Research from JAMA — Clinical Features and Short-term Outcomes of 144 Patients With SARS in the Greater Toronto Area — ContextSevere acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an emerging infectious disease that first manifested in humans in China in November 2002 and has subsequently spread worldwide.ObjectivesTo describe the clinical characteristics and short-term outcomes of SARS in the first large group of patients in North America; to describe how these patients were treated and the variables associated with poor outcome.Design, Setting, and PatientsRetrospective case series involving 144 adult patients admitted to 10 academic and community hospitals in the greater Toronto, Ontario, area between March 7 and April 10, 2003, with a diagnosis of suspected or probable SARS. Patients were included if they had fever, a known exposure to SARS, and respiratory symptoms or infiltrates observed on chest radiograph. Patients were excluded if an alternative diagnosis was determined.Main Outcome MeasuresLocation of exposure to SARS; features of the history, physical examination, and laboratory tests at admission to the hospital; and 21-day outcomes such as death or intensive care unit (ICU) admission with or without mechanical ventilation.ResultsOf the 144 patients, 111 (77%) were exposed to SARS in the hospital setting. Features of the clinical examination most commonly found in these patients at admission were self-reported fever (99%), documented elevated temperature (85%), nonproductive cough (69%), myalgia (49%), and dyspnea (42%). Common laboratory features included elevated lactate dehydrogenase (87%), hypocalcemia (60%), and lymphopenia (54%). Only 2% of patients had rhinorrhea. A total of 126 patients (88%) were treated with ribavirin, although its use was associated with significant toxicity, including hemolysis (in 76%) and decrease in hemoglobin of 2 g/dL (in 49%). Twenty-nine patients (20%) were admitted to the ICU with or without mechanical ventilation, and 8 patients died (21-day mortality, 6.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9%-11.8%). Multivariable analysis showed that the presence of diabetes (relative risk [RR], 3.1; 95% CI, 1.4-7.2; P = .01) or other comorbid conditions (RR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.8; P = .03) were independently associated with poor outcome (death, ICU admission, or mechanical ventilation).ConclusionsThe majority of cases in the SARS outbreak in the greater Toronto area were related to hospital exposure. In the event that contact history becomes unreliable, several features of the clinical presentation will be useful in raising the suspicion of SARS. Although SARS is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with diabetes or other comorbid conditions, the vast majority (93.5%) of patients in our cohort survived.Published online May 6, 2003 (doi:10.1001/jama.289.21.JOC30885).

Dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572), a once-daily, unboosted integrase inhibitor, was recently approved in the United States for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in combination with other antiretroviral agents. Dolutegravir, in combination with abacavir–lamivudine, may provide a simplified regimen.

ContextThe availability of new antiretroviral drugs and formulations, including drugs in new classes, and recent data on treatment choices for antiretroviral-naive and -experienced patients warrant an update of the International AIDS Society–USA guidelines for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adult human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.ObjectivesTo summarize new data in the field and to provide current recommendations for the antiretroviral management and laboratory monitoring of HIV infection. This report provides guidelines in key areas of antiretroviral management: when to initiate therapy, choice of initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and how best to approach treatment options, including optimal use of recently approved drugs (maraviroc, raltegravir, and etravirine) in treatment-experienced patients.Data Sources and Study SelectionA 14-member panel with expertise in HIV research and clinical care was appointed. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences since the last panel report (August 2006) through June 2008 were identified.Data Extraction and SynthesisData that changed the previous guidelines were reviewed by the panel (according to section). Guidelines were drafted by section writing committees and were then reviewed and edited by the entire panel. Recommendations were made by panel consensus.ConclusionsNew data and considerations support initiating therapy before CD4 cell count declines to less than 350/μL. In patients with 350 CD4 cells/μL or more, the decision to begin therapy should be individualized based on the presence of comorbidities, risk factors for progression to AIDS and non-AIDS diseases, and patient readiness for treatment. In addition to the prior recommendation that a high plasma viral load (eg, >100 000 copies/mL) and rapidly declining CD4 cell count (>100/μL per year) should prompt treatment initiation, active hepatitis B or C virus coinfection, cardiovascular disease risk, and HIV-associated nephropathy increasingly prompt earlier therapy. The initial regimen must be individualized, particularly in the presence of comorbid conditions, but usually will include efavirenz or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine). Treatment failure should be identified and managed promptly, with the goal of therapy, even in heavily pretreated patients, being an HIV-1 RNA level below assay detection limits.

