Infectious Diseases

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is valuable enough for the federal government to mandate insurance coverage, a group of experts told the personal finance website WalletHub, but individuals who are at risk for infection may be missing out for other reasons.

The effectiveness of PrEP is clear, those experts said, but 34% of primary care physicians and nurses in the United States are unaware of the preventive regimen, according to the WalletHub report, which also noted that the majority of Americans with AIDS (61%) are not seeing a specialist.

“Even among [men who have sex with men] in the U.S., coverage is only about 10%, which is abysmal. We can and need to do better. If we don’t pay now, we’ll pay later,” Steffanie Strathdee, PhD, associate dean of global health sciences and Harold Simon Professor at the University of California, San Diego, told WalletHub.

Those taking PrEP have a 90% chance of avoiding HIV infection, the report noted.

“Making PrEP available to all is a giant step forward in the fight against HIV. Mandating this critical prevention be covered by all insurance plans makes it part of mainstream medicine and will only increase its use and help prevent HIV acquisition in exposed populations. I can’t think of other low-risk, high-reward prophylaxis for a lifelong disease,” said Sharon Nachman, MD, professor of pediatrics and associate dean for research at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

To get PrEP covered, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force needs to act, explained Gerald M. Oppenheimer, PhD, MPH, of the department of health policy and management at the City University of New York.

“Under the Affordable Care Act, if the [USPSTF] finds that PrEP serves as an effective prevention to disease and gives it a grade of A or B, all insurers must offer it free. That, of course, may lead to an increase in premiums. This is another example of pharmaceutical companies charging high prices in the U.S., compared to what other countries pay, and cries out for an amendment to Medicare Part D, allowing the federal government to negotiate lower drug prices,” he said.

[email protected]

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is valuable enough for the federal government to mandate insurance coverage, a group of experts told the personal finance website WalletHub, but individuals who are at risk for infection may be missing out for other reasons.

The effectiveness of PrEP is clear, those experts said, but 34% of primary care physicians and nurses in the United States are unaware of the preventive regimen, according to the WalletHub report, which also noted that the majority of Americans with AIDS (61%) are not seeing a specialist.

“Even among [men who have sex with men] in the U.S., coverage is only about 10%, which is abysmal. We can and need to do better. If we don’t pay now, we’ll pay later,” Steffanie Strathdee, PhD, associate dean of global health sciences and Harold Simon Professor at the University of California, San Diego, told WalletHub.

Those taking PrEP have a 90% chance of avoiding HIV infection, the report noted.

“Making PrEP available to all is a giant step forward in the fight against HIV. Mandating this critical prevention be covered by all insurance plans makes it part of mainstream medicine and will only increase its use and help prevent HIV acquisition in exposed populations. I can’t think of other low-risk, high-reward prophylaxis for a lifelong disease,” said Sharon Nachman, MD, professor of pediatrics and associate dean for research at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

To get PrEP covered, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force needs to act, explained Gerald M. Oppenheimer, PhD, MPH, of the department of health policy and management at the City University of New York.

“Under the Affordable Care Act, if the [USPSTF] finds that PrEP serves as an effective prevention to disease and gives it a grade of A or B, all insurers must offer it free. That, of course, may lead to an increase in premiums. This is another example of pharmaceutical companies charging high prices in the U.S., compared to what other countries pay, and cries out for an amendment to Medicare Part D, allowing the federal government to negotiate lower drug prices,” he said.

[email protected]

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV is valuable enough for the federal government to mandate insurance coverage, a group of experts told the personal finance website WalletHub, but individuals who are at risk for infection may be missing out for other reasons.

The effectiveness of PrEP is clear, those experts said, but 34% of primary care physicians and nurses in the United States are unaware of the preventive regimen, according to the WalletHub report, which also noted that the majority of Americans with AIDS (61%) are not seeing a specialist.

“Even among [men who have sex with men] in the U.S., coverage is only about 10%, which is abysmal. We can and need to do better. If we don’t pay now, we’ll pay later,” Steffanie Strathdee, PhD, associate dean of global health sciences and Harold Simon Professor at the University of California, San Diego, told WalletHub.

Those taking PrEP have a 90% chance of avoiding HIV infection, the report noted.

“Making PrEP available to all is a giant step forward in the fight against HIV. Mandating this critical prevention be covered by all insurance plans makes it part of mainstream medicine and will only increase its use and help prevent HIV acquisition in exposed populations. I can’t think of other low-risk, high-reward prophylaxis for a lifelong disease,” said Sharon Nachman, MD, professor of pediatrics and associate dean for research at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

To get PrEP covered, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force needs to act, explained Gerald M. Oppenheimer, PhD, MPH, of the department of health policy and management at the City University of New York.

“Under the Affordable Care Act, if the [USPSTF] finds that PrEP serves as an effective prevention to disease and gives it a grade of A or B, all insurers must offer it free. That, of course, may lead to an increase in premiums. This is another example of pharmaceutical companies charging high prices in the U.S., compared to what other countries pay, and cries out for an amendment to Medicare Part D, allowing the federal government to negotiate lower drug prices,” he said.

[email protected]

CHICAGO – The big news regarding Lyme disease at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology was a report that hamstring tendon calcification is extremely common among patients who have persistent Lyme arthritis despite having undergone appropriate antibiotic therapy.

“This is a fascinating study,” Robert A. Kalish, MD, a Lyme disease expert not involved in the research, said regarding the report by Sheila L. Arvikar, MD, and her coworkers at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

One implication of this finding by a renowned group of Lyme disease researchers is that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis may in many cases be due to ongoing immunostimulation by spirochete remains located in hamstring tendons, a privileged, relatively avascular site where the foreign material may be able to evade immune clearance.

Also, as Dr. Arvikar pointed out in her presentation, calcific tendinopathy implies prior inflammation or degenerative changes. Thus, these calcific hamstring abnormalities implicate the hamstring tendons as a potential initial site of infection by hematogenously-spread Borrelia burgdorferi during the prearthritis phase of Lyme disease.

A further implication of the study is the possibility that hamstring tendon calcification could serve as a useful diagnostic aid in distinguishing Lyme arthritis from arthritis due to other causes. In the study, hamstring calcific tendinopathy was found in 28 of 31 adults and children with Lyme arthritis, 3 of 22 with knee osteoarthritis, and 1 of 14 patients with inflammatory arthritis, Dr. Arvikar noted.

She and her coinvestigators evaluated tendon pathology in their retrospective study of patients at the Massachusetts General Hospital Rheumatology Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Clinic. They used ultrasound because they have found it offers far better spatial resolution of calcification than does MRI or x-rays. The semimembranosus tendon was the hamstring tendon that most commonly exhibited calcification, although 11 patients with Lyme arthritis also had involvement of the semitendinosus tendon, compared with none of the controls with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis.

In the eight patients with serial ultrasound evaluations over a period of up to 12 months, the calcification persisted but the symptoms of tendinitis and synovitis improved.

Dr. Arvikar and her colleagues are expanding the scope of their ongoing study by examining patients whose Lyme arthritis is milder than that of the initial population, including patients who haven’t yet received antibiotics. They are also evaluating more controls with inflammatory arthritis.

In a separate presentation, Dr. Kalish noted that Lyme arthritis, the manifestation of Lyme disease of greatest interest to rheumatologists, occurs in about 60% of untreated patients, with onset a mean of 6 months after the tick bite. It typically entails recurrent mono- or oligoarthritis of large joints. The knee is involved in roughly 95% of cases.

The natural history of untreated Lyme arthritis is a spontaneous resolution rate of 10%-20% per year. Since the 1980s, however, 4 weeks of oral doxycycline or amoxicillin has been the treatment of choice. About 10% of patients with Lyme arthritis continue to have active synovitis 3 months after their course of antibiotics.

“There are some patients you give the treatment to and their arthritis just melts away in a month, but some, no matter what you do with antibiotics, continue to have synovitis, often developing a highly proliferative palpable synovitis that is really gunked up and features obliterative microvascular lesions,” observed Dr. Kalish, a rheumatologist at Tufts University in Boston.

Dr. Kalish said that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis is most often due to a self-perpetuating immune response after the spirochete has been killed by antibiotics. He noted that patients with certain HLA-DRB1 haplotypes are more likely to experience persistent Lyme arthritis after standard recommended courses of antibiotics, and these DRB1 alleles correlate closely with the shared epitope associated with increased susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis. Several candidate autoantigens have already been identified.

He noted that the Massachusetts General group, in an earlier study, demonstrated that the presence of B. burgdorferi DNA by PCR in synovial fluid from patients with persistent Lyme arthritis after antibiotic therapy was not a reliable indicator of active joint infection (Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Aug;63[8]:2238-47).

“This was a paradigm change for me in seeing this study, because prior to that I had used PCR somewhat to guide treatment and make management decisions,” Dr. Kalish said.

What’s a reasonable treatment strategy in patients with persistent Lyme arthritis despite 30 days of oral antibiotics? Dr. Kalish favors an algorithm similar to one published by Dr. Arvikar and Allen C. Steere, MD (Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2015 Jun;29[2]:269-80). In the case of mild persistent arthritis, he opts for another 30 days of oral doxycycline. If the arthritis is moderate or severe, he goes with either another 30 days of doxycycline or 30 days of intravenous ceftriaxone.

If the arthritis still hasn’t resolved despite two 30-day rounds of antibiotic therapy, he prescribes an NSAID or hydroxychloroquine if the persistent arthritis is mild, or methotrexate if it’s moderate to severe. And if the arthritis still persists after 3-6 months of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, he’ll consider synovectomy, which has a good success rate.

Neither Dr. Arvikar nor Dr. Kalish reported having any financial conflicts regarding their presentations.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Arvikar SL et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 950.

CHICAGO – The big news regarding Lyme disease at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology was a report that hamstring tendon calcification is extremely common among patients who have persistent Lyme arthritis despite having undergone appropriate antibiotic therapy.

“This is a fascinating study,” Robert A. Kalish, MD, a Lyme disease expert not involved in the research, said regarding the report by Sheila L. Arvikar, MD, and her coworkers at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

One implication of this finding by a renowned group of Lyme disease researchers is that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis may in many cases be due to ongoing immunostimulation by spirochete remains located in hamstring tendons, a privileged, relatively avascular site where the foreign material may be able to evade immune clearance.

Also, as Dr. Arvikar pointed out in her presentation, calcific tendinopathy implies prior inflammation or degenerative changes. Thus, these calcific hamstring abnormalities implicate the hamstring tendons as a potential initial site of infection by hematogenously-spread Borrelia burgdorferi during the prearthritis phase of Lyme disease.

A further implication of the study is the possibility that hamstring tendon calcification could serve as a useful diagnostic aid in distinguishing Lyme arthritis from arthritis due to other causes. In the study, hamstring calcific tendinopathy was found in 28 of 31 adults and children with Lyme arthritis, 3 of 22 with knee osteoarthritis, and 1 of 14 patients with inflammatory arthritis, Dr. Arvikar noted.

She and her coinvestigators evaluated tendon pathology in their retrospective study of patients at the Massachusetts General Hospital Rheumatology Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Clinic. They used ultrasound because they have found it offers far better spatial resolution of calcification than does MRI or x-rays. The semimembranosus tendon was the hamstring tendon that most commonly exhibited calcification, although 11 patients with Lyme arthritis also had involvement of the semitendinosus tendon, compared with none of the controls with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis.

In the eight patients with serial ultrasound evaluations over a period of up to 12 months, the calcification persisted but the symptoms of tendinitis and synovitis improved.

Dr. Arvikar and her colleagues are expanding the scope of their ongoing study by examining patients whose Lyme arthritis is milder than that of the initial population, including patients who haven’t yet received antibiotics. They are also evaluating more controls with inflammatory arthritis.

In a separate presentation, Dr. Kalish noted that Lyme arthritis, the manifestation of Lyme disease of greatest interest to rheumatologists, occurs in about 60% of untreated patients, with onset a mean of 6 months after the tick bite. It typically entails recurrent mono- or oligoarthritis of large joints. The knee is involved in roughly 95% of cases.

The natural history of untreated Lyme arthritis is a spontaneous resolution rate of 10%-20% per year. Since the 1980s, however, 4 weeks of oral doxycycline or amoxicillin has been the treatment of choice. About 10% of patients with Lyme arthritis continue to have active synovitis 3 months after their course of antibiotics.

“There are some patients you give the treatment to and their arthritis just melts away in a month, but some, no matter what you do with antibiotics, continue to have synovitis, often developing a highly proliferative palpable synovitis that is really gunked up and features obliterative microvascular lesions,” observed Dr. Kalish, a rheumatologist at Tufts University in Boston.

Dr. Kalish said that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis is most often due to a self-perpetuating immune response after the spirochete has been killed by antibiotics. He noted that patients with certain HLA-DRB1 haplotypes are more likely to experience persistent Lyme arthritis after standard recommended courses of antibiotics, and these DRB1 alleles correlate closely with the shared epitope associated with increased susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis. Several candidate autoantigens have already been identified.

He noted that the Massachusetts General group, in an earlier study, demonstrated that the presence of B. burgdorferi DNA by PCR in synovial fluid from patients with persistent Lyme arthritis after antibiotic therapy was not a reliable indicator of active joint infection (Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Aug;63[8]:2238-47).

