Post on 27-Apr-2023
328 • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • HIV/AIDS
H I V / A I D S I N V I T E D A R T I C L EKenneth H. Mayer, Section Editor
The Absence of CD4+ T Cell Count Recovery DespiteReceipt of Virologically Suppressive Highly ActiveAntiretroviral Therapy: Clinical Risk, Immunological Gaps,and Therapeutic Options
Lidia Gazzola, Camilla Tincati, Giusi Maria Bellistrı, Antonella d’Arminio Monforte, and Giulia MarchettiDepartment of Medicine, Surgery, and Dentistry, Clinic of Infectious Diseases, “San Paolo” Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
Up to 30% of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected patients who are receiving long-term highly active antiretroviraltherapy do not exhibit a marked increase in the CD4+ T cell count, despite achieving complete suppression of the HIV load.These patients are referred to as “immunological nonresponders.” When treating immunological nonresponders, the practicingclinician has several questions, including questions about the clinical risk associated with persistent immunodeficiency andabout possible approaches to treatment that would provide clinical and immunological benefits. However, tentative answersto these questions require investigations of the mechanisms that underlie the lack of immune recovery, because only thedeepest comprehension of the immunological gaps underlying functional defects will allow administration of highly targetedand efficacious treatment strategies. The aim of our review is to provide a thorough assessment of the clinical implicationsof a lack of increase in the CD4+ T cell count in immunological nonresponders, to examine the immunological gaps limitingrecovery of the CD4+ T cell count, and to note possible therapeutic avenues, which may offer clinicians guidance regardinghow to most efficaciously treat these critical patients.
IMMUNOLOGICAL FAILURE AND HAART
In the era of HAART, HIV/AIDS clinicians have observed a
remarkable reduction in AIDS-related morbidity and mortality
rates. In fact, HAART has been shown to improve survival rates
among HIV-infected individuals through its ability to reduce
the HIV load to undetectable levels and to increase the CD4+
lymphocyte count in peripheral blood (defined as a full re-
sponse) [1, 2]. However, 15%–30% of patients have discordant
responses to long-term HAART consisting of a lack of increase
in the CD4+ T cell count but full suppression of HIV replication;
these people are referred to as “immunological nonresponders”
(INRs) [3, 4]. From a clinical standpoint, lack of CD4+ immune
reconstitution during receipt of effective HAART represents an
everyday issue in the clinical management of HIV/AIDS. In
Received 28 May 2008; accepted 16 September 2008; electronically published 5 January2009.
Reprints or correspondence: Dr. Giulia Marchetti, Dept. of Medicine, Surgery, and Dentistry,Clinic of Infectious Diseases, “San Paolo” Hospital, University of Milan, Via A. Di Rudinı, 8,20142 Milan, Italy (giulia.marchetti@unimi.it).
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2009; 48:328–37� 2009 by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved.1058-4838/2009/4803-0010$15.00DOI: 10.1086/595851
particular, clinicians question whether INRs have an increased
risk of clinical progression to AIDS and whether it is possible
to identify early predictive factors of immunological failure
during HAART.
From a therapeutic standpoint, failure of CD4+ cell recon-
stitution during receipt of virologically suppressive HAART in-
dicates the need for alternative treatment strategies. However,
the essential premise of studies of therapeutic options in this
clinical context is the deep comprehension of the pathogenetic
mechanisms that underlie immunological failure. We assessed
the clinical implications of a lack of a recovery in the CD4+
cell count among INRs, the immunological gaps limiting CD4+
cell count recovery, and the possible therapeutic avenues that
may offer clinicians guidance regarding the most effective treat-
ments for these critical patients.
INVESTIGATING THE CLINICAL CORRELATESOF IMMUNOLOGICAL FAILURE DURINGHAART: ARE INRS AT INCREASED RISK OF HIV/AIDS DISEASE PROGRESSION AND DEATH?
