SlideShare una empresa de Scribd logo
1 de 9
Descargar para leer sin conexión
The   n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l   of   m e dic i n e



                                                                                  original article


                                                      Antiretroviral Agents and Prevention
                                                  of Malaria in HIV-Infected Ugandan Children
                                                            Jane Achan, M.Med., Abel Kakuru, M.D., Gloria Ikilezi, M.D.,
                                                    Theodore Ruel, M.D., Tamara D. Clark, M.P.H., Christian Nsanzabana, Ph.D.,
                                                          Edwin Charlebois, M.P.H., Ph.D., Francesca Aweeka, Pharm.D.,
                                                      Grant Dorsey, M.D., Ph.D., Philip J. Rosenthal, M.D., Diane Havlir, M.D.,
                                                                       and Moses R. Kamya, M.Med., Ph.D.

                                                                                        A BS T R AC T

                                                  Background
From the Departments of Pediatrics and            Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitors show activity against
Child Health (J.A.) and Medicine (M.R.K.),        Plasmodium falciparum in vitro. We hypothesized that the incidence of malaria in HIV-
Makerere University College of Health
Sciences, and the Infectious Diseases             infected children would be lower among children receiving lopinavir–ritonavir–
Research Collaboration (J.A., A.K., G.I.,         based antiretroviral therapy (ART) than among those receiving nonnucleoside
M.R.K.) — both in Kampala, Uganda; and            reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)–based ART.
the Departments of Pediatrics (T.R.),
Medicine (T.D.C., C.N., E.C., G.D., P.J.R.,       Methods
D.H.), and Clinical Pharmacy, Drug Re-
search Unit (F.A.), University of California,
                                                  We conducted an open-label trial in which HIV-infected children 2 months to 5 years
San Francisco, San Francisco. Address             of age who were eligible for ART or were currently receiving NNRTI-based ART
reprint requests to Dr. Achan at Makerere         were randomly assigned to either lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART or NNRTI-based
University College of Health Sciences,
P.O. Box 7475, Kampala, Uganda, or at
                                                  ART and were followed for 6 months to 2 years. Cases of uncomplicated malaria
achanj@yahoo.co.uk.                               were treated with artemether–lumefantrine. The primary end point was the incidence
N Engl J Med 2012;367:2110-8.
                                                  of malaria.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200501                        Results
Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society.
                                                  We enrolled 176 children, of whom 170 received the study regimen: 86 received
                                                  NNRTI-based ART, and 84 lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART. The incidence of ma-
                                                  laria was lower among children receiving the lopinavir–ritonavir–based regimen
                                                  than among those receiving the NNRTI-based regimen (1.32 vs. 2.25 episodes per
                                                  person-year; incidence-rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.97;
                                                  P = 0.04), as was the risk of a recurrence of malaria after treatment with arte-
                                                  mether–lumefantrine (28.1% vs. 54.2%; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.76;
                                                  P = 0.004). The median lumefantrine level on day 7 after treatment for malaria was
                                                  significantly higher in the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group. In
                                                  the lopinavir–ritonavir group, lumefantrine levels exceeding 300 ng per milliliter on
                                                  day 7 were associated with a reduction of more than 85% in the 63-day risk of recur-
                                                  rent malaria. A greater number of serious adverse events occurred in the lopinavir–
                                                  ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group (5.6% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.16). Pruritus occurred
                                                  significantly more frequently in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and elevated alanine
                                                  aminotransferase levels significantly more frequently in the NNRTI group.
                                                  Conclusions
                                                  Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART as compared with NNRTI-based ART reduced the
                                                  incidence of malaria by 41%, with the lower incidence attributable largely to a sig-
                                                  nificant reduction in the recurrence of malaria after treatment with artemether–
                                                  lumefantrine. Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART was accompanied by an increase in
                                                  serious adverse events. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of
                                                  Child Health and Human Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00978068.)
2110                                                          n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012

                                                            The New England Journal of Medicine
                             Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                                              Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children




M
           alaria and human immunodefi-                   dix and in the protocol, both of which are avail-
           ciency virus (HIV) infection impose            able with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
           immense and overlapping burdens in             The parents or guardians provided written in-
sub-Saharan Africa. Prophylaxis with trimetho­            formed consent for the participation of their
prim–sulfamethoxazole and insecticide-treated             children in the trial.
bed nets reduce the incidence of malaria among
HIV-infected children, but protection is incom-           Study Design
plete, and even with the use of these protective          This was an open-label trial with randomization
strategies, the burden of malaria remains great           stratified at the time of enrollment according to
in areas of high-intensity transmission.1 Thus,           prior or no prior receipt of ART. Randomization
new approaches to the prevention of malaria are           was performed in permuted blocks of 2 or 4.
an important public health priority.                      Participants received either lopinavir–ritonavir
    Antiretroviral protease inhibitors show in vitro      (Abbott Laboratories) plus two NRTIs or an
activity against Plasmodium falciparum2-4 (the cause      NNRTI — nevirapine (for children <3 years of
of most malaria cases in Africa), probably owing          age) or efavirenz (for children ≥3 years of age)
to inhibition of plasmodial aspartic proteases            — plus two NRTIs. The NRTIs that were used in
that are biochemically similar to the HIV-1 pro-          the regimens were lamivudine and zidovudine,
tease.3,5 Lopinavir is the most potent of these           with stavudine or abacavir replacing zidovudine
inhibitors and is active at levels well below those       in children who had anemia. Children who were
achieved with standard doses of coformulated              already receiving ART were randomly assigned to
lopinavir–ritonavir.2,3 Since lopinavir–ritonavir         continue their current regimen or to switch to
is increasingly available for the treatment of HIV        lopinavir–ritonavir while continuing the same
infections in Africa, it may represent a valuable         NRTIs. Parents and guardians received counsel-
tool for the prevention of malaria. However,              ing on adherence before the children underwent
because ritonavir inhibits the metabolism of              randomization and were given a 4-week supply of
many drugs, it has the potential for interactions         ART at each monthly visit. Insulated coolers were
with antimalarial agents, including widely used           provided when liquid lopinavir–ritonavir was dis-
artemisinin-based combination therapies, poten-           pensed for young children. Adherence to ART
tially affecting the efficacy and safety of the           was assessed monthly on the basis of caregiver
drugs.6 We assessed the incidence of malaria in           reports and pill counts.
HIV-infected Ugandan children who were ran-
domly assigned to receive a lopinavir–ritonavir–          Study Procedures
based antiretroviral regimen or a nonnucleoside           At the time of enrollment, children received a
reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)–based             long-lasting insecticide-treated bed net, a hygienic
antiretroviral regimen.                                   water-storage container, multivitamins, and tri-
                                                          methoprim–sulfamethoxazole to be taken daily.
                   Me thods                               Participants received all their medical care at a
                                                          study clinic that was open every day. Routine vis-
Study Participants                                        its were scheduled every 4 weeks, and routine
We conducted the study in Tororo, Uganda, an              laboratory tests were performed every 12 weeks.
area of high-intensity malaria transmission.7 Eli-        Parents or guardians were encouraged to bring a
gible children were 2 months to 5 years of age,           child to the clinic any time the child was ill. In
with confirmed HIV infection. Participants had            the case of children who presented with a docu-
either never received antiretroviral therapy (ART)        mented fever (a tympanic temperature ≥38.0°C)
and were eligible for initiation of ART according         or a history of fever in the previous 24 hours,
to national guidelines or were currently receiving        blood was obtained by finger prick for examina-
standard first-line ART, comprising one NNRTI             tion of a thick blood smear. The diagnosis of
plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibi-         malaria was made if the smear was positive for
tors (NRTIs), and had an HIV RNA level of less            malaria parasites. Children with uncomplicated
than 400 copies per milliliter, as assessed in the        malaria were treated with artemether–lumefan-
most recent measurement during the preceding­             trine, which is the recommended first-line treat-
6 months. A complete description of the entry             ment in Uganda, and the parents or guardians
criteria is provided in the Supplementary Appen-          were instructed to bring the children back for

                                n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012                                     2111
                                          The New England Journal of Medicine
           Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                            Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
The   n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l    of   m e dic i n e