“This was a paradigm change for me in seeing this study, because prior to that I had used PCR somewhat to guide treatment and make management decisions,” Dr. Kalish said.

What’s a reasonable treatment strategy in patients with persistent Lyme arthritis despite 30 days of oral antibiotics? Dr. Kalish favors an algorithm similar to one published by Dr. Arvikar and Allen C. Steere, MD (Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2015 Jun;29[2]:269-80). In the case of mild persistent arthritis, he opts for another 30 days of oral doxycycline. If the arthritis is moderate or severe, he goes with either another 30 days of doxycycline or 30 days of intravenous ceftriaxone.

If the arthritis still hasn’t resolved despite two 30-day rounds of antibiotic therapy, he prescribes an NSAID or hydroxychloroquine if the persistent arthritis is mild, or methotrexate if it’s moderate to severe. And if the arthritis still persists after 3-6 months of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, he’ll consider synovectomy, which has a good success rate.

Neither Dr. Arvikar nor Dr. Kalish reported having any financial conflicts regarding their presentations.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Arvikar SL et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 950.

CHICAGO – The big news regarding Lyme disease at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology was a report that hamstring tendon calcification is extremely common among patients who have persistent Lyme arthritis despite having undergone appropriate antibiotic therapy.

“This is a fascinating study,” Robert A. Kalish, MD, a Lyme disease expert not involved in the research, said regarding the report by Sheila L. Arvikar, MD, and her coworkers at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

One implication of this finding by a renowned group of Lyme disease researchers is that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis may in many cases be due to ongoing immunostimulation by spirochete remains located in hamstring tendons, a privileged, relatively avascular site where the foreign material may be able to evade immune clearance.

Also, as Dr. Arvikar pointed out in her presentation, calcific tendinopathy implies prior inflammation or degenerative changes. Thus, these calcific hamstring abnormalities implicate the hamstring tendons as a potential initial site of infection by hematogenously-spread Borrelia burgdorferi during the prearthritis phase of Lyme disease.

A further implication of the study is the possibility that hamstring tendon calcification could serve as a useful diagnostic aid in distinguishing Lyme arthritis from arthritis due to other causes. In the study, hamstring calcific tendinopathy was found in 28 of 31 adults and children with Lyme arthritis, 3 of 22 with knee osteoarthritis, and 1 of 14 patients with inflammatory arthritis, Dr. Arvikar noted.

She and her coinvestigators evaluated tendon pathology in their retrospective study of patients at the Massachusetts General Hospital Rheumatology Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Clinic. They used ultrasound because they have found it offers far better spatial resolution of calcification than does MRI or x-rays. The semimembranosus tendon was the hamstring tendon that most commonly exhibited calcification, although 11 patients with Lyme arthritis also had involvement of the semitendinosus tendon, compared with none of the controls with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis.

In the eight patients with serial ultrasound evaluations over a period of up to 12 months, the calcification persisted but the symptoms of tendinitis and synovitis improved.

Dr. Arvikar and her colleagues are expanding the scope of their ongoing study by examining patients whose Lyme arthritis is milder than that of the initial population, including patients who haven’t yet received antibiotics. They are also evaluating more controls with inflammatory arthritis.

In a separate presentation, Dr. Kalish noted that Lyme arthritis, the manifestation of Lyme disease of greatest interest to rheumatologists, occurs in about 60% of untreated patients, with onset a mean of 6 months after the tick bite. It typically entails recurrent mono- or oligoarthritis of large joints. The knee is involved in roughly 95% of cases.

The natural history of untreated Lyme arthritis is a spontaneous resolution rate of 10%-20% per year. Since the 1980s, however, 4 weeks of oral doxycycline or amoxicillin has been the treatment of choice. About 10% of patients with Lyme arthritis continue to have active synovitis 3 months after their course of antibiotics.

“There are some patients you give the treatment to and their arthritis just melts away in a month, but some, no matter what you do with antibiotics, continue to have synovitis, often developing a highly proliferative palpable synovitis that is really gunked up and features obliterative microvascular lesions,” observed Dr. Kalish, a rheumatologist at Tufts University in Boston.

Dr. Kalish said that persistent posttreatment Lyme arthritis is most often due to a self-perpetuating immune response after the spirochete has been killed by antibiotics. He noted that patients with certain HLA-DRB1 haplotypes are more likely to experience persistent Lyme arthritis after standard recommended courses of antibiotics, and these DRB1 alleles correlate closely with the shared epitope associated with increased susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis. Several candidate autoantigens have already been identified.

He noted that the Massachusetts General group, in an earlier study, demonstrated that the presence of B. burgdorferi DNA by PCR in synovial fluid from patients with persistent Lyme arthritis after antibiotic therapy was not a reliable indicator of active joint infection (Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Aug;63[8]:2238-47).

“This was a paradigm change for me in seeing this study, because prior to that I had used PCR somewhat to guide treatment and make management decisions,” Dr. Kalish said.

What’s a reasonable treatment strategy in patients with persistent Lyme arthritis despite 30 days of oral antibiotics? Dr. Kalish favors an algorithm similar to one published by Dr. Arvikar and Allen C. Steere, MD (Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2015 Jun;29[2]:269-80). In the case of mild persistent arthritis, he opts for another 30 days of oral doxycycline. If the arthritis is moderate or severe, he goes with either another 30 days of doxycycline or 30 days of intravenous ceftriaxone.

If the arthritis still hasn’t resolved despite two 30-day rounds of antibiotic therapy, he prescribes an NSAID or hydroxychloroquine if the persistent arthritis is mild, or methotrexate if it’s moderate to severe. And if the arthritis still persists after 3-6 months of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, he’ll consider synovectomy, which has a good success rate.

Neither Dr. Arvikar nor Dr. Kalish reported having any financial conflicts regarding their presentations.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Arvikar SL et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(Suppl 10): Abstract 950.

In the year prior to HIV diagnosis, there were high rates of missed opportunities for HIV testing and sexual history documentation, according to a retrospective study of youth with HIV aged 14-26 years who were treated at an HIV clinic. These results demonstrate a failed need for routine HIV screening and counseling in adolescents, according to Nellie Riendeau Lazar, MPH, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and her colleagues.

alexskopje/ThinkStock

The researchers retrospectively identified 301 subjects between January 2009 and April 2015 who met their study criteria. A total of 58 of these (19%) had at least one visit in the care network in the year prior to diagnosis and their entry into the adolescent HIV clinic, and they were analyzed for missed diagnosis. The adolescent HIV clinic is part of a large care network in the Philadelphia area that includes a pediatric emergency department and a tertiary care hospital. At the time of the study, there were 31 primary care sites, according to the authors.

The mean age of the subjects in the study was 17. The majority (80%) were young men, African-American (93%), and men who have sex with men (81%). There were no significant differences seen in demographics between those with and without prior visits in the health system (J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802).

The 58 subjects were seen in 179 health care visits in the year prior to their diagnosis: 56% outpatient, 40% emergency department, and 4% inpatient visits. Only 59% of these visits had any documentation of sexual history and “the overwhelming majority of those noting sexual activity included no other information,” such as number of partners, sex of partners, or condom use, according to the researchers.

Among the total cohort, 183 of 301 had never had an HIV test prior to their first positive test, even though 26% had been seen in the care network in the 3 years prior to their diagnosis. Among the 58 in the missed opportunity analysis, only 48% had HIV testing, even though 88% (51) had documented symptoms in their visits that could have been consistent with acute infection.

“Our findings support the most recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), recommending routine HIV screening for all adolescents, regardless of risk,” the researchers stated. “Adolescents may not always disclose sexual activity during routine assessment, and provider level barriers limit the reach of risk-based testing algorithms,” they added.

The authors reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Lazar NR et al. J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802.

In the year prior to HIV diagnosis, there were high rates of missed opportunities for HIV testing and sexual history documentation, according to a retrospective study of youth with HIV aged 14-26 years who were treated at an HIV clinic. These results demonstrate a failed need for routine HIV screening and counseling in adolescents, according to Nellie Riendeau Lazar, MPH, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and her colleagues.

alexskopje/ThinkStock

The researchers retrospectively identified 301 subjects between January 2009 and April 2015 who met their study criteria. A total of 58 of these (19%) had at least one visit in the care network in the year prior to diagnosis and their entry into the adolescent HIV clinic, and they were analyzed for missed diagnosis. The adolescent HIV clinic is part of a large care network in the Philadelphia area that includes a pediatric emergency department and a tertiary care hospital. At the time of the study, there were 31 primary care sites, according to the authors.

The mean age of the subjects in the study was 17. The majority (80%) were young men, African-American (93%), and men who have sex with men (81%). There were no significant differences seen in demographics between those with and without prior visits in the health system (J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802).

The 58 subjects were seen in 179 health care visits in the year prior to their diagnosis: 56% outpatient, 40% emergency department, and 4% inpatient visits. Only 59% of these visits had any documentation of sexual history and “the overwhelming majority of those noting sexual activity included no other information,” such as number of partners, sex of partners, or condom use, according to the researchers.

Among the total cohort, 183 of 301 had never had an HIV test prior to their first positive test, even though 26% had been seen in the care network in the 3 years prior to their diagnosis. Among the 58 in the missed opportunity analysis, only 48% had HIV testing, even though 88% (51) had documented symptoms in their visits that could have been consistent with acute infection.

“Our findings support the most recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), recommending routine HIV screening for all adolescents, regardless of risk,” the researchers stated. “Adolescents may not always disclose sexual activity during routine assessment, and provider level barriers limit the reach of risk-based testing algorithms,” they added.

The authors reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Lazar NR et al. J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802.

In the year prior to HIV diagnosis, there were high rates of missed opportunities for HIV testing and sexual history documentation, according to a retrospective study of youth with HIV aged 14-26 years who were treated at an HIV clinic. These results demonstrate a failed need for routine HIV screening and counseling in adolescents, according to Nellie Riendeau Lazar, MPH, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and her colleagues.

alexskopje/ThinkStock

The researchers retrospectively identified 301 subjects between January 2009 and April 2015 who met their study criteria. A total of 58 of these (19%) had at least one visit in the care network in the year prior to diagnosis and their entry into the adolescent HIV clinic, and they were analyzed for missed diagnosis. The adolescent HIV clinic is part of a large care network in the Philadelphia area that includes a pediatric emergency department and a tertiary care hospital. At the time of the study, there were 31 primary care sites, according to the authors.

The mean age of the subjects in the study was 17. The majority (80%) were young men, African-American (93%), and men who have sex with men (81%). There were no significant differences seen in demographics between those with and without prior visits in the health system (J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802).

The 58 subjects were seen in 179 health care visits in the year prior to their diagnosis: 56% outpatient, 40% emergency department, and 4% inpatient visits. Only 59% of these visits had any documentation of sexual history and “the overwhelming majority of those noting sexual activity included no other information,” such as number of partners, sex of partners, or condom use, according to the researchers.

Among the total cohort, 183 of 301 had never had an HIV test prior to their first positive test, even though 26% had been seen in the care network in the 3 years prior to their diagnosis. Among the 58 in the missed opportunity analysis, only 48% had HIV testing, even though 88% (51) had documented symptoms in their visits that could have been consistent with acute infection.

“Our findings support the most recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), recommending routine HIV screening for all adolescents, regardless of risk,” the researchers stated. “Adolescents may not always disclose sexual activity during routine assessment, and provider level barriers limit the reach of risk-based testing algorithms,” they added.

The authors reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Lazar NR et al. J Adolesc Health. 2018;63:799-802.

India has the third largest HIV epidemic in the world because of its large population size, with 0.3% of the adult population infected with HIV. That translates to 2.1 million infected people, posing a significant challenge in the management of these individuals.¹ In all, 43% of the infected are currently on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART).¹ There has been a significant decrease in the number of HIV-AIDS–related deaths in recent years because of the remarkable increase in the use of antiretroviral therapy.² However, the prolonged life expectancy in these patients has resulted in an increase in the risk of various new diseases such as cancers. With the complex interactions between altered immunity and infections, the risk of cancers is markedly increased in patients with HIV-AIDS.³ The spectrum of malignancies in this group of patients differs from that in the general population. In addition, the pattern and the magnitude of malignancies differ in different parts of the world.⁴ In this study, we have analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS in a regional cancer center in India. The aim of the study was to analyze the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS based on their age and sex and to document the CD4 counts at the time the malignancy was diagnosed.

Methods

We retrieved data from our institution’s medical records department on all patients who had HIV-AIDS and had been diagnosed with a malignancy. Data of all patients presenting with a malignancy and coexisting HIV-AIDS from January 2013 through December 2016 were analyzed initially. Only patients for whom there was a documented CD4 count were included in the final retrospective analysis. We analyzed the correlation between the patients’ CD4 counts and malignancies subclassified as AIDS-defining malignancies (ADMs; aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma [NHL] and cervical cancer) or non–AIDS-defining malignancies (NADMs; all other malignancies other than aggressive NHL and carcinoma cervix were defined as NADM). We also analyzed the correlation between the CD4 count and NHL and other malignancies. A statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 23 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY). The independent sample Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparing the CD4 counts between the various subgroups of malignancies. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines.
 

