Since the first antiviral drug, idoxuridine, was approved in 1963, 90 antiviral drugs categorized into 13 functional groups have been formally approved for the treatment of the following 9 human infectious diseases: (i) HIV infections (protease inhibitors, integrase inhibitors, entry inhibitors, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and acyclic nucleoside phosphonate analogues), (ii) hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections (lamivudine, interferons, nucleoside analogues, and acyclic nucleoside phosphonate analogues), (iii) hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections (ribavirin, interferons, NS3/4A protease inhibitors, NS5A inhibitors, and NS5B polymerase inhibitors), (iv) herpesvirus infections (5-substituted 2'-deoxyuridine analogues, entry inhibitors, nucleoside analogues, pyrophosphate analogues, and acyclic guanosine analogues), (v) influenza virus infections (ribavirin, matrix 2 protein inhibitors, RNA polymerase inhibitors, and neuraminidase inhibitors), (vi) human cytomegalovirus infections (acyclic guanosine analogues, acyclic nucleoside phosphonate analogues, pyrophosphate analogues, and oligonucleotides), (vii) varicella-zoster virus infections (acyclic guanosine analogues, nucleoside analogues, 5-substituted 2'-deoxyuridine analogues, and antibodies), (viii) respiratory syncytial virus infections (ribavirin and antibodies), and (ix) external anogenital warts caused by human papillomavirus infections (imiquimod, sinecatechins, and podofilox). Here, we present for the first time a comprehensive overview of antiviral drugs approved over the past 50 years, shedding light on the development of effective antiviral treatments against current and emerging infectious diseases worldwide.

/pdf/approved-antiviral-drugs-over-the-past-50-years-4if2c1n8se.pdf

Approved Antiviral Drugs over the Past 50 Years

BACKGROUND 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. METHODS We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study involving adult participants who had not received previous therapy for HIV-1 infection and who had an HIV-1 RNA level of 1000 copies per milliliter or more. Participants were randomly assigned to dolutegravir at a dose of 50 mg plus abacavir–lamivudine once daily (DTG–ABC–3TC group) or combination therapy with efavirenz–tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)–emtricitabine once daily (EFV–TDF–FTC group). The primary end point was the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 48. Secondary end points included the time to viral suppression, the change from baseline in CD4+ T-cell count, safety, and viral resistance. RESULTS A total of 833 participants received at least one dose of study drug. At week 48, the proportion of participants with an HIV-1 RNA level of less than 50 copies per milliliter was significantly higher in the DTG–ABC–3TC group than in the EFV–TDF–FTC group (88% vs. 81%, P = 0.003), thus meeting the criterion for superiority. The DTG– ABC–3TC group had a shorter median time to viral suppression than did the EFV– TDF–FTC group (28 vs. 84 days, P<0.001), as well as greater increases in CD4+ T-cell count (267 vs. 208 per cubic millimeter, P<0.001). The proportion of participants who discontinued therapy owing to adverse events was lower in the DTG–ABC–3TC group than in the EFV–TDF–FTC group (2% vs. 10%); rash and neuropsychiatric events (including abnormal dreams, anxiety, dizziness, and somnolence) were significantly more common in the EFV–TDF–FTC group, whereas insomnia was reported more frequently in the DTG–ABC–3TC group. No participants in the DTG– ABC–3TC group had detectable antiviral resistance; one tenofovir DF–associated mutation and four efavirenz-associated mutations were detected in participants with virologic failure in the EFV–TDF–FTC group. CONCLUSIONS Dolutegravir plus abacavir–lamivudine had a better safety profile and was more effective through 48 weeks than the regimen with efavirenz–tenofovir DF–emtricitabine. (Funded by ViiV Healthcare; SINGLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01263015.)

/pdf/dolutegravir-plus-abacavir-lamivudine-for-the-treatment-of-3qvt73fwzw.pdf

Dolutegravir plus Abacavir–Lamivudine for the Treatment of HIV-1 Infection

Importance New data and therapeutic options warrant updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to treat or to prevent HIV infection in adults. Objective To provide updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adults (aged ≥18 years) with established HIV infection, including when to start treatment, initial regimens, and changing regimens, along with recommendations for using ARVs for preventing HIV among those at risk, including preexposure and postexposure prophylaxis. Evidence Review A panel of experts in HIV research and patient care convened by the International Antiviral Society–USA reviewed data published in peer-reviewed journals, presented by regulatory agencies, or presented as conference abstracts at peer-reviewed scientific conferences since the 2014 report, for new data or evidence that would change previous recommendations or their ratings. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in the PubMed and EMBASE databases through April 2016. Recommendations were by consensus, and each recommendation was rated by strength and quality of the evidence. Findings Newer data support the widely accepted recommendation that antiretroviral therapy should be started in all individuals with HIV infection with detectable viremia regardless of CD4 cell count. Recommended optimal initial regimens for most patients are 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI). Other effective regimens include nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors or boosted protease inhibitors with 2 NRTIs. Recommendations for special populations and in the settings of opportunistic infections and concomitant conditions are provided. Reasons for switching therapy include convenience, tolerability, simplification, anticipation of potential new drug interactions, pregnancy or plans for pregnancy, elimination of food restrictions, virologic failure, or drug toxicities. Laboratory assessments are recommended before treatment, and monitoring during treatment is recommended to assess response, adverse effects, and adherence. Approaches are recommended to improve linkage to and retention in care are provided. Daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine is recommended for use as preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection in persons at high risk. When indicated, postexposure prophylaxis should be started as soon as possible after exposure. Conclusions and Relevance Antiretroviral agents remain the cornerstone of HIV treatment and prevention. All HIV-infected individuals with detectable plasma virus should receive treatment with recommended initial regimens consisting of an InSTI plus 2 NRTIs. Preexposure prophylaxis should be considered as part of an HIV prevention strategy for at-risk individuals. When used effectively, currently available ARVs can sustain HIV suppression and can prevent new HIV infection. With these treatment regimens, survival rates among HIV-infected adults who are retained in care can approach those of uninfected adults.

