We identified a CR1 promoter allele, associated with higher E-CR1 expression, that conferred protection against cerebral malaria. Previous studies have shown that the rate of clearance of immune complexes (ICs) from the circulation is related to the E-CR1 level. These results lead to the hypothesis that the clearance of ICs regulated by E-CR1 therefore plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of cerebral malaria.

IntroductionEtravirine(ETR) can be used for patients who have failed NNRTI-based regimen. In Thailand, ETR is approximately 45 times more expensive than rilpivirine(RPV). However, there are no data of RPV use in NNRTI failure. Therefore, we assessed the susceptibility and mutation patterns of first line NNRTI failure and the possibility of using RPV compared to ETV in patients who have failed efavirenz(EFV)- and nevirapine(NVP)-based regimens.MethodsClinical samples with confirmed virological failure from EFV- or NVP-based regimens were retrospectively analyzed. Resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were interpreted by IAS-USA Drug Resistance Mutations. Susceptibility of ETR and RPV were interpreted by DUET, Monogram scoring system, and Stanford University HIV Drug Resistance Database.Results1,279 and 528 patients failed EFV- and NVP-based regimens, respectively. Y181C was the most common NVP-associated RAM (54.3% vs. 14.7%, p<0.01). K103N was the most common EFV-associated RAM (56.5% vs. 19.1%, P<0.01). The results from all three scoring systems were concordant. 165(11.1%) and 161(10.9%) patients who failed NVP-based regimen were susceptible to ETR and RPV, respectively (p = 0.85). 195 (32.2%) and 191 (31.6%) patients who failed EFV-based regimen, were susceptible to ETR and RPV, respectively (p = 0.79). The susceptibility of ETV and RPV in EFV failure was significantly higher than NVP failure (p<0.01).ConclusionThe mutation patterns for ETR and RPV were similar but 32% and 11% of patients who failed EFV and NVP -based regimen, respectivly were susceptible to RPV. This finding suggests that RPV can be used as the alternative antiretroviral agent in patients who have failed EFV-based regimen.

IntroductionA dual split reporter protein system (DSP), recombining Renilla luciferase (RL) and green fluorescent protein (GFP) split into two different constructs (DSP1–7 and DSP8–11), was adapted to create a novel rapid phenotypic tropism assay (PTA) for HIV-1 infection (DSP-Pheno).MethodsDSP1–7 was stably expressed in the glioma-derived NP-2 cell lines, which expressed CD4/CXCR4 (N4X4) or CD4/CCR5 (N4R5), respectively. An expression vector with DSP8–11 (pRE11) was constructed. The HIV-1 envelope genes were subcloned in pRE11 (pRE11-env) and transfected into 293FT cells. Transfected 293FT cells were incubated with the indicator cell lines independently. In developing the assay, we selected the DSP1–7-positive clones that showed the highest GFP activity after complementation with DSP8–11. These cell lines, designated N4R5-DSP1–7, N4X4-DSP1–7 were used for subsequent assays.ResultsThe env gene from the reference strains (BaL for R5 virus, NL4-3 for X4 virus, SF2 for dual tropic virus) subcloned in pRE11 and tested, was concordant with the expected co-receptor usage. Assay results were available in two ways (RL or GFP). The assay sensitivity by RL activity was comparable with those of the published phenotypic assays using pseudovirus. The shortest turnaround time was 5 days after obtaining the patient's plasma. All clinical samples gave positive RL signals on R5 indicator cells in the fusion assay. Median RLU value of the low CD4 group was significantly higher on X4 indicator cells and suggested the presence of more dual or X4 tropic viruses in this group of patients. Comparison of representative samples with Geno2Pheno [co-receptor] assay was concordant.ConclusionsA new cell-fusion-based, high-throughput PTA for HIV-1, which would be suitable for in-house studies, was developed. Equipped with two-way reporter system, RL and GFP, DSP-Pheno is a sensitive test with short turnaround time. Although maintenance of cell lines and laboratory equipment is necessary, it provides a safe assay system without infectious viruses. With further validation against other conventional analyses, DSP-Pheno may prove to be a useful laboratory tool. The assay may be useful especially for the research on non-B subtype HIV-1 whose co-receptor usage has not been studied much.

Abstract.A 58-year-old Thai man was infected with Plasmodium knowlesi in Chantaburi Province, eastern Thailand. In addition to pyrexia, the patient developed hypotension, renal failure, jaundice, and severe thrombocytopenia. The parasitemia at the time of admission was 16.67% or~503,400 parasites/μL. With artesunate treatment and supportive care, the patient recovered uneventfully. The occurrence of complicated knowlesi malaria in a low-endemic area underscores the risk of high morbidity from this simian malaria.

IntroductionEtravirine (ETR) and rilpivirine (RPV) are the second-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) for treatment of HIV-1 infection. Etravirine is recommended for patients with virologic failure from first generation NNRTI-based regimen [1]. RPV has profile with similar properties to ETR but this agent is approved for treatment-naïve patients [2]. In Thailand, ETR is approximately 45 times more expensive than RPV. We aimed to study the patterns of genotypic resistance and possibility of using RPV in patients with virologic failure from two common NNRTI-based regimens: efavirenz (EFV)- or nevirapine (NVP)-based regimen.Materials and MethodsData of clinical samples with confirmed virologic failure during 2003–2010 were reviewed. We selected the samples from patients who failed EFV- or NVP-based regimen. Resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were determined by IAS-USA Drug Resistance Mutations. DUET, Monogram scoring system and Stanford Genotypic Resistance Interpretation were applied to determine the susceptibility of ETR and RPV.ResultsA total of 2086 samples were analyzed. Samples from 1482 patients with virologic failure from NVP-based regimen treatment failure (NVP group) and 604 patients with virologic failure from EFV-based regimen treatment failure (EFV group) were included. 95% of samples were HIV-1 CRF01_AE subtype. Approximately 80% of samples in each group had one to three NNRTI-RAMs and 20% had four to seven NNRTI-RAMs. 181C mutation was the most common NVP-associated RAM (54.3% vs 14.7%, p<0.01). 103N mutation was the most common EFV-associated RAM (56.5% vs 19.1%, p<0.01). The calculated scores from all three scoring systems were concordant. In NVP group, 165 (11.1%) and 161 (10.9%) patients were susceptible to ETR and RPV, respectively (p=0.81). In EFV group, 195 (32.2%) and 191 (31.6%) patients were susceptible to ETR and RPV, respectively (p=0.81). The proportions of viruses that remained susceptible to ETR and RPV in EFV group were significantly higher than NPV group (ETR susceptibility 32.2% vs 11.1%, p<0.01, RPV susceptibility 31.6% vs 10.9%, p<0.01), respectively.ConclusionsRPV might be a cost saving and reasonable second line NNRTI for patients who failed EFV- or NVP-containing regimens, especially in resource-limited setting because these two agents have comparable susceptibility identified by genotyping. From our study, approximately 30% of patients who failed EFV-based regimens had viruses that remained susceptible to RPV.