Results

A total of 370 patients who were diagnosed with malignancy and have coexisting HIV-AIDS were identified. In all, 85 patients were excluded because there were no CD4 counts available for them, and the remaining 285 patients were included in the final analysis. Of that total, 136 patients (48%) were men, and 149 (52%) were women.

The median age of the population was 44.8 years (5-80 years) at the time of diagnosis with malignancy. The mean CD4 count of the entire population was 235.4 cells/mm³ (50-734 cells/mm³). There were 104 patients with CD4 counts of ≤200 cells/mm³, and 181 patients had CD4 counts of >200 cells/mm³ (Table 1). All patients received the HAART regimen, efavirenz-lamuvidine-tenofovir (600 mg/300 mg/300 mg Telura).

Discussion

In 2015, a report from the Indian government estimated the prevalence of HIV in the country as 0.26% (0.22%-0.32%).⁵ The report also noted a decreasing trend in the number of new cases of HIV diagnosed and a decrease in the number of AIDS-related deaths.⁵ The decrease in deaths from AIDS is primarily attributed to the widespread use of HAART. With the introduction of HAART therapy, the survival of patients diagnosed with HIV-AIDS has increased markedly.⁶ However, newer challenges have emerged with improved survival, such as an increasing number of patients being diagnosed with malignancies. In the current HAART era, the pattern of malignancies in people living with HIV-AIDS has changed compared with the pre-HAART era.⁷ The literature suggests that worldwide, malignancies are encountered in about 30% patients with HIV-AIDS, but that percentage differs sharply from that encountered in India, where it is less than 5%.⁸ This may partly be explained by opportunistic infections such as tuberculosis in Indian patients, which remains the leading cause of death in the HIV-AIDS population. In our study, we retrospectively analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS.

Although few studies have quoted NHL as the predominant malignancy in their patients with HIV-AIDS, the predominant malignancy was cervical cancer in our patient population, as seen in few other studies.^8-10 Head and neck malignancies also continue to be common malignancies in men with HIV-AIDS.¹⁰ Thus, an increase in malignancies induced by the human papillomavirus (HPV) can be seen in this group of patients. Only a few pediatric malignancies were noted in our study, and all of those patients had a vertical transmission of HIV.

Kaposi sarcoma is quite rare in the Indian population, and no case of Kaposi sarcoma was diagnosed in our study population. A similar finding was seen in several earlier publications from India. In the largest published series from India by Dhir and colleagues, evaluating 251 patients with HIV-AIDS and malignancy, no case of Kaposi sarcoma was reported.¹⁰ The authors mentioned that this finding might be because of the low seroprevalence of Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus in the Asian population.¹⁰ Three different studies from southern India have also not reported the incidence of Kaposi Sarcoma in their series of HIV-AIDS patients with malignancies,^11-13 and similar findings were also reported in a study from northern India.⁹ The incidence of other immunodeficiency-related malignancies was identical to those reported in other studies in the literature.^10,14

As seen in other studies, the CD4 counts in patients with ADM were significantly lower compared with those of patients with NADM, and that difference was not seen when CD4 counts of patients with cervical cancer were compared with patients in the NADM subgroup. The risk of NHL increases proportionally to the degree of immune suppression. The increased susceptibility to various infections in patients with low CD4 counts may also contribute to the occurrence of NHL in patients with low CD4 counts. The occurrence of various other rare cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS may be because of confounding rather than a direct HIV or immunosuppression effect.

An increasing incidence of NADMs has been noted in the Western literature.^7,14 ADMs remain the most common malignancies in the HIV-AIDS population, accounting for about 48% of all malignancies.⁸ This is in concordance with previous publications from India.^8,10 With the widespread availability of generic HAART, the incidence of ADMs may decrease even more in the future. In developing countries where the screening procedures for malignancies in both the general population and patients with HIV-AIDS have not yet been implemented at a national level, premalignant lesions of the cervix are not detected.¹⁰ Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy in our study population, which underscores the importance of cervical cancer screening in patients with HIV-AIDS.

In the developed countries, following the introduction of HAART in HIV-AIDS management, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma decreased by 60% to 70%, and the incidence of NHL decreased by 30% to 50%, whereas the rates of cervical cancer remained either stable or declined.^15,16 Despite the declining trend, the incidence of these malignancies continues to be high among patients with HIV-AIDS compared with the general population.¹⁷ A study from the United States showed increasing trends in various NADMs (such as anal, lung, and liver cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma) from 2006 to 2010.¹⁷ In 2003, the number of patients with NADM were higher than the number of patients with ADM in the United States.¹⁴ In a population-based study from Brazil, ADMs were the most common malignancies diagnosed in patients with HIV-AIDS. A declining trend was noted in the incidence of ADMs in the population and an increasing trend in the incidence of NADMs. This increase in NADM incidence was contributed by anal and lung cancers.¹⁸ Studies from developing countries such as Uganda and Botswana have also shown a decrease in the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma after the introduction of HAART.^19-21

Kaposi sarcoma, cervical cancer, NHL (including Burkitt lymphoma, immunoblastic lymphoma, and primary CNS lymphoma [PCNSL]) comprise ADMs. All 3 ADMs have an underlying viral infection as the causative agent.²² Kaposi sarcoma is caused by the Kaposi sarcoma herpes virus, for which seroprevalence varies worldwide.²³ As already noted in this article, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma among the HIV-AIDS population has decreased worldwide since the introduction of HAART. The preinvasive uterine cervix lesions and carcinoma cervix are caused by HPV. NHL in patients with HIV-AIDS is a predominantly aggressive B-cell neoplasm. Epstein-Barr virus is implicated for most of the ADM NHLs.²⁴ PCNSL occurs in patients with low CD4 counts and poses a diagnostic challenge. The treatment outcomes for patients with PCNSL before the HAART era were dismal. With the widespread use of HAART, the treatment outcomes of patients with HIV-AIDS and NHL improved, and, currently, these patients are managed the same way as other patients with NHL.²²

The increasing incidence of the NADM is partly attributed to the increasing incidence of these malignancies in the general population. An elevated risk of certain NADMs is also attributable to viral infections. The common NADMs in the United States are lung, anal, oropharyngeal, and hepatocellular cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma.¹⁴ The common NADMs in our study population were oral, oropharyngeal, colon, and breast cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma. One-third of head and neck cancers, including most oropharyngeal cancers, and cervical and anal cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS are related to HPV.²⁵ Patients with HIV-AIDS are at increased risk for chronic HPV infection from immunosuppression. Chronic HPV infections and prolonged immunosuppression cause premalignant high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive cancers.²² The initiation of and adherence to HAART leads to immune recovery and reduces high-risk HPV-associated morbidity.²⁶ Findings from previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of screening for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS.²⁷ The HPV vaccine is immunogenic in patients with HIV-AIDS and might help prevent HPV-associated malignancies.²⁸

Conclusions

With the wide use of HAART by patients with HIV-AIDS, we can expect an increase in the survival of that population. The incidence of malignancies may also increase significantly in these patients, and further longitudinal studies are needed, as malignancies may emerge as the most common cause of death in patients with HIV-AIDS. In addition, the extensive use of HAART therapy and implementation of screening programs for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS could result in a decrease in the incidence of ADMs.

India has the third largest HIV epidemic in the world because of its large population size, with 0.3% of the adult population infected with HIV. That translates to 2.1 million infected people, posing a significant challenge in the management of these individuals.¹ In all, 43% of the infected are currently on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART).¹ There has been a significant decrease in the number of HIV-AIDS–related deaths in recent years because of the remarkable increase in the use of antiretroviral therapy.² However, the prolonged life expectancy in these patients has resulted in an increase in the risk of various new diseases such as cancers. With the complex interactions between altered immunity and infections, the risk of cancers is markedly increased in patients with HIV-AIDS.³ The spectrum of malignancies in this group of patients differs from that in the general population. In addition, the pattern and the magnitude of malignancies differ in different parts of the world.⁴ In this study, we have analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS in a regional cancer center in India. The aim of the study was to analyze the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS based on their age and sex and to document the CD4 counts at the time the malignancy was diagnosed.

Methods

We retrieved data from our institution’s medical records department on all patients who had HIV-AIDS and had been diagnosed with a malignancy. Data of all patients presenting with a malignancy and coexisting HIV-AIDS from January 2013 through December 2016 were analyzed initially. Only patients for whom there was a documented CD4 count were included in the final retrospective analysis. We analyzed the correlation between the patients’ CD4 counts and malignancies subclassified as AIDS-defining malignancies (ADMs; aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma [NHL] and cervical cancer) or non–AIDS-defining malignancies (NADMs; all other malignancies other than aggressive NHL and carcinoma cervix were defined as NADM). We also analyzed the correlation between the CD4 count and NHL and other malignancies. A statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 23 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY). The independent sample Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparing the CD4 counts between the various subgroups of malignancies. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines.
 

Results

A total of 370 patients who were diagnosed with malignancy and have coexisting HIV-AIDS were identified. In all, 85 patients were excluded because there were no CD4 counts available for them, and the remaining 285 patients were included in the final analysis. Of that total, 136 patients (48%) were men, and 149 (52%) were women.

The median age of the population was 44.8 years (5-80 years) at the time of diagnosis with malignancy. The mean CD4 count of the entire population was 235.4 cells/mm³ (50-734 cells/mm³). There were 104 patients with CD4 counts of ≤200 cells/mm³, and 181 patients had CD4 counts of >200 cells/mm³ (Table 1). All patients received the HAART regimen, efavirenz-lamuvidine-tenofovir (600 mg/300 mg/300 mg Telura).

Discussion

In 2015, a report from the Indian government estimated the prevalence of HIV in the country as 0.26% (0.22%-0.32%).⁵ The report also noted a decreasing trend in the number of new cases of HIV diagnosed and a decrease in the number of AIDS-related deaths.⁵ The decrease in deaths from AIDS is primarily attributed to the widespread use of HAART. With the introduction of HAART therapy, the survival of patients diagnosed with HIV-AIDS has increased markedly.⁶ However, newer challenges have emerged with improved survival, such as an increasing number of patients being diagnosed with malignancies. In the current HAART era, the pattern of malignancies in people living with HIV-AIDS has changed compared with the pre-HAART era.⁷ The literature suggests that worldwide, malignancies are encountered in about 30% patients with HIV-AIDS, but that percentage differs sharply from that encountered in India, where it is less than 5%.⁸ This may partly be explained by opportunistic infections such as tuberculosis in Indian patients, which remains the leading cause of death in the HIV-AIDS population. In our study, we retrospectively analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS.

Although few studies have quoted NHL as the predominant malignancy in their patients with HIV-AIDS, the predominant malignancy was cervical cancer in our patient population, as seen in few other studies.^8-10 Head and neck malignancies also continue to be common malignancies in men with HIV-AIDS.¹⁰ Thus, an increase in malignancies induced by the human papillomavirus (HPV) can be seen in this group of patients. Only a few pediatric malignancies were noted in our study, and all of those patients had a vertical transmission of HIV.

Kaposi sarcoma is quite rare in the Indian population, and no case of Kaposi sarcoma was diagnosed in our study population. A similar finding was seen in several earlier publications from India. In the largest published series from India by Dhir and colleagues, evaluating 251 patients with HIV-AIDS and malignancy, no case of Kaposi sarcoma was reported.¹⁰ The authors mentioned that this finding might be because of the low seroprevalence of Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus in the Asian population.¹⁰ Three different studies from southern India have also not reported the incidence of Kaposi Sarcoma in their series of HIV-AIDS patients with malignancies,^11-13 and similar findings were also reported in a study from northern India.⁹ The incidence of other immunodeficiency-related malignancies was identical to those reported in other studies in the literature.^10,14

As seen in other studies, the CD4 counts in patients with ADM were significantly lower compared with those of patients with NADM, and that difference was not seen when CD4 counts of patients with cervical cancer were compared with patients in the NADM subgroup. The risk of NHL increases proportionally to the degree of immune suppression. The increased susceptibility to various infections in patients with low CD4 counts may also contribute to the occurrence of NHL in patients with low CD4 counts. The occurrence of various other rare cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS may be because of confounding rather than a direct HIV or immunosuppression effect.

An increasing incidence of NADMs has been noted in the Western literature.^7,14 ADMs remain the most common malignancies in the HIV-AIDS population, accounting for about 48% of all malignancies.⁸ This is in concordance with previous publications from India.^8,10 With the widespread availability of generic HAART, the incidence of ADMs may decrease even more in the future. In developing countries where the screening procedures for malignancies in both the general population and patients with HIV-AIDS have not yet been implemented at a national level, premalignant lesions of the cervix are not detected.¹⁰ Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy in our study population, which underscores the importance of cervical cancer screening in patients with HIV-AIDS.

