. Sixty-eight patients (51 with cataplexy) completed the 12-month treatment. Common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache (11.8% of patients), insomnia (8.8%), weight gain (7.8%), anxiety (6.9%), depressive symptoms (4.9%), and nausea (4.9%). Seven patients had a serious adverse effect, unrelated to pitolisant except for a possibly related miscarriage. One-third of patients stopped pitolisant, mostly (19.6%) for insufficient benefit. ESS score decreased by 4.6 ± 0.6. Two-thirds of patients completing the treatment were responders (ESS ≤ 10 or ESS decrease ≥ 3), and one third had normalized ESS (≤10). Complete and partial cataplexy, hallucinations, sleep paralysis, and sleep attacks were reduced by 76%, 65%, 54%, 63%, and 27%, respectively. Pitolisant as monotherapy (43% of patients) was better tolerated and more efficacious on ESS than on add-on, but efficacy was maintained in this last case.

Conclusions

Long-term safety and efficacy of pitolisant on daytime sleepiness, cataplexy, hallucinations, and sleep paralysis is confirmed.

Safety and efficacy of pitolisant on cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Histaminergic neurons are crucial to maintain wakefulness, but their role in cataplexy is unknown. We assessed the safety and efficacy of pitolisant, a histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist, for treatment of cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy.

METHODS

For this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial we recruited patients with narcolepsy from 16 sleep centres in nine countries (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine). Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with narcolepsy with cataplexy according to version two of the International Classification of Sleep Disorders criteria, experienced at least three cataplexies per week, and had excessive daytime sleepiness (defined as an Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≥12). We used a computer-generated sequence via an interactive web response system to randomly assign patients to receive either pitolisant or placebo once per day (1:1 ratio). Randomisation was done in blocks of four. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Treatment lasted for 7 weeks: 3 weeks of flexible dosing decided by investigators according to efficacy and tolerance (5 mg, 10 mg, or 20 mg oral pitolisant), followed by 4 weeks of stable dosing (5 mg, 10 mg, 20 mg, or 40 mg). The primary endpoint was the change in the average number of cataplexy attacks per week as recorded in patient diaries (weekly cataplexy rate [WCR]) between the 2 weeks of baseline and the 4 weeks of stable dosing period. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01800045.

FINDINGS

The trial was done between April 19, 2013, and Jan 28, 2015. We screened 117 patients, 106 of whom were randomly assigned to treatment (54 to pitolisant and 52 to placebo) and, after dropout, 54 patients from the pitolisant group and 51 from the placebo group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The WCR during the stable dosing period compared with baseline was decreased by 75% (WCR_final=2·27; WCR_baseline=9·15; WCR_{final/baseline}=0·25) in patients who received pitolisant and 38% (WCR_final=4·52; WCR_baseline=7·31; WCR_{final/baseline}=0·62) in patients who received placebo (rate ratio 0·512; 95% CI 0·43-0·60, p<0·0001). Treatment-related adverse events were significantly more common in the pitolisant group than in the placebo group (15 [28%] of 54 vs 6 [12%] of 51; p=0·048). There were no serious adverse events, but one case of severe nausea in the pitolisant group. The most frequent adverse events in the pitolisant group (headache, irritability, anxiety, and nausea) were mild or moderate except one case of severe nausea. No withdrawal syndrome was detected following pitolisant treatment; one case was detected in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

Pitolisant was well tolerated and efficacious in reducing cataplexy. If confirmed in long-term studies, pitolisant might constitute a useful first-line therapy for cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy, for whom there are currently few therapeutic options.

FUNDING

Bioprojet, France.

Diffuse large and small bowel necrosis in catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome

The catastrophic variant is an accelerated form of the antiphospholipid syndrome resulting in multiorgan failure because of multiple small vessel occlusions. We report a case of catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome in a patient with subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus and ischemic bowel, who presented with acute abdominal pain due to diffuse right colon and small bowel necrosis requiring large resection, associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome, thrombocytopenia and disseminated intravascular coagulation. Histopathological examination of resected tissues showed diffuse arteriolar and venous thrombosis but no vasculitis, and mesenteric artery lumen severely narrowed by intimal fibrosis. The patient died 15 days after admission despite treatment with anticoagulation, steroids, continuous hemofiltration and plasma exchange. Ischemic bowel and diffuse intestinal necrosis may be secondary to the antiphospholipid syndrome, and a high level of suspicion and an early diagnosis are required.

