for these fourth-generation combination assays is >99.7%, and test results can be
available within 3 hours which represents opportunity for more rapid engagement in
clinical care upon a positive test result.
55 Unless there is reason to suspect very early
infection, no further testing is required for a nonreactive antigen/antibody
combination assay. Specimen with reactive antigen/antibody results should be further
tested with an immunoassay to differentiate HIV-1 and HIV-2 antibodies. NATs for
HIV RNA should be used to confirm an indeterminate antibody differentiation
immunoassay or a negative antigen/antibody tests in patients where there is reason to
the severity of immune damage and
potential for disease progression should still be assessed to determine the clinical
urgency for beginning treatment and if additional therapeutic interventions to prevent
opportunistic infection are needed. As stated previously, HIV predominantly infects
and destroys T cells. The larger the viral load, the greater the risk for T-cell
destruction and opportunistic infections. Therefore, quantitative measurements of
E.J.’s HIV viral load and T-cell counts will assist in “staging” the severity of
infection, assessing the risk for disease progression, and providing a reference point
(i.e., baseline) for future therapeutic decisions.
Identification and measurement of T-lymphocyte subsets (e.g., CD4, CD8) are
based on flow cytometry readings of fluorescent-labeled monoclonal antibodies.
These values can vary widely on repeated laboratory evaluations, even in clinically
stable patients. Patient samples can display up to 30% intralaboratory and
interlaboratory variabilities.
3 Consequently, it is important to realize that assessment
of T-cell measurements should always be interpreted as trends and not as individual
values. Variability can also be minimized by using the same laboratory and by
sampling patients at a consistent time of day.
The measurement of HIV viral load can be performed by one of three methods:
reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), branched-chain DNA
assay, or nucleic acid sequence-based amplification.
are obtained when viral RNA is amplified and counted. In contrast, branched-chain
DNA amplifies and enumerates the signal from target probes attached to the viral
RNA. Nucleic acid sequence-based amplification allows real-time, high throughput
amplification of viral RNA. All methods report HIV RNA in plasma as the number of
copies per milliliter but have differing lower limits of quantitation.
recognized that plasma viral RNA values measure the amount of free virus in the
periphery and not the lymph nodes. Because viral concentrations are substantially
greater in the lymph node, plasma measurements of HIV indirectly reflect spillover
from replication in that compartment.
Similar to CD4 counts, viral load measurements (copies/milliliter) can vary by as
much as threefold (0.5 log) in either direction.
3 When obtaining a patient’s baseline
value, a number of issues must be considered. On initial infection with HIV, a burst
of viremia occurs until the host’s immune responses are able to control the infection.
Consequently, viral load measurements obtained during the first 6 months of infection
may not accurately reflect a true baseline value.
In addition, factors that activate the
immune system, such as the development of a new opportunistic infection or
62 can result in transient elevations of viral load measurements. In
these situations, concentrations obtained within 4 weeks of the event may not
accurately reflect the baseline viral load measurement.
Some clinicians would recommend that at least two separate viral load
measurements, which are obtained within 1 to 4 weeks of each other, be performed
before making decisions regarding therapeutic options.
3 As with T-cell values, viral
load measurements should be evaluated as trends.
In addition to quantifying the viral load, baseline resistance testing should be
performed, using either genotypic or phenotypic testing,
initial regimen. Resistance testing is recommended in most clinical situations before
beginning treatment, because the rate of transmission of virus resistant to at least one
(see Resistance, Viral Genotyping, Phenotyping, and Viral Fitness section
CASE 76-1, QUESTION 2: E.J.’s HIV-1/2 antigen/antibody combination immunoassay is reactive and the
laboratory tests should be obtained?