In the developed countries, following the introduction of HAART in HIV-AIDS management, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma decreased by 60% to 70%, and the incidence of NHL decreased by 30% to 50%, whereas the rates of cervical cancer remained either stable or declined.^15,16 Despite the declining trend, the incidence of these malignancies continues to be high among patients with HIV-AIDS compared with the general population.¹⁷ A study from the United States showed increasing trends in various NADMs (such as anal, lung, and liver cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma) from 2006 to 2010.¹⁷ In 2003, the number of patients with NADM were higher than the number of patients with ADM in the United States.¹⁴ In a population-based study from Brazil, ADMs were the most common malignancies diagnosed in patients with HIV-AIDS. A declining trend was noted in the incidence of ADMs in the population and an increasing trend in the incidence of NADMs. This increase in NADM incidence was contributed by anal and lung cancers.¹⁸ Studies from developing countries such as Uganda and Botswana have also shown a decrease in the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma after the introduction of HAART.^19-21

Kaposi sarcoma, cervical cancer, NHL (including Burkitt lymphoma, immunoblastic lymphoma, and primary CNS lymphoma [PCNSL]) comprise ADMs. All 3 ADMs have an underlying viral infection as the causative agent.²² Kaposi sarcoma is caused by the Kaposi sarcoma herpes virus, for which seroprevalence varies worldwide.²³ As already noted in this article, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma among the HIV-AIDS population has decreased worldwide since the introduction of HAART. The preinvasive uterine cervix lesions and carcinoma cervix are caused by HPV. NHL in patients with HIV-AIDS is a predominantly aggressive B-cell neoplasm. Epstein-Barr virus is implicated for most of the ADM NHLs.²⁴ PCNSL occurs in patients with low CD4 counts and poses a diagnostic challenge. The treatment outcomes for patients with PCNSL before the HAART era were dismal. With the widespread use of HAART, the treatment outcomes of patients with HIV-AIDS and NHL improved, and, currently, these patients are managed the same way as other patients with NHL.²²

The increasing incidence of the NADM is partly attributed to the increasing incidence of these malignancies in the general population. An elevated risk of certain NADMs is also attributable to viral infections. The common NADMs in the United States are lung, anal, oropharyngeal, and hepatocellular cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma.¹⁴ The common NADMs in our study population were oral, oropharyngeal, colon, and breast cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma. One-third of head and neck cancers, including most oropharyngeal cancers, and cervical and anal cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS are related to HPV.²⁵ Patients with HIV-AIDS are at increased risk for chronic HPV infection from immunosuppression. Chronic HPV infections and prolonged immunosuppression cause premalignant high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive cancers.²² The initiation of and adherence to HAART leads to immune recovery and reduces high-risk HPV-associated morbidity.²⁶ Findings from previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of screening for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS.²⁷ The HPV vaccine is immunogenic in patients with HIV-AIDS and might help prevent HPV-associated malignancies.²⁸

Conclusions

With the wide use of HAART by patients with HIV-AIDS, we can expect an increase in the survival of that population. The incidence of malignancies may also increase significantly in these patients, and further longitudinal studies are needed, as malignancies may emerge as the most common cause of death in patients with HIV-AIDS. In addition, the extensive use of HAART therapy and implementation of screening programs for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS could result in a decrease in the incidence of ADMs.

India has the third largest HIV epidemic in the world because of its large population size, with 0.3% of the adult population infected with HIV. That translates to 2.1 million infected people, posing a significant challenge in the management of these individuals.¹ In all, 43% of the infected are currently on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART).¹ There has been a significant decrease in the number of HIV-AIDS–related deaths in recent years because of the remarkable increase in the use of antiretroviral therapy.² However, the prolonged life expectancy in these patients has resulted in an increase in the risk of various new diseases such as cancers. With the complex interactions between altered immunity and infections, the risk of cancers is markedly increased in patients with HIV-AIDS.³ The spectrum of malignancies in this group of patients differs from that in the general population. In addition, the pattern and the magnitude of malignancies differ in different parts of the world.⁴ In this study, we have analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS in a regional cancer center in India. The aim of the study was to analyze the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS based on their age and sex and to document the CD4 counts at the time the malignancy was diagnosed.

Methods

We retrieved data from our institution’s medical records department on all patients who had HIV-AIDS and had been diagnosed with a malignancy. Data of all patients presenting with a malignancy and coexisting HIV-AIDS from January 2013 through December 2016 were analyzed initially. Only patients for whom there was a documented CD4 count were included in the final retrospective analysis. We analyzed the correlation between the patients’ CD4 counts and malignancies subclassified as AIDS-defining malignancies (ADMs; aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma [NHL] and cervical cancer) or non–AIDS-defining malignancies (NADMs; all other malignancies other than aggressive NHL and carcinoma cervix were defined as NADM). We also analyzed the correlation between the CD4 count and NHL and other malignancies. A statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 23 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY). The independent sample Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparing the CD4 counts between the various subgroups of malignancies. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines.
 

Results

A total of 370 patients who were diagnosed with malignancy and have coexisting HIV-AIDS were identified. In all, 85 patients were excluded because there were no CD4 counts available for them, and the remaining 285 patients were included in the final analysis. Of that total, 136 patients (48%) were men, and 149 (52%) were women.

The median age of the population was 44.8 years (5-80 years) at the time of diagnosis with malignancy. The mean CD4 count of the entire population was 235.4 cells/mm³ (50-734 cells/mm³). There were 104 patients with CD4 counts of ≤200 cells/mm³, and 181 patients had CD4 counts of >200 cells/mm³ (Table 1). All patients received the HAART regimen, efavirenz-lamuvidine-tenofovir (600 mg/300 mg/300 mg Telura).

Discussion

In 2015, a report from the Indian government estimated the prevalence of HIV in the country as 0.26% (0.22%-0.32%).⁵ The report also noted a decreasing trend in the number of new cases of HIV diagnosed and a decrease in the number of AIDS-related deaths.⁵ The decrease in deaths from AIDS is primarily attributed to the widespread use of HAART. With the introduction of HAART therapy, the survival of patients diagnosed with HIV-AIDS has increased markedly.⁶ However, newer challenges have emerged with improved survival, such as an increasing number of patients being diagnosed with malignancies. In the current HAART era, the pattern of malignancies in people living with HIV-AIDS has changed compared with the pre-HAART era.⁷ The literature suggests that worldwide, malignancies are encountered in about 30% patients with HIV-AIDS, but that percentage differs sharply from that encountered in India, where it is less than 5%.⁸ This may partly be explained by opportunistic infections such as tuberculosis in Indian patients, which remains the leading cause of death in the HIV-AIDS population. In our study, we retrospectively analyzed the pattern of malignancies in patients with HIV-AIDS.

Although few studies have quoted NHL as the predominant malignancy in their patients with HIV-AIDS, the predominant malignancy was cervical cancer in our patient population, as seen in few other studies.^8-10 Head and neck malignancies also continue to be common malignancies in men with HIV-AIDS.¹⁰ Thus, an increase in malignancies induced by the human papillomavirus (HPV) can be seen in this group of patients. Only a few pediatric malignancies were noted in our study, and all of those patients had a vertical transmission of HIV.

Kaposi sarcoma is quite rare in the Indian population, and no case of Kaposi sarcoma was diagnosed in our study population. A similar finding was seen in several earlier publications from India. In the largest published series from India by Dhir and colleagues, evaluating 251 patients with HIV-AIDS and malignancy, no case of Kaposi sarcoma was reported.¹⁰ The authors mentioned that this finding might be because of the low seroprevalence of Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus in the Asian population.¹⁰ Three different studies from southern India have also not reported the incidence of Kaposi Sarcoma in their series of HIV-AIDS patients with malignancies,^11-13 and similar findings were also reported in a study from northern India.⁹ The incidence of other immunodeficiency-related malignancies was identical to those reported in other studies in the literature.^10,14

As seen in other studies, the CD4 counts in patients with ADM were significantly lower compared with those of patients with NADM, and that difference was not seen when CD4 counts of patients with cervical cancer were compared with patients in the NADM subgroup. The risk of NHL increases proportionally to the degree of immune suppression. The increased susceptibility to various infections in patients with low CD4 counts may also contribute to the occurrence of NHL in patients with low CD4 counts. The occurrence of various other rare cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS may be because of confounding rather than a direct HIV or immunosuppression effect.

An increasing incidence of NADMs has been noted in the Western literature.^7,14 ADMs remain the most common malignancies in the HIV-AIDS population, accounting for about 48% of all malignancies.⁸ This is in concordance with previous publications from India.^8,10 With the widespread availability of generic HAART, the incidence of ADMs may decrease even more in the future. In developing countries where the screening procedures for malignancies in both the general population and patients with HIV-AIDS have not yet been implemented at a national level, premalignant lesions of the cervix are not detected.¹⁰ Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy in our study population, which underscores the importance of cervical cancer screening in patients with HIV-AIDS.

In the developed countries, following the introduction of HAART in HIV-AIDS management, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma decreased by 60% to 70%, and the incidence of NHL decreased by 30% to 50%, whereas the rates of cervical cancer remained either stable or declined.^15,16 Despite the declining trend, the incidence of these malignancies continues to be high among patients with HIV-AIDS compared with the general population.¹⁷ A study from the United States showed increasing trends in various NADMs (such as anal, lung, and liver cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma) from 2006 to 2010.¹⁷ In 2003, the number of patients with NADM were higher than the number of patients with ADM in the United States.¹⁴ In a population-based study from Brazil, ADMs were the most common malignancies diagnosed in patients with HIV-AIDS. A declining trend was noted in the incidence of ADMs in the population and an increasing trend in the incidence of NADMs. This increase in NADM incidence was contributed by anal and lung cancers.¹⁸ Studies from developing countries such as Uganda and Botswana have also shown a decrease in the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma after the introduction of HAART.^19-21

Kaposi sarcoma, cervical cancer, NHL (including Burkitt lymphoma, immunoblastic lymphoma, and primary CNS lymphoma [PCNSL]) comprise ADMs. All 3 ADMs have an underlying viral infection as the causative agent.²² Kaposi sarcoma is caused by the Kaposi sarcoma herpes virus, for which seroprevalence varies worldwide.²³ As already noted in this article, the incidence of Kaposi sarcoma among the HIV-AIDS population has decreased worldwide since the introduction of HAART. The preinvasive uterine cervix lesions and carcinoma cervix are caused by HPV. NHL in patients with HIV-AIDS is a predominantly aggressive B-cell neoplasm. Epstein-Barr virus is implicated for most of the ADM NHLs.²⁴ PCNSL occurs in patients with low CD4 counts and poses a diagnostic challenge. The treatment outcomes for patients with PCNSL before the HAART era were dismal. With the widespread use of HAART, the treatment outcomes of patients with HIV-AIDS and NHL improved, and, currently, these patients are managed the same way as other patients with NHL.²²

The increasing incidence of the NADM is partly attributed to the increasing incidence of these malignancies in the general population. An elevated risk of certain NADMs is also attributable to viral infections. The common NADMs in the United States are lung, anal, oropharyngeal, and hepatocellular cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma.¹⁴ The common NADMs in our study population were oral, oropharyngeal, colon, and breast cancers and Hodgkin lymphoma. One-third of head and neck cancers, including most oropharyngeal cancers, and cervical and anal cancers in patients with HIV-AIDS are related to HPV.²⁵ Patients with HIV-AIDS are at increased risk for chronic HPV infection from immunosuppression. Chronic HPV infections and prolonged immunosuppression cause premalignant high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive cancers.²² The initiation of and adherence to HAART leads to immune recovery and reduces high-risk HPV-associated morbidity.²⁶ Findings from previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of screening for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS.²⁷ The HPV vaccine is immunogenic in patients with HIV-AIDS and might help prevent HPV-associated malignancies.²⁸

Conclusions

With the wide use of HAART by patients with HIV-AIDS, we can expect an increase in the survival of that population. The incidence of malignancies may also increase significantly in these patients, and further longitudinal studies are needed, as malignancies may emerge as the most common cause of death in patients with HIV-AIDS. In addition, the extensive use of HAART therapy and implementation of screening programs for cervical cancer in patients with HIV-AIDS could result in a decrease in the incidence of ADMs.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the combination of lamivudine (3TC) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) known as Temixys for treatment of HIV-1 when used with other antiretrovirals. The approval is for adult and pediatric patients with HIV-1 who weigh at least 35 kg.

The approval is based on data through 144 weeks in a double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial in 600 antiretroviral-naive patients. The trial compared TDF/3TC plus efavirenz (EFV) with 3TC/EFV plus stavudine (d4T). The results showed similar responses at 144 weeks between both groups: 62% of patients taking TDF/3TC/EFV and 58% of patients taking d4T/3TC/EFV achieved and maintained fewer than 50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA.

The most common adverse events include headache, pain, depression, rash, and diarrhea. Prior to initiating treatment, patients should be tested for hepatitis B virus because there have been reports of 3TC-resistant strains of hepatitis B virus associated with treatment of HIV-1 with 3TC-containing regimens in coinfected patients. Patients should also be tested for estimated creatinine clearance, urine glucose, and urine protein because TDF/3TC is not recommended for patients with renal impairment.

The full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the combination of lamivudine (3TC) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) known as Temixys for treatment of HIV-1 when used with other antiretrovirals. The approval is for adult and pediatric patients with HIV-1 who weigh at least 35 kg.