       follow-up evaluation on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21,            assay precision (percentage coefficient of varia-
       and 28. The administration of each first daily              tion) was 5.3 to 6.1% and 2.2 to 10%, respec-
       dose of artemether–lumefantrine was directly                tively. The interassay and intra-assay accuracy
       observed in the study clinic, and each second               was 103.5 to 107.1% and 99.5 to 109.7%, respec-
       daily dose was administered at home. A complete             tively. The lower limit of quantification was 50 ng
       blood count and measurement of the alanine                  per milliliter. At the time of the diagnosis of ma-
       aminotransferase level were performed on days 0             laria, in vitro culturing of selected P. falciparum
       and 28. From July 13, 2010, through June 8, 2011,           isolates was performed as described previously.12
       blood samples were obtained by means of finger              After 2 to 4 weeks, aliquots were frozen in glyc-
       prick 7 days after initiation of artemether–lume-           erol and stored in liquid nitrogen; they were sub-
       fantrine therapy, for measurement of lumefan-               sequently thawed and cloned by means of a limit-
       trine levels. After November 15, 2010, electrocar-          ing-dilution technique.13 Drug-interaction studies
       diograms were obtained and were read by trained             were performed on clones from two different pa-
       study physicians on days 0 and 3 to assess cor-             tients with the use of the checkerboard tech-
       rected QT (QTc) intervals. Outcomes of malaria              nique, as described previously.2
       treatment were classified according to World
       Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.8 Adverse              Study End Points
       events were assessed at every visit and were grad-          The primary end point was the incidence of ma-
       ed according to standardized criteria.9                     laria, which was defined as the number of inci-
                                                                   dent episodes of malaria per time at risk. Malaria
       Study Oversight                                             that was diagnosed within 14 days after a prior
       The study was approved by the Makerere Univer-              episode was not considered to be an incident
       sity School of Medicine Research and Ethics                 event. The time at risk was calculated as the time
       Committee, the Uganda National Council for Sci-             from the day after initiation of study treatment to
       ence and Technology, and the University of Cali-            the last day of observation, minus 14 days after
       fornia, San Francisco, Committee for Human                  each incident episode of malaria. In the calcula-
       Research. Lopinavir–ritonavir was donated by                tion of the time at risk, discounting the 14 days
       Abbott Laboratories, which played no role in the            after each incident episode of malaria is a stan-
       design of the study, the accrual or analysis of the         dard approach. Secondary outcomes included the
       data, or the preparation of the manuscript. All             incidence of complicated malaria, the efficacy
       other antiretroviral drugs were available through           and safety of antimalarial therapy, and pharma-
       existing distribution systems of the Uganda Min-            cokinetic characteristics of lumefantrine.
       istry of Health, through Tororo District Hospital;
       in the event that any of these drugs were not               Statistical Analysis
       available through this process, the drugs were              To test the hypothesis that lopinavir–ritonavir–
       purchased by the study team from a reputable                based ART would reduce the incidence of malar-
       pharmacy. The antimalarial drugs were pur-                  ia, we assumed that the incidence of malaria in
       chased by the study team. All the authors vouch             the NNRTI group would be 0.70 episodes per
       for the completeness and accuracy of the data               person-year and estimated that we would need a
       and analyses and for the fidelity of the study to           sample of 300 participants for the study to have
       the protocol.                                               80% power to show a 35% reduction in the inci-
                                                                   dence of malaria in the lopinavir–ritonavir group,
       Laboratory Procedures                                       at a two-sided significance level of 0.05. We sub-
       Parasite density was assessed from blood smears             sequently observed an incidence of malaria in the
       as described previously.10 If a participant had a           NNRTI group that was higher than anticipated
       recurrence of malaria 4 to 63 days after the ini-           (2.19 episodes per person-year) and revised the
       tiation of malaria therapy, genotyping was per-             sample size to 150 participants, who would be
       formed, as described previously, to distinguish             followed for at least 6 months.
       recrudescence from new infection.10 Lumefan-                    The statistical analysis was performed accord-
       trine levels were measured in 25-μl samples as              ing to the intention-to-treat principle, with the use
       described previously.11 The interassay and intra-           of Stata software, version 11. For the between-



2112                                      n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012

                                       The New England Journal of Medicine
        Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                         Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children




                                                       404 Children were screened



                                                                                228 Were excluded
                                                                                  136 Were not eligible for ART
                                                                                   34 Were on ART with detectable viral load
                                                                                   32 Were HIV-negative
                                                                                    8 Had not received ART but had prior exposure
                                                                                      to nevirapine
                                                                                    3 Were on ART for <12 mo
                                                                                    3 Were >5 yr of age
                                                                                    3 Had active severe medical condition
                                                                                    3 Failed to return for laboratory results
                                                                                    2 Had abnormal screening laboratory results
                                                                                    1 Lived >30 km from study clinic
                                                                                    1 Was on second-line ART
                                                                                    1 Intended to move from study area
                                                                                    1 Refused informed consent


                                                  176 Were enrolled and underwent
                                                          randomization




                          89 Were assigned to receive                           87 Were assigned to receive
                              NNRTI-based ART                                  lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART


  3 Did not initiate study drug
                                                                                                         3 Did not initiate study drug
    2 Were awaiting initiation
                                                                                                           2 Were awaiting initiation
      of ART
                                                                                                             of ART
    1 Was unable to be located
                                                                                                           1 Died
      for >60 days



                            86 Initiated study drugs                                84 Initiated study drugs



  6 Were withdrawn from study
    2 Died
    2 Were unable to comply                                                                             1 Was withdrawn from study
      with study                                                                                          owing to relocation from
    1 Was withdrawn by investi-                                                                           study area
      gators
    1 Moved from study area


                      80 Were included in the follow-up                      83 Were included in the follow-up
                      through end of observation period                      through end of observation period


 Figure 1. Screening, Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up.
 ART denotes antiretroviral therapy, HIV human immunodeficiency virus, and NNRTI nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase
 inhibitor.



group comparisons of the incidence of malaria,                       measures in the same patient. Pairwise compari-
we used a negative binomial regression model.                        sons of categorical and continuous variables at the
Time to events was estimated with the use of the                     level of each episode of malaria were made with
Kaplan–Meier product-limit formula, and compari-                     the use of generalized estimating equations with
sons were made with the use of a Cox propor-                         adjustment for repeated measures in the same pa-
tional-hazards model with adjustment for repeated                    tient and with exchangeable correlation and robust



                                     n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012                                                    2113
                                            The New England Journal of Medicine
             Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                              Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
The   n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l    of   m e dic i n e


                    standard errors. P values of less than 0.05 were domization: 89 were assigned to NNRTI-based
                    considered to indicate statistical significance.           ART and 87 to lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART.
                                                                               Study drugs were initiated in 86 children in the
                                             R e sult s                        NNRTI group and 84 in the lopinavir–ritonavir
                                                                               group, and these children were followed for a
                    Study Participants and Follow-up                           median of 366 days. The baseline characteristics
                    From September 2009 through July 2011, a total were similar between the two groups (Table 1).
                    of 404 children were screened for eligibility; 228 During monthly routine assessments, 97% of
                    were found not to be eligible, including 136 who caregivers reported 100% adherence to ART.
                    did not meet the criteria for initiation of ART
                    (Fig. 1). A total of 176 children underwent ran- Incidence of Malaria
                                                                               Among the study participants, there were 285
 Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of Participants Who Received Study Drugs.*  new episodes of malaria during 162 person-years
                                         NNRTI-Based      Lopinavir–Ritonavir–
                                                                               of follow-up; all the episodes of malaria were due
 Characteristic                           ART (N = 86)     Based ART (N = 84)  to P. falciparum infection. The incidence of ma-
 Age — yr                                                                      laria was significantly lower in the lopinavir–
                                                                               ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group (1.32 vs.
    Median                                     3.1                 2.9
                                                                               2.25 episodes per person-year), resulting in pro-
    Range                                    0.5–5.9             0.7–6.0
                                                                               tective efficacy of 41% with lopinavir–ritonavir
 Female sex — no. (%)                        41 (48)             41 (49)       (incidence rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence inter-
 No previous ART — no. (%)                   58 (67)             57 (68)       val [CI], 0.36 to 0.97; P = 0.04) (Table 2). Compli-
 WHO clinical HIV stage — no. (%)                                              cated malaria occurred infrequently, with a simi-
    I                                        66 (77)             60 (71)       lar incidence in the two groups. To assess the
    II                                       15 (17)             16 (19)
                                                                               effect of ART independently of potential interac-
                                                                               tions with antimalarial therapy after treatment
    III                                       1 (1)               2 (2)
                                                                               for malaria, we compared the two groups with
    IV                                        4 (5)               6 (7)
                                                                               respect to the time to the first episode of malaria
 CD4 percentage†                                                               (Fig. 2A). The 6-month risk of a first episode of
    No previous ART                                                            malaria was 40.7% in the lopinavir–ritonavir
        Median                                 16                  14          group, as compared with 52.5% in the NNRTI
        Range                                 2–43                2–44         group (hazard ratio with lopinavir–ritonavir,
    Previous ART
                                                                               0.71; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.12; P = 0.14) (Table 2).
        Median                               30                    31
                                                                                  Efficacy and Safety Outcomes after
        Range                              10–45                  8–51            Antimalarial Therapy
 Viral load — log10 copies/ml                                                   Of the 285 new episodes of malaria, 281 (98.6%)
     No previous ART                                                            were uncomplicated and were treated with arte-
          Median                               5.5                5.4           mether–lumefantrine. To assess the effect of
          Range                             BLD–6.4            BLD–6.4          potential interactions between ART and arte-
                                                                                mether–lumefantrine, the risks of recurrent para-
      Previous ART
                                                                                sitemia and recurrent malaria were compared
          Median                              BLD                BLD
                                                                                between the two groups. The 28-day risk of re-
          Range                               BLD                BLD            current parasitemia was significantly lower in
  Hemoglobin — g/dl                         10.6±1.5           10.4±1.3         the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI
  Positive blood smear for asexual           11 (13)            10 (12)         group (14.0% vs. 40.8%, P = 0.004), as was the
              parasites — no. (%)                                               63-day risk of recurrent malaria (28.1% vs. 54.2%,
                                                                                P = 0.004) (Table 2 and Fig. 2B). Among patients
*	Plus–minus values are means ±SD. There were no significant differences be-
  tween the groups in baseline characteristics. BLD denotes below the level of  in whom parasites were cleared by 7 days, there
  detection (<400 copies per microliter), and WHO World Health Organization. were 111 episodes of recurrent malaria within 63
†	CD4 percentage is the preferred measurement for children younger than 5 years days; 107 cases were successfully genotyped, and
  of age, as recommended by the WHO. The percentage represents the percent-
  age of white cells that are CD4 cells.                                        all were classified as new infections. Resolution
                                                                                of fever, parasite clearance, and recovery of mean


2114                                                     n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012

                                                      The New England Journal of Medicine
                       Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                                        Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children



 Table 2. Main Study Outcomes.