E.J. should have a baseline T-cell count, viral load measurement, and viral
genotype obtained. A complete blood count, electrolyte panel, renal, and liver
function tests and hepatitis B and C serology should be performed. If specific
therapies are being considered, such as abacavir and maraviroc, specific testing is
available to guide the appropriate use of these agents. HLA-B5701 screening is
performed before starting a patient on abacavir because of an increased risk for
exhibiting a hypersensitivity reaction in patients positive for this allele. Co-receptor
tropism assay is performed before initiating maraviroc to determine whether the
patient has a virus that predominantly uses CCR5 receptors (vs. ones
that use primarily CXCR-4 receptors or ones that can use both).
results help in selecting therapeutic options (see subsequent discussion) and establish
baseline values in the event that problems are encountered in the future.
CASE 76-1, QUESTION 3: E.J.’s T-cell count and viral load measurement return at 225 cells/μL and
145,000 copies/mL (by RT-PCR assay), respectively. Should antiretroviral therapy be initiated?
In deciding to initiate antiretroviral therapy, it is important to consider both the
(and cross-resistance; see subsequent discussion). Antiretroviral therapy should be
offered to all patients who are willing and able to commit to lifelong treatment after
an in-depth discussion of the benefits and risks of HAART and the importance of
adherence. Recently, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) HIV
Treatment Guideline Panel issued a statement modifying their 2015 guidelines. This
modification was based on the results of two large randomized clinical trials
(START; The Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment and the TEMPRANO
ARNS 12136 Study). These trials investigated the risks and benefits of initiating
HAART at a CD4 count >500 cell/μL versus delaying until the CD4 count declined
to <350 cell/μL. A significant increase in morbidity and mortality was observed
when HAART was delayed prompting the Guideline Panel to upgrade the strength of
their former recommendation to start HAART at any baseline CD4 count to the
highest level of evidence (AI; strong recommendation supported by data from
randomized controlled trials).
64 Previously, the strength of evidence in support of
initiating HAART was prioritized across three categories of increasing baseline CD4
cell count (>500 cell/μL: lowest strength; 350–500 cell/μL: intermediate strength;
<350 cell/μL: highest strength).
In further support of starting HAART regardless of
baseline CD4 count, the 2015 guidelines recognize the benefits of initiating HAART
for HIV prevention and support initiating HAART to prevent perinatal and
heterosexual transmission (AI evidence rating) or other transmission risks (AIII
evidence rating). Clinical situations which favor more urgent initiation of HAART
include pregnancy; AIDS-defining condition such as an opportunistic infection; CD4
count of <200 cells/μL; HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN); hepatitis B and/or C
coinfection; rapidly declining CD4 count (>100 cells/μL decrease per year); higher
baseline viral load (>100,000 copies/mL); and acute/early HIV infection.
who are asymptomatic, assessment of the patient’s surrogate marker data (T-cell
count, viral load measurements), concurrent medical conditions, medication
adherence history (if any), and motivation to initiate therapy are necessary. The
results of resistance testing should be considered before initiating therapy.
Knowledge of both the T-cell count and the baseline viral load values is important
to “stage” the severity of infection (Table 76-1). In otherwise healthy,
immunocompetent persons, T-cell measurements are greater than 1,200 cells/μL. In
patients who have been chronically infected with HIV, significant T-cell destruction
occurs. When T-cell counts fall to less than 500 cells/μL, patients are at increased
risk for opportunistic infections. Data from both clinical trials and observational
cohort studies have long shown a clear benefit for antiretroviral therapy when CD4
cell counts are ≤350 cells/μL, and many cohort analyses have shown benefit for
starting therapy at CD4 counts ≤500 cells/μL.
3 Early, less definitive evidence also
suggested initiating HAART in patients with CD4 counts of >500 cells/μL improves
immune recovery, reduces HIV transmission risk, and potentially reduces the risk of
non–AIDS-defining diseases. These suggestive data were recently confirmed by the
two previously mentioned randomized trials, START and Temprano ANRS 12136
study, both of which found definitive benefit when initiating HAART at a CD4 Count
>500 cells/μL versus delaying.