The approval is based on data through 144 weeks in a double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial in 600 antiretroviral-naive patients. The trial compared TDF/3TC plus efavirenz (EFV) with 3TC/EFV plus stavudine (d4T). The results showed similar responses at 144 weeks between both groups: 62% of patients taking TDF/3TC/EFV and 58% of patients taking d4T/3TC/EFV achieved and maintained fewer than 50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA.

The most common adverse events include headache, pain, depression, rash, and diarrhea. Prior to initiating treatment, patients should be tested for hepatitis B virus because there have been reports of 3TC-resistant strains of hepatitis B virus associated with treatment of HIV-1 with 3TC-containing regimens in coinfected patients. Patients should also be tested for estimated creatinine clearance, urine glucose, and urine protein because TDF/3TC is not recommended for patients with renal impairment.

The full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the combination of lamivudine (3TC) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) known as Temixys for treatment of HIV-1 when used with other antiretrovirals. The approval is for adult and pediatric patients with HIV-1 who weigh at least 35 kg.

The approval is based on data through 144 weeks in a double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial in 600 antiretroviral-naive patients. The trial compared TDF/3TC plus efavirenz (EFV) with 3TC/EFV plus stavudine (d4T). The results showed similar responses at 144 weeks between both groups: 62% of patients taking TDF/3TC/EFV and 58% of patients taking d4T/3TC/EFV achieved and maintained fewer than 50 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA.

The most common adverse events include headache, pain, depression, rash, and diarrhea. Prior to initiating treatment, patients should be tested for hepatitis B virus because there have been reports of 3TC-resistant strains of hepatitis B virus associated with treatment of HIV-1 with 3TC-containing regimens in coinfected patients. Patients should also be tested for estimated creatinine clearance, urine glucose, and urine protein because TDF/3TC is not recommended for patients with renal impairment.

The full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website.

[email protected]

Inflammation is a double-edged sword. Controlled and modest proinflammatory responses can enhance host immunity against viruses and decrease bacterial colonization and infection, whereas excessive uncontrolled proinflammatory responses may increase the susceptibility to bacterial colonization and secondary infection to facilitate disease pathogenesis. The immune system produces both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines. It is a balanced response that is key to maintaining good health.

Cynthia Goldsmith/CDC photo #10073

Viral upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) are caused by rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, enteroviruses, respiratory syncytial viruses, influenza A and B viruses, parainfluenza viruses, adenoviruses, and human metapneumoviruses. Viruses are powerful. In the nose, they induce hypersecretion of mucus, slow cilia beating, up-regulate nasal epithelial cell receptors to facilitate bacterial attachment, suppress neutrophil function, and cause increased release of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. All these actions by respiratory viruses promote bacterial overgrowth in the nasopharynx and thereby facilitate bacterial superinfections. In fact, progression in pathogenesis of the common bacterial respiratory infections – acute otitis media, acute sinusitis, acute conjunctivitis, and pneumonia – almost always is preceded by a viral URI. Viruses activate multiple target cells in the upper respiratory tract to produce an array of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. The symptoms of a viral URI resolve coinciding with an anti-inflammatory response and adaptive immunity.

In recent work, we found a higher frequency of viral URIs in children who experienced more frequent acute otitis media (AOM). We sought to understand why this might occur by comparing levels of inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in the nose during viral URI that did not precipitate AOM versus when a viral URI precipitated an AOM episode. When a child had a viral URI but did not go on to experience an AOM, the child had higher proinflammatory responses than when the viral URI precipitated an AOM. When differences of levels of proinflammatory cytokines/chemokines were compared in otitis-prone and non–otitis-prone children, lower nasal responses were associated with higher otitis-prone classification frequency (Clin Infect Dis. 2018. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy750).

The powerful virus and the inflammatory response it can induce also play a major role in allergy and asthma. Viral URIs enhance allergic sensitization to respiratory viruses, such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus, cause cytopathic damage to airway epithelium, promote excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production, and increase the exposure of allergens and irritants to antigen-presenting cells. Viral infections also may induce the release of epithelial mediators and cytokines that may propagate eosinophilia. Viral URIs, particularly with respiratory syncytial virus and rhinovirus, are the most common causes of wheezing in children, and they have important influences on the development of asthma. Studies have shown that viral infections trigger up to 85% of asthma exacerbations in school-aged children.

Because this column is being published during the winter, a brief discussion of influenza as a powerful virus is appropriate. Influenza occurs in winter outbreaks of varying extent every year. The severity of the influenza season reflects the changing nature of the antigenic properties of influenza viruses, and their spread depends on susceptibility of the population. Influenza outbreaks typically peak over a 2-3 week period and last for 2-3 months. Most outbreaks have attack rates of 10%-20% in children. There may be variations in disease severity caused by different influenza virus types. The symptoms are caused by excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production in the nose and lung.

Influenza and other viruses can precipitate the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), a manifestation of extreme immune dysregulation resulting in organ dysfunction that clinically resembles bacterial sepsis. In this syndrome, tissues remote from the original insult display the cardinal signs of inflammation, including vasodilation, increased microvascular permeability, and leukocyte accumulation. SIRS is another example of the double-edged sword of inflammation.

The onset and progression of SIRS occurs because of dysregulation of the normal inflammatory response, usually with an increase in both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, initiating a chain of events that leads to organ failure.

Dr. Pichichero is a specialist in pediatric infectious diseases and director of the Research Institute at Rochester (N.Y.) General Hospital. He reported having no conflicts of interest. Email him at [email protected].

Inflammation is a double-edged sword. Controlled and modest proinflammatory responses can enhance host immunity against viruses and decrease bacterial colonization and infection, whereas excessive uncontrolled proinflammatory responses may increase the susceptibility to bacterial colonization and secondary infection to facilitate disease pathogenesis. The immune system produces both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines. It is a balanced response that is key to maintaining good health.

Cynthia Goldsmith/CDC photo #10073

Viral upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) are caused by rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, enteroviruses, respiratory syncytial viruses, influenza A and B viruses, parainfluenza viruses, adenoviruses, and human metapneumoviruses. Viruses are powerful. In the nose, they induce hypersecretion of mucus, slow cilia beating, up-regulate nasal epithelial cell receptors to facilitate bacterial attachment, suppress neutrophil function, and cause increased release of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. All these actions by respiratory viruses promote bacterial overgrowth in the nasopharynx and thereby facilitate bacterial superinfections. In fact, progression in pathogenesis of the common bacterial respiratory infections – acute otitis media, acute sinusitis, acute conjunctivitis, and pneumonia – almost always is preceded by a viral URI. Viruses activate multiple target cells in the upper respiratory tract to produce an array of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. The symptoms of a viral URI resolve coinciding with an anti-inflammatory response and adaptive immunity.

In recent work, we found a higher frequency of viral URIs in children who experienced more frequent acute otitis media (AOM). We sought to understand why this might occur by comparing levels of inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in the nose during viral URI that did not precipitate AOM versus when a viral URI precipitated an AOM episode. When a child had a viral URI but did not go on to experience an AOM, the child had higher proinflammatory responses than when the viral URI precipitated an AOM. When differences of levels of proinflammatory cytokines/chemokines were compared in otitis-prone and non–otitis-prone children, lower nasal responses were associated with higher otitis-prone classification frequency (Clin Infect Dis. 2018. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy750).

The powerful virus and the inflammatory response it can induce also play a major role in allergy and asthma. Viral URIs enhance allergic sensitization to respiratory viruses, such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus, cause cytopathic damage to airway epithelium, promote excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production, and increase the exposure of allergens and irritants to antigen-presenting cells. Viral infections also may induce the release of epithelial mediators and cytokines that may propagate eosinophilia. Viral URIs, particularly with respiratory syncytial virus and rhinovirus, are the most common causes of wheezing in children, and they have important influences on the development of asthma. Studies have shown that viral infections trigger up to 85% of asthma exacerbations in school-aged children.

Because this column is being published during the winter, a brief discussion of influenza as a powerful virus is appropriate. Influenza occurs in winter outbreaks of varying extent every year. The severity of the influenza season reflects the changing nature of the antigenic properties of influenza viruses, and their spread depends on susceptibility of the population. Influenza outbreaks typically peak over a 2-3 week period and last for 2-3 months. Most outbreaks have attack rates of 10%-20% in children. There may be variations in disease severity caused by different influenza virus types. The symptoms are caused by excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production in the nose and lung.

Influenza and other viruses can precipitate the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), a manifestation of extreme immune dysregulation resulting in organ dysfunction that clinically resembles bacterial sepsis. In this syndrome, tissues remote from the original insult display the cardinal signs of inflammation, including vasodilation, increased microvascular permeability, and leukocyte accumulation. SIRS is another example of the double-edged sword of inflammation.

The onset and progression of SIRS occurs because of dysregulation of the normal inflammatory response, usually with an increase in both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, initiating a chain of events that leads to organ failure.

Dr. Pichichero is a specialist in pediatric infectious diseases and director of the Research Institute at Rochester (N.Y.) General Hospital. He reported having no conflicts of interest. Email him at [email protected].

Inflammation is a double-edged sword. Controlled and modest proinflammatory responses can enhance host immunity against viruses and decrease bacterial colonization and infection, whereas excessive uncontrolled proinflammatory responses may increase the susceptibility to bacterial colonization and secondary infection to facilitate disease pathogenesis. The immune system produces both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines. It is a balanced response that is key to maintaining good health.

Cynthia Goldsmith/CDC photo #10073

Viral upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) are caused by rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, enteroviruses, respiratory syncytial viruses, influenza A and B viruses, parainfluenza viruses, adenoviruses, and human metapneumoviruses. Viruses are powerful. In the nose, they induce hypersecretion of mucus, slow cilia beating, up-regulate nasal epithelial cell receptors to facilitate bacterial attachment, suppress neutrophil function, and cause increased release of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. All these actions by respiratory viruses promote bacterial overgrowth in the nasopharynx and thereby facilitate bacterial superinfections. In fact, progression in pathogenesis of the common bacterial respiratory infections – acute otitis media, acute sinusitis, acute conjunctivitis, and pneumonia – almost always is preceded by a viral URI. Viruses activate multiple target cells in the upper respiratory tract to produce an array of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. The symptoms of a viral URI resolve coinciding with an anti-inflammatory response and adaptive immunity.

In recent work, we found a higher frequency of viral URIs in children who experienced more frequent acute otitis media (AOM). We sought to understand why this might occur by comparing levels of inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in the nose during viral URI that did not precipitate AOM versus when a viral URI precipitated an AOM episode. When a child had a viral URI but did not go on to experience an AOM, the child had higher proinflammatory responses than when the viral URI precipitated an AOM. When differences of levels of proinflammatory cytokines/chemokines were compared in otitis-prone and non–otitis-prone children, lower nasal responses were associated with higher otitis-prone classification frequency (Clin Infect Dis. 2018. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy750).

The powerful virus and the inflammatory response it can induce also play a major role in allergy and asthma. Viral URIs enhance allergic sensitization to respiratory viruses, such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus, cause cytopathic damage to airway epithelium, promote excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production, and increase the exposure of allergens and irritants to antigen-presenting cells. Viral infections also may induce the release of epithelial mediators and cytokines that may propagate eosinophilia. Viral URIs, particularly with respiratory syncytial virus and rhinovirus, are the most common causes of wheezing in children, and they have important influences on the development of asthma. Studies have shown that viral infections trigger up to 85% of asthma exacerbations in school-aged children.

Because this column is being published during the winter, a brief discussion of influenza as a powerful virus is appropriate. Influenza occurs in winter outbreaks of varying extent every year. The severity of the influenza season reflects the changing nature of the antigenic properties of influenza viruses, and their spread depends on susceptibility of the population. Influenza outbreaks typically peak over a 2-3 week period and last for 2-3 months. Most outbreaks have attack rates of 10%-20% in children. There may be variations in disease severity caused by different influenza virus types. The symptoms are caused by excessive proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine production in the nose and lung.

Influenza and other viruses can precipitate the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), a manifestation of extreme immune dysregulation resulting in organ dysfunction that clinically resembles bacterial sepsis. In this syndrome, tissues remote from the original insult display the cardinal signs of inflammation, including vasodilation, increased microvascular permeability, and leukocyte accumulation. SIRS is another example of the double-edged sword of inflammation.

The onset and progression of SIRS occurs because of dysregulation of the normal inflammatory response, usually with an increase in both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, initiating a chain of events that leads to organ failure.

Dr. Pichichero is a specialist in pediatric infectious diseases and director of the Research Institute at Rochester (N.Y.) General Hospital. He reported having no conflicts of interest. Email him at [email protected].

The updated guidance on managing acute flaccid myelitis is unlikely to relieve the frustrations of physicians struggling to treat the condition.

After reviewing the extant data on the baffling disorder, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found no evidence that corticosteroids, interferon, antivirals, or any other immunologic or biologic therapy is an effective treatment.

All of the treatments mentioned in the guidance have been used anecdotally, and often for cases proven to be associated with enterovirus-related cases. However, there are no well validated studies confirming benefit for any of these approaches, the agency said in its clinical management document.

Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) has stricken 90 patients in the United States this year and another 252 cases are being investigated, according to new data from the CDC. The number of confirmed cases is triple that seen in 2017. Whether the disease is an infectious or autoimmune process, or something else entirely, remains unknown.