                                                                                                            Incidence-Rate Ratio
 Outcome                                  NNRTI-Based ART               Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART             (95% CI)       P Value
                                   No. of    Person-Yr Episodes/        No. of    Person-Yr Episodes/
                                   Events     at Risk  Person-Yr        Events     at Risk  Person-Yr
 Episodes of malaria
     All episodes                   176        78.2       2.25            109         82.3      1.32         0.59 (0.36–0.97)      0.04
     Complicated malaria              2        78.2       0.026             2         82.3      0.024        0.80 (0.06–11.16)     0.87
                                                                                                             Hazard Ratio with
                                                                                                            Lopinavir–Ritonavir
                                          NNRTI-Based ART               Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART            (95% CI)         P Value
                                   No. of                               No. of
                                   Events       Cumulative Risk         Events       Cumulative Risk
                                                  % (95% CI)                           % (95% CI)
 Risk of malaria
     6-mo risk of first episode      42         52.5 (42.0–63.9)           33        40.7 (30.9–52.2)         0.71 (0.45–1.12)     0.14
        of malaria*
     28-day risk of recurrent       174         40.8 (33.9–48.6)          107        14.0 (8.7–22.2)          0.31 (0.14–0.68)     0.004
        parasitemia†
     63-day risk of recurrent       174         54.2 (46.4–62.2)          107        28.1 (20.2–38.3)         0.41 (0.22–0.76)     0.004
        malaria†

*	The 6-month risk of a first episode of malaria was assessed in 86 patients in the NNRTI group and 84 in the lopinavir–ritonavir group.
  Among patients who were followed for 6 months, malaria did not develop in 34 patients in the NNRTI group and 44 in the lopinavir–ritona-
  vir group; data on 10 patients in the NNRTI group and 7 in the lopinavir–ritonavir group were censored before the 6-month follow-up as-
  sessment.
†	The risk of recurrence was assessed among patients who had had uncomplicated malaria that had been treated with artemether–lumefan-
  trine.



hemoglobin levels after antimalarial treatment              initiation of treatment for malaria in a subgroup
were similar in the two groups (Table S1 in the             of 120 patients showed no episodes of prolonga-
Supplementary Appendix). There were no signifi-             tion of the QTc interval (Table S2 in the Supple-
cant differences in the rates of adverse events             mentary Appendix).
over the course of the 28-day period after anti-
malarial therapy, except that pruritus was more             Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Malaria
common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group (5.6%               Therapy and Drug Interactions
vs. 1.2%, P = 0.04), and elevation of alanine ami-          During the period in which blood samples were
notransferase levels occurred more frequently in            obtained to assess drug levels, there were 103 epi-
the NNRTI group (13.5% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.003) (Ta-            sodes of malaria in the NNRTI group and 73 in
ble S2 in the Supplementary Appendix). A total of           the lopinavir–ritonavir group; lumefantrine levels
10 serious adverse events occurred during the               were successfully measured on day 7 after initia-
standard WHO 28-day period for malaria follow-              tion of malaria treatment in the case of 92 epi-
up, with a trend toward a higher frequency in the           sodes (89%) and 65 episodes (89%), respectively.
lopinavir–ritonavir group (5.6% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.16).        The median lumefantrine level was significantly
All the serious adverse events were considered to           higher in the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in
be unrelated to the study drugs, with the excep-            the NNRTI group (926 ng per milliliter [inter-
tion of one episode of the Stevens–Johnson syn-             quartile range, 473 to 1910] vs. 200 ng per milli-
drome in the NNRTI group, which led to discon-              liter [interquartile range, 108 to 510], P<0.001).
tinuation of the study drug, and two episodes of            In addition, in the NNRTI group, the median
neutropenia in the lopinavir–ritonavir group,               lumefantrine level on day 7 was significantly
which resolved without discontinuation of thera-            higher among the 67 patients who were taking
py. Electrocardiograms obtained on day 3 after              nevirapine than among the 25 patients who were


                                  n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012                                                   2115
                                            The New England Journal of Medicine
             Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                              Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
The   n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l     of   m e dic i n e


                                                                                                                        in vitro drug-sensitivity testing. Modest synergy
 A                                                                                                                      between lopinavir and lumefantrine was observed;
                                     1.00
                                                                                                                        data consistent with this are concave isobolo-
                                                                                                                        gram curves and mean fractional inhibitory
  Cumulative Risk of First Episode




                                     0.75                                         P=0.14                                concentrations near 0.5 (Fig. S1 in the Supple-
                                                                                                                        mentary Appendix).
            of Malaria




                                                                                                NNRTI-based ART
                                     0.50
                                                                                                                                           Discussion

                                     0.25
                                                                                                                        Among HIV-infected children in Uganda, a lopina-
                                                                                  Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART
                                                                                                                        vir–ritonavir–based antiretroviral regimen, as
                                                                                                                        compared with an NNRTI-based regimen, re-
                                     0.00                                                                               duced the incidence of malaria by 41%. The pri-
                                            0        30          60          90          120           150        180
                                                                                                                        mary benefit in the lopinavir–ritonavir group
                                                           Days since Initiation of Study Drugs
                                                                                                                        was conferred by a dramatic reduction in the risk
 B
                                                                                                                        of recurrent malaria after treatment with arte-
                                     1.00
                                                                                                                        mether–lumefantrine.
                                                                                                                           The protective effect of lopinavir–ritonavir
                                                                                                                        against malaria could have resulted from direct
  Cumulative Risk of Recurrent




                                     0.75                                         P=0.004                               antimalarial activity of lopinavir–ritonavir; inhi-
     Episode of Malaria




                                                                                                                        bition of lumefantrine metabolism after treat-
                                                                                                NNRTI-based ART         ment with artemether–lumefantrine, which would
                                     0.50
                                                                                                                        have extended the post-treatment prophylactic
                                                                                                                        effect; or antimalarial synergy between lumefan-
                                     0.25                                                                               trine and lopinavir. The possibility of direct an-
                                                                                                                        timalarial effects of HIV protease inhibitors is
                                                                                  Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART         supported by in vitro studies showing activity of
                                     0.00
                                            0   7         14     21     28        35       42     49         56   63    lopinavir at levels achievable in humans,3,5 in
                                                           Days since Initiation of Study Drugs                         vivo studies showing activity against the rodent
                                                                                                                        parasite P. chabaudi,5 activity against clinical iso-
 Figure 2. Selected Secondary Study Outcomes                                                                            lates of P. falciparum and P. vivax,14 in vitro activ-
 Panel A shows Kaplan–Meier curves for the 6-month risk of a first episode of                                           ity against P. falciparum in serum samples from
 malaria, according to study group. Panel B shows Kaplan–Meier curves for                                               patients receiving protease inhibitors,15 and ac-
 the 63-day risk of recurrent malaria after treatment of malaria with artemether–                                       tion against P. falciparum cytoadherence and phago-
 lumefantrine, according to study group.
                                                                                                                        cytosis.16 In vitro antimalarial activity has not
                                                                                                                        been reported with levels of NNRTIs that are
                                                                                                                        attained with standard doses.2
                                                taking efavirenz (388 ng per milliliter [interquar-                        The antimalarial activity of HIV protease in-
                                                tile range, 164 to 563] vs. 97 ng per milliliter                        hibitors could theoretically be due to inhibition
                                                [interquartile range, 61 to 124], P<0.001). There                       of plasmodial aspartic proteases that are bio-
                                                was no significant association between the lume-                        chemically similar to the HIV protease.3,5 How-
                                                fantrine level on day 7 and the 63-day risk of re-                      ever, we found only a nonsignificant trend to-
                                                current malaria in the NNRTI group. In contrast,                        ward a reduced risk of a first episode of malaria
                                                in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, children with                         in the lopinavir–ritonavir group. Rather, protec-
                                                lumefantrine levels of 300 ng per milliliter or                         tion against recurrent malaria accounted for most
                                                higher on day 7, as compared with children with                         of the benefit of lopinavir–ritonavir, suggesting
                                                lower drug levels, had a significantly reduced                          that the principal role of lopinavir–ritonavir with
                                                risk of recurrent malaria within 63 days (Fig. 3,                       respect to protection against malaria is an effect
                                                and Table S3 in the Supplementary Appendix).                            on lumefantrine exposure. Children in the lopina-
                                                    To determine whether there were direct anti-                        vir–ritonavir group had significantly higher
                                                malarial interactions between lopinavir and                             lumefantrine levels 7 days after the initiation of
                                                lumefantrine, two field isolates were cloned for                        artemether–lumefantrine therapy than did chil-


2116                                                                                         n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012

                                                                                   The New England Journal of Medicine
                                                    Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                                                                     Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children


dren in the NNRTI group, and this effect was
associated with a 59% reduction in the 63-day               A NNRTI-Based ART
                                                                                            1.00
risk of recurrent malaria in the lopinavir–ritona-                                                     P=0.71 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 300 to <700 ng/ml
vir group as compared with the NNRTI group.                                                            P=0.44 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 700 to <4500 ng/ml




                                                             Cumulative Risk of Recurrent
Increased lumefantrine exposure with concomi-                                               0.75




