Explore the vast range of titles available.

Maraviroc treatment for HIV-1 infected patients results in larger CD4(+) T cell rises than are attributable to its antiviral activity alone. We investigated whether this is due to modulation of T cell activation and inflammation. Thirty maraviroc-treated patients from the Maraviroc versus Efavirenz Regimens as Initial Therapy (MERIT) study were randomly selected from among those who had CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV on screening and achieved undetectable HIV RNA (<50 copies/mL) by Week 48. Efavirenz-treated controls were matched for baseline characteristics to the maraviroc-treated patients selected for this substudy. Changes in immune activation and inflammation markers were examined for associations with CD4(+) T cell changes. Maraviroc treatment tended to result in more rapid decreases in CD38 expression on CD4(+) T cells and in plasma D-dimer concentrations than did treatment with efavirenz. The proportion of patients with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein >2 µg/mL increased from 45% to 66% in the efavirenz arm, but remained constant in the maraviroc arm (P = 0.033). Decreases in CD38 expression on CD8(+) T cells were correlated with CD4(+) T cell rises for maraviroc treatment (r = -0.4, P = 0.048), but not for treatment with efavirenz. Maraviroc-treated patients had earlier, modest decreases in certain markers of immune activation and inflammation, although in this small study, many of the differences were not statistically significant. Levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein remained constant in the maraviroc arm and increased in the efavirenz arm. Decreases in immune activation correlated with increased CD4(+) T cell gains. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00098293.

Background. A tropism test is required before administration of the antiretroviral drug maraviroc. However, plasma RNA testing is not possible in patients with undetectable plasma viral loads. Here we assess genotypic testing of cellular human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) DNA from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) to predict virologic responses in treatment-experienced patients beginning maraviroc-containing regimens. Methods. PBMC samples from 181 maraviroc recipients at study entry in MOTIVATE or A4001029 (51% R5 by original Trofile). The V3 loop was amplified in triplicate from cellular HIV DNA, and matching plasma RNA (n = 156). Sequencing was performed using standard population-based methods and next-generation deep sequencing, with tropism assessment as previously defined. Results. Genotypic DNA-based tropism testing from the cellular compartment had 78%–81% sensitivity relative to RNA-based Trofile at the same time point. Cell-based genotypic tropism methods and plasma-based phenotypic and genotypic methods were predictive of virologic response. However, when classifications were discordant, the outcomes favored the plasma predictions over the DNA ones. Conclusions. Genotypic determination of HIV tropism can be performed using cell-derived viral DNA, and is a predictor of virologic success on maraviroc in therapy-experienced patients. However, the PBMC compartment appears to be a suboptimal predictor compared to plasma.

Pneumonia remains the leading cause of death in young children. The poor specificity of chest radiographs (CXRs) to diagnose pneumococcal pneumonia may underestimate the efficacy of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in preventing pneumococcal pneumonia. The efficacy of nine-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine among children not infected with HIV (21%; 95% confidence interval, 1%-37%) increased when CXR-confirmed pneumonia was associated with serum C-reactive protein of 120 mg/l (12 mg/dl) or more and procalcitonin of 5.0 ng/ml or more (64%; 95% confidence interval, 23%-83%). Similar results were observed in children infected with HIV. C-reactive protein and procalcitonin improve the specificity of CXR to diagnose pneumococcal pneumonia and may be useful for the future evaluation of the effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in preventing pneumococcal pneumonia.

