Explore the vast range of titles available.

The CCR5 coreceptor may be a therapeutic target to block HIV infection. HIV-1–infected patients who had received previous antiretroviral treatment were enrolled in one of two phase 3, placebo-controlled, double-blind international studies of treatment with maraviroc (a CCR5 antagonist). Maraviroc significantly lowered the HIV-1 viral load and increased the CD4 cell count at 48 weeks. The CCR5 coreceptor may be a therapeutic target to block HIV infection. In two studies, maraviroc (a CCR5 antagonist) significantly lowered the HIV-1 viral load and increased the CD4 cell count at 48 weeks. For the past decade, treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) has consisted of a multiple-drug regimen targeting one or more of three HIV-1 proteins: reverse transcriptase, protease, and the glycoprotein envelope subunit gp41. 1 Although these antiretroviral combinations are successful in suppressing viral replication and delaying disease progression, drug resistance and toxic effects may occur. 2 – 4 There is therefore a need for better-tolerated, convenient antiretroviral agents with reduced toxicity and activity against multidrug-resistant viruses. Agents with novel mechanisms of action provide options for patients with drug-resistant virus. 4 CC chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is an attractive therapeutic target, since people . . .

For patients infected with multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), therapeutic options are limited. Raltegravir is a new molecule that inhibits HIV integrase. In two phase 3 studies, raltegravir was found to be superior to placebo, in the context of optimized background antiviral therapy, in suppressing HIV viral load at 48 weeks (62.1% vs. 32.9%). In two phase 3 studies, raltegravir was found to be superior to placebo, in the context of optimized background antiviral therapy, in suppressing HIV viral load at 48 weeks (62.1% vs. 32.9%). Highly active antiretroviral therapy is the standard of care for patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. 1 Combination regimens have resulted in improved survival, decreased morbidity, and cost-effective care for patients with a CD4 count of less than 350 per cubic millimeter. 2 – 8 However, viral suppression cannot always be achieved or sustained with standard treatments because of the development of viral resistance, toxic effects of drugs, or lack of adherence. 9 – 18 The majority of HIV-infected patients in whom highly active antiretroviral therapy fails have resistant viral quasispecies. 12 – 15 , 19 , 20 Cross-resistance to agents within a drug class may exhaust . . .

In subgroups of two phase 3 studies, patients with high-risk features for failure of antiretroviral therapy, such as a low CD4 count, high base-line level of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 RNA, or unfavorable genotypic or phenotypic sensitivity score, raltegravir was superior to placebo in terms of a virologic response at 48 weeks. However, among these patients, in whom antiretroviral therapy had been used previously, 23% of raltegravir recipients had virologic failure by 48 weeks. In patients with high-risk features for failure of antiretroviral therapy, raltegravir was superior to placebo in terms of a virologic response at 48 weeks. However, among these patients, in whom antiretroviral therapy had been used previously, 23% of raltegravir recipients had virologic failure by 48 weeks. Despite the substantial decrease in mortality and morbidity rates associated with highly active antiretroviral therapy over the past decade, there is still a substantial need for effective antiretroviral drugs for patients infected with resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). 1 , 2 The majority of licensed antiretroviral drugs belong to three classes targeting either the HIV-1 protease or reverse transcriptase, and considerable cross-resistance exists among drugs within each class. 3 , 4 In patients with resistant virus, use of antiretroviral agents from new classes offers considerable potential benefit because of the absence of cross-resistance. 5 – 7 HIV-1 integrase represents a new therapeutic target. 8 , . . .

A key unsolved question in the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the duration of acquired immunity. Insights from infections with the four seasonal human coronaviruses might reveal common characteristics applicable to all human coronaviruses. We monitored healthy individuals for more than 35 years and determined that reinfection with the same seasonal coronavirus occurred frequently at 12 months after infection. The durability of immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is unknown. Lessons from seasonal coronavirus infections in humans show that reinfections can occur within 12 months of initial infection, coupled with changes in levels of virus-specific antibodies.

Simplified treatment regimens for HIV management may increase adherence. In this open-label, randomized, controlled trial, longer-acting (monthly) injectable cabotegravir plus rilpivirine was compared with standard oral treatment. At 48 weeks, similar viral suppression was seen with the two regimens.

Simplified treatment regimens for HIV-1 may have advantages. In this open-label, randomized, controlled trial, patients with HIV-1 infection who had not previously received antiretroviral therapy were given oral induction therapy, then treated with either monthly injections of long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine or standard treatment. At 48 weeks, similar viral suppression was observed with the two regimens.

