Background Late initiation of HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) in pregnancy is associated with not achieving viral suppression before giving birth and increased mother-to-child transmission of HIV. We aimed to investigate virological suppression before giving birth with dolutegravir compared with efavirenz, when initiated during the third trimester. MethodsIn this randomised, open-label trial, DolPHIN-2, we recruited pregnant women in South Africa and Uganda aged at least 18 years, with untreated but confirmed HIV infection and an estimated gestation of at least 28 weeks, initiating ART in third trimester. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to dolutegravir-based or efavirenz-based therapy. HIV viral load was measured 7 days and 28 days after antiretroviral initiation, at 36 weeks' gestation, and at the post-partum visit (0-14 days post partum). The primary efficacy outcome was a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL at the first post-partum visit, and the primary safety outcome was the occurrence of drug-related adverse events in mothers and infants until the post-partum visit. Longer-term follow-up of mothers and infants continues. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03249181.Findings Between Jan 23, and Aug 15, 2018, we randomly assigned 268 mothers to dolutegravir (135) or efavirenz (133). All mothers and their infants were included in the safety analysis, and 250 mothers (125 in the dolutegravir group, 125 in the efavirenz group) and their infants in efficacy analyses, by intention-to-treat analyses. The median duration of maternal therapy at birth was 55 days (IQR 33-77). 89 (74%) of 120 in the dolutegravir group had viral loads less than 50 copies per mL, compared with 50 (43%) of 117 in the efavirenz group (risk ratio 1•64, 95% CI 1•31-2•06). 30 (22%) of 137 mothers in the dolutegravir group reported serious adverse events compared with 14 (11%) of 131 in the efavirenz group (p=0•013), particularly surrounding pregnancy and puerperium. We found no differences in births less than 37 weeks and less than 34 weeks gestation (16•4% vs 3•3%, across both groups). Three stillbirths in the dolutegravir group and one in the efavirenz group were considered unrelated to treatment. Three infant HIV infections were detected, all in the dolutegravir group, and were considered likely to be in-utero transmissions.Interpretation Our data support the revision to WHO guidelines recommending the transition to dolutegravir in first-line ART for all adults, regardless of pregnancy or child-bearing potential.Funding Unitaid.

BackgroundThe global transition to use of dolutegravir (DTG) in WHO-preferred regimens for HIV treatment is limited by lack of knowledge on use in pregnancy. Here we assessed the relationship between drug concentrations (pharmacokinetics, PK), including in breastmilk, and impact on viral suppression when initiated in the third trimester (T3).Methods and findingsIn DolPHIN-1, HIV-infected treatment-naïve pregnant women (28–36 weeks of gestation, age 26 (19–42), weight 67kg (45–119), all Black African) in Uganda and South Africa were randomised 1:1 to dolutegravir (DTG) or efavirenz (EFV)-containing ART until 2 weeks post-partum (2wPP), between 9th March 2017 and 16th January 2018, with follow-up until six months postpartum. The primary endpoint was pharmacokinetics of DTG in women and breastfed infants; secondary endpoints included maternal and infant safety and viral suppression. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling of DTG was undertaken at day 14 and 2wPP following administration of a medium-fat breakfast, with additional paired sampling between maternal plasma and cord blood, breastmilk and infant plasma.No differences in median baseline maternal age, gestation (31 vs 30 weeks), weight, obstetric history, viral load (4.5 log10 copies/mL both arms) and CD4 count (343 vs 466 cells/mm3) were observed between DTG (n = 29) and EFV (n = 31) arms. Although DTG Ctrough was below the target 324ng/mL (clinical EC90) in 9/28 (32%) mothers in the third trimester, transfer across the placenta (121% of plasma concentrations) and into breastmilk (3% of plasma concentrations), coupled with slower elimination, led to significant infant plasma exposures (3–8% of maternal exposures). Both regimens were well-tolerated with no significant differences in frequency of adverse events (two on DTG-ART, one on EFV-ART, all considered unrelated to drug). No congenital abnormalities were observed. DTG resulted in significantly faster viral suppression (P = 0.02) at the 2wPP visit, with median time to <50 copies/mL of 32 vs 72 days. Limitations related to the requirement to initiate EFV-ART prior to randomisation, and to continue DTG for only two weeks postpartum.ConclusionDespite low plasma DTG exposures in the third trimester, transfer across the placenta and through breastfeeding was observed in this study, with persistence in infants likely due to slower metabolic clearance. HIV RNA suppression <50 copies/mL was twice as fast with DTG compared to EFV, suggesting DTG has potential to reduce risk of vertical transmission in mothers who are initiated on treatment late in pregnancy.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov NCT02245022