An essential premise in the assessment of clinical correlates of
insufficient immunological response to long-term HAART is
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
HIV/AIDS • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • 329
the definition of immunological response itself. There is no
clear-cut agreement on how to assess an insufficient immune
response to HAART, with particular regard to the adequate
time to evaluation of immune response after the commence-
ment of HAART. Although an interval of 12 months may be
too premature to evaluate immune response to HAART [5], it
is our opinion that the broadly used criteria of an increase in
the CD4+ T cell count of !30% and an absolute CD4+ T cell
count �200 cells/mL during the first 6–12 months of HIV-
suppressive HAART identifies immunological nonresponse [6],
because immune response after 3–6 months of HAART is pre-
dictive of both immune reconstitution and HIV-related mor-
bidity and mortality in the long term [7, 8]. However, this
definition may identify an overly heterogeneous population and
fail to discriminate between a real long-term nonresponse and
a delayed response.
Kaufmann et al. [7] demonstrated that an incomplete im-
mune response in the short term led to an elevated risk of
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention category B and C
events in the long term, indicating an augmented risk of disease
progression in INRs. Additional observational studies have de-
fined an approximately doubled relative risk of clinical pro-
gression to AIDS and an increased risk of mortality in INRs,
compared with patients who had a complete response [9–13].
In addition, a new clinical concern was recently raised by
Gutierrez et al. [12], who showed that, despite having similar
proportions of new AIDS-defining events, INRs had an overall
higher rate of non–AIDS-related mortality, compared with pa-
tients who had a complete response, causing additional clinical
concern about the long-term risks of subclinical immunode-
ficiency. Accordingly, guidelines of the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) prefer to define immunological
failure as the lack of an increase in the CD4+ T cell count to
more than 350–500 cells/mL after receipt of 4–7 years of effective
HAART [14], given recent data linking these immunological
thresholds with the risk of non-AIDS clinical events [15].
INVESTIGATION OF FACTORS ASSOCIATEDWITH IMMUNOLOGICAL FAILURE DURINGLONG-TERM HAART: WHICH FACTORSPREDICT IMMUNOLOGICAL NONRESPONSE?
Having defined an overall increased risk of HIV/AIDS disease
progression in INRs, we still need to assess whether the clinician
can depend on specific factors for early identification of which
patients are most likely to experience insufficient immune re-
covery while receiving HAART. As illustrated in table 1, several
factors have been individually associated with immunological
failure during HAART, and yet only those below have been
invariably proven to predict immunological nonresponse.
Age has been reported to have a significant impact on im-
mune recovery: the older the patient is, the more likely that
he or she will experience delayed immune reconstitution [18].
Indeed, older age has been associated with a decrease of thymic
function and other regenerative mechanisms, thus explaining
its role as an independent predictive factor of impaired immune
recovery [7, 10, 11, 16, 19]. In addition, recent data from cohort
studies suggest that immune recovery in older patients may
hide a more profound functional impairment, as evidenced by
a persistent increased risk of AIDS-related events in these pa-
tients, even after adjustment for CD4+ T cell counts [20, 21].
Another factor presumed to affect immune recovery during
HAART is concurrent viral hepatitis. In a recent meta-analysis,
Miller et al. [22] showed that increases in the CD4+ T cell count
during HAART are significantly lower in the course of hepatitis
C virus (HCV) coinfection. The biological rationale posits that
there are higher levels of T cell activation and death in HIV-
HCV–coinfected patients and that there is a possible direct
negative effect of HCV infection and replication inside lym-
phocyte subpopulations [23, 24]. However, the actual impact
of HCV infection on immune recovery in HIV-infected patients
still remains a matter of controversy, given the numerous con-
founding factors often present in the HCV-infected population,
such as a history of injection drug use, poor adherence to
therapy, and decreased access to health care [25–28]. Of these
factors, adherence to antiretroviral therapy has been proven to
be a strong independent predictor of recovery in the CD4+ T
cell count and the ultimate cause of impaired immune recovery
in injection drug users [29, 30].
With regard to immunovirological factors, nadir CD4+ T cell
count is the most common and most reliable determinant of
suboptimal immune recovery during HAART [7, 16, 17, 31,
32]. From a mechanistic standpoint, differences in CD4+ T cell
nadir are indicators of differences in immunological regulatory
functions over T cell homeostasis that might affect immune
recovery competence [33]. However, the sole quantification of
nadir CD4+ T cell count may fail to qualitatively estimate the
immunological mechanism(s) that hinder CD4+ T cell count
rescue, indicating a need for a more detailed assessment of
immunological gaps associated with nadir-driven T cell
homeostasis.