                                                                Episode of Malaria
tant lopinavir–ritonavir therapy, which was
thought to be the result of inhibition of cyto-                                                                               300 to <700 ng/ml
                                                                                            0.50
chrome P450 3A4 metabolism by ritonavir, was                                                                                                      <300 ng/ml
previously observed in healthy adults.6 In con-
trast, nevirapine and efavirenz both induce cyto-                                           0.25
chrome P450 3A4 pathways, and the concurrent
                                                                                                                                                  700 to <4500 ng/ml
administration of either of these drugs with
artemether–lumefantrine might diminish lume-                                                0.00
                                                                                                   0       7     14      21     28     35      42       49       56     63
fantrine exposure. However, day 7 lumefantrine
                                                                                                   Days since Initiation of Treatment with Artemether–Lumefantrine
levels in the nevirapine group were similar to
those reported previously in HIV-uninfected                 B Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART
children receiving artemether–lumefantrine,17                                               1.00
suggesting that the greater protection in the                                                          P=0.005 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 300 to <700 ng/ml
                                                                                                       P<0.001 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 700 to <4500 ng/ml
lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI
group was due to inhibition of lumefantrine                  Cumulative Risk of Recurrent   0.75
                                                                Episode of Malaria                                                                  <300 ng/ml
metabolism by lopinavir–ritonavir rather than to
enhancement of cytochrome P450 3A4 metabo-                                                  0.50
lism by the NNRTIs.
   The higher lumefantrine levels in the lopina-
vir–ritonavir group were not associated with a                                              0.25                                                    300 to <700 ng/ml
significantly increased risk of adverse events,
with the exception of pruritus. Halofantrine, a                                                                                                     700 to <4500 ng/ml
                                                                                            0.00
related drug, is associated with prolongation of                                                   0       7     14      21     28     35      42        49     56     63
the QT interval and cardiac rhythm disturbances.                                                   Days since Initiation of Treatment with Artemether–Lumefantrine
In this study, no episodes of prolongation of the
QTc interval were observed 3 days after the ini-            Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier Curves for the 63-Day Risk of Recurrent Malaria,
tiation of artemether–lumefantrine.18 We noted              According to Study Group and Lumefantrine Level on Day 7 after Initiation
a trend toward a higher risk of serious adverse             of Artemether–Lumefantrine Therapy.
events after antimalarial therapy in the lopina-
vir–ritonavir group, with two episodes of neutro-
penia possibly related to the study drug. Given           trial. Perhaps the synergistic antimalarial activ-
our limited statistical power for the comparison          ity between lopinavir and lumefantrine enhanced
of uncommon events in this study and our lim-             the protective effect of prolonged lumefantrine
ited evaluation of potential cardiotoxic effects,         exposure.
future studies of the safety of coadministration              Our results suggest that a strategy of pharma-
of lopinavir–ritonavir and lumefantrine are war-          cologic enhancement of exposure to antimalarial
ranted. Increased lumefantrine exposure might             agents may be useful in reducing the burden of
also increase the selection of lumefantrine-resis-        malaria, particularly in areas where the transmis-
tant parasites. Genetic polymorphisms associated          sion intensity is high and recurrent malaria after
with decreased activity are selected by arte-             treatment is commonplace. Although artemether–
mether–lumefantrine,19 suggesting that continued          lumefantrine was very effective in clearing infec-
surveillance of the efficacy of artemether–lume-          tions, the high risk of recurrent malaria after
fantrine therapy is warranted.                            therapy, even with the use of insecticide-treated
   In vitro synergy in antimalarial activity be-          bed nets and trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole
tween lopinavir and lumefantrine has been ob-             prophylaxis, highlights the importance of post-
served in laboratory strains of P. falciparum2 and        treatment prophylaxis in high-transmission areas
in two isolates obtained from children in this            such as Uganda. In HIV-infected children requir-


                                n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012                                                                                        2117
                                          The New England Journal of Medicine
           Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                            Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children


       ing ART, it may be possible to use pharmacologic                     ed, the relative antiretroviral efficacies of various
       enhancement with lopinavir–ritonavir to provide                      regimens should be studied further, the applica-
       protection from malaria. It is unlikely that an                      bility of our findings to areas with a lower inten-
       increase in the antimalarial dose without lopina-                    sity of malaria transmission should be considered,
       vir–ritonavir therapy will achieve the same effect                   and logistical challenges must be addressed. We
       that we observed with lopinavir–ritonavir thera-                     are continuing to follow our cohort in order to
       py in our cohort. The effects that are seen with                     evaluate long-term HIV efficacy outcomes. Previ-
       increases in exposure of a drug may be several                       ously, the high cost of the drugs and complex
       magnitudes greater than the effects that are pos-                    storage requirements represented considerable
       sible with dose escalation — a finding that has                      challenges in administering lopinavir–ritonavir in
       been shown with respect to the enhancement of                        low-income countries. However, the declining cost
       HIV protease inhibitors with ritonavir.20 In addi-                   of the drugs and the availability of a heat-stable
       tion, lumefantrine exhibits saturable absorption,                    lopinavir–ritonavir formulation suggest that these
       with the result that only modest increases in ex-                    challenges are now surmountable. In conclusion,
       posure are seen after dose escalation.21                             pharmacologic enhancement with the use of
           In a randomized trial comparing lopinavir–                       agents that alter drug metabolism may offer a
       ritonavir therapy with NNRTI therapy in children,                    means of improving the control of malaria.
       virologic suppression rates were higher with lopin­
       avir–ritonavir than with NNRTI — a finding that                         Supported by a grant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver Na-
                                                                            tional Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
       also supports the use of lopinavir–ritonavir.22,23                      Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with
       However, before changes in policy are implement-                     the full text of this article at NEJM.org.

       References

       1.	 Kamya MR, Gasasira AF, Achan J, et         fectious Diseases, 2004 (http://www.niaid     of Plasmodium falciparum-parasitised
       al. Effects of trimethoprim-sulfamethox-       .nih.gov/LabsAndResources/resources/          erythrocytes. Lancet 2003;362:1039-41.
       azole and insecticide-treated bednets on       DAIDSClinRsrch/Documents/                     17.	 Mwesigwa J, Parikh S, McGee B, et al.
       malaria among HIV-infected Ugandan             daidsaegradingtable.pdf ).                    Pharmacokinetics of artemether-lumefan-
       children. AIDS 2007;21:2059-66.                10.	 Dorsey G, Staedke S, Clark TD, et al.    trine and artesunate-amodiaquine in chil-
       2.	 Nsanzabana C, Rosenthal PJ. In vitro       Combination therapy for uncomplicated         dren in Kampala, Uganda. Antimicrob
       activity of antiretroviral drugs against       falciparum malaria in Ugandan children:       Agents Chemother 2010;54:52-9.
       Plasmodium falciparum. Antimicrob              a randomized trial. JAMA 2007;297:2210-9.     18.	 van Vugt M, Ezzet F, Nosten F, et al.
       Agents Chemother 2011;55:5073-7.               11.	 Huang L, Li X, Marzan F, Lizak PS,       No evidence of cardiotoxicity during anti-
       3.	 Parikh S, Gut J, Istvan E, Goldberg        Aweeka FT. Determination of lumefan-          malarial treatment with artemether-lume-
       DE, Havlir DV, Rosenthal PJ. Antimalarial      trine in small-volume human plasma by         fantrine. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1999;61:964-7.
       activity of human immunodeficiency virus       LC-MS/MS: using a deuterated lumefan-         19.	 Dokomajilar C, Nsobya SL, Green-
       type 1 protease inhibitors. Antimicrob         trine to overcome matrix effect and ioniza-   house B, Rosenthal PJ, Dorsey G. Selec-
       Agents Chemother 2005;49:2983-5.               tion saturation. Bioanalysis 2012;4:157-66.   tion of Plasmodium falciparum pfmdr1
       4.	 Skinner-Adams TS, McCarthy JS, Gar-        12.	 Nsobya SL, Kiggundu M, Nanyunja S,       alleles following therapy with artemether-
       diner DL, Hilton PM, Andrews KT. Anti-         Joloba M, Greenhouse B, Rosenthal PJ. In      lumefantrine in an area of Uganda where
       retrovirals as antimalarial agents. J Infect   vitro sensitivities of Plasmodium falci-      malaria is highly endemic. Antimicrob
       Dis 2004;190:1998-2000.                        parum to different antimalarial drugs in      Agents Chemother 2006;50:1893-5.
       5.	 Andrews KT, Fairlie DP, Madala PK, et      Uganda. Antimicrob Agents Chemother           20.	 Palumbo P, Lindsey JC, Hughes MD,
       al. Potencies of human immunodeficiency        2010;54:1200-6.                               et al. Antiretroviral treatment for children
       virus protease inhibitors in vitro against     13.	 François G, Hendrix L, Wery M. A         with peripartum nevirapine exposure.
       Plasmodium falciparum and in vivo against      highly efficient in vitro cloning proce-      N Engl J Med 2010;363:1510-20.
       murine malaria. Antimicrob Agents Che-         dure for asexual erythrocytic forms of the    21.	 Palumbo PVA. NVP– vs LPV/r-based
       mother 2006;50:639-48.                         human malaria parasite Plasmodium fal-        ART among HIV+ infants in resource lim-
       6.	 German P, Parikh S, Lawrence J, et al.     ciparum. Ann Soc Belg Med Trop                ited settings: the IMPAACT1060 trial. Pre-
       Lopinavir/ritonavir affects pharmacokinetic    1994;74:177-85.                               sented at the 18th Conference on Retrovi-
       exposure of artemether/lumefantrine in         14.	 Lek-Uthai U, Suwanarusk R, Ruen-         ruses and Opportunistic Infections, Boston,
       HIV-uninfected healthy volunteers. J Ac-       gweerayut R, et al. Stronger activity of      February 27–March 2, 2011. abstract.
       quir Immune Defic Syndr 2009;51:424-9.         human immunodeficiency virus type 1           22.	 Zeldin RK, Petruschke RA. Pharma-
       7.	 Okello PE, Van Bortel W, Byaruhanga        protease inhibitors against clinical iso-     cological and therapeutic properties of
       AM, et al. Variation in malaria transmission   lates of Plasmodium vivax than against        ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor ther-
       intensity in seven sites throughout Uganda.    those of P. falciparum. Antimicrob Agents     apy in HIV-infected patients. J Antimicrob
       Am J Trop Med Hyg 2006;75:219-25.              Chemother 2008;52:2435-41.                    Chemother 2004;53:4-9.
       8.	 Susceptibility of Plasmodium falci-        15.	 Redmond AM, Skinner-Adams T, An-         23.	 Ashley EA, Stepniewska K, Linde-
       parum to antimalarial drugs: report on         drews KT, et al. Antimalarial activity of     gårdh N, et al. Pharmacokinetic study of
       global monitoring: 1996-2004. Geneva:          sera from subjects taking HIV protease        artemether-lumefantrine given once daily
       World Health Organization, 2005.               inhibitors. AIDS 2007;21:763-5.               for the treatment of uncomplicated multi-
       9.	 Table for grading the severity of adult    16.	 Nathoo S, Serghides L, Kain KC. Ef-      drug-resistant falciparum malaria. Trop
       and pediatric adverse events. Bethesda,        fect of HIV-1 antiretroviral drugs on         Med Int Health 2007;12:201-8.
       MD: National Institute of Allergy and In-      cyto­ dherence and phagocytic clearance
                                                           a                                        Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society.


