| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Berner-Rodoreda, Astrid, et al.
(author)
-
Where is the 'global' in the European Union's Health Research and Innovation Agenda?
- 2019
-
In: BMJ Global Health. - : BMJ. - 2059-7908. ; 4:5
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Global Health has not featured as prominently in the European Union (EU) research agenda in recent years as it did in the first decade of the new millennium, and participation of low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in EU health research has declined substantially. The Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Framework adopted by the European Parliament in April 2019 for the period 2021-2027 will serve as an important funding instrument for health research, yet the proposed health research budget to be finalised towards the end of 2019 was reduced from 10% in the current framework, Horizon 2020, to 8% in Horizon Europe. Our analysis takes the evolvement of Horizon Europe from the initial framework of June 2018 to the framework agreed on in April 2019 into account. It shows that despite some improvements in terms of Global Health and reference to the Sustainable Development Goals, European industrial competitiveness continues to play a paramount role, with Global Health research needs and relevant health research for LMICs being only partially addressed. We argue that the globally interconnected nature of health and the transdisciplinary nature of health research need to be fully taken into account and acted on in the new European Research and Innovation Framework. A facilitated global research collaboration through Horizon Europe could ensure that Global Health innovations and solutions benefit all parts of the world including EU countries.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lambert-Niclot, S., et al.
(author)
-
Antiretroviral resistance at virological failure in the NEAT 001/ANRS 143 trial: Raltegravir plus darunavir/ritonavir or tenofovir/emtricitabine plus darunavir/ritonavir as first-line ART
- 2016
-
In: Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2091 .- 0305-7453. ; 71:4, s. 1056-1062
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To describe the pattern of drug resistance at virological failure in the NEAT001/ANRS143 trial (first-line treatment with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus either tenofovir/emtricitabine or raltegravir). Methods: Genotypic testing was performed at baseline for reverse transcriptase (RT) and protease genes and for RT, protease and integrase (IN) genes for patients with a confirmed viral load (VL) >50 copies/mL or any single VL >500 copies/mL during or after week 32. Results: A resistance test was obtained for 110/805 (13.7%) randomized participants qualifying for resistance analysis (61/401 of participants in the raltegravir arm and 49/404 of participants in the tenofovir/emtricitabine arm). No resistance-associated mutation (RAM) was observed in the tenofovir/emtricitabine plus darunavir/ritonavir arm, and all further analyses were limited to the raltegravir plus darunavir arm. In this group, 15/55 (27.3%) participants had viruses with IN RAMs (12 N155H alone, 1 N155H + Q148R, 1 F121Y and 1 Y143C), 2/53 (3.8%) with nucleotide analogue RT inhibitor RAMs (K65R, M41L) and 1/57 (1.8%) with primary protease RAM (L76V). The frequency of IN mutations at failure was significantly associated with baseline VL: 7.1% for a VL of TREND = 0.007). Of note, 4/15 participants with IN RAM had a VL <200 copies/mL at time of testing. Conclusions: In the NEAT001/ANRS143 trial, there was no RAM at virological failure in the standard tenofovir/emtricitabine plus darunavir/ritonavir regimen, contrasting with a rate of 29.5% (mostly IN mutations) in the raltegravir plus darunavir/ritonavir NRTI-sparing regimen. The cumulative risk of IN RAM after 96 weeks of follow-up in participants initiating ART with raltegravir plus darunavir/ritonavir was 3.9%.
|
|
| 4. |
- Raffi, François, et al.
(author)
-
Ritonavir-boosted darunavir combined with raltegravir or tenofovir-emtricitabine in antiretroviral-naive adults infected with HIV-1 : 96 week results from the NEAT001/ANRS143 randomised non-inferiority trial
- 2014
-
In: The Lancet. - 1474-547X. ; 384:9958, s. 51-1942
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Standard first-line antiretroviral therapy for HIV-1 infection includes two nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NtRTIs), but these drugs have limitations. We assessed the 96 week efficacy and safety of an NtRTI-sparing regimen.METHODS: Between August, 2010, and September, 2011, we enrolled treatment-naive adults into this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial in treatment-naive adults in 15 European countries. The composite primary outcome was change to randomised treatment before week 32 because of insufficient virological response, no virological response by week 32, HIV-1 RNA concentration 50 copies per mL or higher at any time after week 32; death from any cause; any new or recurrent AIDS event; or any serious non-AIDS event. Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral treatment with 400 mg raltegravir twice daily plus 800 mg darunavir and 100 mg ritonavir once daily (NtRTI-sparing regimen) or tenofovir-emtricitabine in a 245 mg and 200 mg fixed-dose combination once daily, plus 800 mg darunavir and 100 mg ritonavir once daily (standard regimen). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01066962.FINDINGS: Of 805 patients enrolled, 401 received the NtRTI-sparing regimen and 404 the standard regimen, with median follow-up of 123 weeks (IQR 112-133). Treatment failure was seen in 77 (19%) in the NtRTI-sparing group and 61 (15%) in the standard group. Kaplan-Meier estimated proportions of treatment failure by week 96 were 17·8% and 13·8%, respectively (difference 4·0%, 95% CI -0·8 to 8·8). The frequency of serious or treatment-modifying adverse events were similar (10·2 vs 8·3 per 100 person-years and 3·9 vs 4·2 per 100 person-years, respectively).INTERPRETATION: Our NtRTI-sparing regimen was non-inferior to standard treatment and represents a treatment option for patients with CD4 cell counts higher than 200 cells per μL.FUNDING: European Union Sixth Framework Programme, Inserm-ANRS, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck Laboratories.
|
|
