Background Covid-19 is defined by an association of multiple symptoms, including frequently reported olfactory and gustatory disorders. Objective The main purpose of this study was to analyze the prevalence of these neurosensory impairments in patients with Covid-19, and to assess short-term recovery. Methods We performed a multicenter case series study during the Covid-19 epidemic. All patients presenting a RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included, whether hospitalized or treated at home. To analyze the prevalence and features of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions, a phone interview was conducted 5 days after the positive PCR result. The questionnaire was submitted again 10 days later to patients having reported olfactory and gustatory disorders, in order to assess their recovery. Results 115 patients were included in our study. 81 patients (70%) reported olfactory and gustatory disorders without nasal obstruction or rhinorrhea. These impairments were more frequently reported in the female population, young people, and house-bound patients with mild symptomatic forms. Short-term recovery assessed at Day 15 was complete for 64% of the patients, and incomplete in 33%. Median recovery time was 15 days (4–27 days) after olfactory or gustatory symptom onset. Conclusion Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions related to Covid-19 are frequently reported and prevalent in mild symptomatic forms of the disease. Recovery in most cases seems rapid and complete.

Background We investigated whether dolutegravir (DTG) monotherapy could be used to maintain virological suppression in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) on a successful dolutegravir-based triple therapy. Methods MONCAY (MONotherapy of TiviCAY) was a 48-week, multicentric, randomized, open-label, 12% noninferiority margin trial. Patients with CD4 nadir >100/μL, plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL for ≥12 months, and stable regimen with DTG/abacavir (ABC)/lamivudine (3TC) were 1:1 randomized to continue their regimen or to DTG monotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24 in intention-to-treat snapshot analysis. Virologic failure (VF) was defined as 2 consecutive HIV RNA >50 copies/mL within 2 weeks apart. Results Seventy-eight patients were assigned to DTG monotherapy and 80 to continue DTG/ABC/3TC. By week 24, 2 patients in the DTG group experienced VF without resistance to the integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) class; 1 patient discontinued DTG/ABC/3TC due to an adverse event. The success rate at week 24 was 73/78 (93.6%) in the DTG arm and 77/80 (96.3%) in the DTG/ABC/3TC arm (difference, 2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], –5.0 to 10.8). During subsequent follow-up, 5 additional VFs occurred in the DTG arm (2 of which harbored emerging resistance mutation to INSTI). The cumulative incidence of VF at week 48 was 9.7% (95% CI, 2.8 to 16.6) in the DTG arm compared with 0% in the DTG/ABC/3TC arm (P = .005 by the log-rank test). The Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended to reintensify the DTG arm with standardized triple therapy. Conclusions Because the risk of VF with resistance increases over time, we recommend avoiding DTG monotherapy as a maintenance strategy among people living with chronic HIV infection. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02596334 and EudraCT 2015-002853-36.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives Low HIV reservoirs may be associated with viral suppression under a lower number of antiretroviral drugs. We investigated tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine as a maintenance strategy in people living with HIV (PLHIV) with low HIV-DNA. Methods TRULIGHT (NCT02302547) was a multicentre, open-label, randomized trial comparing a simplification to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine versus a triple regimen continuation (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine with a third agent, control arm) in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-DNA &lt;2.7 log10 copies/106 PBMCs and no prior virological failure (VF). The primary endpoint (non-inferiority margin 12%) was the percentage of participants with a plasma viral load (pVL) &lt;50 copies/mL in ITT (Snapshot approach) and PP analyses at Week 48 (W48). Results Of the 326 participants screened, 223 (68%) were randomized to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine arm (n = 113) or control arm (n = 110). At W48, the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and control arms maintained a pVL &lt; 50 copies/mL in 100/113 (88.5%) and 100/110 (90.9%) participants, respectively (ITT difference 2.4%, 95% CI –5.9 to 10.7; PP difference 3.4%, 95% CI –4.2 to 11.0). Six VFs occurred in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine arm (two with emerging mutations M184V and K65R) versus two in the control arm (ITT difference 3.5%, 95% CI –1.9 to 9.4). All VFs were resuppressed after treatment modification. Conclusions Although non-inferiority was shown, simplification to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine should not be used for most PLHIV because of a low risk of VF with resistance.