In a phase 2 trial, outpatients with Covid-19 who received a single infusion of a 2800-mg dose of the neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 had a greater reduction from baseline in viral load than those who received placebo. Hospitalization was less frequent among antibody-treated patients (1.6% vs. 6.3%).

Phase 3 clinical studies showed non-inferiority of long-acting intramuscular cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 4 weeks to oral antiretroviral therapy. Important phase 2 results of every 8 weeks dosing, and supportive modelling, underpin further evaluation of every 8 weeks dosing in this trial, which has the potential to offer greater convenience. Our objective was to compare the week 48 antiviral efficacy of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting dosed every 8 weeks with that of every 4 weeks dosing. ATLAS-2M is an ongoing, randomised, multicentre (13 countries; Australia, Argentina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, and the USA), open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting maintenance therapy administered intramuscularly every 8 weeks (cabotegravir 600 mg plus rilpivirine 900 mg) or every 4 weeks (cabotegravir 400 mg plus rilpivirine 600 mg) to treatment-experienced adults living with HIV-1. Eligible newly recruited individuals must have received an uninterrupted first or second oral standard-of-care regimen for at least 6 months without virological failure and be aged 18 years or older. Eligible participants from the ATLAS trial, from both the oral standard-of-care and long-acting groups, must have completed the 52-week comparative phase with an ATLAS-2M screening plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting every 8 weeks or every 4 weeks. The randomisation schedule was generated by means of the GlaxoSmithKline validated randomisation software RANDALL NG. The primary endpoint at week 48 was HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL (Snapshot, intention-to-treat exposed), with a non-inferiority margin of 4%. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03299049 and is ongoing. Screening occurred between Oct 27, 2017, and May 31, 2018. Of 1149 individuals screened, 1045 participants were randomised to the every 8 weeks (n=522) or every 4 weeks (n=523) groups; 37% (n=391) transitioned from every 4 weeks cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting in ATLAS. Median participant age was 42 years (IQR 34–50); 27% (n=280) female at birth; 73% (n=763) white race. Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting every 8 weeks was non-inferior to dosing every 4 weeks (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; 2% vs 1%) with an adjusted treatment difference of 0·8 (95% CI −0·6–2·2). There were eight (2%, every 8 weeks group) and two (<1%, every 4 weeks group) confirmed virological failures (two sequential measures ≥200 copies per mL). For the every 8 weeks group, five (63%) of eight had archived non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance-associated mutations to rilpivirine at baseline. The safety profile was similar between dosing groups, with 844 (81%) of 1045 participants having adverse events (excluding injection site reactions); no treatment-related deaths occurred. The efficacy and safety profiles of dosing every 8 weeks and dosing every 4 weeks were similar. These results support the use of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting administered every 2 months as a therapeutic option for people living with HIV-1. ViiV Healthcare and Janssen.

Ebola transmission has been ongoing in the Democratic Republic of Congo since August 2018. In this trial of MAb114, REGN-EB3, remdesivir, and ZMapp (as the control), mortality from Ebola virus disease was lower in the MAb114 and REGN-EB3 groups than in the other groups.

Background and methodsThe SMART study compared 2 strategies for using antiretroviral therapy—drug conservation (DC) and viral suppression (VS)—in 5472 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected patients with CD4+ cell counts >350 cells/μL. Rates and predictors of opportunistic disease or death (OD/death) and the relative risk (RR) in DC versus VS groups according to the latest CD4+ cell count and HIV RNA level are reported ResultsDuring a mean of 16 months of follow-up, DC patients spent more time with a latest CD4+ cell count <350 cells/μL (for DC vs. VS, 31% vs. 8%) and with a latest HIV RNA level >400 copies/mL (71% vs. 28%) and had a higher rate of OD/death (3.4 vs. 1.3/100 person-years) than VS patients. For periods of follow-up with a CD4+ cell count <350 cells/μL, rates of OD/death were increased but similar in the 2 groups (5.7 vs. 4.6/100 person-years), whereas the rates were higher in DC versus VS patients (2.3 vs. 1.0/100 person-years; RR, 2.3 [95% confidence interval, 1.5–3.4]) for periods with the latest CD4+ cell count ⩾350 cells/μL—an increase explained by the higher HIV RNA levels in the DC group ConclusionsThe higher risk of OD/death in DC patients was associated with (1) spending more follow-up time with relative immunodeficiency and (2) living longer with uncontrolled HIV replication even at higher CD4+ cell counts. Ongoing HIV replication at a given CD4+ cell count places patients at an excess risk of OD/death Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00027352