The identification of immunopathogenetic models behind
the negative impact of age, HCV coinfection, and nadir CD4+
cell count on immune recovery raises an additional clinical
question: are there immunological, virological, or genetic mark-
ers that can be directly exploited, from bench to bedside, to
predict immunological failure during HAART in at-risk pa-
tients? Although Spritzler et al. [34] demonstrate that peripheral
immunophenotype has a limited ability to predict HAART re-
sponse, only the most thorough investigation of immunovi-
rological correlates of discordant responses will allow for a
targeted immune-based treatment approach.
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
330
Tabl
e1.
Ove
rvie
wof
the
maj
orst
udie
sev
alua
ting
pred
ictiv
efa
ctor
sof
shor
t-ter
man
dlo
ng-te
rmim
mun
olog
ical
resp
onse
toan
tiret
rovi
ral
ther
apy
(ART
).
Ref
eren
ceYe
arS
tudy
popu
latio
nA
RT
regi
men
(s)
Defi
nitio
nof
“inc
ompl
ete
imm
unol
ogic
alre
spon
se”
No.
(%)
ofpa
tient
sS
tatis
tical
anal
ysis
Ris
kfa
ctor
sfo
und
byst
atis
tical
anal
ysis
Gra
bar
etal
.[9
]20
0022
36P
I-nai
vepa
tient
s(7
7.3%
wer
eA
RT
expe
rienc
edan
d22
.7%
wer
eA
RT
naiv
e)
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
!50
cells
/mL
at6
mon
ths
afte
rA
RT
intr
o-du
ctio
n,w
itha
decr
ease
inth
epl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad11
log 1
0co
pies
/mL
ora
plas
ma
HIV
load
!10
00co
pies
/mL
387
(17.
3)K
rusk
al-W
allis
and
x2
test
sID
U,
high
erba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt,
and
low
erba
selin
epl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad
Kau
fman
net
al.
[16]
2002
95P
atie
nts
(52%
wer
eN
RTI
expe
ri-en
ced
and
48%
wer
eN
RTI
naiv
e)
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI,
2N
RTI
spl
usan
NN
RTI
,an
NR
TIpl
us2
PIs
,an
NN
RTI
plus
aP
I,or
2N
RTI
s
Tota
lCD
4+T
cell
coun
t!50
0ce
lls/m
Lat
4ye
ars
afte
rA
RT
intr
oduc
tion,
with
plas
ma
HIV
load
!40
0co
pies
/mL
22(2
3)U
niva
riate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onLo
wer
nadi
rC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
and
low
erba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onLo
wer
nadi
rC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
Dro
nda
etal
.[5
]20
0225
5A
RT-
naiv
epa
tient
s2
NR
TIs
plus
aP
Ior
2N
RTI
spl
usan
NN
RTI
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
!10
0ce
lls/m
L24
mon
ths
afte
rA
RT
intr
o-du
ctio
n,w
ithpl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad!50
copi
es/m
L
42(1
6.5)
Uni
varia
telo
gist
icre
gres
sion
Low
erba
selin
epl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad,
high
erba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt,
and
prev
i-ou
sID
U
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onP
revi
ous
IDU
Flor
ence
etal
.[1
7]20
0378
0P
atie
nts
(61%
wer
eN
RTI
expe
ri-en
ced
and
39%
wer
eN
RTI
naiv
e)
NR
TIs
plus
aP
I,N
RTI
spl
usan
NN
RTI
,or
anN
NR
TIpl
usa
PI
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
!50
cells
/mL
bym
onth
6or
!75
cells
/mL
bym
onth
12,
with
apl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad!50
0co
pies
/mL
225
(29)
Uni
varia
telo
gist
icre
gres
sion
Old
erag
e,in
terv
albe
twee
nH
IVin
fec-
tion
diag
nosi
sto
com
men
cem
ent
ofH
AA
RT,
NR
TIex
perie
nce,
low
erna
dir
CD
4+T
cell
coun
t,gr
eate
rin
crea
sein
CD
4+T
cell
coun
tw
ithpr
evio
usA
RT,
low
erba
selin
ean
dpe
akpl
asm
aH
IVlo
ads,
and
prev
ious
KS
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onO
lder
age,
low
erna
dir
CD
4+T
cell
coun
t,lo
wer
base
line
CD
4+T
cell
coun
t,gr
eate
rin
crea
sein
CD
4+T
cell
coun
tw
ithpr
evio
usA
RT,
and
low
erba
selin
epl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
331
Kau
fman
net
al.
