BackgroundWe investigated virological response and the emergence of resistance in the Nevirapine or Abacavir (NORA) substudy of the Development of Antiretroviral Treatment in Africa (DART) trial MethodsSix hundred symptomatic antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adults (CD4 cell count, 1000 copies/mL, the residual activity of therapy was calculated as the reduction in HIV RNA level, compared with baseline ResultsOverall, HIV RNA levels were lower in the nevirapine group than in the abacavir group at 24 and 48 weeks (P<.001), although no differences were observed at weeks 4 and 12. Virological responses were similar in the 2 treatment groups for baseline HIV RNA level <100,000 copies/mL. The mean residual activity at week 48 was higher for abacavir in the presence of the typically observed resistance pattern of thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) and M184V (1.47 log₁₀ copies/mL) than for nevirapine with M184V and nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor mutations, whether accompanied by TAMs (0.96 log₁₀ copies/mL) or not (1.18 log₁₀ copies/mL) ConclusionsThere was more extensive genotypic resistance in both treatment groups than is generally seen in resource-rich settings. However, significant residual activity was observed among patients with virological failure, particularly those receiving zidovudine-lamivudine plus abacavir

Long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy (LA ART) has been found to be non-inferior to daily oral ART in phase 3 clinical trials and is poised to soon enter routine clinical care. This treatment modality has the potential to address many barriers to daily oral ART adherence among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and for HIV Pre-Exposure prevention. Data from the Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) showed high rates of satisfaction, acceptability, tolerability and preference for the LA regimen, compared with the daily oral treatment. Once LA ART is available, access and uptake will be limited because of current knowledge gaps in the use of these agents and multiple challenges many specific to low-income and middle-income countries, where the epidemic is most concentrated and HIV prevention and treatment options are limited. These gaps will lead to multiple systems-level and individual-level barriers to implementation. Anticipating and addressing these gaps and barriers will help fulfill the promise of these agents against the pandemic.

In sub-Saharan Africa, individuals infected with HIV who are severely immunocompromised have high mortality (about 10%) shortly after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). This group also has the greatest risk of morbidity and mortality associated with immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), a paradoxical response to successful ART. Integrase inhibitors lead to significantly more rapid declines in HIV viral load (VL) than all other ART classes. We hypothesised that intensifying standard triple-drug ART with the integrase inhibitor, raltegravir, would reduce HIV VL faster and hence reduce early mortality, although this strategy could also risk more IRIS events. In a 2×2×2 factorial open-label parallel-group trial, treatment-naive adults, adolescents, and children >5 years old infected with HIV, with cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) 0.7) and despite significantly greater VL suppression with raltegravir-intensified ART at 4 weeks (343/836 [41.0%] versus 113/841 [13.4%] with standard ART, p < 0.001) and 12 weeks (567/789 [71.9%] versus 415/803 [51.7%] with standard ART, p < 0.001). Through 48 weeks, there was no evidence of differences in mortality (aHR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.76–1.28], p = 0.91); in serious (aHR = 0.99 [0.81–1.21], p = 0.88), grade-4 (aHR = 0.88 [0.71–1.09], p = 0.29), or ART-modifying (aHR = 0.90 [0.63–1.27], p = 0.54) adverse events (the latter occurring in 59 [6.5%] participants with raltegravir-intensified ART versus 66 [7.3%] with standard ART); in events judged compatible with IRIS (occurring in 89 [9.9%] participants with raltegravir-intensified ART versus 86 [9.5%] with standard ART, p = 0.79) or in hospitalisations (aHR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.76–1.17], p = 0.59). At 12 weeks, one and two raltegravir-intensified participants had predicted intermediate-level and high-level raltegravir resistance, respectively. At 48 weeks, the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutation K219E/Q (p = 0.004) and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations K101E/P (p = 0.03) and P225H (p = 0.007) were less common in virus from participants with raltegravir-intensified ART, with weak evidence of less intermediate- or high-level resistance to tenofovir (p = 0.06), abacavir (p = 0.08), and rilpivirine (p = 0.07). Limitations of the study include limited clinical, radiological, and/or microbiological information for some participants, reflecting available services at the centres, and lack of baseline genotypes. Although 12 weeks of raltegravir intensification was well tolerated and reduced HIV viraemia significantly faster than standard triple-drug ART during the time of greatest risk for early death, this strategy did not reduce mortality or clinical events in this group and is not warranted. There was no excess of IRIS-compatible events, suggesting that integrase inhibitors can be used safely as part of standard triple-drug first-line therapy in severely immunocompromised individuals. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01825031. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number ISRCTN 43622374.