In response to the outbreak – the largest since 2014 – an expert panel of 4 CDC staff physicians reviewed the literature to find what, if any, treatments were effective; another 14 external experts provided input on the recommendations. At this point, nothing can be officially recommended, the agency said.

Corticosteroids

Corticosteroids should not be administered to most patients with AFM. In addition to “a theoretical concern” about the potential adverse effects of these drugs in acute infections, there is some hard evidence that they are associated with worse outcomes in enteroviral neuroinvasive diseases, particularly those caused by EV-71.

This observation, following a 2012 outbreak in Cambodia, led a World Health Organization commission to conclude that corticosteroids were contraindicated in the management of EV-71–associated neuroinvasive disease. This year, there has been an uptick in EV-A71-associated neurologic disease.

The CDC did hedge its advice on corticosteroids a bit in the setting of AFM, however. “There may be theoretical benefit for steroids in the setting of severe cord swelling or long tract signs suggesting white matter involvement, where steroids may salvage tissue that may be harmed due to an ongoing immune/inflammatory response. While AFM is clinically and radiographically defined by the predominance of gray matter damage in the spinal cord, some patients may have some white matter involvement. It is not clear if these different patterns are important relative to therapeutic considerations.”

Nevertheless, the agency does not recommend corticosteroid use for these patients. “The possible benefits of the use of corticosteroids to manage spinal cord edema or white matter involvement in AFM should be balanced with the possible harm due to immunosuppression in the setting of possible viral infection.”
 

IVIG

While IVIG holds some theoretical benefit for AFM, there are no high-level human data, the guidelines state. The treatment is generally safe and well tolerated, but the few reports of its use in AFM did not show clear benefit. These include two case series. One suggested an acute improvement of neurologic status, but no long-term resolution of deficits. The other indicated neither significant improvement nor deterioration.

However, current practice at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia is to initiate IVIG therapy at AFM diagnosis in hopes of boosting humoral immunity.

Nevertheless, the CDC said, “For IVIG to modify disease in an active viral infectious process, early administration is likely required, and possibly prior to exposure,” and the treatment cannot be recommended.
 

Plasma exchange

Plasma exchange in combination with IVIG and corticosteroids was ineffective in a case series of four Argentinian children, although a single case published last year found that the combination was associated with significant improvement. However, there are not enough data to recommend this approach.

Fluoxetine

Fluoxetine’s antiviral potential turned up in a high-throughput screening project to identify novel compounds with antiviral efficacy against enteroviruses. In 2012, researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, tested more than 1,000 compounds and found that the SSRI is a potent inhibitor of coxsackievirus. A later project at the National Institutes of Health replicated this finding, and determined that fluoxetine inhibited several enteroviruses, including the AFM suspect, EV-D68.

Fluoxetine concentrates more highly in the central nervous system than it does in plasma, but its antiviral properties have nothing to do with neurotransmitter activity. Rather, it appears to inhibit protein 2C, a highly conserved nonstructural protein that’s crucial to the assembly of RNA into virion particles.

In early November, a retrospective study examined fluoxetine’s use in 30 AFM patients, compared with 26 who did not receive it. The primary outcome was change in summative limb strength score. The study did little to clarify any benefit, however. The authors concluded that fluoxetine was preferentially given to patients with EDV-68 infections. They had more severe impairment at nadir, and at the last follow-up of about 1 year, they had worse outcomes.

“There is no clear human evidence for efficacy of fluoxetine in the treatment of AFM based on a single retrospective evaluation conducted in patients with AFM, and data from a mouse model also did not support efficacy,” the CDC said.
 

Antiviral medications

The CDC is quite clear on its recommendation that these drugs are not indicated in AFM, since it is not yet proven to be an infectious process.

“Any guidance regarding antiviral medications should be interpreted with great caution, given the unknowns about the pathogenesis of this illness at present ... Testing has been conducted at CDC for antiviral activity of compounds pleconaril, pocapavir, and vapendavir and none have significant activity against currently circulating strains of EV-D68 at clinically relevant concentrations.”
 

Interferon

There is some anecdotal evidence that interferon alpha-2b was beneficial in treating a polio-like syndrome associated with West Nile virus and Saint Louis encephalitis. “Although there are limited in vitro, animal, and anecdotal human data suggesting activity of some interferons against viral infections, sufficient data are lacking in the setting of AFM,” the agency said. “There is no indication that interferon should be used for the treatment of AFM, and there is concern about the potential for harm from the use of interferon given the immunomodulatory effects in the setting of possible ongoing viral replication.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: CDC Acute Flaccid Myelitis: Interim Considerations for Clinical Management

The updated guidance on managing acute flaccid myelitis is unlikely to relieve the frustrations of physicians struggling to treat the condition.

After reviewing the extant data on the baffling disorder, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found no evidence that corticosteroids, interferon, antivirals, or any other immunologic or biologic therapy is an effective treatment.

All of the treatments mentioned in the guidance have been used anecdotally, and often for cases proven to be associated with enterovirus-related cases. However, there are no well validated studies confirming benefit for any of these approaches, the agency said in its clinical management document.

Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) has stricken 90 patients in the United States this year and another 252 cases are being investigated, according to new data from the CDC. The number of confirmed cases is triple that seen in 2017. Whether the disease is an infectious or autoimmune process, or something else entirely, remains unknown.

In response to the outbreak – the largest since 2014 – an expert panel of 4 CDC staff physicians reviewed the literature to find what, if any, treatments were effective; another 14 external experts provided input on the recommendations. At this point, nothing can be officially recommended, the agency said.

Corticosteroids

Corticosteroids should not be administered to most patients with AFM. In addition to “a theoretical concern” about the potential adverse effects of these drugs in acute infections, there is some hard evidence that they are associated with worse outcomes in enteroviral neuroinvasive diseases, particularly those caused by EV-71.

This observation, following a 2012 outbreak in Cambodia, led a World Health Organization commission to conclude that corticosteroids were contraindicated in the management of EV-71–associated neuroinvasive disease. This year, there has been an uptick in EV-A71-associated neurologic disease.

The CDC did hedge its advice on corticosteroids a bit in the setting of AFM, however. “There may be theoretical benefit for steroids in the setting of severe cord swelling or long tract signs suggesting white matter involvement, where steroids may salvage tissue that may be harmed due to an ongoing immune/inflammatory response. While AFM is clinically and radiographically defined by the predominance of gray matter damage in the spinal cord, some patients may have some white matter involvement. It is not clear if these different patterns are important relative to therapeutic considerations.”

Nevertheless, the agency does not recommend corticosteroid use for these patients. “The possible benefits of the use of corticosteroids to manage spinal cord edema or white matter involvement in AFM should be balanced with the possible harm due to immunosuppression in the setting of possible viral infection.”
 

IVIG

While IVIG holds some theoretical benefit for AFM, there are no high-level human data, the guidelines state. The treatment is generally safe and well tolerated, but the few reports of its use in AFM did not show clear benefit. These include two case series. One suggested an acute improvement of neurologic status, but no long-term resolution of deficits. The other indicated neither significant improvement nor deterioration.

However, current practice at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia is to initiate IVIG therapy at AFM diagnosis in hopes of boosting humoral immunity.

Nevertheless, the CDC said, “For IVIG to modify disease in an active viral infectious process, early administration is likely required, and possibly prior to exposure,” and the treatment cannot be recommended.
 

Plasma exchange

Plasma exchange in combination with IVIG and corticosteroids was ineffective in a case series of four Argentinian children, although a single case published last year found that the combination was associated with significant improvement. However, there are not enough data to recommend this approach.

Fluoxetine

Fluoxetine’s antiviral potential turned up in a high-throughput screening project to identify novel compounds with antiviral efficacy against enteroviruses. In 2012, researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, tested more than 1,000 compounds and found that the SSRI is a potent inhibitor of coxsackievirus. A later project at the National Institutes of Health replicated this finding, and determined that fluoxetine inhibited several enteroviruses, including the AFM suspect, EV-D68.

Fluoxetine concentrates more highly in the central nervous system than it does in plasma, but its antiviral properties have nothing to do with neurotransmitter activity. Rather, it appears to inhibit protein 2C, a highly conserved nonstructural protein that’s crucial to the assembly of RNA into virion particles.

In early November, a retrospective study examined fluoxetine’s use in 30 AFM patients, compared with 26 who did not receive it. The primary outcome was change in summative limb strength score. The study did little to clarify any benefit, however. The authors concluded that fluoxetine was preferentially given to patients with EDV-68 infections. They had more severe impairment at nadir, and at the last follow-up of about 1 year, they had worse outcomes.

“There is no clear human evidence for efficacy of fluoxetine in the treatment of AFM based on a single retrospective evaluation conducted in patients with AFM, and data from a mouse model also did not support efficacy,” the CDC said.
 

Antiviral medications

The CDC is quite clear on its recommendation that these drugs are not indicated in AFM, since it is not yet proven to be an infectious process.

“Any guidance regarding antiviral medications should be interpreted with great caution, given the unknowns about the pathogenesis of this illness at present ... Testing has been conducted at CDC for antiviral activity of compounds pleconaril, pocapavir, and vapendavir and none have significant activity against currently circulating strains of EV-D68 at clinically relevant concentrations.”
 

Interferon

There is some anecdotal evidence that interferon alpha-2b was beneficial in treating a polio-like syndrome associated with West Nile virus and Saint Louis encephalitis. “Although there are limited in vitro, animal, and anecdotal human data suggesting activity of some interferons against viral infections, sufficient data are lacking in the setting of AFM,” the agency said. “There is no indication that interferon should be used for the treatment of AFM, and there is concern about the potential for harm from the use of interferon given the immunomodulatory effects in the setting of possible ongoing viral replication.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: CDC Acute Flaccid Myelitis: Interim Considerations for Clinical Management

The updated guidance on managing acute flaccid myelitis is unlikely to relieve the frustrations of physicians struggling to treat the condition.

After reviewing the extant data on the baffling disorder, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found no evidence that corticosteroids, interferon, antivirals, or any other immunologic or biologic therapy is an effective treatment.

All of the treatments mentioned in the guidance have been used anecdotally, and often for cases proven to be associated with enterovirus-related cases. However, there are no well validated studies confirming benefit for any of these approaches, the agency said in its clinical management document.

Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) has stricken 90 patients in the United States this year and another 252 cases are being investigated, according to new data from the CDC. The number of confirmed cases is triple that seen in 2017. Whether the disease is an infectious or autoimmune process, or something else entirely, remains unknown.

In response to the outbreak – the largest since 2014 – an expert panel of 4 CDC staff physicians reviewed the literature to find what, if any, treatments were effective; another 14 external experts provided input on the recommendations. At this point, nothing can be officially recommended, the agency said.

Corticosteroids

Corticosteroids should not be administered to most patients with AFM. In addition to “a theoretical concern” about the potential adverse effects of these drugs in acute infections, there is some hard evidence that they are associated with worse outcomes in enteroviral neuroinvasive diseases, particularly those caused by EV-71.

This observation, following a 2012 outbreak in Cambodia, led a World Health Organization commission to conclude that corticosteroids were contraindicated in the management of EV-71–associated neuroinvasive disease. This year, there has been an uptick in EV-A71-associated neurologic disease.

The CDC did hedge its advice on corticosteroids a bit in the setting of AFM, however. “There may be theoretical benefit for steroids in the setting of severe cord swelling or long tract signs suggesting white matter involvement, where steroids may salvage tissue that may be harmed due to an ongoing immune/inflammatory response. While AFM is clinically and radiographically defined by the predominance of gray matter damage in the spinal cord, some patients may have some white matter involvement. It is not clear if these different patterns are important relative to therapeutic considerations.”

Nevertheless, the agency does not recommend corticosteroid use for these patients. “The possible benefits of the use of corticosteroids to manage spinal cord edema or white matter involvement in AFM should be balanced with the possible harm due to immunosuppression in the setting of possible viral infection.”
 

IVIG

While IVIG holds some theoretical benefit for AFM, there are no high-level human data, the guidelines state. The treatment is generally safe and well tolerated, but the few reports of its use in AFM did not show clear benefit. These include two case series. One suggested an acute improvement of neurologic status, but no long-term resolution of deficits. The other indicated neither significant improvement nor deterioration.

However, current practice at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia is to initiate IVIG therapy at AFM diagnosis in hopes of boosting humoral immunity.

Nevertheless, the CDC said, “For IVIG to modify disease in an active viral infectious process, early administration is likely required, and possibly prior to exposure,” and the treatment cannot be recommended.
 

Plasma exchange

Plasma exchange in combination with IVIG and corticosteroids was ineffective in a case series of four Argentinian children, although a single case published last year found that the combination was associated with significant improvement. However, there are not enough data to recommend this approach.

Fluoxetine

Fluoxetine’s antiviral potential turned up in a high-throughput screening project to identify novel compounds with antiviral efficacy against enteroviruses. In 2012, researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, tested more than 1,000 compounds and found that the SSRI is a potent inhibitor of coxsackievirus. A later project at the National Institutes of Health replicated this finding, and determined that fluoxetine inhibited several enteroviruses, including the AFM suspect, EV-D68.