[7]
2005
293
AR
T-na
ive
patie
nts
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI,
2N
RTI
spl
usan
NN
RTI
,an
NR
TIpl
us2
PIs
,an
NR
TIpl
usan
NN
RTI
and
aP
I,or
3N
RTI
s
Tota
lCD
4+T
cell
coun
t!50
0ce
lls/m
L5
year
saf
ter
AR
Tin
trod
uctio
n,w
itha
plas
ma
HIV
load
!10
00co
pies
/mL
105
(35.
8)U
niva
riate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onO
lder
age,
dura
tion
ofH
IVin
fect
ion,
HC
Van
tibod
ypo
sitiv
ity,
CD
Cin
fec-
tion
cate
gorie
sB
and
C,
and
low
erba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onO
lder
age,
dura
tion
ofH
IVin
fect
ion,
and
low
erba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
Moo
reet
al.
[10]
2005
1527
AR
T-na
ive
patie
nts
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI
or2
NR
TIs
plus
anN
NR
TIIn
crea
sein
the
CD
4+T
cell
coun
t!50
cells
/mL
3–9
mon
ths
afte
rA
RT
intr
o-du
ctio
n,w
itha
plas
ma
HIV
load
!50
0co
pies
/mL
235
(15.
4)M
ultiv
aria
telo
gist
icre
gres
sion
Old
erag
ean
dH
AA
RT
back
bone
of3T
Cpl
usZD
V
Nic
astr
iet
al.
[11]
2005
2143
Pat
ient
s(7
4.2%
wer
eN
RTI
expe
ri-en
ced
and
25.8
%w
ere
NR
TIna
ive)
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
�10
0ce
lls/m
L12
mon
ths
afte
rA
RT
intr
o-du
ctio
n,w
itha
plas
ma
HIV
load
!50
0co
pies
/mL
336
(15.
7)M
ultiv
aria
telo
gist
icre
gres
sion
Old
erag
e,A
RT
naiv
e,an
dba
selin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
�35
0ce
lls/m
L
Mul
tinom
iall
ogis
ticre
gres
-si
on(c
ompa
red
with
com
-pl
ete
resp
onse
)
Bas
elin
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
�35
0ce
lls/
mL
Gut
ierr
ezet
al.
[12]
2008
650
AR
T-na
ive
patie
nts
2N
RTI
spl
usa
PI,
2N
RTI
spl
usan
NN
RTI
,3
NR
TIs,
oran
NN
RTI
plus
aP
I
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
!50
cells
/mL
12m
onth
saf
ter
AR
Tin
tro-
duct
ion,
with
apl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad!50
0co
pies
/mL
108
(16.
6)U
niva
riate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onO
lder
age,
patie
ntse
x,lo
wer
base
line
plas
ma
HIV
load
,an
dhi
gher
base
line
CD
4+T
cell
coun
t
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onO
lder
age
and
IDU
Tan
etal
.[1
3]20
0840
4A
RT-
naiv
epa
tient
s2
NR
TIs
plus
aP
I,2
NR
TIs
plus
anN
NR
TI,
or3
NR
TIs
Incr
ease
inth
eC
D4+
Tce
llco
unt
!50
cells
/mL
3–9
mon
ths
afte
rA
RT
intr
o-du
ctio
n,w
ithan
unde
tect
-ab
lepl
asm
aH
IVlo
ad
35(8
.7)
Mul
tivar
iate
logi
stic
regr
essi
onN
ofa
ctor
s
NO
TE
.C
DC
,Cen
ters
forD
isea
seC
ontr
olan
dP
reve
ntio
n;ID
U,i
njec
tion
drug
use;
KS
,Kap
osis
arco
ma;
NN
RTI
,non
nucl
eosi
dere
vers
e-tr
ansc
ripta
sein
hibi
tor;
NR
TI,n
ucle
osid
ere
vers
e-tr
ansc
ripta
sein
hibi
tor;
PI,
prot
ease
inhi
bito
r;3T
C,
lam
ivud
ine;
ZDV,
zido
vudi
ne.
