Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome: Hirsch MS

Yeni PG, Hammer SM, Carpenter CC, Cooper DA, Fischl MA, Gatell JM, Gazzard BG, Hirsch MS, Jacobsen DM, Katzenstein DA, Montaner JS, Richman DD, Saag MS, Schechter M, Schooley RT, Thompson MA, Vella S, Volberding PA. · Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Department of Infectious Diseases, 46 Rue Henri-Huchard, Paris, Cedex 18 France 75877. · JAMA. · Pubmed #12095387 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: New information warrants updated recommendations for the 4 central issues in antiretroviral therapy: when to start, what drugs to start with, when to change, and what to change to. These updated recommendations are intended to guide practicing physicians actively involved in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)- and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-related care. PARTICIPANTS: In 1995, physicians with specific expertise in HIV-related basic science and clinical research, antiretroviral therapy, and HIV patient care were invited by the International AIDS Society-USA to serve on a volunteer panel. In 1999, others were invited to broaden international representation. The 17-member panel met regularly in closed meetings between its last report in 2000 and April 2002 to review current data. The effort was sponsored and funded by the International AIDS Society-USA, a not-for-profit physician education organization. EVIDENCE AND CONSENSUS PROCESS: The full panel was convened in late 2000 and assigned 7 section committees. A section writer and 3 to 5 section committee members (each panel member served on numerous sections) identified relevant evidence and prepared draft recommendations. Basic science, clinical research, and epidemiologic data from the published literature and abstracts from recent (within 2 years) scientific conferences were considered by strength of evidence. Extrapolations from basic science data and expert opinion of the panel members were included as evidence. Draft sections were combined and circulated to the entire panel and discussed in a series of full-panel conference calls until consensus was reached. Final recommendations represent full consensus agreement of the panel. CONCLUSIONS: Because of increased awareness of the activity and toxicity of current drugs, the threshold for initiation of therapy has shifted to a later time in the course of HIV disease. However, the optimal time to initiate therapy remains imprecisely defined. Availability of new drugs has broadened options for therapy initiation and management of treatment failure, which remains a difficult challenge.

Schooley RT, Spino C, Kuritzkes D, Walker BD, Valentine FA, Hirsch MS, Cooney E, Friedland G, Kundu S, Merigan TC, McElrath MJ, Collier A, Plaeger S, Mitsuyasu R, Kahn J, Haslett P, Uherova P, deGruttola V, Chiu S, Zhang B, Jones G, Bell D, Ketter N, Twadell T, Chernoff D, Rosandich M. · University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver, CO, USA. · J Infect Dis. · Pubmed #11023459 No free full text.

Abstract: The potential role of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-specific immune responses in controlling viral replication in vivo has stimulated interest in enhancing virus-specific immunity by vaccinating infected individuals with HIV-1 or its components. These studies were undertaken to define patient populations most likely to respond to vaccination, with the induction of novel HIV-1-specific cellular immune responses, and to compare the safety and immunogenicity of several candidate recombinant HIV-1 envelope vaccines and adjuvants. New lymphoproliferative responses (LPRs) developed in <30% of vaccine recipients. LPRs were elicited primarily in study participants with a CD4 cell count >350 cells/mm(3) and were usually strain restricted. Responders tended to be more likely than nonresponders to have an undetectable level of HIV-1 RNA at baseline (P=.067). Induction of new cellular immune responses by HIV-1 envelope vaccines is a function of the immunologic stage of disease and baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA level and exhibits considerable vaccine strain specificity.

Motsinger AA, Ritchie MD, Shafer RW, Robbins GK, Morse GD, Labbe L, Wilkinson GR, Clifford DB, D'Aquila RT, Johnson VA, Pollard RB, Merigan TC, Hirsch MS, Donahue JP, Kim RB, Haas DW. · Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee 37203, USA. · Pharmacogenet Genomics. · Pubmed #17047492 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: For the HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitor efavirenz, variant drug transporter gene ABCB1 may predict virologic response but not plasma efavirenz exposure. Conversely, variant drug metabolizing enzyme gene CYP2B6 predicts greater plasma efavirenz exposure but not virologic response. We examined whether long-term responses to efavirenz, and/or plasma efavirenz exposure, are better predicted by multilocus genetic interactions than by individual polymorphisms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied antiretroviral-naïve study participants randomized to receive efavirenz (with or without nelfinavir) plus two nucleoside analogues in study ACTG 384, and who had DNA available for analysis. Participants were followed up for up to 3 years. Nine single nucleotide polymorphisms in ABCB1, CYP2B6, CYP3A4, CYP3A5 and CYP2C19 were identified. Gene-gene interactions were identified using multifactor dimensionality reduction. RESULTS: Among 340 efavirenz recipients, higher efavirenz AUC24 h values were associated with a single locus model involving CYP2B6 516G>T (73% accuracy; P<0.001). This was also the best model among blacks (69% accuracy; P<0.001), whereas among whites the best model involved a gene-gene interaction between CYP2B6 516G>T and ABCB1 2677G>T (82% accuracy, P<0.001). Among 155 participants who received efavirenz without nelfinavir, virologic failure was associated with a two-locus interaction between ABCB1 2677G>T and CYP2B6 516G>T (65% accuracy, P<0.001). Toxicity failure was best predicted by an interaction between ABCB1 2677G>T and ABCB1 3435C>T (71% accuracy, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Multilocus genetic interactions between variant drug metabolism and transporter genes may predict efavirenz pharmacokinetics and treatment responses. This finding may have implications for better individualizing antiretroviral therapy.