A package of enhanced prophylaxis against infections
significantly reduced the risk of death in adults and children with advanced
HIV disease after starting antiretroviral treatment in a randomised study,
Professor James Hakim of the University of Zimbabwe told the 21st
International AIDS Conference (AIDS 2016) in Durban, South Africa, last month.
Professor Hakim was presenting the results of the REALITY
study, a large clinical trial designed to evaluate strategies for reducing the
risk of death in people who start antiretroviral treatment with very low CD4
cell counts (below 100 cells/mm3). Late presentation with HIV disease, often
with symptomatic disease, remains common in sub-Saharan Africa. The risk of
death in the first six months after starting treatment remains high for adults
and children.
Professor Hakim told a press conference that death rates in
the first six months of treatment can be six to ten times higher in low- and
middle-income countries than in the developed world in people who start
treatment with very advanced HIV disease, due to infections such as
tuberculosis (TB) and Cryptococcus, and due to severe malnourishment.
Identifying ways of reducing the risk of death in people who
start antiretroviral therapy (ART) with very low CD4 counts is essential if the
number of AIDS-related deaths is to be reduced. In particular, more evidence is needed to show whether a package of aggressive prophylaxis against the infections that most frequently cause deaths in the first months after starting ART can bring down death rates. Although cotrimoxazole prophylaxis is widely implemented, isoniazid preventive treatment still fails to be provided despite a World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for its use in people living with HIV.
The REALITY trial, carried out in Kenya, Malawi, Uganda and
Zimbabwe, evaluated three strategies for reducing the risk of death:
- Prophylaxis against the infections most commonly
associated with death in advanced HIV disease (TB, Cryptococcus,
bacterial infections and protozoal infections), compared to cotrimoxazole
prophylaxis alone.
- Intensification of ART with
an integrase inhibitor in order to reduce viral load more quickly, leading to
more rapid immune reconstitution, compared to three-drug ART alone.
- Supplementary ready-to-use food for 12 weeks
(two packets of a high energy, low protein food per day) to improve nutrition,
compared to targeted nutritional support for those with poor nutritional status
according to local protocols.
All participants in the study received ART
according to national guidelines (predominantly tenofovir/emtricitabine and
efavirenz). In addition, participants underwent three randomisations (factorial
randomisation), to each of the study interventions or to a control arm.
Participants were therefore randomised to one intervention and then each group
was randomised to receive a further intervention or control, and so on.
Prophylaxis randomisation
Participants randomised to receive enhanced prophylaxis
received:
- 12 weeks of isoniazid (INH 300mg) & 25mg
vitamin B6 per day for TB prevention
- 12 weeks of fluconazole 100mg per day for
prevention of Cryptococcus and other fungal infections
- 5 days of azithromycin 500mg per day as an
anti-bacterial and anti-protozoan
- A single dose of albendazole (400mg) as an
anti-helminth (worming) treatment.
Participants in both arms received daily cotrimoxazole
prophylaxis.
A total of 1805 people were randomised, 906 to the enhanced
prophylaxis arm and 899 to the standard of care arm. The study population had
very advanced HIV disease. The median CD4 cell count of participants was 37
cells/mm3 and approximately 36% had CD4 cell counts below 25
cells/mm3. Almost three-quarters had a viral load above 100,000
copies/ml, and just over half had WHO stage 3 or 4 disease at baseline
(symptomatic). Four per cent of participants were children or adolescents aged
5 to 17 years.
The primary study outcome was the death rate 24 weeks after
starting treatment. Intent to treat analysis which counted everyone randomised
showed that enhanced prophylaxis was associated with a significantly reduced
risk of death. 8.9% of those in the enhanced prophylaxis arm died compared to
12.2% of those in the standard of care arm, a risk reduction of 27% (HR 0.73,
95% CI 0.54-0.97, p = 0.03) and this difference was sustained at week 48 (HR
0.75, 95% CI 0. 58-0.98, p = 0.04).
Analysis of the primary causes of death showed that death
due to Cryptococcus was significantly
reduced in the enhanced prophylaxis arm (p = 0.03) but there was no difference in
rates of death due to TB or bacterial infections. The investigators
concluded that, in most cases, the causes of death were multifactorial.
Nevertheless, the study found that enhanced prophylaxis was associated with a
reduction in new cases of TB, cryptococcal disease or candida, but not of
bacterial infections. Hospitalisation for any cause was also significantly
reduced in the enhanced prophylaxis arm. There was no excess of serious adverse
events definitely or possibly related to prophylaxis, nor of adverse events leading to
modification of opportunistic infection (OI) prophylaxis.
Antiretroviral intensification randomisation
The patient population in the raltegravir randomisation (902
RAL, 903 SOC) had very similar characteristics to those assigned to the
enhanced prophylaxis randomisation.
Participants randomised to the raltegravir arm received raltegravir
for 12 weeks in addition to three-drug ART.
As in the enhanced prophylaxis arm, the primary study
outcome was the death rate 24 weeks after starting treatment. Intent to treat
analysis which counted everyone randomised showed no significant difference
between the raltegravir arm and the standard of care in mortality at 24 weeks
nor in any secondary outcomes with the exception of grade 4 adverse events
definitely or probably related to the study regimen (p = 0.03).
Receipt of raltegravir was not found to interact with
receipt of the enhanced prophylaxis intervention; in other words, the addition
of raltegravir to enhanced prophylaxis did not result in a superior outcome
when compared to the receipt of enhanced prophylaxis alone.
Results of the nutrition randomisation were not presented.
Conclusion
The investigators concluded that policy makers should
consider adopting and implementing the enhanced prophylaxis package, which they
estimate could save 3.3 lives for every 100 people treated with the package.
A preliminary analysis of the cost of the enhanced prophylaxis
package found that costs varied from $7.16 for 12 weeks of prophylaxis in Kenya
to $32.99 in Zimbabwe, with big variations in the costs of fluconazole (around
five times more expensive in Malawi than in other countries) and azithromycin
(around five times more expensive in Zimbabwe than in other countries). There
was a similarly large variation in the drug-cost per life year saved, ranging
from $268 per life-year saved in Kenya to $1211 in Malawi and $1237 in
Zimbabwe. An essential question for policy-makers seeking to implement this
package of care will be to ensure the lowest possible costs for the drugs used,
and to identify local regulatory and supply chain barriers to cost reduction.