2118                                          n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012

                                        The New England Journal of Medicine
         Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
                          Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

Plegable molecular 2
Plegable molecular 2Plegable molecular 2
Plegable molecular 2Heyly
 
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS Carlos Lopez Diaz
 
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...Agriculture Journal IJOEAR
 
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. Malone
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. MaloneZika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. Malone
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. MaloneJan-Cedric Hansen
 
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent Abel
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent AbelHuman Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent Abel
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent AbelHuman Variome Project
 
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...WAidid
 

La actualidad más candente (15)

Plegable molecular 2
Plegable molecular 2Plegable molecular 2
Plegable molecular 2
 
ACTG 5273
ACTG 5273ACTG 5273
ACTG 5273
 
Adult vaccination
Adult vaccinationAdult vaccination
Adult vaccination
 
Proteins
ProteinsProteins
Proteins
 
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS
ALZHEYMER'S DISEASE, ZIKA VIRUS AND PROTEINS
 
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...
Added Value on Sade Village and Bau Nyale Festival in Autoimmune Diseases Imm...
 
Uso de esteroides nasales en el tratamiento de pacientes con rinitis alérgica...
Uso de esteroides nasales en el tratamiento de pacientes con rinitis alérgica...Uso de esteroides nasales en el tratamiento de pacientes con rinitis alérgica...
Uso de esteroides nasales en el tratamiento de pacientes con rinitis alérgica...
 
Scourge of tetanus
Scourge of tetanusScourge of tetanus
Scourge of tetanus
 
Vaccine Truth
Vaccine TruthVaccine Truth
Vaccine Truth
 
Ebola Truth
Ebola TruthEbola Truth
Ebola Truth
 
Zika virus
Zika virusZika virus
Zika virus
 
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. Malone
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. MaloneZika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. Malone
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges by Robert W. Malone
 
Jiy302
Jiy302Jiy302
Jiy302
 
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent Abel
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent AbelHuman Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent Abel
Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases - Laurent Abel
 
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...
Shifting paradigms in vaccinology immune modulation and sex differences explo...
 

Destacado

Malaria Journal Bose T
Malaria Journal Bose TMalaria Journal Bose T
Malaria Journal Bose Tdrtanoybose
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 Dguest7a4f92
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 Dguest7a4f92
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 Dguest7a4f92
 
Time and timetables (2)
Time and timetables (2)Time and timetables (2)
Time and timetables (2)Tukta Anita
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 Dguest7a4f92
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 Dguest7a4f92
 

Destacado (8)

Malaria Journal Bose T
Malaria Journal Bose TMalaria Journal Bose T
Malaria Journal Bose T
 
Malaria
MalariaMalaria
Malaria
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
 
Time and timetables (2)
Time and timetables (2)Time and timetables (2)
Time and timetables (2)
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
 
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 DPandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
Pandemics Week 3 Presentation Summary 1 D
 

Similar a Articulo medico ingles

Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...
Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...
Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...Open Access Research Paper
 
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19Valentina Corona
 
2 good afr health sci
2 good afr health sci2 good afr health sci
2 good afr health sciDavid Deegbe
 
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...hivlifeinfo
 
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...iosrjce
 
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrheahomeworkping8
 
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisRanitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisCMCH,Vellore
 
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisRanitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisCMCH,Vellore
 
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptx
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptxJurnal Reading Infeksi.pptx
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptxKarinaPramudya
 
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group Explained
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group ExplainedEnteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group Explained
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group ExplainedSurajPatel777270
 
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia DrNeeraj Nirala
 

Similar a Articulo medico ingles (20)

Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...
Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...
Comparative study of the effectiveness of combination therapies based on atem...
 
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19
A trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Sever COVID-19
 
Truvada kaletra o maraviroc PrEp
Truvada kaletra o maraviroc PrEpTruvada kaletra o maraviroc PrEp
Truvada kaletra o maraviroc PrEp
 
Truvada EFV en VIH TB
Truvada EFV en VIH TBTruvada EFV en VIH TB
Truvada EFV en VIH TB
 
2 good afr health sci
2 good afr health sci2 good afr health sci
2 good afr health sci
 
Poster Presentation.pdf
Poster Presentation.pdfPoster Presentation.pdf
Poster Presentation.pdf
 
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...
Современное лечение ВИЧ: лечение многократно леченных пациентов с резистентно...
 
14 tlid1074 klein
14 tlid1074 klein14 tlid1074 klein
14 tlid1074 klein
 
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...
A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 5 Days and 14 Days Ceftriaxone Therapy...
 
Truvada kaletra o raltegravir pr ep
Truvada kaletra o raltegravir pr epTruvada kaletra o raltegravir pr ep
Truvada kaletra o raltegravir pr ep
 
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea
126371918 case-study-hiv-with-diarrhea
 
JURNAL ANAK
JURNAL ANAKJURNAL ANAK
JURNAL ANAK
 
NEJM_Wyles et al 2015
NEJM_Wyles et al 2015NEJM_Wyles et al 2015
NEJM_Wyles et al 2015
 
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisRanitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
 
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitisRanitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
Ranitidine is associated with infections, necrotizing enterocolitis
 
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptx
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptxJurnal Reading Infeksi.pptx
Jurnal Reading Infeksi.pptx
 
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group Explained
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group ExplainedEnteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group Explained
Enteric Fever in Paediatrics Age group Explained
 
Varivax pi
Varivax piVarivax pi
Varivax pi
 
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia
journal :Artemisinin resistance in se asia
 
2016 Sessions: Perinatal, Paediatric and adolescence: What are the HIV Priori...
2016 Sessions: Perinatal, Paediatric and adolescence: What are the HIV Priori...2016 Sessions: Perinatal, Paediatric and adolescence: What are the HIV Priori...
2016 Sessions: Perinatal, Paediatric and adolescence: What are the HIV Priori...
 