66 The risk of disease progression is closely tied to
CD4 cell counts, with low CD4 counts (<200 cells/μL) predicting both short-term
and long-term risk of disease progression.
67–69 High viral load (>100,000
copies/mL), increasing age, acquisition of infection through intravenous drug use, and
a previous AIDS diagnosis also increase the risk of disease progression in
The decision to initiate therapy should not be taken lightly. Antiretroviral regimens
may improve the quality and duration of a patient’s life, but they are not without
risks. Once therapy is initiated, antiretroviral therapy is a lifetime commitment. For
some patients, this may be a difficult realization, particularly if the patient is
relatively healthy. In addition, the risk of adverse events/toxicities and the costs of
HAART should be considered before beginning treatment. These guidelines,
therefore, should be used to initiate discussions with the patient regarding the risks
and benefits of therapy. It is critical for practitioners to talk openly with patients
about their fears and concerns and make an assessment about their motivation to
initiate therapy and ability to adhere to a lifelong regimen. The patient should always
make the final decision after careful discussions with the practitioner.
E.J. has a number of significant risk factors for disease progression. He is
clinically symptomatic with oral thrush and nonspecific constitutional symptoms
(e.g., fevers, night sweats, and weight loss). His surrogate maker data place him at
risk for greater disease progression (T-cell count <500 cells/μL and viral load
>100,000 copies/mL). Based on these values, E.J. should be counseled on his risk of
disease progression, potential adverse events associated with both starting and
deferring treatment, and his willingness to adhere to a regimen.
Before developing a patient-specific regimen, it is important to recognize the
benefits and limitations of therapy and identify obtainable and realistic goals.
GOAL 1: MAXIMALLY AND DURABLY SUPPRESS VIRAL LOAD
Maximal viral suppression often results in significant increases in T-cell counts and
improved clinical outcomes. Based on our understanding of viral pathogenesis, this
finding is not surprising. Lower amounts of replicating virus result in decreased risk
for T-cell infection and destruction and, subsequently, a more intact immune
response. Therefore, therapy should suppress viral replication to undetectable levels
in the plasma (<50 copies/mL), for as long as possible.
antiretroviral agents with improved potency, higher genetic barrier to resistance, low
adverse event profiles, and more convenient dosing regimens (including once daily
single tablet regimens) makes viral suppression a reasonable goal in most patients,
even those who previously have received multiple suboptimal regimens or failed
therapy. In the treatment-experienced patient, however, special care must be given to
designing a regimen that will suppress viral
load, yet not contribute to the development of drug resistance that limits future
treatment options. Consultation with an expert in antiretroviral resistance patterns is
critical to designing a salvage regimen in such patients.
The development of drug resistance is also a consideration in the selection of
regimens for patients who have not previously used antiretrovirals (antiretroviral
naïve). In any given viral population, the potential exists for a spontaneous mutation
to occur, which results in a resistant isolate. The larger the population, the greater the
risk for mutations. HIV replication is a highly error-prone process, especially with
the reverse transcriptase enzyme. Given the high rate of viral replication, the
potential exists for the daily production of thousands of replication-competent viral
mutations to each and every site on the HIV genome (~10,000 nucleotides in
35 Under selective pressures from inadequate antiretroviral therapies,
spontaneously produced isolates with reduced susceptibility to the given regimen
eventually flourish and repopulate the host. This fact is of particular concern given
the potential for cross-resistance between antiretroviral agents (see the following
discussion of resistance). Therefore, the use of a regimen that fully suppresses viral
replication reduces the potential for mutations and the development of crossresistance.
Although more than 20 FDA-approved antiretroviral agents are currently available
to use in combination therapies, many of these agents display similar resistance
profiles. Developing resistance to one or more agents in a given regimen may result
in the loss of activity to other agents with similar resistance profiles (i.e., crossresistance).