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
332 • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • HIV/AIDS
Figure 1. Differences in CD4+ T cell dynamics between persons who experienced a full immunological response (FRs; A) and immunologicalnonresponders (INRs; B). Compared with FRs, INRs are notable for reduced bone marrow and thymic output of naive T cells in peripheral circulation,greater HIV- and antigen-driven T cell activation, and reduced content of T regulatory cells, ultimately leading to increase cellular death by apoptosis.Despite significantly lower CD4+ T cell counts in the periphery, a similar stimulation of the IL-7 compensatory loop is displayed by INRs and FRs.However, compared with FRs, INRs are characterized by reduced IL-7R expression on different T cell populations, thus potentially limiting the compensatoryeffect of IL-7. Different T cell pools are represented: recent thymic emigrants, naive T cells, resting memory T cells, activated T cells, T regulatorycells, and hematopoietic stem cell precursors (HSCPs). The size of the boxes and the number of cells represent the relative amount of each cell pooland are not to scale. IL-7R is represented on T cell surface according to its expression, not to scale. Ag, antigen.
INVESTIGATION OF THE PATHOGENETICCORRELATES OF INRS: WHICHIMMUNOVIROLOGICAL AND GENETICMECHANISMS LIMIT IMMUNE RECOVERYDURING LONG-TERM HAART?
Failure in De Novo CD4+ T Cell Production
The pathogenesis of immunological nonresponse may be sec-
ondary to specific failure of the T cell armamentarium ma-
chinery (i.e., failure of the bone marrow to produce hemato-
poietic stem cells) or to a deficiency in thymic output (figure
1) [35].
The role of bone marrow. Decreased bone marrow pro-
genitor cell growth and abnormal stromal microenvironment
have been described in patients with HIV/AIDS [36] and have
been partly restored after the commencement of HAART [37,
38]. Recent observations support the hypothesis that the lack
of immune recovery in INRs may be due, at least in part, to
persistent bone marrow impairment, despite receipt of HAART,
that is possibly characterized by altered clonogenic capability
and stromal cell function (figure 1) [39–41].
The role of thymic output. The failure to restore circulating
CD4+ T cells during HAART may partially be caused by de-
ficiencies in thymopoietin [42–45]. Indeed, several studies have
demonstrated a trend toward smaller thymuses and lower thy-
mopoietin levels in INRs (figure 1) [35, 46–48]. Given that a
hypofunctional thymus may account for the immunological
failure in INRs, a question remains whether the thymus itself
is unable to respond to thymopoietic signals (e.g., IL-7) or
whether the latter are insufficient to drive thymic-dependent
immune reconstitution.
The role of IL-7. IL-7, which is mainly produced by thymic
and bone marrow stromal cells, is a vital cytokine for thymocyte
development for which production is up-regulated in lympho-
penic conditions [49, 50]. A relative deficiency in IL-7 pro-
duction or function may occur in INRs. Studies have found
that plasma IL-7 levels in INRs are comparable to those in
patients who had complete responses, suggesting maintenance
of the IL-7 compensatory loop [47, 48]. Marziali et al. [47]
reported a reduction in IL-7R expression on CD4+ T cells ob-
tained from INRs, compared with CD4+ T cells obtained from
persons who had complete responses, as well as a positive cor-
relation between peripheral percentage of CD4+ T cells and
those expressing IL-7R, leading to speculation about defective
IL-7R expression. Additional studies are needed to aid com-
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
HIV/AIDS • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • 333
prehension about the role of thymopoiesis and IL-7 signaling
in INRs [50, 51].
Excessive CD4+ T Cell Destruction
As illustrated in figure 1, INRs may also be characterized by
augmented levels of CD4+ T cell loss in the periphery [35].
CD4+ T cell hyperactivation. CD4+ T cell hyperactivation
has been demonstrated to persist even after HAART virological
suppression occurs and to have a significant effect on recovery
of the CD4+ T cell count during HAART [52, 53]. Indeed,
despite complete suppression of the HIV load, INRs maintain
CD4+ T cell hyperactivation comparable to that in patients who
have not experienced viral suppression (figure 1) [48, 54].
Although highlighting the possible pathogenetic role of en-
hanced CD4+ T cell activation in insufficient CD4+ T cell count
recovery, these findings also raise questions on the driver(s) of
persistently elevated CD4+ T cell activation.