/pdf/antiretroviral-drugs-for-treatment-and-prevention-of-hiv-4ztow8e871.pdf

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2016 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society–USA Panel

The overall purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance on best clinical practice in the treatment and management of adults with HIV infection with antiretroviral therapy (ART). The scope includes: (i) guidance on the initiation of ART in those previously naive to therapy; (ii)support of patients on treatment; (iii) management of patients experiencing virological failure; and (iv) recommendations in specific patient populations where other factors need to be taken into consideration. The guidelines are aimed at clinical professionals directly involved with and responsible for the care of adults with HIV infection and at community advocates responsible for promoting the best interests and care of HIV-positive adults. They should be read in conjunction with other published BHIVA guidelines.

/pdf/british-hiv-association-guidelines-for-the-treatment-of-hiv-58cu62k9mn.pdf

British HIV Association guidelines for the treatment of HIV-1-positive adults with antiretroviral therapy 2012

Summary Background In the primary analysis of SPRING-2 at week 48, dolutegravir showed non-inferior efficacy to and similar tolerability to raltegravir in adults infected with HIV-1 and naive for antiretroviral treatment. We present the 96 week results. Methods SPRING-2 is an ongoing phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 that started in Oct 19, 2010. We present results for the safety cutoff date of Jan 30, 2013. Patients had to be aged 18 years or older and have HIV-1 RNA concentrations of 1000 copies per mL or more. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or raltegravir (400 mg twice daily), plus investigator-selected tenofovir–emtricitabine or abacavir–lamivudine. Prespecified 96 week secondary endpoints included proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL, CD4 cell count changes from baseline, safety, tolerability, and genotypic or phenotypic resistance. We used an intention-to-treat exposed population (received at least one dose of study drug) for the analyses. Sponsor staff were masked to treatment assignment until primary analysis at week 48; investigators, site staff, and patients were masked until week 96. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01227824. Findings Of 1035 patients screened, 827 were randomly assigned to study group, and 822 received at least one dose of the study drug (411 patients in each group). At week 96, 332 (81%) of 411 patients in the dolutegravir group and 314 (76%) of 411 patients in the raltegravir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted difference 4·5%, 95% CI −1·1% to 10·0%) confirming non-inferiority. Secondary analyses of efficacy such as per protocol (HIV RNA vs 43 [10%] patients for raltegravir). Median increases in CD4 cell count from baseline were similar between groups (276 cells per μL for dolutegravir and 264 cells per μL for raltegravir). Ten patients (2%) in each group discontinued because of adverse events, with few such events between weeks 48 and 96 (zero in the dolutegravir group and one in the raltegravir group). No study-related serious adverse events occurred between week 48 and week 96. At virological failure, no additional resistance to integrase inhibitors or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors was detected since week 48 or in any patient receiving dolutegravir. Interpretation At week 96, once-daily dolutegravir was non-inferior to twice-daily raltegravir in treatment-naive, patients with HIV-1. Once-daily dosing without requirement for a pharmacokinetic booster makes dolutegravir-based therapy an attractive treatment option for HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients. Funding ViiV Healthcare.

/pdf/once-daily-dolutegravir-versus-twice-daily-raltegravir-in-3k6oqz7iaz.pdf

Once-daily dolutegravir versus twice-daily raltegravir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection (SPRING-2 study): 96 week results from a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

https://static.medicine.iupui.edu/divisions/infdresearch/SAILING%20-%20Lancet%202013.pdf

Dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-experienced, integrase-inhibitor-naive adults with HIV: week 48 results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SAILING study.

Diagnosis of primary HIV infection (PHI) has important clinical and public health implications. HAART initiation at this stage remains controversial.

/pdf/acute-retroviral-syndrome-and-high-baseline-viral-load-are-5d9y31x18u.pdf

Acute retroviral syndrome and high baseline viral load are predictors of rapid HIV progression among untreated Argentinean seroconverters

OBJECTIVES To compare the safety and antiviral activity of once (QD) or twice (BID) daily lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in combination with investigator-selected nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in treatment-experienced subjects. METHODS Subjects failing treatment with HIV-1 RNA > 1000 copies per milliliter received LPV/r tablets 800/200 mg QD (n = 300) or 400/100 mg BID (n = 299) with investigator-chosen nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Efficacy was determined by the intent-to-treat time to loss of virologic response (ITT-TLOVR) algorithm. Safety, tolerability, adherence, impact of baseline protease mutations on virologic response, and emergence of resistance on therapy were assessed. RESULTS Demographics were comparable across groups. By intent-to-treat time to loss of virologic response, 166 QD subjects (55.3%) and 155 BID subjects (51.8%) were responders at week 48 (P = 0.413), with similar mean increases in CD4 T-cell count. QD subjects demonstrated better adherence than BID subjects. The occurrence of treatment-related moderate/severe adverse events was comparable for all events except nausea, which was reported more frequently among BID-treated subjects. Emergence of new protease resistance mutations on treatment was similarly infrequent in both groups. CONCLUSION LPV/r dosed QD resulted in increased treatment adherence and was as efficacious as BID LPV/r while providing similar safety, tolerability, and limited resistance evolution.

Horacio Mingrone

Papers

Dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-experienced, integrase-inhibitor-naive adults with HIV: week 48 results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SAILING study.

Acute retroviral syndrome and high baseline viral load are predictors of rapid HIV progression among untreated Argentinean seroconverters

Similar safety and efficacy of once- and twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir tablets in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected subjects at 48 weeks.