4 Whether or not drug resistance develops is determined by the genetic
barrier associated with the individual antiretroviral drugs. Some drugs have low
genetic barriers; that is, only one or two critical changes in the virus are necessary
for resistance to occur. An example of a class of agents with a low genetic barrier is
the NNRTIs. While a number of individual point mutations in the viral genome can
confer the loss of activity for the first-generation NNRTIs (nevirapine and efavirenz),
second-generation NNRTIs (rilpivirine and etravirine) exhibit improved barriers to
resistance compared to these first-generation agents. In contrast, the PIs have a wide
genetic barrier, which requires multiple changes to the viral genome to incur
It should be recognized, however, that just because an agent has a low genetic
barrier does not mean it is virologically inferior or less potent. Potent regimens
containing NNRTIs are highly effective and provide durable treatment responses.
The potency of the entire regimen
is critical to determining whether or not drug
resistance develops. If viral replication is suppressed, the development of resistance
will be minimal. When viral replication does occur, the greater the replication, the
greater the risk for development of resistance. In those situations in which viral
replication does occur, inclusion of a drug with a low genetic barrier in the
antiretroviral regimen may be risky and could result in the loss of activity of the drug,
the development of cross-resistance to other drugs, or both. As a result, an
antiretroviral regimen should be selected that has a high likelihood of suppressing
viral replication and to which the patient will strictly adhere.
GOAL 2: PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN THE IMMUNE SYSTEM
Decreasing viral replication usually leads to increased CD4 cell counts, which
strengthens and preserves the immune system. With increased cell counts, patients are
at lower risk for exhibiting opportunistic infections and death. With newer and
improved regimens, strengthening and preserving the immune system may be possible
even in treatment-experienced patients, although drug regimens must be designed
carefully to prevent developing further resistance. Full immune reconstitution may not
be possible if the CD4 cell count is low for a long period of time; however, it is
reasonable to try and restore immune function as fully as possible. Despite advances
in drug therapy, it is important to remember that HIV remains an incurable condition.
GOAL 3: LIMIT DRUG ADVERSE EVENTS, PROMOTE ADHERENCE,
Treatment with combination therapy has been shown to be highly effective in
suppressing HIV replication and improving survival among patients who are HIV
infected. Lifelong adherence to an antiretroviral regimen is required and can be a
complex and difficult task, although advances in coformulation of drug products and
the advent of ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors have simplified HIV treatment
considerably. Several once-daily regimens and single tablet regimens are
recommended as first-line therapy (Tables 76-3 and 76-4). The patient’s ability to
adhere to therapy may, however, still be the difference between a regimen that fails
and one that results in a clinical benefit. The first regimen generally provides the best
chance for treatment success. Although newer antiretrovirals tend to exhibit better
adverse event profiles compared to the early antiretrovirals, adverse events can still
make tolerating these regimens difficult, and affect drug adherence and response to
therapy. Changes in body composition (known as lipodystrophy), increases in lipids
and triglycerides, bone and joint fractures, increased risks for cardiac disease, and
the development of lactic acidosis are serious concerns.
Although new antiretrovirals offer marked improvement over early generation
agents’ toxicity profiles, lifelong HAART is not without risk. Metabolic
complications from antiretroviral therapy include abnormal distribution of body fat,
lipid abnormalities (e.g., hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, increases in
low-density lipoprotein [LDL] and decreases in high-density lipoprotein [HDL]),
70–72 Coronary artery disease, myocardial infarctions, and
vascular complications among relatively young patients (30–40 years old) taking
HAART-containing regimens have been reported.
73–78 Large observational studies
suggest an increased risk for cardiovascular disease among patients taking HAART,
particularly among those receiving protease inhibitors.
79–81 Additionally, nucleoside
analogs can inhibit mitochondrial DNA polymerase and, as a result, have been
implicated in lipoatrophy; however, this appears to be less of a concern for newer
82 Finally, metabolic abnormalities have also been reported in patients who
are HIV infected before receiving HAART, and it may also be a consequence of HIV
infection or preexisting metabolic disorders that are exacerbated by HAART.