Articulo medico ingles

  • 1. The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e original article Antiretroviral Agents and Prevention of Malaria in HIV-Infected Ugandan Children Jane Achan, M.Med., Abel Kakuru, M.D., Gloria Ikilezi, M.D., Theodore Ruel, M.D., Tamara D. Clark, M.P.H., Christian Nsanzabana, Ph.D., Edwin Charlebois, M.P.H., Ph.D., Francesca Aweeka, Pharm.D., Grant Dorsey, M.D., Ph.D., Philip J. Rosenthal, M.D., Diane Havlir, M.D., and Moses R. Kamya, M.Med., Ph.D. A BS T R AC T Background From the Departments of Pediatrics and Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitors show activity against Child Health (J.A.) and Medicine (M.R.K.), Plasmodium falciparum in vitro. We hypothesized that the incidence of malaria in HIV- Makerere University College of Health Sciences, and the Infectious Diseases infected children would be lower among children receiving lopinavir–ritonavir– Research Collaboration (J.A., A.K., G.I., based antiretroviral therapy (ART) than among those receiving nonnucleoside M.R.K.) — both in Kampala, Uganda; and reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)–based ART. the Departments of Pediatrics (T.R.), Medicine (T.D.C., C.N., E.C., G.D., P.J.R., Methods D.H.), and Clinical Pharmacy, Drug Re- search Unit (F.A.), University of California, We conducted an open-label trial in which HIV-infected children 2 months to 5 years San Francisco, San Francisco. Address of age who were eligible for ART or were currently receiving NNRTI-based ART reprint requests to Dr. Achan at Makerere were randomly assigned to either lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART or NNRTI-based University College of Health Sciences, P.O. Box 7475, Kampala, Uganda, or at ART and were followed for 6 months to 2 years. Cases of uncomplicated malaria achanj@yahoo.co.uk. were treated with artemether–lumefantrine. The primary end point was the incidence N Engl J Med 2012;367:2110-8. of malaria. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200501 Results Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. We enrolled 176 children, of whom 170 received the study regimen: 86 received NNRTI-based ART, and 84 lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART. The incidence of ma- laria was lower among children receiving the lopinavir–ritonavir–based regimen than among those receiving the NNRTI-based regimen (1.32 vs. 2.25 episodes per person-year; incidence-rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.97; P = 0.04), as was the risk of a recurrence of malaria after treatment with arte- mether–lumefantrine (28.1% vs. 54.2%; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.76; P = 0.004). The median lumefantrine level on day 7 after treatment for malaria was significantly higher in the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group. In the lopinavir–ritonavir group, lumefantrine levels exceeding 300 ng per milliliter on day 7 were associated with a reduction of more than 85% in the 63-day risk of recur- rent malaria. A greater number of serious adverse events occurred in the lopinavir– ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group (5.6% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.16). Pruritus occurred significantly more frequently in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and elevated alanine aminotransferase levels significantly more frequently in the NNRTI group. Conclusions Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART as compared with NNRTI-based ART reduced the incidence of malaria by 41%, with the lower incidence attributable largely to a sig- nificant reduction in the recurrence of malaria after treatment with artemether– lumefantrine. Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART was accompanied by an increase in serious adverse events. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00978068.) 2110 n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 2. Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children M alaria and human immunodefi- dix and in the protocol, both of which are avail- ciency virus (HIV) infection impose able with the full text of this article at NEJM.org. immense and overlapping burdens in The parents or guardians provided written in- sub-Saharan Africa. Prophylaxis with trimetho­ formed consent for the participation of their prim–sulfamethoxazole and insecticide-treated children in the trial. bed nets reduce the incidence of malaria among HIV-infected children, but protection is incom- Study Design plete, and even with the use of these protective This was an open-label trial with randomization strategies, the burden of malaria remains great stratified at the time of enrollment according to in areas of high-intensity transmission.1 Thus, prior or no prior receipt of ART. Randomization new approaches to the prevention of malaria are was performed in permuted blocks of 2 or 4. an important public health priority. Participants received either lopinavir–ritonavir Antiretroviral protease inhibitors show in vitro (Abbott Laboratories) plus two NRTIs or an activity against Plasmodium falciparum2-4 (the cause NNRTI — nevirapine (for children <3 years of of most malaria cases in Africa), probably owing age) or efavirenz (for children ≥3 years of age) to inhibition of plasmodial aspartic proteases — plus two NRTIs. The NRTIs that were used in that are biochemically similar to the HIV-1 pro- the regimens were lamivudine and zidovudine, tease.3,5 Lopinavir is the most potent of these with stavudine or abacavir replacing zidovudine inhibitors and is active at levels well below those in children who had anemia. Children who were achieved with standard doses of coformulated already receiving ART were randomly assigned to lopinavir–ritonavir.2,3 Since lopinavir–ritonavir continue their current regimen or to switch to is increasingly available for the treatment of HIV lopinavir–ritonavir while continuing the same infections in Africa, it may represent a valuable NRTIs. Parents and guardians received counsel- tool for the prevention of malaria. However, ing on adherence before the children underwent because ritonavir inhibits the metabolism of randomization and were given a 4-week supply of many drugs, it has the potential for interactions ART at each monthly visit. Insulated coolers were with antimalarial agents, including widely used provided when liquid lopinavir–ritonavir was dis- artemisinin-based combination therapies, poten- pensed for young children. Adherence to ART tially affecting the efficacy and safety of the was assessed monthly on the basis of caregiver drugs.6 We assessed the incidence of malaria in reports and pill counts. HIV-infected Ugandan children who were ran- domly assigned to receive a lopinavir–ritonavir– Study Procedures based antiretroviral regimen or a nonnucleoside At the time of enrollment, children received a reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)–based long-lasting insecticide-treated bed net, a hygienic antiretroviral regimen. water-storage container, multivitamins, and tri- methoprim–sulfamethoxazole to be taken daily. Me thods Participants received all their medical care at a study clinic that was open every day. Routine vis- Study Participants its were scheduled every 4 weeks, and routine We conducted the study in Tororo, Uganda, an laboratory tests were performed every 12 weeks. area of high-intensity malaria transmission.7 Eli- Parents or guardians were encouraged to bring a gible children were 2 months to 5 years of age, child to the clinic any time the child was ill. In with confirmed HIV infection. Participants had the case of children who presented with a docu- either never received antiretroviral therapy (ART) mented fever (a tympanic temperature ≥38.0°C) and were eligible for initiation of ART according or a history of fever in the previous 24 hours, to national guidelines or were currently receiving blood was obtained by finger prick for examina- standard first-line ART, comprising one NNRTI tion of a thick blood smear. The diagnosis of plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibi- malaria was made if the smear was positive for tors (NRTIs), and had an HIV RNA level of less malaria parasites. Children with uncomplicated than 400 copies per milliliter, as assessed in the malaria were treated with artemether–lumefan- most recent measurement during the preceding­ trine, which is the recommended first-line treat- 6 months. A complete description of the entry ment in Uganda, and the parents or guardians criteria is provided in the Supplementary Appen- were instructed to bring the children back for n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 2111 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 3. The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e follow-up evaluation on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, assay precision (percentage coefficient of varia- and 28. The administration of each first daily tion) was 5.3 to 6.1% and 2.2 to 10%, respec- dose of artemether–lumefantrine was directly tively. The interassay and intra-assay accuracy observed in the study clinic, and each second was 103.5 to 107.1% and 99.5 to 109.7%, respec- daily dose was administered at home. A complete tively. The lower limit of quantification was 50 ng blood count and measurement of the alanine per milliliter. At the time of the diagnosis of ma- aminotransferase level were performed on days 0 laria, in vitro culturing of selected P. falciparum and 28. From July 13, 2010, through June 8, 2011, isolates was performed as described previously.12 blood samples were obtained by means of finger After 2 to 4 weeks, aliquots were frozen in glyc- prick 7 days after initiation of artemether–lume- erol and stored in liquid nitrogen; they were sub- fantrine therapy, for measurement of lumefan- sequently thawed and cloned by means of a limit- trine levels. After November 15, 2010, electrocar- ing-dilution technique.13 Drug-interaction studies diograms were obtained and were read by trained were performed on clones from two different pa- study physicians on days 0 and 3 to assess cor- tients with the use of the checkerboard tech- rected QT (QTc) intervals. Outcomes of malaria nique, as described previously.2 treatment were classified according to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.8 Adverse Study End Points events were assessed at every visit and were grad- The primary end point was the incidence of ma- ed according to standardized criteria.9 laria, which was defined as the number of inci- dent episodes of malaria per time at risk. Malaria Study Oversight that was diagnosed within 14 days after a prior The study was approved by the Makerere Univer- episode was not considered to be an incident sity School of Medicine Research and Ethics event. The time at risk was calculated as the time Committee, the Uganda National Council for Sci- from the day after initiation of study treatment to ence and Technology, and the University of Cali- the last day of observation, minus 14 days after fornia, San Francisco, Committee for Human each incident episode of malaria. In the calcula- Research. Lopinavir–ritonavir was donated by tion of the time at risk, discounting the 14 days Abbott Laboratories, which played no role in the after each incident episode of malaria is a stan- design of the study, the accrual or analysis of the dard approach. Secondary outcomes included the data, or the preparation of the manuscript. All incidence of complicated malaria, the efficacy other antiretroviral drugs were available through and safety of antimalarial therapy, and pharma- existing distribution systems of the Uganda Min- cokinetic characteristics of lumefantrine. istry of Health, through Tororo District Hospital; in the event that any of these drugs were not Statistical Analysis available through this process, the drugs were To test the hypothesis that lopinavir–ritonavir– purchased by the study team from a reputable based ART would reduce the incidence of malar- pharmacy. The antimalarial drugs were pur- ia, we assumed that the incidence of malaria in chased by the study team. All the authors vouch the NNRTI group would be 0.70 episodes per for the completeness and accuracy of the data person-year and estimated that we would need a and analyses and for the fidelity of the study to sample of 300 participants for the study to have the protocol. 80% power to show a 35% reduction in the inci- dence of malaria in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, Laboratory Procedures at a two-sided significance level of 0.05. We sub- Parasite density was assessed from blood smears sequently observed an incidence of malaria in the as described previously.10 If a participant had a NNRTI group that was higher than anticipated recurrence of malaria 4 to 63 days after the ini- (2.19 episodes per person-year) and revised the tiation of malaria therapy, genotyping was per- sample size to 150 participants, who would be formed, as described previously, to distinguish followed for at least 6 months. recrudescence from new infection.10 Lumefan- The statistical analysis was performed accord- trine levels were measured in 25-μl samples as ing to the intention-to-treat principle, with the use described previously.11 The interassay and intra- of Stata software, version 11. For the between- 2112 n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 4. Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children 404 Children were screened 228 Were excluded 136 Were not eligible for ART 34 Were on ART with detectable viral load 32 Were HIV-negative 8 Had not received ART but had prior exposure to nevirapine 3 Were on ART for <12 mo 3 Were >5 yr of age 3 Had active severe medical condition 3 Failed to return for laboratory results 2 Had abnormal screening laboratory results 1 Lived >30 km from study clinic 1 Was on second-line ART 1 Intended to move from study area 1 Refused informed consent 176 Were enrolled and underwent randomization 89 Were assigned to receive 87 Were assigned to receive NNRTI-based ART lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART 3 Did not initiate study drug 3 Did not initiate study drug 2 Were awaiting initiation 2 Were awaiting initiation of ART of ART 1 Was unable to be located 1 Died for >60 days 86 Initiated study drugs 84 Initiated study drugs 6 Were withdrawn from study 2 Died 2 Were unable to comply 1 Was withdrawn from study with study owing to relocation from 1 Was withdrawn by investi- study area gators 1 Moved from study area 80 Were included in the follow-up 83 Were included in the follow-up through end of observation period through end of observation period Figure 1. Screening, Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up. ART denotes antiretroviral therapy, HIV human immunodeficiency virus, and NNRTI nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor. group comparisons of the incidence of malaria, measures in the same patient. Pairwise compari- we used a negative binomial regression model. sons of categorical and continuous variables at the Time to events was estimated with the use of the level of each episode of malaria were made with Kaplan–Meier product-limit formula, and compari- the use of generalized estimating equations with sons were made with the use of a Cox propor- adjustment for repeated measures in the same pa- tional-hazards model with adjustment for repeated tient and with exchangeable correlation and robust n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 2113 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 5. The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e standard errors. P values of less than 0.05 were domization: 89 were assigned to NNRTI-based considered to indicate statistical significance. ART and 87 to lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART. Study drugs were initiated in 86 children in the R e sult s NNRTI group and 84 in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and these children were followed for a Study Participants and Follow-up median of 366 days. The baseline characteristics From September 2009 through July 2011, a total were similar between the two groups (Table 1). of 404 children were screened for eligibility; 228 During monthly routine assessments, 97% of were found not to be eligible, including 136 who caregivers reported 100% adherence to ART. did not meet the criteria for initiation of ART (Fig. 1). A total of 176 children underwent ran- Incidence of Malaria Among the study participants, there were 285 Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of Participants Who Received Study Drugs.* new episodes of malaria during 162 person-years NNRTI-Based Lopinavir–Ritonavir– of follow-up; all the episodes of malaria were due Characteristic ART (N = 86) Based ART (N = 84) to P. falciparum infection. The incidence of ma- Age — yr laria was significantly lower in the lopinavir– ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group (1.32 vs. Median 3.1 2.9 2.25 episodes per person-year), resulting in pro- Range 0.5–5.9 0.7–6.0 tective efficacy of 41% with lopinavir–ritonavir Female sex — no. (%) 41 (48) 41 (49) (incidence rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence inter- No previous ART — no. (%) 58 (67) 57 (68) val [CI], 0.36 to 0.97; P = 0.04) (Table 2). Compli- WHO clinical HIV stage — no. (%) cated malaria occurred infrequently, with a simi- I 66 (77) 60 (71) lar incidence in the two groups. To assess the II 15 (17) 16 (19) effect of ART independently of potential interac- tions with antimalarial therapy after treatment III 1 (1) 2 (2) for malaria, we compared the two groups with IV 4 (5) 6 (7) respect to the time to the first episode of malaria CD4 percentage† (Fig. 2A). The 6-month risk of a first episode of No previous ART malaria was 40.7% in the lopinavir–ritonavir Median 16 14 group, as compared with 52.5% in the NNRTI Range 2–43 2–44 group (hazard ratio with lopinavir–ritonavir, Previous ART 0.71; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.12; P = 0.14) (Table 2). Median 30 31 Efficacy and Safety Outcomes after Range 10–45 8–51 Antimalarial Therapy Viral load — log10 copies/ml Of the 285 new episodes of malaria, 281 (98.6%) No previous ART were uncomplicated and were treated with arte- Median 5.5 5.4 mether–lumefantrine. To assess the effect of Range BLD–6.4 BLD–6.4 potential interactions between ART and arte- mether–lumefantrine, the risks of recurrent para- Previous ART sitemia and recurrent malaria were compared Median BLD BLD between the two groups. The 28-day risk of re- Range BLD BLD current parasitemia was significantly lower in Hemoglobin — g/dl 10.6±1.5 10.4±1.3 the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI Positive blood smear for asexual 11 (13) 10 (12) group (14.0% vs. 40.8%, P = 0.004), as was the parasites — no. (%) 63-day risk of recurrent malaria (28.1% vs. 54.2%, P = 0.004) (Table 2 and Fig. 2B). Among patients * Plus–minus values are means ±SD. There were no significant differences be- tween the groups in baseline characteristics. BLD denotes below the level of in whom parasites were cleared by 7 days, there detection (<400 copies per microliter), and WHO World Health Organization. were 111 episodes of recurrent malaria within 63 † CD4 percentage is the preferred measurement for children younger than 5 years days; 107 cases were successfully genotyped, and of age, as recommended by the WHO. The percentage represents the percent- age of white cells that are CD4 cells. all were classified as new infections. Resolution of fever, parasite clearance, and recovery of mean 2114 n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 6. Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children Table 2. Main Study Outcomes. Incidence-Rate Ratio Outcome NNRTI-Based ART Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART (95% CI) P Value No. of Person-Yr Episodes/ No. of Person-Yr Episodes/ Events at Risk Person-Yr Events at Risk Person-Yr Episodes of malaria All episodes 176 78.2 2.25 109 82.3 1.32 0.59 (0.36–0.97) 0.04 Complicated malaria 2 78.2 0.026 2 82.3 0.024 0.80 (0.06–11.16) 0.87 Hazard Ratio with Lopinavir–Ritonavir NNRTI-Based ART Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART (95% CI) P Value No. of No. of Events Cumulative Risk Events Cumulative Risk % (95% CI) % (95% CI) Risk of malaria 6-mo risk of first episode 42 52.5 (42.0–63.9) 33 40.7 (30.9–52.2) 0.71 (0.45–1.12) 0.14 of malaria* 28-day risk of recurrent 174 40.8 (33.9–48.6) 107 14.0 (8.7–22.2) 0.31 (0.14–0.68) 0.004 parasitemia† 63-day risk of recurrent 174 54.2 (46.4–62.2) 107 28.1 (20.2–38.3) 0.41 (0.22–0.76) 0.004 malaria† * The 6-month risk of a first episode of malaria was assessed in 86 patients in the NNRTI group and 84 in the lopinavir–ritonavir group. Among patients who were followed for 6 months, malaria did not develop in 34 patients in the NNRTI group and 44 in the lopinavir–ritona- vir group; data on 10 patients in the NNRTI group and 7 in the lopinavir–ritonavir group were censored before the 6-month follow-up as- sessment. † The risk of recurrence was assessed among patients who had had uncomplicated malaria that had been treated with artemether–lumefan- trine. hemoglobin levels after antimalarial treatment initiation of treatment for malaria in a subgroup were similar in the two groups (Table S1 in the of 120 patients showed no episodes of prolonga- Supplementary Appendix). There were no signifi- tion of the QTc interval (Table S2 in the Supple- cant differences in the rates of adverse events mentary Appendix). over the course of the 28-day period after anti- malarial therapy, except that pruritus was more Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Malaria common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group (5.6% Therapy and Drug Interactions vs. 1.2%, P = 0.04), and elevation of alanine ami- During the period in which blood samples were notransferase levels occurred more frequently in obtained to assess drug levels, there were 103 epi- the NNRTI group (13.5% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.003) (Ta- sodes of malaria in the NNRTI group and 73 in ble S2 in the Supplementary Appendix). A total of the lopinavir–ritonavir group; lumefantrine levels 10 serious adverse events occurred during the were successfully measured on day 7 after initia- standard WHO 28-day period for malaria follow- tion of malaria treatment in the case of 92 epi- up, with a trend toward a higher frequency in the sodes (89%) and 65 episodes (89%), respectively. lopinavir–ritonavir group (5.6% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.16). The median lumefantrine level was significantly All the serious adverse events were considered to higher in the lopinavir–ritonavir group than in be unrelated to the study drugs, with the excep- the NNRTI group (926 ng per milliliter [inter- tion of one episode of the Stevens–Johnson syn- quartile range, 473 to 1910] vs. 200 ng per milli- drome in the NNRTI group, which led to discon- liter [interquartile range, 108 to 510], P<0.001). tinuation of the study drug, and two episodes of In addition, in the NNRTI group, the median neutropenia in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, lumefantrine level on day 7 was significantly which resolved without discontinuation of thera- higher among the 67 patients who were taking py. Electrocardiograms obtained on day 3 after nevirapine than among the 25 patients who were n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 2115 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 7. The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e in vitro drug-sensitivity testing. Modest synergy A between lopinavir and lumefantrine was observed; 1.00 data consistent with this are concave isobolo- gram curves and mean fractional inhibitory Cumulative Risk of First Episode 0.75 P=0.14 concentrations near 0.5 (Fig. S1 in the Supple- mentary Appendix). of Malaria NNRTI-based ART 0.50 Discussion 0.25 Among HIV-infected children in Uganda, a lopina- Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART vir–ritonavir–based antiretroviral regimen, as compared with an NNRTI-based regimen, re- 0.00 duced the incidence of malaria by 41%. The pri- 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 mary benefit in the lopinavir–ritonavir group Days since Initiation of Study Drugs was conferred by a dramatic reduction in the risk B of recurrent malaria after treatment with arte- 1.00 mether–lumefantrine. The protective effect of lopinavir–ritonavir against malaria could have resulted from direct Cumulative Risk of Recurrent 0.75 P=0.004 antimalarial activity of lopinavir–ritonavir; inhi- Episode of Malaria bition of lumefantrine metabolism after treat- NNRTI-based ART ment with artemether–lumefantrine, which would 0.50 have extended the post-treatment prophylactic effect; or antimalarial synergy between lumefan- 0.25 trine and lopinavir. The possibility of direct an- timalarial effects of HIV protease inhibitors is Lopinavir–ritonavir–based ART supported by in vitro studies showing activity of 0.00 0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 lopinavir at levels achievable in humans,3,5 in Days since Initiation of Study Drugs vivo studies showing activity against the rodent parasite P. chabaudi,5 activity against clinical iso- Figure 2. Selected Secondary Study Outcomes lates of P. falciparum and P. vivax,14 in vitro activ- Panel A shows Kaplan–Meier curves for the 6-month risk of a first episode of ity against P. falciparum in serum samples from malaria, according to study group. Panel B shows Kaplan–Meier curves for patients receiving protease inhibitors,15 and ac- the 63-day risk of recurrent malaria after treatment of malaria with artemether– tion against P. falciparum cytoadherence and phago- lumefantrine, according to study group. cytosis.16 In vitro antimalarial activity has not been reported with levels of NNRTIs that are attained with standard doses.2 taking efavirenz (388 ng per milliliter [interquar- The antimalarial activity of HIV protease in- tile range, 164 to 563] vs. 97 ng per milliliter hibitors could theoretically be due to inhibition [interquartile range, 61 to 124], P<0.001). There of plasmodial aspartic proteases that are bio- was no significant association between the lume- chemically similar to the HIV protease.3,5 How- fantrine level on day 7 and the 63-day risk of re- ever, we found only a nonsignificant trend to- current malaria in the NNRTI group. In contrast, ward a reduced risk of a first episode of malaria in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, children with in the lopinavir–ritonavir group. Rather, protec- lumefantrine levels of 300 ng per milliliter or tion against recurrent malaria accounted for most higher on day 7, as compared with children with of the benefit of lopinavir–ritonavir, suggesting lower drug levels, had a significantly reduced that the principal role of lopinavir–ritonavir with risk of recurrent malaria within 63 days (Fig. 3, respect to protection against malaria is an effect and Table S3 in the Supplementary Appendix). on lumefantrine exposure. Children in the lopina- To determine whether there were direct anti- vir–ritonavir group had significantly higher malarial interactions between lopinavir and lumefantrine levels 7 days after the initiation of lumefantrine, two field isolates were cloned for artemether–lumefantrine therapy than did chil- 2116 n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 8. Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children dren in the NNRTI group, and this effect was associated with a 59% reduction in the 63-day A NNRTI-Based ART 1.00 risk of recurrent malaria in the lopinavir–ritona- P=0.71 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 300 to <700 ng/ml vir group as compared with the NNRTI group. P=0.44 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 700 to <4500 ng/ml Cumulative Risk of Recurrent Increased lumefantrine exposure with concomi- 0.75 Episode of Malaria tant lopinavir–ritonavir therapy, which was thought to be the result of inhibition of cyto- 300 to <700 ng/ml 0.50 chrome P450 3A4 metabolism by ritonavir, was <300 ng/ml previously observed in healthy adults.6 In con- trast, nevirapine and efavirenz both induce cyto- 0.25 chrome P450 3A4 pathways, and the concurrent 700 to <4500 ng/ml administration of either of these drugs with artemether–lumefantrine might diminish lume- 0.00 0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 fantrine exposure. However, day 7 lumefantrine Days since Initiation of Treatment with Artemether–Lumefantrine levels in the nevirapine group were similar to those reported previously in HIV-uninfected B Lopinavir–Ritonavir–Based ART children receiving artemether–lumefantrine,17 1.00 suggesting that the greater protection in the P=0.005 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 300 to <700 ng/ml P<0.001 for the comparison of <300 ng/ml with 700 to <4500 ng/ml lopinavir–ritonavir group than in the NNRTI group was due to inhibition of lumefantrine Cumulative Risk of Recurrent 0.75 Episode of Malaria <300 ng/ml metabolism by lopinavir–ritonavir rather than to enhancement of cytochrome P450 3A4 metabo- 0.50 lism by the NNRTIs. The higher lumefantrine levels in the lopina- vir–ritonavir group were not associated with a 0.25 300 to <700 ng/ml significantly increased risk of adverse events, with the exception of pruritus. Halofantrine, a 700 to <4500 ng/ml 0.00 related drug, is associated with prolongation of 0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 the QT interval and cardiac rhythm disturbances. Days since Initiation of Treatment with Artemether–Lumefantrine In this study, no episodes of prolongation of the QTc interval were observed 3 days after the ini- Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier Curves for the 63-Day Risk of Recurrent Malaria, tiation of artemether–lumefantrine.18 We noted According to Study Group and Lumefantrine Level on Day 7 after Initiation a trend toward a higher risk of serious adverse of Artemether–Lumefantrine Therapy. events after antimalarial therapy in the lopina- vir–ritonavir group, with two episodes of neutro- penia possibly related to the study drug. Given trial. Perhaps the synergistic antimalarial activ- our limited statistical power for the comparison ity between lopinavir and lumefantrine enhanced of uncommon events in this study and our lim- the protective effect of prolonged lumefantrine ited evaluation of potential cardiotoxic effects, exposure. future studies of the safety of coadministration Our results suggest that a strategy of pharma- of lopinavir–ritonavir and lumefantrine are war- cologic enhancement of exposure to antimalarial ranted. Increased lumefantrine exposure might agents may be useful in reducing the burden of also increase the selection of lumefantrine-resis- malaria, particularly in areas where the transmis- tant parasites. Genetic polymorphisms associated sion intensity is high and recurrent malaria after with decreased activity are selected by arte- treatment is commonplace. Although artemether– mether–lumefantrine,19 suggesting that continued lumefantrine was very effective in clearing infec- surveillance of the efficacy of artemether–lume- tions, the high risk of recurrent malaria after fantrine therapy is warranted. therapy, even with the use of insecticide-treated In vitro synergy in antimalarial activity be- bed nets and trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole tween lopinavir and lumefantrine has been ob- prophylaxis, highlights the importance of post- served in laboratory strains of P. falciparum2 and treatment prophylaxis in high-transmission areas in two isolates obtained from children in this such as Uganda. In HIV-infected children requir- n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 2117 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
  • 9. Antiretrovir als and Malaria in HIV-Infected Children ing ART, it may be possible to use pharmacologic ed, the relative antiretroviral efficacies of various enhancement with lopinavir–ritonavir to provide regimens should be studied further, the applica- protection from malaria. It is unlikely that an bility of our findings to areas with a lower inten- increase in the antimalarial dose without lopina- sity of malaria transmission should be considered, vir–ritonavir therapy will achieve the same effect and logistical challenges must be addressed. We that we observed with lopinavir–ritonavir thera- are continuing to follow our cohort in order to py in our cohort. The effects that are seen with evaluate long-term HIV efficacy outcomes. Previ- increases in exposure of a drug may be several ously, the high cost of the drugs and complex magnitudes greater than the effects that are pos- storage requirements represented considerable sible with dose escalation — a finding that has challenges in administering lopinavir–ritonavir in been shown with respect to the enhancement of low-income countries. However, the declining cost HIV protease inhibitors with ritonavir.20 In addi- of the drugs and the availability of a heat-stable tion, lumefantrine exhibits saturable absorption, lopinavir–ritonavir formulation suggest that these with the result that only modest increases in ex- challenges are now surmountable. In conclusion, posure are seen after dose escalation.21 pharmacologic enhancement with the use of In a randomized trial comparing lopinavir– agents that alter drug metabolism may offer a ritonavir therapy with NNRTI therapy in children, means of improving the control of malaria. virologic suppression rates were higher with lopin­ avir–ritonavir than with NNRTI — a finding that Supported by a grant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver Na- tional Institute of Child Health and Human Development. also supports the use of lopinavir–ritonavir.22,23 Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with However, before changes in policy are implement- the full text of this article at NEJM.org. References 1. Kamya MR, Gasasira AF, Achan J, et fectious Diseases, 2004 (http://www.niaid of Plasmodium falciparum-parasitised al. Effects of trimethoprim-sulfamethox- .nih.gov/LabsAndResources/resources/ erythrocytes. Lancet 2003;362:1039-41. azole and insecticide-treated bednets on DAIDSClinRsrch/Documents/ 17. Mwesigwa J, Parikh S, McGee B, et al. malaria among HIV-infected Ugandan daidsaegradingtable.pdf ). Pharmacokinetics of artemether-lumefan- children. AIDS 2007;21:2059-66. 10. Dorsey G, Staedke S, Clark TD, et al. trine and artesunate-amodiaquine in chil- 2. Nsanzabana C, Rosenthal PJ. In vitro Combination therapy for uncomplicated dren in Kampala, Uganda. Antimicrob activity of antiretroviral drugs against falciparum malaria in Ugandan children: Agents Chemother 2010;54:52-9. Plasmodium falciparum. Antimicrob a randomized trial. JAMA 2007;297:2210-9. 18. van Vugt M, Ezzet F, Nosten F, et al. Agents Chemother 2011;55:5073-7. 11. Huang L, Li X, Marzan F, Lizak PS, No evidence of cardiotoxicity during anti- 3. Parikh S, Gut J, Istvan E, Goldberg Aweeka FT. Determination of lumefan- malarial treatment with artemether-lume- DE, Havlir DV, Rosenthal PJ. Antimalarial trine in small-volume human plasma by fantrine. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1999;61:964-7. activity of human immunodeficiency virus LC-MS/MS: using a deuterated lumefan- 19. Dokomajilar C, Nsobya SL, Green- type 1 protease inhibitors. Antimicrob trine to overcome matrix effect and ioniza- house B, Rosenthal PJ, Dorsey G. Selec- Agents Chemother 2005;49:2983-5. tion saturation. Bioanalysis 2012;4:157-66. tion of Plasmodium falciparum pfmdr1 4. Skinner-Adams TS, McCarthy JS, Gar- 12. Nsobya SL, Kiggundu M, Nanyunja S, alleles following therapy with artemether- diner DL, Hilton PM, Andrews KT. Anti- Joloba M, Greenhouse B, Rosenthal PJ. In lumefantrine in an area of Uganda where retrovirals as antimalarial agents. J Infect vitro sensitivities of Plasmodium falci- malaria is highly endemic. Antimicrob Dis 2004;190:1998-2000. parum to different antimalarial drugs in Agents Chemother 2006;50:1893-5. 5. Andrews KT, Fairlie DP, Madala PK, et Uganda. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 20. Palumbo P, Lindsey JC, Hughes MD, al. Potencies of human immunodeficiency 2010;54:1200-6. et al. Antiretroviral treatment for children virus protease inhibitors in vitro against 13. François G, Hendrix L, Wery M. A with peripartum nevirapine exposure. Plasmodium falciparum and in vivo against highly efficient in vitro cloning proce- N Engl J Med 2010;363:1510-20. murine malaria. Antimicrob Agents Che- dure for asexual erythrocytic forms of the 21. Palumbo PVA. NVP– vs LPV/r-based mother 2006;50:639-48. human malaria parasite Plasmodium fal- ART among HIV+ infants in resource lim- 6. German P, Parikh S, Lawrence J, et al. ciparum. Ann Soc Belg Med Trop ited settings: the IMPAACT1060 trial. Pre- Lopinavir/ritonavir affects pharmacokinetic 1994;74:177-85. sented at the 18th Conference on Retrovi- exposure of artemether/lumefantrine in 14. Lek-Uthai U, Suwanarusk R, Ruen- ruses and Opportunistic Infections, Boston, HIV-uninfected healthy volunteers. J Ac- gweerayut R, et al. Stronger activity of February 27–March 2, 2011. abstract. quir Immune Defic Syndr 2009;51:424-9. human immunodeficiency virus type 1 22. Zeldin RK, Petruschke RA. Pharma- 7. Okello PE, Van Bortel W, Byaruhanga protease inhibitors against clinical iso- cological and therapeutic properties of AM, et al. Variation in malaria transmission lates of Plasmodium vivax than against ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor ther- intensity in seven sites throughout Uganda. those of P. falciparum. Antimicrob Agents apy in HIV-infected patients. J Antimicrob Am J Trop Med Hyg 2006;75:219-25. Chemother 2008;52:2435-41. Chemother 2004;53:4-9. 8. Susceptibility of Plasmodium falci- 15. Redmond AM, Skinner-Adams T, An- 23. Ashley EA, Stepniewska K, Linde- parum to antimalarial drugs: report on drews KT, et al. Antimalarial activity of gårdh N, et al. Pharmacokinetic study of global monitoring: 1996-2004. Geneva: sera from subjects taking HIV protease artemether-lumefantrine given once daily World Health Organization, 2005. inhibitors. AIDS 2007;21:763-5. for the treatment of uncomplicated multi- 9. Table for grading the severity of adult 16. Nathoo S, Serghides L, Kain KC. Ef- drug-resistant falciparum malaria. Trop and pediatric adverse events. Bethesda, fect of HIV-1 antiretroviral drugs on Med Int Health 2007;12:201-8. MD: National Institute of Allergy and In- cyto­ dherence and phagocytic clearance a Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. 2118 n engl j med 367;22  nejm.org  november 29, 2012 The New England Journal of Medicine Downloaded from nejm.org on December 13, 2012. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2012 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.