Ongoing viral replication. Even in the context of complete
viral suppression, INRs have been shown to have higher levels
of proviral DNA in total, memory, and naive CD4+ T cells,
reinforcing the role of increased HIV antigen–driven CD4+ T
cell activation as a driving force of continuous loss of CD4+ T
cells in INRs [48]. On the one hand, despite control of plasma
viral loads, the persistence of residual low-level viral replication
at levels less than the detection limit of the most-sensitive meth-
ods, either in blood or in other compartments, maintains the
HIV DNA burden in the reservoir; on the other hand, it rep-
resents a continuous trigger of immune activation [55, 56].
Persistent antigenic stimulation. CD4+ T cell hyperacti-
vation may also be secondary to ongoing chronic inflammatory
disease. Recently, a pathogenetic model of increased translo-
cation of microbial bioproducts from the gastrointestinal lumen
has been proposed as a continuous trigger of immune activation
in patients with HIV/AIDS [57, 58]. Brenchley et al. [59] el-
egantly demonstrated that high levels of plasma lipopolysac-
charide—an indicator of microbial translocation—in HIV-in-
fected patients correlate with immune hyperactivation and are
only partially restored by HAART. We reported a consistent
trend toward higher lipopolysaccharide levels in INRs, com-
pared with levels in persons who had a complete response, that
correlated with the proportion of activated Ki67+ CD4+ and
CD8+ cells. Taken together, these data allow speculation that
microbial translocation, by perpetuating peripheral CD4+ T cell
activation, may contribute to the inefficient recovery in the
CD4+ T cell count in INRs [60]. Consistent with this finding
is the fact that HIV-driven dysfunction of CD4+ T cell ho-
meostasis in the gut mucosa, with local immune activation, has
been shown to persist after commencement of HAART [61–
64]. However, a clear-cut correlation between mucosal immune
restoration and immunological and clinical outcome during
HAART is still missing [64, 65].
Immunoregulatory mechanisms. T regulatory cells are a
specialized T cell subpopulation with the ability to down-mod-
ulate immune activation and function [66]. Indeed, Marziali
et al. [47] reported a significant reduction in T regulatory cell
count in INRs, compared with patients who had complete re-
sponses, inversely correlating with activated CD4+ T cells, al-
lowing one to hypothesize that persistently low levels of T
regulatory cells, which are unable to turn off immune activa-
tion, could partly account for immune reconstitution failure
in INRs [47].
Genetic Influence
A role of genetic polymorphisms involved in CD4+ T cell ho-
meostasis has also been postulated in dictating the magnitude
of recovery in the CD4+ T cell count during HAART. In a
recent multivariate analysis, Haas et al. [67] found a significant
association between CD4+ T cell count recovery and polymor-
phisms in genes encoding TNF-related apoptosis-induced li-
gand, TNF-a, Bcl-2–interacting molecule, and IL-15/IL-15R.
Similarly, diverse polymorphisms in chemokine or chemokine
receptors and HLA genes have been associated with the re-
sponse to HAART, although different association patterns were
demonstrated by different authors [68–70]. In conclusion, it
seems reasonable that multiple genetic variants may be involved
in the pathogenesis of immunological nonresponse vis-a-vis
complex immune phenotypes in these individuals.
INVESTIGATION OF THE THERAPEUTICOPTIONS FOR INRS: WHICH STRATEGIES MAYIMPROVE IMMUNE RECOVERY IN INRS?
Having assessed the clinical risk and the immunological defects
that may be potential targets for adjuvant approaches in INRs,
additional questions arise on the actual direction for an effective
therapeutic strategy. Should we aim at improving peripheral T
cell production and expansion or rather, should we seek im-
mune activation control, enhancing peripheral survival of CD4+
T cells?
MOLECULES THAT SUSTAIN THE CD4+ T CELLCOUNT IN THE PERIPHERY
IL-2. Thus far, several controlled studies have been conducted
to investigate the effect of IL-2 in INRs, concluding that IL-2
is safe and efficacious in inducing a rapid and significant re-
constitution of the CD4+ T cell compartment, with no signif-
icant impact on HIV load [71–73]. Most interestingly, data
showing no HIV-related events among IL-2–treated patients,
compared with recipients of HAART alone, suggest that the IL-
2–driven increases in the CD4+ T cell count may also be effective
in preserving an adequate cellular immunity [72, 74–76], even
though the ultimate evidence of IL-2 clinical impact is still being
sought [14, 77].