Up to 40% of patients on PI-based HAART are reported to experience impaired
glucose tolerance because of significant insulin resistance.
diabetes mellitus are at increased risk, and PI-based regimens should be used with
caution in these patients. Fasting glucose measures for all patients are recommended
before and during therapy (e.g., every 3–6 months) with PI-based regimens.
Treatment of type 2 diabetes in HIV patients as a result of HAART therapy should be
handled similarly to any other patient.
Elevations in serum levels of triglycerides, total cholesterol, and LDL, with mild
decreases in HDL, are associated with HAART.
seen as early as 2 weeks after the initiation of therapy.
implicated, these laboratory abnormalities appear to occur more frequently in
ritonavir-containing regimens, and less frequently in patients receiving atazanavir
71 The NNRTIs can also cause lipid alterations, although their incidence is
lower. Both efavirenz and nevirapine have been shown to increase HDL
concentrations among patients receiving HAART. Nevirapine may have the least
detrimental lipid profile (i.e., greater increases in HDLconcentrations and less effect
86 Of the NRTIs, stavudine appears to affect lipid profiles to the
greatest extent: two prospective clinical trials have shown greater increases in
triglycerides and total cholesterol among patients receiving stavudine-based HAART
compared with zidovudine- or tenofovir-based regimens.
HAART-associated hyperlipidemias should be handled similarly to hyperlipidemia
in other patients with close attention paid to preventing drug–drug interactions.
Recommended Antiretroviral Agents for Initial Treatment of Established
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection
Darunavir/ritonavir + emtricitabine/tenofovir
emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
Darunavir/ritonavir + abacavir/lamivudine
emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
or emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
or emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
or emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
or emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
Elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir
Elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir
Dolutegravir + emtricitabine/tenofovir
emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide
Dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine
Efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil
Rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil
rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir
All monotherapies, dual-nucleoside
regimens, triple-NRTI regimens
adverse events associated with their use.
bOnly for patients who are HLA-B*5701 negative.
cOnly for patients with pretreatment estimated CrCl >70 mL/minute.
dOnly for patients with pretreatment HIV RNA <100,000 copies/mL and CD4 count >200 cells/μL.
Up to 40% to 50% of patients have been reported to experience alterations in body
composition (fat loss [arms, legs, face, buttocks] and fat accumulation [dorsocervical
fatty deposits or “buffalo humps”], increased abdominal girth), although the exact
rate is confounded by differences in definition and assessment.
complication include higher baseline body mass index, increased duration of
exposure to antiretroviral agents, lower CD4 nadir at time of initiation of HAART,
increasing age, female sex, and prolonged duration of HIV infection. The nucleoside
analogs are likely responsible for lipoatrophy, whereas the PIs are believed to be
responsible for lipoaccumulation,
71 although it is difficult to precisely identify which
class of agents is responsible for which adverse event because they are given in
The causes of lipodystrophy are unknown. It appears that there is greater
propensity for lipoatrophy by those nucleoside analogs which greatly inhibit
mitochondrial DNA polymerase in vitro (e.g., stavudine). Although substituting
stavudine with an alternate NRTI such as zidovudine, tenofovir, or abacavir is
associated with significant increases in arm and leg fat, and decreases in trunk fat
(using radiographic tests such as dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, computed
tomography scans), these improvements are so modest that they may not be clinically
89–93 The use of recombinant human growth hormone, an agent with
lipolytic effects, decreases the size of buffalo humps and abdominal girth; however,
the growth often returns once growth hormone therapy is stopped.
growth hormone–releasing factor given as a 2-mg once daily subcutaneous injection,
was approved in 2010. It is specifically indicated for the reduction of excess
abdominal fat in HIV-infected patients with lipodystrophy.
liposuction may be effective; however, recurrences, along with adverse events
(intestinal perforation, intraperitoneal bleeding), have been reported.
wasting, injection of fat or synthetic polymers into the recessed areas of the cheeks
Other important long-term complications include nucleoside-associated lactic
acidosis, osteonecrosis, and osteopenia.
