Vaccine protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection wanes over time, requiring updated boosters. In a phase 2, open-label, randomized clinical trial with sequentially enrolled stages at 22 US sites, we assessed safety and immunogenicity of a second boost with monovalent or bivalent variant vaccines from mRNA and protein-based platforms targeting wild-type, Beta, Delta and Omicron BA.1 spike antigens. The primary outcome was pseudovirus neutralization titers at 50% inhibitory dilution (ID50 titers) with 95% confidence intervals against different SARS-CoV-2 strains. The secondary outcome assessed safety by solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs), unsolicited AEs, serious AEs and AEs of special interest. Boosting with prototype/wild-type vaccines produced numerically lower ID50 titers than any variant-containing vaccine against all variants. Conversely, boosting with a variant vaccine excluding prototype was not associated with decreased neutralization against D614G. Omicron BA.1 or Beta monovalent vaccines were nearly equivalent to Omicron BA.1 + prototype or Beta + prototype bivalent vaccines for neutralization of Beta, Omicron BA.1 and Omicron BA.4/5, although they were lower for contemporaneous Omicron subvariants. Safety was similar across arms and stages and comparable to previous reports. Our study shows that updated vaccines targeting Beta or Omicron BA.1 provide broadly crossprotective neutralizing antibody responses against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants without sacrificing immunity to the ancestral strain. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05289037 .

BACKGROUND: The goal of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is to suppress HIV-1 replication and reconstitute CD4+ T cells. Here, we report on HIV-infected individuals who had a paradoxical decline in CD4+ T cells despite ART-mediated suppression of plasma HIV-1 load (pVL). We defined such an immunological outcome as extreme immune decline (EXID). METHODS: EXID's clinical and immunological characteristics were compared to immunological responders (IRs), immunological nonresponders (INRs), healthy controls (HCs), and idiopathic CD4+ lymphopenia (ICL) patients. T cell immunophenotyping and assembly/activation of inflammasomes were evaluated by flow cytometry. PBMC transcriptome analysis and genetic screening for pathogenic variants were performed. Levels of cytokines/chemokines were measured by electrochemiluminescence. Luciferase immunoprecipitation system and NK-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) assays were used to identify anti-lymphocyte autoantibodies. RESULTS: EXIDs were infected with non-B HIV-1 subtypes and after 192 weeks of consistent ART-mediated pVL suppression had a median CD4+ decrease of 157 cells/μl, compared with CD4+ increases of 193 cells/μl and 427 cells/μl in INR and IR, respectively. EXID had reduced naive CD4+ T cells, but similar proportions of cycling CD4+ T cells and HLA-DR+CD38+CD8+ T cells compared with IR and INR. Levels of inflammatory cytokines were also similar in EXID and INR, but the IL-7 axis was profoundly perturbed compared with HC, IR, INR, and ICL. Genes involved in T cell and monocyte/macrophage function, autophagy, and cell migration were differentially expressed in EXID. Two of the 5 EXIDs had autoantibodies causing ADCC, while 2 different EXIDs had an increased inflammasome/caspase-1 activation despite consistently ART-suppressed pVL. CONCLUSIONS: EXID is a distinct immunological outcome compared with previously described INR. Anti-CD4+ T cell autoantibodies and aberrant inflammasome/caspase-1 activation despite suppressed HIV-1 viremia are among the mechanisms responsible for EXID.

Given the high prevalence of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), we examined the performance of a novel computerized cognitive assessment device (NCAD) for the evaluation of neurocognitive impairment in the setting of HIV. In addition to a standard 8-test neuropsychological battery, each participant underwent testing with the NCAD, which requires approximately 20 min and has been shown to accurately measure neurocognition in elderly individuals. The NCAD yields seven subtest scores in addition to an overall predictive score that is calculated based on subtest results. Thirty-nine HIV-infected participants were included in this study; the majority of which (71.8 %) had undetectable plasma HIV RNA levels and a history of significant immunocompromise (median nadir CD4+ count 34 cells/μl). The mean composite neuropsychological score (NPT-8) was 46.07, and mean global deficit score (GDS) was 0.59. NCAD total subtest accuracy correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Pearson correlation r = 0.59, p & #lt; 0.0001) as well as GDS (Spearman’s rho = −0.36, p = 0.02). NCAD predictive score also correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Spearman’s rho = −0.5601, p = 0.0016) and GDS (Spearman’s rho = 0.45, p = 0.0144). When using the most recent nosology of HAND criteria for neurocognitive impairment, the area under the curve (AUC) for NCAD total subtest accuracy was 0.7562 (p = 0.012), while the AUC for the HIV dementia scale was 0.508 (p = 0.930). While not as comprehensive as a full neuropsychological battery, the NCAD shows promise as a rapid screening tool for HIV-infected individuals, and additional research of this device is indicated.