Fluoxetine concentrates more highly in the central nervous system than it does in plasma, but its antiviral properties have nothing to do with neurotransmitter activity. Rather, it appears to inhibit protein 2C, a highly conserved nonstructural protein that’s crucial to the assembly of RNA into virion particles.

In early November, a retrospective study examined fluoxetine’s use in 30 AFM patients, compared with 26 who did not receive it. The primary outcome was change in summative limb strength score. The study did little to clarify any benefit, however. The authors concluded that fluoxetine was preferentially given to patients with EDV-68 infections. They had more severe impairment at nadir, and at the last follow-up of about 1 year, they had worse outcomes.

“There is no clear human evidence for efficacy of fluoxetine in the treatment of AFM based on a single retrospective evaluation conducted in patients with AFM, and data from a mouse model also did not support efficacy,” the CDC said.
 

Antiviral medications

The CDC is quite clear on its recommendation that these drugs are not indicated in AFM, since it is not yet proven to be an infectious process.

“Any guidance regarding antiviral medications should be interpreted with great caution, given the unknowns about the pathogenesis of this illness at present ... Testing has been conducted at CDC for antiviral activity of compounds pleconaril, pocapavir, and vapendavir and none have significant activity against currently circulating strains of EV-D68 at clinically relevant concentrations.”
 

Interferon

There is some anecdotal evidence that interferon alpha-2b was beneficial in treating a polio-like syndrome associated with West Nile virus and Saint Louis encephalitis. “Although there are limited in vitro, animal, and anecdotal human data suggesting activity of some interferons against viral infections, sufficient data are lacking in the setting of AFM,” the agency said. “There is no indication that interferon should be used for the treatment of AFM, and there is concern about the potential for harm from the use of interferon given the immunomodulatory effects in the setting of possible ongoing viral replication.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: CDC Acute Flaccid Myelitis: Interim Considerations for Clinical Management

Infection with certain viruses has been causally linked to the development of cancer. In recent years, an improved understanding of the unique pathology and molecular underpinnings of these virally associated cancers has prompted the development of more personalized treatment strategies, with a particular focus on immunotherapy. Here, we describe some of the latest developments.

The link between viruses and cancer

Suspicions about a possible role of viral infections in the development of cancer were first aroused in the early 1900s. The seminal discovery is traced back to Peyton Rous, who showed that a malignant tumor growing in a chicken could be transferred to a healthy bird by injecting it with tumor extracts that contained no actual tumor cells.¹

The infectious etiology of human cancer, however, remained controversial until many years later when the first cancer-causing virus, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), was identified in cell cultures from patients with Burkitt lymphoma. Shortly afterward, the Rous sarcoma virus was unveiled as the oncogenic agent behind Rous’ observations.²Seven viruses have now been linked to the development of cancers and are thought to be responsible for around 12% of all cancer cases worldwide. The burden is likely to increase as technological advancements make it easier to establish a causal link between viruses and cancer development.³

In addition to making these links, researchers have also made significant headway in understanding how viruses cause cancer. Cancerous transformation of host cells occurs in only a minority of those who are infected with oncogenic viruses and often occurs in the setting of chronic infection.

Viruses can mediate carcinogenesis by direct and/or indirect mechanisms (Figure 1). Many of the hallmarks of cancer, the key attributes that drive the transformation from a normal cell to a malignant one, are compatible with the virus’s needs, such as needing to avoid cell death, increasing cell proliferation, and avoiding detection by the immune system.

Vaccines lead the charge in HPV-driven cancers

German virologist Harald zur Hausen received the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of the oncogenic role of human papillomaviruses (HPVs), a large family of more than 100 DNA viruses that infect the epithelial cells of the skin and mucous membranes. They are responsible for the largest number of virally associated cancer cases globally – around 5% (Table 1).

A number of different cancer types are linked to HPV infection, but it is best known as the cause of cervical cancer. The development of diagnostic blood tests and prophylactic vaccines for prevention and early intervention in HPV infection has helped to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. Conversely, another type of HPV-associated cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), has seen increased incidence in recent years.

HPVs are categorized according to their oncogenic potential as high, intermediate, or low risk. The high-risk HPV16 and HPV18 strains are most commonly associated with cancer. They are thought to cause cancer predominantly through integration into the host genome. The HPV genome is composed of 8 genes encoding proteins that regulate viral replication and assembly. The E6 and E7 genes are the most highly oncogenic; as the HPV DNA is inserted into the host genome, the transcriptional regulator of E6/E7 is lost, leading to their increased expression. These genes have significant oncogenic potential because of their interaction with 2 tumor suppressor proteins, p53 and pRb.^6,7

The largest investment in therapeutic development for HPV-positive cancers has been in the realm of immunotherapy in an effort to boost the anti-tumor immune response. In particular, there has been a focus on the development of therapeutic vaccines, designed to prime the anti-tumor immune response to recognize viral antigens. A variety of different types of vaccines are being developed, including live, attenuated and inactivated vaccines that are protein, DNA, or peptide based. Most developed to date target the E6/E7 proteins from the HPV16/18 strains (Table 2).^8,9

Hepatocellular carcinoma: a tale of two viruses

The hepatitis viruses are a group of 5 unrelated viruses that causes inflammation of the liver. Hepatitis B (HBV), a DNA virus, and hepatitis C (HCV), an RNA virus, are also oncoviruses; HBV in particular is one of the main causes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of liver cancer.

The highly inflammatory environment fostered by HBV and HCV infection causes liver damage that often leads to cirrhosis. Continued infection can drive permanent damage to the hepatocytes, leading to genetic and epigenetic damage and driving oncogenesis. As an RNA virus, HCV doesn’t integrate into the genome and no confirmed viral oncoproteins have been identified to date, therefore it mostly drives cancer through these indirect mechanisms, which is also reflected in the fact that HCV-associated HCC predominantly occurs against a backdrop of liver cirrhosis.

HBV does integrate into the host genome. Genome sequencing studies revealed hundreds of integration sites, but most commonly they disrupted host genes involved in telomere stability and cell cycle regulation, providing some insight into the mechanisms by which HBV-associated HCC develops. In addition, HBV produces several oncoproteins, including HBx, which disrupts gene transcription, cell signaling pathways, cell cycle progress, apoptosis and other cellular processes.^15,16

Multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been the focal point of therapeutic development in HCC. However, following the approval of sorafenib in 2008, there was a dearth of effective new treatment options despite substantial efforts and numerous phase 3 trials. More recently, immunotherapy has also come to the forefront, especially immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Last year marked the first new drug approvals in nearly a decade – the TKI regorafenib (Stivarga) and immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), both in the second-line setting after failure of sorafenib. Treatment options in this setting may continue to expand, with the TKIs cabozantinib and lenvatinib and the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab and the combination of durvalumab and tremelimumab hot on their heels.^17-20 Many of these drugs are also being evaluated in the front-line setting in comparison with sorafenib (Table 3).

Adoptive cell therapy promising in EBV-positive cancers

More than 90% of the global population is infected with EBV, making it one of the most common human viruses. It is a member of the herpesvirus family that is probably best known as the cause of infectious mononucleosis. On rare occasions, however, EBV can cause tumor development, though our understanding of its exact pathogenic role in cancer is still incomplete.

EBV is a DNA virus that doesn’t tend to integrate into the host genome, but instead remains in the nucleus in the form of episomes and produces several oncoproteins, including latent membrane protein-1. It is associated with a range of different cancer types, including Burkitt lymphoma and other B-cell malignancies. It also infects epithelial cells and can cause nasopharyngeal carcinoma and gastric cancer, however, much less is known about the molecular underpinnings of these EBV-positive cancer types.^26,27Gastric cancers actually comprise the largest group of EBV-associated tumors because of the global incidence of this cancer type. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network recently characterized gastric cancer on a molecular level and identified an EBV-positive subgroup as a distinct clinical entity with unique molecular characteristics.²⁹

The focus of therapeutic development has again been on immunotherapy, however in this case the idea of collecting the patients T cells, engineering them to recognize EBV, and then reinfusing them into the patient – adoptive cell therapy – has gained the most traction (Table 4).

Newest oncovirus on the block

The most recently discovered cancer-associated virus is Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV), a DNA virus that was identified in 2008. Like EBV, virtually the whole global adult population is infected with MCV. It is linked to the development of a highly aggressive and lethal, though rare, form of skin cancer – Merkel cell carcinoma.

MCV is found in around 80% of MCC cases and in fewer than 10% of melanomas and other skin cancers. Thus far, several direct mechanisms of oncogenesis have been described, including integration of MCV into the host genome and the production of viral oncogenes, though their precise function is as yet unclear.^32-34

The American Cancer Society estimates that only 1500 cases of MCC are diagnosed each year in the United States.³⁵ Its rarity makes it difficult to conduct clinical trials with sufficient power, yet some headway has still been made.

Around half of MCCs express the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) on their surface, making them a logical candidate for immune checkpoint inhibition. In 2017, avelumab became the first FDA-approved drug for the treatment of MCC. Approval was based on the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study in which 88 patients received avelumab. After 1 year of follow-up the ORR was 31.8%, with a CR rate of 9%.³⁶

Genome sequencing studies suggest that the mutational profile of MCV-positive tumors is quite different to those that are MCV-negative, which could have therapeutic implications. To date, these implications have not been delineated, given the challenge of small patient numbers, however an ongoing phase 1/2 trial is evaluating the combination of avelumab and radiation therapy or recombinant interferon beta, with or without MCV-specific cytotoxic T cells in patients with MCC and MCV infection.

The 2 other known cancer-causing viruses are human T-lymphotropic virus 1 (HTLV-1), a retrovirus associated with adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) and Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV). The latter is the causative agent of Kaposi sarcoma, often in combination with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a rare skin tumor that became renowned in the 1980s as an AIDS-defining illness.

The incidence of HTLV-1- and KSHV-positive tumors is substantially lower than the other virally associated cancers and, like MCC, this makes studying them and conducting clinical trials of novel therapeutic options a challenge. Nonetheless, several trials of targeted therapies and immunotherapies are underway.

Infection with certain viruses has been causally linked to the development of cancer. In recent years, an improved understanding of the unique pathology and molecular underpinnings of these virally associated cancers has prompted the development of more personalized treatment strategies, with a particular focus on immunotherapy. Here, we describe some of the latest developments.

The link between viruses and cancer

Suspicions about a possible role of viral infections in the development of cancer were first aroused in the early 1900s. The seminal discovery is traced back to Peyton Rous, who showed that a malignant tumor growing in a chicken could be transferred to a healthy bird by injecting it with tumor extracts that contained no actual tumor cells.¹

The infectious etiology of human cancer, however, remained controversial until many years later when the first cancer-causing virus, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), was identified in cell cultures from patients with Burkitt lymphoma. Shortly afterward, the Rous sarcoma virus was unveiled as the oncogenic agent behind Rous’ observations.²Seven viruses have now been linked to the development of cancers and are thought to be responsible for around 12% of all cancer cases worldwide. The burden is likely to increase as technological advancements make it easier to establish a causal link between viruses and cancer development.³

In addition to making these links, researchers have also made significant headway in understanding how viruses cause cancer. Cancerous transformation of host cells occurs in only a minority of those who are infected with oncogenic viruses and often occurs in the setting of chronic infection.

Viruses can mediate carcinogenesis by direct and/or indirect mechanisms (Figure 1). Many of the hallmarks of cancer, the key attributes that drive the transformation from a normal cell to a malignant one, are compatible with the virus’s needs, such as needing to avoid cell death, increasing cell proliferation, and avoiding detection by the immune system.

Vaccines lead the charge in HPV-driven cancers

German virologist Harald zur Hausen received the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of the oncogenic role of human papillomaviruses (HPVs), a large family of more than 100 DNA viruses that infect the epithelial cells of the skin and mucous membranes. They are responsible for the largest number of virally associated cancer cases globally – around 5% (Table 1).

A number of different cancer types are linked to HPV infection, but it is best known as the cause of cervical cancer. The development of diagnostic blood tests and prophylactic vaccines for prevention and early intervention in HPV infection has helped to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. Conversely, another type of HPV-associated cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), has seen increased incidence in recent years.

HPVs are categorized according to their oncogenic potential as high, intermediate, or low risk. The high-risk HPV16 and HPV18 strains are most commonly associated with cancer. They are thought to cause cancer predominantly through integration into the host genome. The HPV genome is composed of 8 genes encoding proteins that regulate viral replication and assembly. The E6 and E7 genes are the most highly oncogenic; as the HPV DNA is inserted into the host genome, the transcriptional regulator of E6/E7 is lost, leading to their increased expression. These genes have significant oncogenic potential because of their interaction with 2 tumor suppressor proteins, p53 and pRb.^6,7

The largest investment in therapeutic development for HPV-positive cancers has been in the realm of immunotherapy in an effort to boost the anti-tumor immune response. In particular, there has been a focus on the development of therapeutic vaccines, designed to prime the anti-tumor immune response to recognize viral antigens. A variety of different types of vaccines are being developed, including live, attenuated and inactivated vaccines that are protein, DNA, or peptide based. Most developed to date target the E6/E7 proteins from the HPV16/18 strains (Table 2).^8,9

Hepatocellular carcinoma: a tale of two viruses

The hepatitis viruses are a group of 5 unrelated viruses that causes inflammation of the liver. Hepatitis B (HBV), a DNA virus, and hepatitis C (HCV), an RNA virus, are also oncoviruses; HBV in particular is one of the main causes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of liver cancer.