71 Lactic acidosis has been predominantly
associated with the use of older NRTIs (stavudine, zidovudine, and didanosine)
which are no longer preferred antiretrovirals but has been reported with other
nucleoside analogs. This complication is managed by discontinuing therapy until
lactate levels return to normal and then reinitiating
therapy with a non-stavudine or non-nucleoside analog-containing HAART
3 Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a novel formulation of tenofovir, is
associated with improved long-term bone and renal outcomes compared to tenofovir
disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in patients initiating therapy. [Ref 97: Wang H et al. The
efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in
antiretroviral regimens for HIV-1 therapy Meta-analysis. Medicine. 2016;
95:41(e5146).] With the availability of generic tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FDA
approved in June 2017), balancing lower cost vs improved safety will be an
important consideration for clinicians in selecting a tenofovir based regimen.
While the exact degree of adherence required for clinical success is currently
unknown and varies by antiretroviral class, taking 90% to 95% of prescribed doses
is generally believed to be necessary to prevent the development of resistance. Data
from studies evaluating adherence among HIV-infected patients indicates that
approximately 62% of patients take ≥90% of the prescribed doses of
98 Although it is important to note that adherence patterns vary widely
based on patient-specific factors. The four most common reasons for skipping
antiretroviral doses are simple forgetfulness, a change in daily routine, being too
busy with other things, and being away from home.
99 Factors associated with poor
adherence include (a) the number of medications (the greater the number, the greater
the likelihood of poor adherence); (b) the complexity of the regimen (special meal
requirements, escalating or de-escalating doses, dose frequency); (c) special storage
requirements; (d) interference of medication with lifestyle and daily activities; and
(e) poor communication with primary care providers and other health care
professionals. Comorbid psychiatric conditions, as well as substance abuse issues,
are also significant barriers to adherence in the HIV-infected population.
Incorporating these factors into the selection of a patient-specific regimen may
improve adherence and, subsequently, the chance for an improved clinical outcome
To better address the complex, multidimensional, patient-specific structures that
can influence adherence behavior and retention in care, the DHHS HIV Treatment
Guidelines recommend that clinics adopt a multidisciplinary team approach which
provides access to trustworthy case managers, pharmacists, social workers, nurses,
psychiatric care providers, etc.
3 Additionally, before selecting an HIV treatment
regimen clinicians should provide adherence-related education (including
information regarding why adherence is important) and involve the patient in the
antiretroviral selection process. Selecting a treatment plan that the patient can (1)
understand and (2) commit to for the long term is critical for fostering lifelong
adherence. Thus, considering the patient’s daily schedule and their ability to comply
with antiretroviral specific requirements (i.e., food requirements, drug interactions,
etc.) is important. For example, rilpivirine should be consumed with a full meal
(ideally ≥500 kcal) and therefore may not be the best option for a patient who
frequently skips meals or does not have a consistent eating schedule. Efavirenz which
may cause drowsiness and is generally taken before bed on an empty stomach to
mitigate this CNS effect might not be the best option for a person who works night
shifts where they are on for 7 days then off for 7 days. Involving patients in the
selection of their antiretroviral regimen maximizes the possibility of selecting a
regimen which is least burdensome to their daily routine and helps to reduce certain
barriers which lead to poor adherence. After the antiretroviral regimen has been
selected and treatment initiated, quickly identifying patients who are struggling with
adherence (via patient self-report, pharmacy records, pill counts, etc.); identifying
their specific barriers to adherence (i.e., pill fatigue, high co-pays, forgetfulness,
etc.); and employing targeted interventions to improve adherence are essential.
Examples of specific strategies to improve adherence can be found in Table 13
(https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/lvguidelines/AA_Tables.pdf) of the 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment
اكتب تعليق حول الموضوع