Prudence Ive

Bio: Prudence Ive is an academic researcher from University of the Witwatersrand. The author has contributed to research in topics: Viral load & Tuberculosis. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 50 publications receiving 3039 citations.

Timing of Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV-1 Infection and Tuberculosis

Abstract: Background Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is indicated during tuberculosis treatment in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), but the timing for the initiation of ART wh...

Maraviroc versus Efavirenz, Both in Combination with Zidovudine-Lamivudine, for the Treatment of Antiretroviral-Naive Subjects with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 Infection

Abstract: n p 721 vs 73.1% for efavirenz) but not for !50 copies/mL (65.3% vs 69.3%) at a threshold of 10%. More maraviroc patients discontinued for lack of efficacy (11.9% vs 4.2%), but fewer discontinued for adverse events (4.2% vs 13.6%). In a post hoc reanalysis excluding 107 patients (15%) with non-R5 screening virus by the current, more sensitive tropism assay, the lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the difference between treatment groups was above ‐10% for each end point. Conclusions. Twice-daily maraviroc was not noninferior to efavirenz at !50 copies/mL in the primary analysis. However, 15% of patients would have been ineligible for inclusion by a more sensitive screening assay. Their retrospective exclusion resulted in similar response rates in both arms Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: (NCT00098293).

SOLO: 48-week efficacy and safety comparison of once-daily fosamprenavir /ritonavir versus twice-daily nelfinavir in naive HIV-1-infected patients.

Abstract: Objective: To compare the magnitude and durability of the antiviral response to fosamprenavir (FPV) plus ritonavir (RTV) once-daily (FPV/r QD) with nelfinavir twice-daily (NFV BID), each administered with abacavir and lamivudine twice-daily. Methods: An international, phase III, randomized, open-label study in antiretroviral therapy-naive, HIV-infected adults. Results: Patients with advanced HIV disease received FPV/r QD (n = 322) or NFV BID (n = 327). At week 48, 69% of patients in the FPV/r QD group and 68% in the NFV BID group had plasma HIV-1 RNA (vRNA) < 400 copies/ml, whereas 55% of patients in the FPV/r QD group and 53% in the NFV BID group had vRNA < 50 copies/ml (intent to treat, rebound/discontinuation = failure). More patients in the NFV BID group (17%) experienced virological failure than in the FPV/r QD group (7%). Efficacy of FPV/r QD was maintained in patients with CD4+ cell counts < 50 × 10 6 cells/I or vRNA ≥ 100 000 copies/ml at entry. At week 48, median CD4+ cell counts were increased to 203 × 10 6 cells/l (FPV/r QD group) and 207 × 10 6 cells/l (NFV BID group). Both regimens were generally well tolerated. Diarrhea was more common on NFV BID than on FPV/r QD (16 versus 9%; P= 0.008). Fasting lipid profile results were generally favorable in both treatment arms. FPV/r QD maintained plasma amprenavir (APV) trough concentrations above the mean phenotypic drug-susceptibility (IC 50 ) for wild-type virus for APV. Conclusion: As a first choice protease inhibitor with a low daily pill burden, FPV/ r QD was well tolerated and provided potent, durable antiviral suppression.

British HIV Association guidelines for the treatment of HIV-1-infected adults with antiretroviral therapy 2008

Abstract: The 2008 BHIVA Guidelines have been updated to incorporate all the new relevant information (including presentations at the 15th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections 2008) since the last iteration. The guidelines follow the methodology outlined below and all the peer-reviewed publications and important, potentially treatment-changing abstracts from the last 2 years have been reviewed. The translation of data into clinical practice is often difficult even with the best possible evidence (i.e. two randomized controlled trials) because of trial design, inclusion criteria and precise surrogate marker endpoints (see Appendix). The recommendations based upon expert opinion have the least good evidence but perhaps provide an important reason for writing the guidelines to produce a consensual opinion about current practice. It must, however, be appreciated that such opinion is often wrong and should not stifle research to challenge it. Similarly, although the Writing Group seeks to provide guidelines to optimize treatment, such care needs to be individualized and we have not constructed a document that we would wish to see used as a ‘standard’ for litigation.

Official American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines: Treatment of Drug-Susceptible Tuberculosis.

Abstract: The American Thoracic Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Infectious Diseases Society of America jointly sponsored the development of this guideline for the treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis, which is also endorsed by the European Respiratory Society and the US National Tuberculosis Controllers Association. Representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Canadian Thoracic Society, the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, and the World Health Organization also participated in the development of the guideline. This guideline provides recommendations on the clinical and public health management of tuberculosis in children and adults in settings in which mycobacterial cultures, molecular and phenotypic drug susceptibility tests, and radiographic studies, among other diagnostic tools, are available on a routine basis. For all recommendations, literature reviews were performed, followed by discussion by an expert committee according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Given the public health implications of prompt diagnosis and effective management of tuberculosis, empiric multidrug treatment is initiated in almost all situations in which active tuberculosis is suspected. Additional characteristics such as presence of comorbidities, severity of disease, and response to treatment influence management decisions. Specific recommendations on the use of case management strategies (including directly observed therapy), regimen and dosing selection in adults and children (daily vs intermittent), treatment of tuberculosis in the presence of HIV infection (duration of tuberculosis treatment and timing of initiation of antiretroviral therapy), as well as treatment of extrapulmonary disease (central nervous system, pericardial among other sites) are provided. The development of more potent and better-tolerated drug regimens, optimization of drug exposure for the component drugs, optimal management of tuberculosis in special populations, identification of accurate biomarkers of treatment effect, and the assessment of new strategies for implementing regimens in the field remain key priority areas for research. See the full-text online version of the document for detailed discussion of the management of tuberculosis and recommendations for practice.

Advances in the development of new tuberculosis drugs and treatment regimens

Abstract: Despite the introduction 40 years ago of the inexpensive and effective four-drug (isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide and ethambutol) treatment regimen, tuberculosis (TB) continues to cause considerable morbidity and mortality worldwide. For the first time since the 1960s, new and novel drugs and regimens for all forms of TB are emerging. Such regimens are likely to utilize both repurposed drugs and new chemical entities, and several of these regimens are now progressing through clinical trials. This article covers current concepts and recent advances in TB drug discovery and development, including an update of ongoing TB treatment trials, newer clinical trial designs, TB biomarkers and adjunct host-directed therapies.