Objective: Higher incidence of osteopenia and osteoporosis underlie increased rates of fragility fracture in HIV infection. B cells are a major source of osteoprotegerin (OPG), an inhibitor of the key osteoclastogenic cytokine receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL). We previously showed that higher B-cell RANKL/OPG ratio contributes to HIV-induced bone loss. T-cell OPG production in humans, however, remains undefined and the contribution of T-cell OPG and RANKL to HIV-induced bone loss has not been explored. Design: We investigated T-cell OPG and RANKL production in ART-naive HIV-infected and uninfected individuals in relation to indices of bone loss in a cross-sectional study. Methods: T-cell RANKL and OPG production was determined by intracellular staining and flow cytometry, and plasma levels of bone resorption markers were determined by ELISA. Results: We demonstrate for the first time in-vivo human T-cell OPG production, which was significantly lower in HIV-infected individuals and was coupled with moderately higher T-cell RANKL production, resulting in a significantly higher T-cell RANKL/OPG ratio. T-cell RANKL/OPG ratio correlated significantly with BMD-derived z-scores at the hip, lumbar spine and femur neck in HIV-infected individuals with CD4+ T-cell counts at least 200 cells/μl but not in those with lower counts. Conclusion: Our data suggest that T cells may be a physiologically relevant source of OPG and T-cell RANKL/OPG imbalance is associated with HIV-induced bone loss in CD4+ T-cell-sufficient patients. Both B and T lymphocytes may thus contribute to HIV-induced bone loss.

The HIV type-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, efavirenz, is widely used to treat HIV type-1 infection. Efavirenz is predominantly metabolized into inactive metabolites by cytochrome P450 (CYP)2B6, and patients with certain CYP2B6 genetic variants may be at increased risk for adverse effects, particularly central nervous system toxicity and treatment discontinuation. We summarize the evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for efavirenz prescribing based on CYP2B6 genotypes.

© 2016, Springer Science+Business Media New York. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) can minimize HIV transmission. Prevention benefits may be compromised by barriers to virologic suppression, and by increased condomless sex among those initiating ART. We evaluated condomless sex in a cohort of HIVinfected US individuals poised to initiate ART in a clinical trial. We assessed partner and sex act type, condom use, and perception of infectiousness. Six percent of participants reported as not infectious; men who have sex with men were more likely to perceive high infectivity. Prevalence of condomless sex was 44 %; 74 % of those also reported homosexual acquisition of HIV. Predictors of increased risk of condomless sex included greater numbers of lifetime partners, recent stimulant drug use and an HIV-positive or unknown serostatus partner. In the context of serodifferent partners, lower perception of infectiousness was also associated with a higher risk of condomless sex. Results highlight opportunities for prevention education for HIV infected individuals at ART initiation.