No abstract

Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) are currently the first-line drugs for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria, the most deadly of the human malarias. Malaria parasite clearance rates estimated from patients' blood following ACT treatment have been widely adopted as a measure of drug effectiveness and as surveillance tools for detecting the presence of potential artemisinin resistance. This metric has not been investigated in detail, nor have its properties or potential shortcomings been identified. Herein, the pharmacology of drug treatment, parasite biology, and human immunity are combined to investigate the dynamics of parasite clearance following ACT. This approach parsimoniously recovers the principal clinical features and dynamics of clearance. Human immunity is the primary determinant of clearance rates, unless or until artemisinin killing has fallen to near-ineffective levels. Clearance rates are therefore highly insensitive metrics for surveillance that may lead to overconfidence, as even quite substantial reductions in drug sensitivity may not be detected as lower clearance rates. Equally serious is the use of clearance rates to quantify the impact of ACT regimen changes, as this strategy will plausibly miss even very substantial increases in drug effectiveness. In particular, the malaria community may be missing the opportunity to dramatically increase ACT effectiveness through regimen changes, particularly through a switch to twice-daily regimens and/or increases in artemisinin dosing levels. The malaria community therefore appears overreliant on a single metric of drug effectiveness, the parasite clearance rate, that has significant and serious shortcomings.T he timely provision of effective antimalarial drugs is a public health priority in most of the developing world (1). The current generation of antimalarial drugs centers on artemisininbased combination therapies (ACTs), and recent reports that tolerance of and/or resistance to artemisinins is evolving (2-7) have caused considerable concern (8-12). ACTs remain largely effective in clearing malaria infections, but reduced parasite clearance rates (i.e., the rate at which parasitemia declines after treatment [13]) have been widely interpreted as indicating the presence of reduced parasite sensitivity to the artemisinin component and hence indicative of the early stages of resistance (2-12). Parasite clearance rates have also been used to evaluate the likely clinical impact of alterations in artemisinin or ACT dosing regimens (14) that may be able to increase ACT effectiveness and hence reduce the threat of resistance. It therefore seems reasonable to expect that parasite clearance rates are a well-validated, demonstrably robust measure of drug effectiveness and resistance. Unfortunately, this appears not to be the case, as reflected in concerns raised in recent commentaries (15-17). Herein, the pharmacology of drug action, parasite biology, and human immunity are combined to investigate the dynamics of parasite clearance following...

BackgroundSuccessful programmatic use of anti-malarials faces challenges that are not covered by standard drug development processes. The development of appropriate pragmatic dosing regimens for low-resource settings or community-based use is not formally regulated, even though these may alter factors which can substantially affect individual patient and population level outcome, such as drug exposure, patient adherence and the spread of drug resistance and can affect a drug’s reputation and its eventual therapeutic lifespan.MethodsAn in silico pharmacological model of anti-malarial drug treatment with the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of artemether-lumefantrine (AM-LF, Coartem®) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHA-PPQ, Eurartesim®) was constructed to assess the potential impact of programmatic factors, including regionally optimized, age-based dosing regimens, poor patient adherence, food effects and drug resistance on treatment outcome at population level, and compared both drugs’ susceptibility to these factors.ResultsCompared with DHA-PPQ, therapeutic effectiveness of AM-LF seems more robust to factors affecting drug exposure, such as age- instead of weight-based dosing or poor adherence. The model highlights the sub-optimally low ratio of DHA:PPQ which, in combination with the narrow therapeutic dose range of PPQ compared to DHA that drives the weight or age cut-offs, leaves DHA at a high risk of under-dosing.ConclusionPharmacological modelling of real-life scenarios can provide valuable supportive data and highlight modifiable determinants of therapeutic effectiveness that can help optimize the deployment of anti-malarials in control programmes.