The highly inflammatory environment fostered by HBV and HCV infection causes liver damage that often leads to cirrhosis. Continued infection can drive permanent damage to the hepatocytes, leading to genetic and epigenetic damage and driving oncogenesis. As an RNA virus, HCV doesn’t integrate into the genome and no confirmed viral oncoproteins have been identified to date, therefore it mostly drives cancer through these indirect mechanisms, which is also reflected in the fact that HCV-associated HCC predominantly occurs against a backdrop of liver cirrhosis.

HBV does integrate into the host genome. Genome sequencing studies revealed hundreds of integration sites, but most commonly they disrupted host genes involved in telomere stability and cell cycle regulation, providing some insight into the mechanisms by which HBV-associated HCC develops. In addition, HBV produces several oncoproteins, including HBx, which disrupts gene transcription, cell signaling pathways, cell cycle progress, apoptosis and other cellular processes.^15,16

Multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been the focal point of therapeutic development in HCC. However, following the approval of sorafenib in 2008, there was a dearth of effective new treatment options despite substantial efforts and numerous phase 3 trials. More recently, immunotherapy has also come to the forefront, especially immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Last year marked the first new drug approvals in nearly a decade – the TKI regorafenib (Stivarga) and immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), both in the second-line setting after failure of sorafenib. Treatment options in this setting may continue to expand, with the TKIs cabozantinib and lenvatinib and the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab and the combination of durvalumab and tremelimumab hot on their heels.^17-20 Many of these drugs are also being evaluated in the front-line setting in comparison with sorafenib (Table 3).

Adoptive cell therapy promising in EBV-positive cancers

More than 90% of the global population is infected with EBV, making it one of the most common human viruses. It is a member of the herpesvirus family that is probably best known as the cause of infectious mononucleosis. On rare occasions, however, EBV can cause tumor development, though our understanding of its exact pathogenic role in cancer is still incomplete.

EBV is a DNA virus that doesn’t tend to integrate into the host genome, but instead remains in the nucleus in the form of episomes and produces several oncoproteins, including latent membrane protein-1. It is associated with a range of different cancer types, including Burkitt lymphoma and other B-cell malignancies. It also infects epithelial cells and can cause nasopharyngeal carcinoma and gastric cancer, however, much less is known about the molecular underpinnings of these EBV-positive cancer types.^26,27Gastric cancers actually comprise the largest group of EBV-associated tumors because of the global incidence of this cancer type. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network recently characterized gastric cancer on a molecular level and identified an EBV-positive subgroup as a distinct clinical entity with unique molecular characteristics.²⁹

The focus of therapeutic development has again been on immunotherapy, however in this case the idea of collecting the patients T cells, engineering them to recognize EBV, and then reinfusing them into the patient – adoptive cell therapy – has gained the most traction (Table 4).

Newest oncovirus on the block

The most recently discovered cancer-associated virus is Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV), a DNA virus that was identified in 2008. Like EBV, virtually the whole global adult population is infected with MCV. It is linked to the development of a highly aggressive and lethal, though rare, form of skin cancer – Merkel cell carcinoma.

MCV is found in around 80% of MCC cases and in fewer than 10% of melanomas and other skin cancers. Thus far, several direct mechanisms of oncogenesis have been described, including integration of MCV into the host genome and the production of viral oncogenes, though their precise function is as yet unclear.^32-34

The American Cancer Society estimates that only 1500 cases of MCC are diagnosed each year in the United States.³⁵ Its rarity makes it difficult to conduct clinical trials with sufficient power, yet some headway has still been made.

Around half of MCCs express the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) on their surface, making them a logical candidate for immune checkpoint inhibition. In 2017, avelumab became the first FDA-approved drug for the treatment of MCC. Approval was based on the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study in which 88 patients received avelumab. After 1 year of follow-up the ORR was 31.8%, with a CR rate of 9%.³⁶

Genome sequencing studies suggest that the mutational profile of MCV-positive tumors is quite different to those that are MCV-negative, which could have therapeutic implications. To date, these implications have not been delineated, given the challenge of small patient numbers, however an ongoing phase 1/2 trial is evaluating the combination of avelumab and radiation therapy or recombinant interferon beta, with or without MCV-specific cytotoxic T cells in patients with MCC and MCV infection.

The 2 other known cancer-causing viruses are human T-lymphotropic virus 1 (HTLV-1), a retrovirus associated with adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) and Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV). The latter is the causative agent of Kaposi sarcoma, often in combination with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a rare skin tumor that became renowned in the 1980s as an AIDS-defining illness.

The incidence of HTLV-1- and KSHV-positive tumors is substantially lower than the other virally associated cancers and, like MCC, this makes studying them and conducting clinical trials of novel therapeutic options a challenge. Nonetheless, several trials of targeted therapies and immunotherapies are underway.

Infection with certain viruses has been causally linked to the development of cancer. In recent years, an improved understanding of the unique pathology and molecular underpinnings of these virally associated cancers has prompted the development of more personalized treatment strategies, with a particular focus on immunotherapy. Here, we describe some of the latest developments.

The link between viruses and cancer

Suspicions about a possible role of viral infections in the development of cancer were first aroused in the early 1900s. The seminal discovery is traced back to Peyton Rous, who showed that a malignant tumor growing in a chicken could be transferred to a healthy bird by injecting it with tumor extracts that contained no actual tumor cells.¹

The infectious etiology of human cancer, however, remained controversial until many years later when the first cancer-causing virus, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), was identified in cell cultures from patients with Burkitt lymphoma. Shortly afterward, the Rous sarcoma virus was unveiled as the oncogenic agent behind Rous’ observations.²Seven viruses have now been linked to the development of cancers and are thought to be responsible for around 12% of all cancer cases worldwide. The burden is likely to increase as technological advancements make it easier to establish a causal link between viruses and cancer development.³

In addition to making these links, researchers have also made significant headway in understanding how viruses cause cancer. Cancerous transformation of host cells occurs in only a minority of those who are infected with oncogenic viruses and often occurs in the setting of chronic infection.

Viruses can mediate carcinogenesis by direct and/or indirect mechanisms (Figure 1). Many of the hallmarks of cancer, the key attributes that drive the transformation from a normal cell to a malignant one, are compatible with the virus’s needs, such as needing to avoid cell death, increasing cell proliferation, and avoiding detection by the immune system.

Vaccines lead the charge in HPV-driven cancers

German virologist Harald zur Hausen received the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of the oncogenic role of human papillomaviruses (HPVs), a large family of more than 100 DNA viruses that infect the epithelial cells of the skin and mucous membranes. They are responsible for the largest number of virally associated cancer cases globally – around 5% (Table 1).

A number of different cancer types are linked to HPV infection, but it is best known as the cause of cervical cancer. The development of diagnostic blood tests and prophylactic vaccines for prevention and early intervention in HPV infection has helped to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. Conversely, another type of HPV-associated cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), has seen increased incidence in recent years.

HPVs are categorized according to their oncogenic potential as high, intermediate, or low risk. The high-risk HPV16 and HPV18 strains are most commonly associated with cancer. They are thought to cause cancer predominantly through integration into the host genome. The HPV genome is composed of 8 genes encoding proteins that regulate viral replication and assembly. The E6 and E7 genes are the most highly oncogenic; as the HPV DNA is inserted into the host genome, the transcriptional regulator of E6/E7 is lost, leading to their increased expression. These genes have significant oncogenic potential because of their interaction with 2 tumor suppressor proteins, p53 and pRb.^6,7

The largest investment in therapeutic development for HPV-positive cancers has been in the realm of immunotherapy in an effort to boost the anti-tumor immune response. In particular, there has been a focus on the development of therapeutic vaccines, designed to prime the anti-tumor immune response to recognize viral antigens. A variety of different types of vaccines are being developed, including live, attenuated and inactivated vaccines that are protein, DNA, or peptide based. Most developed to date target the E6/E7 proteins from the HPV16/18 strains (Table 2).^8,9

Hepatocellular carcinoma: a tale of two viruses

The hepatitis viruses are a group of 5 unrelated viruses that causes inflammation of the liver. Hepatitis B (HBV), a DNA virus, and hepatitis C (HCV), an RNA virus, are also oncoviruses; HBV in particular is one of the main causes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of liver cancer.

The highly inflammatory environment fostered by HBV and HCV infection causes liver damage that often leads to cirrhosis. Continued infection can drive permanent damage to the hepatocytes, leading to genetic and epigenetic damage and driving oncogenesis. As an RNA virus, HCV doesn’t integrate into the genome and no confirmed viral oncoproteins have been identified to date, therefore it mostly drives cancer through these indirect mechanisms, which is also reflected in the fact that HCV-associated HCC predominantly occurs against a backdrop of liver cirrhosis.

HBV does integrate into the host genome. Genome sequencing studies revealed hundreds of integration sites, but most commonly they disrupted host genes involved in telomere stability and cell cycle regulation, providing some insight into the mechanisms by which HBV-associated HCC develops. In addition, HBV produces several oncoproteins, including HBx, which disrupts gene transcription, cell signaling pathways, cell cycle progress, apoptosis and other cellular processes.^15,16

Multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been the focal point of therapeutic development in HCC. However, following the approval of sorafenib in 2008, there was a dearth of effective new treatment options despite substantial efforts and numerous phase 3 trials. More recently, immunotherapy has also come to the forefront, especially immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Last year marked the first new drug approvals in nearly a decade – the TKI regorafenib (Stivarga) and immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), both in the second-line setting after failure of sorafenib. Treatment options in this setting may continue to expand, with the TKIs cabozantinib and lenvatinib and the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab and the combination of durvalumab and tremelimumab hot on their heels.^17-20 Many of these drugs are also being evaluated in the front-line setting in comparison with sorafenib (Table 3).

Adoptive cell therapy promising in EBV-positive cancers

More than 90% of the global population is infected with EBV, making it one of the most common human viruses. It is a member of the herpesvirus family that is probably best known as the cause of infectious mononucleosis. On rare occasions, however, EBV can cause tumor development, though our understanding of its exact pathogenic role in cancer is still incomplete.

EBV is a DNA virus that doesn’t tend to integrate into the host genome, but instead remains in the nucleus in the form of episomes and produces several oncoproteins, including latent membrane protein-1. It is associated with a range of different cancer types, including Burkitt lymphoma and other B-cell malignancies. It also infects epithelial cells and can cause nasopharyngeal carcinoma and gastric cancer, however, much less is known about the molecular underpinnings of these EBV-positive cancer types.^26,27Gastric cancers actually comprise the largest group of EBV-associated tumors because of the global incidence of this cancer type. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network recently characterized gastric cancer on a molecular level and identified an EBV-positive subgroup as a distinct clinical entity with unique molecular characteristics.²⁹

The focus of therapeutic development has again been on immunotherapy, however in this case the idea of collecting the patients T cells, engineering them to recognize EBV, and then reinfusing them into the patient – adoptive cell therapy – has gained the most traction (Table 4).

Newest oncovirus on the block

The most recently discovered cancer-associated virus is Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV), a DNA virus that was identified in 2008. Like EBV, virtually the whole global adult population is infected with MCV. It is linked to the development of a highly aggressive and lethal, though rare, form of skin cancer – Merkel cell carcinoma.

MCV is found in around 80% of MCC cases and in fewer than 10% of melanomas and other skin cancers. Thus far, several direct mechanisms of oncogenesis have been described, including integration of MCV into the host genome and the production of viral oncogenes, though their precise function is as yet unclear.^32-34

The American Cancer Society estimates that only 1500 cases of MCC are diagnosed each year in the United States.³⁵ Its rarity makes it difficult to conduct clinical trials with sufficient power, yet some headway has still been made.

Around half of MCCs express the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) on their surface, making them a logical candidate for immune checkpoint inhibition. In 2017, avelumab became the first FDA-approved drug for the treatment of MCC. Approval was based on the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study in which 88 patients received avelumab. After 1 year of follow-up the ORR was 31.8%, with a CR rate of 9%.³⁶

Genome sequencing studies suggest that the mutational profile of MCV-positive tumors is quite different to those that are MCV-negative, which could have therapeutic implications. To date, these implications have not been delineated, given the challenge of small patient numbers, however an ongoing phase 1/2 trial is evaluating the combination of avelumab and radiation therapy or recombinant interferon beta, with or without MCV-specific cytotoxic T cells in patients with MCC and MCV infection.

The 2 other known cancer-causing viruses are human T-lymphotropic virus 1 (HTLV-1), a retrovirus associated with adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) and Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV). The latter is the causative agent of Kaposi sarcoma, often in combination with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a rare skin tumor that became renowned in the 1980s as an AIDS-defining illness.

The incidence of HTLV-1- and KSHV-positive tumors is substantially lower than the other virally associated cancers and, like MCC, this makes studying them and conducting clinical trials of novel therapeutic options a challenge. Nonetheless, several trials of targeted therapies and immunotherapies are underway.