Introduction MODERN (A4001095) was the first prospective phase 3 study comparing genotype vs phenotype (Trofile™) tropism assessments. Materials and Methods Treatment‐naïve adults with HIV‐1 RNA >1000 copies/mL were randomized 1:1 at screening to either genotype or Trofile for tropism assessment. Genotype was determined using the geno2pheno algorithm to assess triplicate HIV‐1 gp120 V3 loop sequences (plasma); false‐positive rate=10%. R5‐virus‐infected subjects were then randomized 1:1 to receive Maraviroc (MVC) 150 mg QD or Truvada 200/300 mg QD each with DRV/r 800/100 mg QD. Tropism of screening samples from enrolled subjects was also retrospectively determined using the alternate testing method. Positive predictive values (PPV) were estimated by%R5 subjects with Week 48 HIV‐1 RNA < 50 c/mL. PPV for each assay was estimated using the response rate among those randomized to that assay and using model‐based response estimates in those with R5 by that assay (at screening or retest). Results The observed response rate was 146/181 (80.7%) for genotype vs 160/215 (74.4%) for Trofile (stratification adjusted difference=6.9%, 95% CI 1.3% to 15%). The model‐based estimates of PPV (±SE) were 79.1% (±2.42) and 76.3% (±2.38), respectively (difference = 2.8%, 95% CI −2.1% to 7.2%). There was no difference in response rate between assays in the Truvada arm (observed difference=− 0.1%, 95% CI −6.8% to 6.6%). Most enrolled subjects had R5 results at screening using both assays (285/396 (72%)), and of these subjects, 79.3% (226/285) had HIV‐1 RNA <50 c/mL at week 48 (Table 1). The few subjects classified as non‐R5 by the alternate assay had similar virologic responses to the concordant R5 group. Conclusion There was a higher MVC response rate and model‐based positive predictive value with genotype compared to Trofile, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. The majority of subjects had concordant R5 tropism results. Either phenotype or genotype can effectively predict MVC response.

Background. The MERIT (Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients) study compared maraviroc and efavirenz, both with zidovudine-lamivudine, in antiretroviral-naive patients with R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Methods. Patients screened for R5 HIV-1 were randomized to receive efavirenz (600 mg once daily) or maraviroc (300 mg once or twice daily) with zidovudine-lamivudine. Coprimary end points were proportions of patients with a viral load <400 and <50 copies/mL at week 48; the noninferiority of maraviroc was assessed. Results. The once-daily maraviroc arm was discontinued for not meeting prespecified noninferiority criteria. In the primary 48-week analysis (n=721), maraviroc was noninferior for <400 copies/mL (70.6% for maraviroc vs 73.1% for efavirenz) but not for <50 copies/mL (65.3% vs 69.3%) at a threshold of −10%. More maraviroc patients discontinued for lack of efficacy (11.9% vs 4.2%), but fewer discontinued for adverse events (4.2% vs 13.6%). In a post hoc reanalysis excluding 107 patients (15%) with non-R5 screening virus by the current, more sensitive tropism assay, the lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the difference between treatment groups was above −10% for each end point. Conclusions. Twice-daily maraviroc was not noninferior to efavirenz at <50 copies/mL in the primary analysis. However, 15% of patients would have been ineligible for inclusion by a more sensitive screening assay. Their retrospective exclusion resulted in similar response rates in both arms Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: (NCT00098293).

Background. The Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) studies compared maraviroc versus placebo in treatment-experienced patients with CCR5-using (R5) human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), screened using the original Trofile assay. A subset with non-R5 HIV infection entered the A4001029 trial. We retrospectively examined the performance of a genotypic tropism assay based on deep sequencing of the HIV env V3 loop in predicting virologic response to maraviroc in these trials. Methods. V3 amplicons were prepared from 1827 screening plasma samples and sequenced on a Roche/454 GS-FLX to a depth of >3000 sequences/sample. Samples were considered non-R5 if ≥2% of their viral population scored greater than or equal to -4.75 or ≤3.5 using the PSSM x4/R5 or geno2pheno algorithms, respectively. Results. Deep sequencing identified more than twice as many maraviroc recipients as having non-R5 HIV, compared with the original Trofile. With use of genotyping, we determined that 49% of maraviroc recipients with R5 HIV at screening had a week 48 viral load <50 copies/mL versus 26% of recipients with non-R5. Corresponding percentages were 46% and 23% with screening by Trofile. In cases in which screening assays differed, median week 8 log₁₀ copies/mL viral load decrease favored 454. Other parameters predicted by genotyping included likelihood of changing to non-R5 tropism. Conclusions. This large study establishes deep V3 sequencing as a promising tool for identifying treatment-experienced individuals who could benefit from CCR5-antagonist—containing regimens.