The T-20 vs. Optimized Regimen Only Study 1 (TORO 1) was a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of enfuvirtide (T-20), a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) fusion inhibitor. Methods Patients from 48 sites in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil with at least six months of previous treatment with agents in three classes of antiretroviral drugs, resistance to drugs in these classes, or both, and with at least 5000 copies of HIV-1 RNA per milliliter of plasma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive enfuvirtide plus an optimized background regimen of three to five antiretroviral drugs or such a regimen alone (control group). The primary efficacy end point was the change in the plasma HIV-1 RNA level from base line to week 24. Results A total of 501 patients underwent randomization, and 491 received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one measurement of plasma HIV-1 RNA after treatment began. The two groups were balanced in terms of the median base-line HIV-1 RNA level (5.2 log10 copies per milliliter in both groups), median CD4+ cell count (75.5 cells per cubic millimeter in the enfuvirtide group, and 87.0 cells per cubic millimeter in the control group), demographic characteristics, and previous antiretroviral therapy. At 24 weeks, the least-squares mean change from base line in the viral load (intention-to-treat, last observation carried forward) was a decrease of 1.696 log10 copies per milliliter in the enfuvirtide group, and a decrease of 0.764 log10 copies per milliliter in the control group (P<0.001). The mean increases in CD4+ cell count were 76 cells per cubic millimeter and 32 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively (P<0.001). Reactions at the site of the injections were reported by 98 percent of patients receiving enfuvirtide. There were more cases of pneumonia in the enfuvirtide group than in the control group. Conclusions The addition of enfuvirtide to an optimized antiretroviral regimen provided significant antiretroviral and immunologic benefit through 24 weeks in patients who had previously received multiple antiretroviral drugs and had multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection.

Lopinavir is a newly developed inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease that, when formulated with ritonavir, yields mean trough plasma lopinavir concentrations that are at least 75 times as high as that needed to inhibit replication of wild-type HIV by 50 percent. We conducted a double-blind trial in which 653 HIV-infected adults who had not received antiretroviral therapy for more than 14 days were randomly assigned to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg of lopinavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir twice daily) with nelfinavir placebo or nelfinavir (750 mg three times daily) with lopinavir–ritonavir placebo. All patients also received open-label stavudine and lamivudine. The primary efficacy end points were the presence of fewer than 400 HIV RNA copies per milliliter of plasma at week 24 and the time to the loss of virologic response through week 48. At week 48, greater proportions of patients treated with lopinavir–ritonavir than of patients treated with nelfinavir had fewer than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter (75 percent vs. 63 percent, P<0.001) and fewer than 50 copies per milliliter (67 percent vs. 52 percent, P<0.001). The time to the loss of virologic response was greater in the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the nelfinavir group (hazard ratio, 2.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.5 to 2.7; P<0.001). The estimated proportion of patients with a persistent virologic response through week 48 was 84 percent for patients receiving lopinavir–ritonavir and 66 percent for those receiving nelfinavir. Both regimens were well tolerated, with the rate of discontinuation related to the study drugs at 3.4 percent among patients receiving lopinavir–ritonavir and 3.7 percent among patients receiving nelfinavir. Among patients with more than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter at some point from week 24 through week 48, resistance mutations in HIV protease were demonstrated in viral isolates from 25 of 76 nelfinavir-treated patients (33 percent) and none of 37 patients treated with lopinavir–ritonavir (P<0.001). For the initial treatment of HIV-infected adults, a combination regimen that includes lopinavir–ritonavir is well tolerated and has antiviral activity superior to that of a nelfinavir-containing regimen.