Triple Nucleoside Combination Zidovudine/Lamivudine/Abacavir versus Zidovudine/Lamivudine/Nelfinavir as First-Line Therapy in HIV-1-Infected Adults: A Randomized Trial

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of a triple nucleoside combination to a protease inhibitor-containing triple regimen as first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in HIV-1-infected patients.

Design

Open-label study in HIV-1-infected ART-naive adults, randomized to receive either Combivir® (lamivudine 150 mg/zidovudine 300 mg twice daily) + abacavir (300 mg twice daily), or Combivir® + nelfinavir (750 mg every 8 h) for 48 weeks. Plasma HIV-1 RNA, CD4 cell count and adverse events were assessed at baseline and weeks 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40 and 48.

Results

195 subjects (131 men, 64 women), median age 34 years, were randomized: 98 received combivir/abacavir and 97 combivir/nelfinavir. Baseline median plasma HIV-1 RNA was 4.2 log10 copies/ml [Interquartile range (IQR): 3.7-4.5.2] and 4.1 log10 copies/ml (IQR: 3.8–4.6), respectively. Baseline median CD4 cell count was 387 cells/mm3 (IQR: 194–501) and 449 cells/mm3 (IQR: 334–605), respectively. Nine patients (3 vs 6, respectively) did not start treatment or did not have any available efficacy data. At week 48, using the intent to treat analysis (switch/missing equals failure), plasma HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies/ml in 54/95 (57%) and 53/91 (58%) of subjects, respectively. Median CD4 increase was +110 and +120 cells/mm3, respectively. Possible hypersensitivity reactions to abacavir were reported in four subjects (4%).

Conclusion

The triple nucleoside combination combivir/abacavir is well tolerated as a first-line ART regimen in HIV-1-infected adults, with comparable antiviral activity to a nelfinavir-containing regimen at week 48.

[Prophylactic prescription of low-molecular-weight heparin in the non-surgical setting: impact of recommendations]

OBJECTIVE

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) had official approval for use for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis only for surgery patients when this survey was conducted, but were nevertheless often used in non-surgery patients. We conducted this "before and after" survey from May 1998 to April 1999 to assess the impact of the recommendations implemented in the beginning of 1999.

METHODS

Data on the use of LMWH were collected on three different days within a three week interval in all non-surgery departments at the Tenon hospital before distribution of expert recommendations early in 1999. Published in La Presse Médicale in January 2000, these recommendations issued from an external panel of 43 experts who were contacted to establish a consensus opinion using the Delphi method. Data were again collected on three different days after implementation of the recommendations. Implementation was based on a patient-specific prescription order form requested by the hospital pharmacy for delivery to the department.

RESULTS

Data were collected for 121 prescriptions prior to the recommendations and for 158 after. Sex-ratio, mean age and percentage of LMWH prescriptions did not differ significantly between the two periods. There was a lower number of non-appropriate prescriptions after implementation of the recommendations from 54.5% to 35.4% (p = 0.01) with better conformity for recommendation A (high-risk patients) (36% versus 43%, NS) and for recommendation B (= 2 risk situations or = 1 risk situation and = 2 aggravating factors) (10% versus 22%, p = 0.01). Better conformity of LMWH prescriptions in oncology and radiotherapy departments partially explained this general improvement, but the difference remained significant when excluding these two departments (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that physician compliance with recognized expert recommendations can improve their implementation. This procedure is now in general use in the Tenon hospital.

Long-term outcome and treatment modifications in a prospective cohort of human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients on triple-drug antiretroviral regimens. Triest Cohort Investigators

We designed a cohort in order to assess the long-term effects of triple-drug antiretroviral combinations in 608 patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). We recruited patients who had been previously treated with nucleoside analogues as well as treatment-naive patients who were starting triple-drug antiretroviral combinations consisting of nucleoside analogues, either alone or in combination with a protease inhibitor. After a median follow-up time of 22 months, the incidence rates of acquired immune deficiency syndrome-defining events and death were, respectively, 6.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3-8.8) and 2.9 (95% CI, 1.9-4.2) per 100 person-years. Advanced clinical stage of disease (P=.004), a low CD4(+) cell count (P=.002), and a low quality-of-life score (P=.001) at baseline were independent predictors of clinical progression. The initial triple-drug combination was modified a total of 647 times in 321 patients. The only independent predictor of treatment modification was previous exposure to a nucleoside analogue in patients who did not receive a new nucleoside analogue at inclusion (P=.001). Plasma HIV RNA values below 500 copies/mL were obtained in 88% of the treatment-naive patients and in 57% of the previously treated patients (P<.001). Compared with previously treated patients who received > or = 1 new nucleoside analogue at enrollment, previously treated patients who did not receive a new nucleoside analogue at enrollment were twice as likely to have plasma HIV RNA values >500 copies/mL at the last visit (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.8), and the antiretroviral-naive patients were significantly less likely to have plasma HIV RNA values >500 copies/mL at the last visit (adjusted OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.4).