Background. There is a need to prevent or minimize bone loss associated with antiretroviral treatment (ART) initiation. We compared maraviroc (MVC)- to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)–containing ART. Methods. This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. ART-naive subjects with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA load (viral load [VL]) >1000 copies/mL and R5 tropism were randomized to MVC 150 mg or TDF 300 mg once daily (1:1), stratified by VL <100 000 or ≥100 000 copies/mL and age <30 or ≥30 years. All subjects received darunavir 800 mg, ritonavir 100 mg, and emtricitabine 200 mg daily. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanning was done at baseline and week 48. The primary endpoint was percentage change in total hip bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline to week 48 in the as-treated population. Results. We enrolled 262 subjects. A total of 259 subjects (130 MVC, 129 TDF) contributed to the analyses (91% male; median age, 33 years; 45% white, 30% black, 22% Hispanic). Baseline median VL was 4.5 log10 copies/mL and CD4 count was 390 cells/μL. The decline in hip BMD (n = 115 for MVC, n = 109 for TDF) at week 48 was less with MVC (median [Q1, Q3] of −1.51% [−2.93%, −0.11%] vs −2.40% [−4.30%, −1.32%] for TDF (P<.001). Lumbar spine BMD decline was also less with MVC (median −0.88% vs −2.35%; P<.001). Similar proportions of subjects in both arms achieved VL ≤50 copies/mL in as-treated and ITT analyses. Conclusions. MVC was associated with less bone loss at the hip and lumbar spine compared with TDF. MVC may be an option to attenuate ART-associated bone loss. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01400412.

Maraviroc treatment for HIV-1 infected patients results in larger CD4.sup.+ T cell rises than are attributable to its antiviral activity alone. We investigated whether this is due to modulation of T cell activation and inflammation. Thirty maraviroc-treated patients from the Maraviroc versus Efavirenz Regimens as Initial Therapy (MERIT) study were randomly selected from among those who had CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV on screening and achieved undetectable HIV RNA (2 [micro]g/mL increased from 45% to 66% in the efavirenz arm, but remained constant in the maraviroc arm (P = 0.033). Decreases in CD38 expression on CD8.sup.+ T cells were correlated with CD4.sup.+ T cell rises for maraviroc treatment (r = -0.4, P = 0.048), but not for treatment with efavirenz. Maraviroc-treated patients had earlier, modest decreases in certain markers of immune activation and inflammation, although in this small study, many of the differences were not statistically significant. Levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein remained constant in the maraviroc arm and increased in the efavirenz arm. Decreases in immune activation correlated with increased CD4.sup.+ T cell gains.

Background. Deep sequencing is a highly sensitive technique that can detect and quantify the proportion of non-R5 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) variants, including small minorities, that may emerge and cause virologic failure in patients who receive maraviroc-containing regimens. We retrospectively tested the ability of deep sequencing to predict response to a maraviroc-containing regimen in the Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients (MERIT) trial. Results were compared with those obtained using the Enhanced Sensitivity Trofile Assay (ESTA), which is widely used in clinical practice. Methods. Screening plasma samples from treatment-naive patients who received maraviroc and efavirenz in the MERIT trial were assessed. Samples were extracted, and the V3 region of HIV type 1 glycoprotein 120 was amplified in triplicate and combined in equal quantities before sequencing on a Roche/454 Genome Sequencer-FLX (n = 859). Tropism was inferred from third variable (V3) sequences, with samples classified as non-R5 if ≥2% of the viral population scored ≤3.5 using geno2pheno. Results. Deep sequencing distinguished between responders and nonresponders to maraviroc. Among patients identified as having R5-HIV by deep sequencing, 67% of maraviroc recipients and 69% of efavirenz recipients had a plasma viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, similar to the ESTA results: 68% and 68%, respectively. Conclusions. Reanalysis of the MERIT trial using deep V3 loop sequencing indicates that, had patients originally been screened using this method, the maraviroc arm would have likely been found to be noninferior to the efavirenz arm.