Background: The pathophysiology of COVID-19 includes immune-mediated hyperinflammation, which could potentially lead to respiratory failure and death. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is among cytokines that contribute to the inflammatory processes. Lenzilumab, a GM-CSF neutralising monoclonal antibody, was investigated in the LIVE-AIR trial to assess its efficacy and safety in treating COVID-19 beyond available treatments. Methods: In LIVE-AIR, a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation were recruited from 29 sites in the USA and Brazil and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive three intravenous doses of lenzilumab (600 mg per dose) or placebo delivered 8 h apart. All patients received standard supportive care, including the use of remdesivir and corticosteroids. Patients were stratified at randomisation by age and disease severity. The primary endpoint was survival without invasive mechanical ventilation to day 28 in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT), comprising all randomised participants who received at least one dose of study drug under the documented supervision of the principal investigator or sub-investigator. Adverse events were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04351152, and is completed. Findings: Patients were enrolled from May 5, 2020, until Jan 27, 2021. 528 patients were screened, of whom 520 were randomly assigned and included in the intention-to-treat population. 479 of these patients (n=236, lenzilumab; n=243, placebo) were included in the mITT analysis for the primary outcome. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. 311 (65%) participants were males, mean age was 61 (SD 14) years at baseline, and median C-reactive protein concentration was 79 (IQR 41–137) mg/L. Steroids were administered to 449 (94%) patients and remdesivir to 347 (72%) patients; 331 (69%) patients received both treatments. Survival without invasive mechanical ventilation to day 28 was achieved in 198 (84%; 95% CI 79–89) participants in the lenzilumab group and in 190 (78%; 72–83) patients in the placebo group, and the likelihood of survival was greater with lenzilumab than placebo (hazard ratio 1·54; 95% CI 1·02–2·32; p=0·040). 68 (27%) of 255 patients in the lenzilumab group and 84 (33%) of 257 patients in the placebo group experienced at least one adverse event that was at least grade 3 in severity based on CTCAE criteria. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher were related to respiratory disorders (26%) and cardiac disorders (6%) and none led to death. Interpretation: Lenzilumab significantly improved survival without invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, with a safety profile similar to that of placebo. The added value of lenzilumab beyond other immunomodulators used to treat COVID-19 alongside steroids remains unknown. Funding: Humanigen.

To excel in the practice of medicine is to master the skill of swimming through waves of uncertainty. When treating a patient how certain is the diagnosis? If the diagnosis is certain, is there a treatment that is better than all others? If there is a proven treatment, was it studied in this population, with this patient’s comorbidities? Add to these typical factors a unique viral pandemic, and the size and frequency of the uncertainty waves become magnified. Physicians in 2020 must decide whether to try treatments that may have been tested against other viral pathogens, including the other two coronaviruses that have appeared in the two decades. Until clinical trials of therapies for Covid-19 are complete, navigating these choices feels somewhat like swimming in the dark.

BENCHMRK-1 and -2 are ongoing double-blind phase III studies of raltegravir in patients experiencing failure of antiretroviral therapy with triple-class drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus infection. At week 96 (combined data), raltegravir (400 mg twice daily) plus optimized background therapy was generally well tolerated, with superior and durable antiretroviral and immunological efficacy, compared with optimized background therapy alone. Raltegravir is a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) integrase strand-transfer inhibitor that is active against multidrug-resistant HIV-1 in vitro [1, 2]. In phase II clinical trials, raltegravir demonstrated potent and durable antiretroviral activity for up to 96 weeks when given with optimized background therapy (OBT) in treatment-experienced patients [3] or with tenofovir and lamivudine in treatment-naive patients [4]. Week 48 results of the BENCHMRK phase III studies confirmed the efficacy of raltegravir in treatment-experienced patients infected with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 [5, 6]. This report presents follow-up results through week 96 of the ongoing BENCHMRK studies.

Background: We analyzed the 96-week results in the overall population and in prespecified subgroups from the ongoing STARTMRK study of treatment-naive HIV-infected patients. Methods: Eligible patients with HIV-1 RNA (vRNA) levels >5000 copies per milliliter and without baseline resistance to efavirenz, tenofovir, or emtricitabine were randomized in a double-blind noninferiority study to receive raltegravir or efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine. Results: At week 96 counting noncompleters as failures, 81% versus 79% achieved vRNA levels <50 copies per milliliter in the raltegravir and efavirenz groups, respectively [δ (95% confidence interval) = 2% (24 to 9), noninferiority P < 0.001]. Mean change in baseline CD4 count was 240 and 225 cells per cubic millimeter in the raltegravir and efavirenz groups, respectively [δ (95% confidence interval) = 15 (-13 to 42)]. Treatment effects were consistent across prespecified baseline demographic and prognostic subgroups. Fewer drug-related clinical adverse events (47% versus 78%; P < 0.001) occurred in raltegravir than efavirenz recipients. Both regimens had modest effects on serum lipids and glucose levels and on body fat composition. Conclusions: When combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine in treatment-naive patients, raltegravir exhibited durable antiretroviral activity that was noninferior to the efficacy of efavirenz through 96 weeks of therapy. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent with the overall findings. Both regimens were well tolerated.