Explore the vast range of titles available.

Ebola remains a global threat. In a randomized, controlled trial to assess the safety and immunogenicity of two vaccines against Ebola virus disease in Liberia, no safety signals were found. The vaccines elicited immune responses lasting at least 1 year.

Despite effective antiretroviral treatment (ART), HIV-positive individuals are at increased risk of serious non-AIDS conditions (cardiovascular, liver and renal disease, and cancers), perhaps due in part to ongoing inflammation and/or coagulation. To estimate the potential risk reduction in serious non-AIDS conditions or death from any cause that might be achieved with treatments that reduce inflammation and/or coagulation, we examined associations of interleukin-6 (IL-6), D-dimer, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels with serious non-AIDS conditions or death in 3 large cohorts. In HIV-positive adults on suppressive ART, associations of IL-6, D-dimer, and hsCRP levels at study entry with serious non-AIDS conditions or death were studied using Cox regression. Hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for age, gender, study, and regression dilution bias (due to within-person biomarker variability) were used to predict risk reductions in serious non-AIDS conditions or death associated with lower \"usual\" levels of IL-6 and D-dimer. Over 4.9 years of mean follow-up, 260 of the 3766 participants experienced serious non-AIDS conditions or death. IL-6, D-dimer and hsCRP were each individually associated with risk of serious non-AIDS conditions or death, HR = 1.45 (95% CI: 1.30 to 1.63), 1.28 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.44), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.26) per 2x higher biomarker levels, respectively. In joint models, IL-6 and D-dimer were independently associated with serious non-AIDS conditions or death, with consistent results across the 3 cohorts and across serious non-AIDS event types. The association of IL-6 and D-dimer with serious non-AIDS conditions or death was graded and persisted throughout follow-up. For 25% lower \"usual\" IL-6 and D-dimer levels, the joint biomarker model estimates a 37% reduction (95% CI: 28 to 46%) in the risk of serious non-AIDS conditions or death if the relationship is causal. Both IL-6 and D-dimer are independently associated with serious non-AIDS conditions or death among HIV-positive adults with suppressed virus. This suggests that treatments that reduce IL-6 and D-dimer levels might substantially decrease morbidity and mortality in patients on suppressive ART. Clinical trials are needed to test this hypothesis.

BackgroundThe Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment (START) trial demonstrated that immediate (at CD4+ >500 cells/µL) vs deferred (to CD4+ <350 cells/µL or AIDS) antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation reduced risk for AIDS and serious non-AIDS (SNA). We investigated associations of inflammation, coagulation, and vascular injury biomarkers with AIDS, SNA or death, and the effect of immediate ART initiation.MethodsBiomarkers were measured from stored plasma prior to randomization and at month 8. Associations of baseline biomarkers with event risk were estimated with Cox regression, pooled across groups, adjusted for age, gender, and treatment group, and stratified by region. Mean changes over 8 months were estimated and compared between the immediate and deferred ART arms using analysis of covariance models, adjusted for levels at entry.ResultsBaseline biomarker levels were available for 4299 START participants (92%). Mean follow-up was 3.2 years. Higher levels of IL-6 and D-dimer were the only biomarkers associated with risk for AIDS, SNA or death, as well as the individual components of SNA and AIDS events (HRs ranged 1.37–1.41 per 2-fold higher level), even after adjustment for baseline CD4+ count, HIV RNA level, and other biomarkers. At month 8, biomarker levels were lower in the immediate arm by 12%–21%.ConclusionsThese data, combined with evidence from prior biomarker studies, demonstrate that IL-6 and D-dimer consistently predict clinical risk across a broad spectrum of CD4 counts for those both ART-naïve and treated. Research is needed to identify disease-modifying treatments that target inflammation beyond the effects of ART.

Objectives. Health utility estimates from the current era of HIV treatment, critical for cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) informing HIV health policy, are limited. We examined peer-reviewed literature to assess the appropriateness of commonly referenced utilities, present previously unreported quality-of-life data from two studies, and discuss future implications for HIV-related CEA. Methods. We searched a database of cost-effectiveness analyses specific to HIV prevention efforts from 1999 to 2016 to identify the most commonly referenced sources for health utilities and to examine practices around using and reporting health utility data. Additionally, we present new utility estimates from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention’s Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) and the INSIGHT Strategies for Management of Anti-Retroviral Therapy (SMART) trial. We compare data collection time frames, sample characteristics, assessment methods, and key estimates. Results. Data collection for the most frequently cited utility estimates ranged from 1985 to 1997, predating modern HIV treatment. Reporting practices around utility weights are poor and lack details on participant characteristics, which may be important stratifying factors for CEA. More recent utility estimates derived from MMP and SMART were similar across CD4+ count strata and had a narrower range than pre–antiretroviral therapy (ART) utilities. Conclusions. Despite the widespread use of ART, cost-effectiveness analysis of HIV prevention interventions frequently apply pre-ART health utility weights. Use of utility weights reflecting the current state of the US epidemic are needed to best inform HIV research and public policy decisions. Improved practices around the selection, application, and reporting of health utility data used in HIV prevention CEA are needed to improve transparency.

The Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) Cross-Trial Statistics Group gathered lessons learned from statisticians responsible for the design and analysis of the 11 ACTIV therapeutic master protocols to inform contemporary trial design as well as preparation for a future pandemic. The ACTIV master protocols were designed to rapidly assess what treatments might save lives, keep people out of the hospital, and help them feel better faster. Study teams initially worked without knowledge of the natural history of disease and thus without key information for design decisions. Moreover, the science of platform trial design was in its infancy. Here, we discuss the statistical design choices made and the adaptations forced by the changing pandemic context. Lessons around critical aspects of trial design are summarized, and recommendations are made for the organization of master protocols in the future.

When to start antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection on the basis of the CD4+ count has been controversial. In a global randomized trial, treatment of patients with a CD4+ count of more than 500 cells per cubic millimeter showed significant benefit. The immune compromise caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is characterized by a loss of CD4+ T cells. Rates of HIV-associated complications and death increase as the number of these cells in peripheral blood (CD4+ count) declines. 1 – 3 It has been general practice to defer the initiation of antiretroviral therapy in asymptomatic patients with a CD4+ count above a certain threshold level. The applicable threshold has changed over time, and recommendations remain inconsistent across various guidelines. 4 Randomized studies that have assessed the benefits and risks of treating patients with HIV infection sooner rather than later have largely enrolled patients . . .

In a platform trial involving patients hospitalized with Covid-19, among 314 patients who were also being treated with remdesivir, those who received the monoclonal antibody LY-CoV555 did not have better pulmonary function at day 5 than those who received placebo. The trial was stopped for futility.

Background. Interleukin 6 (IL-6), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and D-dimer levels are linked to adverse outcomes in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, but the strength of their associations with different clinical end points warrants investigation. Methods. Participants receiving standard of care in 2 HIV trials with measured biomarker levels were followed to ascertain all-cause death, non-AIDS-related death, AIDS, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and non-AIDS-defining malignancies. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of each end point for quartiles and Iog₂ -transformed IL-6, hsCRP, and D-dimer levels were calculated using Cox models. Marginal models modelling multiple events tested for equal effects of biomarker levels on different end points. Results. Among 4304 participants, there were 157 all-cause deaths, 117 non-AIDS-related deaths, 101 AIDS cases, 121 CVD cases, and 99 non-AIDS-defining malignancies. IL-6 was more strongly associated with most end points, compared with hsCRP. IL-6 appeared to be a stronger predictor than D-dimer for CVD and non-AIDS-defining malignancies, but 95% CIs overlapped.Independent associations of IL-6 were stronger for non-AIDS-related death (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43-2.04) and all-cause death (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.33-1.84) and similar for CVD (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.12-1.62) and non-AIDS-defining malignancies (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.61). There was heterogeneity of IL-6 (P<.001) but not hsCRP (P=.15) or D-dimer (P=.20) as a predictor for different end points. Conclusions. IL-6 is a stronger predictor of fatal events than of CVD and non-AIDS-defining malignancies. Adjuvant antiinflammatory and antithrombotic therapies should be tested in HIV-infected individuals.

Passive immunotherapy using hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) to SARS-CoV-2, derived from recovered donors, is a potential rapidly available, specific therapy for an outbreak infection such as SARS-CoV-2. Findings from randomised clinical trials of hIVIG for the treatment of COVID-19 are limited. In this international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had been symptomatic for up to 12 days and did not have acute end-organ failure were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either hIVIG or an equivalent volume of saline as placebo, in addition to remdesivir, when not contraindicated, and other standard clinical care. Randomisation was stratified by site pharmacy; schedules were prepared using a mass-weighted urn design. Infusions were prepared and masked by trial pharmacists; all other investigators, research staff, and trial participants were masked to group allocation. Follow-up was for 28 days. The primary outcome was measured at day 7 by a seven-category ordinal endpoint that considered pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications and ranged from no limiting symptoms to death. Deaths and adverse events, including organ failure and serious infections, were used to define composite safety outcomes at days 7 and 28. Prespecified subgroup analyses were carried out for efficacy and safety outcomes by duration of symptoms, the presence of anti-spike neutralising antibodies, and other baseline factors. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, which included all randomly assigned participants who met eligibility criteria and received all or part of the assigned study product infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546581. From Oct 8, 2020, to Feb 10, 2021, 593 participants (n=301 hIVIG, n=292 placebo) were enrolled at 63 sites in 11 countries; 579 patients were included in the mITT analysis. Compared with placebo, the hIVIG group did not have significantly greater odds of a more favourable outcome at day 7; the adjusted OR was 1·06 (95% CI 0·77–1·45; p=0·72). Infusions were well tolerated, although infusion reactions were more common in the hIVIG group (18·6% vs 9·5% for placebo; p=0·002). The percentage with the composite safety outcome at day 7 was similar for the hIVIG (24%) and placebo groups (25%; OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·66–1·46; p=0·91). The ORs for the day 7 ordinal outcome did not vary for subgroups considered, but there was evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect for the day 7 composite safety outcome: risk was greater for hIVIG compared with placebo for patients who were antibody positive (OR 2·21, 95% CI 1·14–4·29); for patients who were antibody negative, the OR was 0·51 (0·29–0·90; pinteraction=0·001). When administered with standard of care including remdesivir, SARS-CoV-2 hIVIG did not demonstrate efficacy among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. The safety of hIVIG might vary by the presence of endogenous neutralising antibodies at entry. US National Institutes of Health.