In patients with Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS), the therapeutic goal is to achieve a durable remission in the size and number of skin and visceral lesions. Although most patients show tumor regression in response to standard systemic chemotherapy regimens, alternative systemic treatments are needed for patients who develop refractory KS. Anti-angiogenic therapies represent attractive therapeutic targets in this context, due to the central role of angiogenesis in KS pathogenesis. Pomalidomide, which exhibits such anti-angiogenic activity through inhibition of VEGF, currently constitutes the most promising agent of this class and has been recently approved by the FDA. In addition, immune checkpoint blockade also represents an interesting alternative therapeutic approach through the restoration of immunity against HHV-8, the causative agent of KS, and improvement of tumor control. Although small series of cases treated successfully with these drugs have been reported, there is no marketing approval for anti-immune checkpoint antibodies for KS to date. In the present review, we will discuss potential therapeutic options for patients with recurrent or refractory KS, including systemic chemotherapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-herpesvirus agents, and anti-angiogenic drugs. Well-conducted clinical trials in this population are urgently needed to correctly address the efficacy of targeted agents and immunomodulators, while monitoring for adverse effects.
People living with HIV (PLWH) with advanced immunosuppression who initiate antiretroviral therapy (ART) are susceptible to the occurrence of an immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS). Although ART is responsible for AIDS- associated Kaposi sarcoma (KS) improvement and resolution, new onset (unmasking KS-IRIS) or sudden progression of preexisting KS (paradoxical KS-IRIS) can occur after a time delay of between a few days and 6 months after the initiation or resumption of ART, even in patients with a low degree of immunocompromise. KS-IRIS incidence varies from 2.4% to 39%, depending on study design, populations, and geographic regions. Risk factors for developing KS-IRIS include advanced KS tumor stage (T1), pre-treatment HIV viral load >5 log10 copies/mL, detectable pre-treatment plasma-KSHV, and initiation of ART alone without concurrent chemotherapy. Both paradoxical and unmasking KS-IRIS have been associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and thrombocytopenia (<100,000 platelets/mm3 at 12 weeks) has been associated with death. KS-IRIS is not to be considered as ART failure, and an ART regimen must be pursued. Systemic chemotherapy for KS in conjunction with ART is recommended and, in contrast with management of IRIS for other opportunistic infections, glucocorticoids are contra-indicated. Despite our preliminary results, the place of targeted therapies in the prevention or treatment of KS-IRIS needs further assessment.
Since the advent of highly effective combined antiretroviral treatment (cART), and with the implementation of large HIV testing programs and universal access to cART, the burden of AIDS-related comorbidities has dramatically decreased over time. The incidence of Kaposi’s sarcoma (SK), strongly associated with HIV replication and CD4 immunosuppression, was greatly reduced. However, KS remains the most common cancer in patients living with HIV (PLHIV). HIV physicians are increasingly faced with KS in virally suppressed HIV-patients, as reflected by increasing description of case series. Though SK seem less aggressive than those in PLHIV with uncontrolled HIV-disease, some may require systemic chemotherapy. Persistent lack of specific anti-HHV-8 cellular immunity could be involved in the physiopathology of these KS. These clinical forms are a real therapeutic challenge without possible short-term improvement of anti-HHV-8 immunity, and no active replication of HIV to control. The cumulative toxicity of chemotherapies repeatedly leads to a therapeutic dead end. The introduction or maintenance of protease inhibitors in cART does not seem to have an impact on the evolution of these KS. Research programs in this emerging condition are important to consider new strategies.
In this observational study, we aimed to evaluate whether bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) administered 5 or 4 days a week is able to maintain viral suppression in people living with HIV (PLHIV). We enrolled 85 patients who initiated intermittent B/F/TAF between 28 November 2018 and 30 July 2020: median (IQR) age 52 years (46–59), duration of virological suppression 9 years (3–13), CD4 633/mm3 (461–781). Median follow-up was 101 weeks (82–111). The virological success rate (no virological failure [VF]: confirmed plasma viral load [pVL] ≥ 50 copies/mL, or single pVL ≥ 200 copies/mL, or ≥50 copies/mL with ART change) was 100% (95%CI 95.8–100) and the strategy success rate (pVL < 50 copies/mL with no ART regimen change) was 92.9% (95%CI 85.3–97.4) at W48. Two VF occurred at W49 and W70, in 2 patients self-reporting poor compliance. No resistance mutation emerged at time of VF. Eight patients presented strategy discontinuation for adverse events. There was no significant change in the CD4 count, residual viraemia rate, neither body weight during follow-up, but a slight increase in CD4/CD8 ratio (p = 0.02). In conclusion, our findings suggest that B/F/TAF administered 5 or 4 days a week could maintain the control of HIV replication in virologically suppressed PLHIV while reducing cumulative exposition of ART.
Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS) is a radiosensitive cancer regardless of its form (classical, endemic, AIDS-related, and immunosuppressant therapy-related). Radiotherapy (RT) is an integral part of the therapeutic management of KS. RT may be used as the main treatment, in the case of solitary lesions, or as palliative therapy in the disseminated forms. The dose of RT to be delivered is 20–30 Gy by low-energy photons or by electrons. The complete response rate after RT is high, around 80–90%. This treatment is well tolerated. However, patients should be informed of the possible risk of the development of late skin sequelae and the possibility of recurrence. With the advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), the indications for RT treatment in HIV-positive patients have decreased.
4 July 2019 in Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Objectives: In a context of life-long therapy, we asked whether it could be possible to reduce the number of antiretroviral drugs without jeopardizing viral suppression.Methods: ECOVIR was a prospective study aiming to assess whether in patients on combination ART with ≥4 antiretrovirals for ≥24 weeks and virally suppressed for ≥48 weeks, a drug-reduced (DR) regimen could be proposed. The intervention consisted of discontinuing genotypically less susceptible drugs to reach a DR regimen with ≤3 antiretrovirals. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients maintaining viral suppression at week (W) 24.Results: From 89 eligible individuals for the study, a DR regimen was proposed in 86 (97%) patients, of whom 71 were switched to a DR regimen. Baseline characteristics [median (IQR)] were: age 58 (53–65) years, duration of treatment 24 (21–26) years and viral suppression 8 (6–11) years. The cumulative resistance profile showed full resistance to lamivudine/emtricitabine (91%), abacavir (74%), efavirenz/nevirapine (70%), rilpivirine (56%), darunavir (q24h/q12h) (42%/29%), lopinavir (69%), atazanavir (71%) and raltegravir (24%). The final DR regimen consisted of a two-drug or three-drug regimen in 54 patients (76%) and in 17 patients (24%), respectively. The success rate of a DR regimen at W24 was 93.9% (95% CI 84.4–97.6, Kaplan–Meier estimate). Four patients experienced virological failure (at W4, W8 and W12), all with plasma viral load (pVL) <600 copies/mL and no emergence of resistance mutations. The DR strategy allowed a monthly cost saving of 36%.Conclusions: In experienced patients with high-level resistance, individualized strategies based on expert advice can offer DR regimen options with fewer drug–drug interactions and a significant economic impact while ensuring virological success.