In treatment-experienced patients with suboptimal viral suppression, tenofovir DF significantly reduced HIV-1 RNA level and had a safety profile similar to that of placebo.

AMD070 is an oral CXCR4 antagonist with in vitro activity against X4-tropic human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Thirty fasting healthy male volunteers received oral doses of AMD070 ranging from a single 50-mg dose to seven 400-mg doses given every 12 h (q12h). Nine subjects received a 200-mg dose during fasting and prior to a meal. Subjects were monitored for safety and pharmacokinetics. AMD070 was well tolerated, without serious adverse events. Transient headaches (13 subjects) and neurocognitive (8 subjects) and gastrointestinal (7 subjects) symptoms were the most common complaints. Seven subjects had sinus tachycardia, and two were symptomatic. AMD070 plasma concentrations peaked 1 to 2 h after patient dosing. The estimated terminal half-life ranged from 11.2 to 15.9 h among cohorts. Dose proportionality was not demonstrated. Less than 1% of the drug appeared unchanged in the urine. Food reduced the maximum concentration of drug in serum and the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h by 70% and 56%, respectively (P < 0.01). A dose-dependent elevation of white blood cells (WBC) demonstrated a maximum twofold increase over baseline (95% confidence interval, 2.0-to 2.1-fold) in an E max model. In healthy volunteers, AMD070 was well tolerated and demonstrated mixed-order pharmacokinetics, and food reduced drug exposure. AMD070 induced a dose-related elevation of WBC which was attributed to CXCR4 blockade. Using leukocytosis as a surrogate marker for CXCR4 inhibition, this dose-response relationship suggests that the doses used in this study were active in vivo, though not maximal, throughout the dosing interval. Trough concentrations with the 400-mg dose q12h exceeded the antiviral in vitro 90% effective concentration of AMD070.

The prevalence and predisposing factors of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) were evaluated among patients in the Collaborations in Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Outcomes Research/US cohort. Of 6022 patients, 17 (0.3%) had TMA, with unadjusted incidences per 100 person-years of 0.079 for TMA, 0.009 for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, and 0.069 for hemolytic-uremic syndrome. Compared with patients without TMA, patients with TMA had lower mean CD4(+) cell counts (197 vs. 439 cells/mm(3); P=.0009) and higher mean log(10) HIV-1 RNA levels (4.6 vs. 3.3 copies/mL; P=.0001) at last follow-up and a significantly greater incidence of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (82.4% vs. 55.3%; P=.025), Mycobacterium avium complex infection (17.6% vs. 3.3%; P=.018), hepatitis C (29.4% vs. 11.3%; P=.001), and death (41.2% vs. 7.4%; P<.0001). The prevalence of herpes and use of antiherpetics were slightly higher for patients with TMA, but unadjusted distributions were not statistically significant. TMA in a cohort surveyed after the introduction of HAART was rare and was associated with advanced HIV disease.

Recently, the RV144 randomized, double-blind, efficacy trial in Thailand reported that a prime-boost human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) vaccine regimen conferred ∼30% protection against HIV acquisition. However, different analyses seemed to give conflicting results, and a heated debate ensued as scientists and the broader public struggled with their interpretation. The lack of accounting for statistical principles helped flame the debate, and we leverage these principles to provide a more scientific interpretation. We first address interpretation of frequentist results, including interpretation of P values, synthesis of results from multiple analyses (ie, intention-to-treat versus per-protocol/fully immunized), and accounting for external efficacy trials. Second, we address how Bayesian statistics, which provide clearly interpretable statements about probabilities that the vaccine efficacy takes certain values, provide more information for weighing the evidence about efficacy than do frequentist statistics alone. Third, we evaluate RV144 for completeness of end point ascertainment and integrity of blinding, necessary tasks for establishing robustly interpretable results.

These results demonstrate the activity of AMD11070, the first oral CXCR4 antagonist, against X4-tropic HIV-1. The drug was well tolerated, with no serious safety concerns. AMD11070 is on clinical hold because of histologic changes to the liver observed in long-term animal studies; additional preclinical safety assessments are pending.

Typical adherence with HAART reduces quality-adjusted life expectancy by 12% compared with ideal adherence. Interventions to improve adherence appear to be a highly cost-effective use of resources.

Thirty years after its beginning, the HIV/AIDS epidemic is still raging around the world. According to UNAIDS, in 2011 alone 1.7M deaths were attributable to AIDS, and 2.5M people were newly infected by the virus. Despite the success in treating HIV-infected people with potent antiretroviral drugs, preventing HIV infection is the key to ending the epidemic. Recently, the efficacy of topical and systemic antiviral chemoprophylaxis (i.e., preexposure prophylaxis or "PrEP"), using the same drugs used for HIV treatment, has been demonstrated in a number of clinical trials. However, results from other trials have been inconsistent, especially those evaluating PrEP in women. These inconsistencies may result from our incomplete understanding of pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) at the mucosal sites of sexual transmission: the male and female gastrointestinal and reproductive tracts. The drug concentrations used in these trials were derived from those used for treatment; however, we still do not know the relationship between the therapeutic and the preventive dose. This article presents the first comprehensive review of the available data in the HIV pharmacology field from animal models to human studies, and outlines gaps, challenges, and future directions. Addressing these pharmacological gaps and challenges will be critical in selecting and advancing future PrEP candidates and strategies with the greatest impact on the HIV epidemic.

There are currently several ongoing or planned trials evaluating the efficacy of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as a preventative approach to reducing the transmission of HIV. PrEP may prove ineffective, demonstrate partial efficacy, or show high efficacy and have the potential to reduce HIV infection in a significant way. However, in addition to the trial results, it is important that issues related to delivery, implementation and further research are also discussed. As a part of the ongoing discussion, in June 2009, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation sponsored a Planning for PrEP conference with stakeholders to review expected trial results, outline responsible educational approaches, and develop potential delivery and implementation strategies. The conference reinforced the need for continued and sustained dialogue to identify where PrEP implementation may fit best within an integrated HIV prevention package. This paper identifies the key action points that emerged from the Planning for PrEP meeting.