Background: There are limited data on primary human immunodeficiency virus drug resistance (HIVDR) in pediatric populations. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of primary HIVDR and associated risk factors among children initiating first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Uganda. Methods: At three Ugandan clinics, children (age <12 years) requiring ART were recruited between January 2010 and August 2011. Before starting ART, blood was collected for viral load and pol gene sequencing. Drug resistance mutations were determined using the 2010 International AIDS Society–USA mutation list. Risk factors for HIVDR were assessed with multivariate regression analysis. Results: Three hundred nineteen HIV-infected children with a median age of 4.9 years were enrolled. Sequencing was successful in 279 children (87.5%). HIVDR was present in 10% of all children and 15.2% of children <3 years. Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-NRTI (NNRTI), and dual-class resistance was present in 5.7%, 7.5%, and 3.2%, respectively. HIVDR occurred in 35.7% of prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT)–exposed children, 15.6% in children with unknown PMTCT history, and 7.7% among antiretroviral-naive children. History of PMTCT exposure [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 2.6, 95% CI: 1.3–5.1] or unknown PMTCT status (AOR: 3.8, 95% CI: 1.1–13.5), low CD4 (AOR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.3–3.6), current breastfeeding (AOR: 7.4, 95% CI: 2.6–21), and current maternal ART use (AOR: 6.4, 95% CI: 3.4–11.9) emerged as risk factors for primary HIVDR in multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Pretreatment HIVDR is high, especially in children with PMTCT exposure. Protease inhibitor (PI)–based regimens are advocated by the World Health Organization, but availability in children is limited. Children with (unknown) PMTCT exposure, low CD4 count, current breastfeeding, or maternal ART need to be prioritized to receive PI-based regimens.

In sub-Saharan Africa antiretroviral therapy (ART) is being decentralized from tertiary/secondary care facilities to primary care. The Lablite project supports effective decentralization in 3 countries. It began with a cross-sectional survey to describe HIV and ART services. 81 purposively sampled health facilities in Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe were surveyed. The lowest level primary health centres comprised 16/20, 21/39 and 16/22 facilities included in Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe respectively. In Malawi and Uganda most primary health facilities had at least 1 medical assistant/clinical officer, with average 2.5 and 4 nurses/midwives for median catchment populations of 29,275 and 9,000 respectively. Primary health facilities in Zimbabwe were run by nurses/midwives, with average 6 for a median catchment population of 8,616. All primary health facilities provided HIV testing and counselling, 50/53 (94%) cotrimoxazole preventive therapy (CPT), 52/53 (98%) prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) and 30/53 (57%) ART management (1/30 post ART-initiation follow-up only). All secondary and tertiary-level facilities provided HIV and ART services. In total, 58/81 had ART provision. Stock-outs during the 3 months prior to survey occurred across facility levels for HIV test-kits in 55%, 26% and 9% facilities in Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe respectively; for CPT in 58%, 32% and 9% and for PMTCT drugs in 26%, 10% and 0% of facilities (excluding facilities where patients were referred out for either drug). Across all countries, in facilities with ART stored on-site, adult ART stock-outs were reported in 3/44 (7%) facilities compared with 10/43 (23%) facility stock-outs of paediatric ART. Laboratory services at primary health facilities were limited: CD4 was used for ART initiation in 4/9, 5/6 and 13/14 in Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe respectively, but frequently only in selected patients. Routine viral load monitoring was not used; 6/58 (10%) facilities with ART provision accessed centralised viral loads for selected patients. Although coverage of HIV testing, PMTCT and cotrimoxazole prophylaxis was high in all countries, decentralization of ART services was variable and incomplete. Challenges of staffing and stock management were evident. Laboratory testing for toxicity and treatment effectiveness monitoring was not available in most primary level facilities.

Introduction: To achieve viral suppression among more than 90% of people on antiretroviral therapy (ART), improved understanding is warranted of the modifiable causes of HIV viremic episodes. We assessed the relative contributions of drug-resistance, nonadherence and low-level viremia (LLV) (viral load 50–999 cps/ml) on viremic episodes in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: In a multicountry adult cohort initiating nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based first-line ART, viremic episodes (viral load ≥1000 cps/ml) were classified as first, viral nonsuppression at 12 months; second, virological rebound at 24 months (after initial viral suppression at 12 months); third, failure to achieve viral resuppression at 24 months (after viremic episode at 12 months). We used adjusted odds ratios from multivariable logistic regression to estimate attributable fractions for each risk factor. Results: Of 2737 cohort participants, 1935 had data on pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) and at least 1 viral load outcome. Viral nonsuppression episodes [173/1935 (8.9%)] were attributable to nonadherence in 30% (35% in men vs. 24% in women) and to PDR to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in 10% (15% in women vs. 6% in men). Notably, at contemporary PDR prevalences of 10–25%, PDR would explain 13–30% of viral nonsuppression. Virological rebound episodes [96/1515 (6.3%)] were mostly attributable to LLV (29%) and nonadherence (14%), and only rarely to PDR (1.1%). Failures to achieve viral resuppression [66/81 (81.5%)] were mostly attributable to the presence of acquired drug resistance (34%) and only rarely to nonadherence (2.4%). Conclusion: Effective adherence interventions could substantially reduce viral nonsuppression (especially in men) and virological rebound (especially during LLV), but would have limited effect on improving viral resuppression. Alternative ART regimens could circumvent PDR and acquired resistance.