AIDS-related Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in the era of adjunctive steroids: implication of BAL neutrophilia

Factors predictive of mortality in patients with AIDS and Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) were identified before the introduction of adjunctive steroids, but they have not been reevaluated since. Because PCP still occurs in AIDS, remaining fatal in some cases, we conducted a multivariate analysis of factors predicting mortality in patients with HIV-positive PCP managed from 1990 to 1995, i.e., after the consensus conference on the use of adjunctive steroids. The predictive value of clinical, laboratory, and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) data at admission and during the course of PCP was studied retrospectively using multivariate methods, in 144 patients with AIDS. Overall mortality was 21.5%. The univariate analysis identified seven factors predictive of 90-d mortality: Pa(O(2)) on room air < 60 mm Hg, lactate dehydrogenase > 1,000 IU, albuminemia < 30 g/L, BAL neutrophilia > 10%, nosocomial infection, pneumothorax, and a need for mechanical ventilation. Four of these factors were independently associated with 90-d mortality in the multivariate analysis; among them, two were evaluable at admission, namely, Pa(O(2)) < 60 mm Hg on room air and BAL neutrophilia > 10%, and two during hospitalization, namely, the development of pneumothorax and a need for mechanical ventilation. Moreover, BAL neutrophilia was correlated to occurrence of pneumothorax and a need for mechanical ventilation. In the era of adjunctive steroid use, AIDS-related PCP remains fairly common. Two independent factors evaluable at admission, Pa(O(2)) on room air and BAL neutrophilia, are predictive of death.

Sonography in AIDS-related cholangitis: prevalence and cause of an echogenic nodule in the distal end of the common bile duct

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and cause of an echogenic nodule in the distal end of the common bile duct seen on sonograms in patients who have AIDS-related cholangitis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Sonograms of the liver and bile ducts were obtained in 15 patients who had AIDS-related cholangitis. Both 3.75- and 5-MHz transducers were used in all patients. The appearance of an echogenic nodule in the distal end of the common bile duct was compared with the results of endoscopic retrograde cholangiograms in 12 patients and with biopsies of the papilla of Vater in the first five cases.

RESULTS

Sonograms showed a hyperechoic nodule in the distal end of the common bile duct in 10 of the 15 cases. Visualization was improved after oral administration of water. The finding correlated with edema of the papilla of Vater noted on retrograde cholangiograms in eight cases. Biopsy of the papilla of Vater in five cases showed an inflammatory infiltrate. The nodule became smaller in one patient when cholestasis improved after treatment for cryptosporidiosis.

CONCLUSION

An echogenic nodule was detected in the distal end of the common bile duct on sonograms in two thirds of patients who had AIDS-related cholangitis. Our findings suggest the abnormality is caused by edema of the papilla of Vater.

[Treatment with doxycycline and nifuroxazide of Isospora belli infection in AIDS]

Isospora belli infection is the most frequent coccidiosis after cryptosporidiosis in AIDS patients. Chronic watery diarrhea is observed. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is the recommended treatment. Four AIDS patients were intolerant to this drug and were treated with doxycycline and nifuroxazide. Three patients were cured. Two patients died of other infections. The two last patients relapsed and were treated again with long term doxycycline. No relapse occurred during the following twelve months.

[Infectious esophagitis in HIV infection]

Infectious oesophagitis is the most frequent of digestive tract diseases occurring in patients with AIDS. It is diagnosed by endoscopy which permits brushing and biopsy of mucosal lesions for cytological, histological and microbiological examinations. In 40 to 50 percent of HIV positive patients, Candida is responsible for oesophagitis which is often asymptomatic and almost regularly associated with oral candidiasis. Brushing is preferable to biopsy to confirm a diagnosis which is frequently obvious at endoscopy. The prevalence of CMV and HSV oesophagitis has perhaps been underestimated. Diagnosis rests on the finding of intranuclear inclusions, usually in endothelial cells of the chorion for CMV and in epithelial cells for HSV. The demonstration of viral antigens by immunoperoxidase staining is useful in difficult cases, as is viral culture. Antiviral agents (gancyclovir against CMV, acyclovir against HSV) are usually effective. Co-infection with both Candida and a virus is not uncommon. The other pathogens, such as bacteria or mycobacteria, are exceptional. The authors suggest a therapeutic strategy taking into account epidemiological and clinical data.