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
334 • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • HIV/AIDS
Nonetheless, major constraints to the clinical use of IL-2 in
INRs include a time-limited immune benefit in sustaining CD4+
T cell counts and inefficacy in a minor group of nonresponding
patients. Although a possible way to overcome such limitations
has recently been proposed (consisting of induction mainte-
nance strategies of long-term IL-2 treatment [78]), it is clear
that IL-2 immunotherapy alone for the treatment of INRs failed
to meet the initial expectations. Given these controversies and
possible drug-associated adverse effects in IL-2 recipients,
DHHS guidelines recommend the use of IL-2 immunotherapy
only in the context of clinical trials [14].
IL-7. Two recent trials have demonstrated a sustained dose-
dependent increase in naive and memory CD4+ and CD8+ T
cells after administration of IL-7 to HIV-infected patients [79–
81]. However, the opportunity to use IL-7 as an immune ad-
juvant in INRs is still controversial, given evidence that en-
dogenous plasma IL-7 levels are already elevated in INRs. In
our opinion, a possible way to understand this controversy is
analysis of IL-7 production and signaling in INRs that would
yield evidence on the functional status of the IL-7 axis and,
thus, to the possible benefits of its exogenous administration.
However, DHHS guidelines recommend use of IL-7 immu-
notherapy only in the context of clinical trials [14].
Modulation of T regulatory cells. Although they are an
intriguing target for immune therapy, no clear-cut consensus
has been reached on whether and how to exogenously modulate
T regulatory cell function and/or activity [82]. Thus far, data
on the effects of IL-2 and IL-7 immunotherapy on T regulatory
cells have been discordant [83, 84], indicating the importance
of investigating the role of cytokine-based approaches to this
particular T cell population.
STRATEGIES AIMED AT TURNING OFF IMMUNEHYPERACTIVATION
Antiretroviral therapy strategies. Differences in CD4+ T cell
response may exist among different drug classes. Controversial
data on a greater immunological efficacy of protease inhibitor–
containing regimens have been generated [85]. Indeed, a recent
randomized clinical trial that compared first-line regimens in-
cluding nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors versus
protease inhibitor reported a superior immune response to the
latter regimen, but this occurred only in the long term, and
there was doubt about its clinical significance [86]. Further-
more, data on thymidine analogue–associated mitochondrial
toxicity and oxidative stress have accumulated recently. These
findings suggest a role for thymidine analogues—including nu-
cleoside reverse-transcriptase–based regimens—in cell dys-
function [87], possibly hampering recovery of the CD4+ T cell
count.
The negative impact of low-level residual HIV levels to less
than suppressive threshold during CD4+ immune recovery in
INRs led to the hypothesis that intensification of HAART may
improve immunological responses in INRs [88–92]. The avail-
ability of new drug classes, such as fusion and integrase inhib-
itors, which provide the strongest suppression of HIV loads
and HIV DNA burden and the greatest immunological efficacy
[93, 94], makes this issue more relevant and current. Recently,
CCR5 antagonists have been suggested to have the potential to
yield the greatest CD4+ T cell count gains, given their specific
effect in the suppression of immune activation [95]. Indeed, a
very recent meta-analysis investigated the differences in in-
creases in the CD4+ T cell count among patients enrolled in
phase II/III trials of new antiretrovirals and found an enhanced
CD4+ T cell response in recipients of CCR5 antagonist–con-
taining regimens, compared with recipients of other regimens,
that was independent of suppression of the HIV load [96].
Even if the durability and clinical meaning of this finding re-
main to be determined, these data support deeper investigation
of this approach in INRs.
In addition to identification of the “best” antiretroviral strat-
egy for INRs, a major challenge for clinicians is the identifi-
cation of the “best” CD4+ T cell range for initiation of HAART.
Indeed, given the persistence of different trajectories for the
recovery of the CD4+ T cell count based on different baseline
ranks, with some individuals barely achieving a protective CD4+
T cell count of !200 cells/mL after 5 years of HAART, the impact
of commencement of HAART should be evaluated in patients
with a high risk of becoming INRs, such as older patients
[21, 97].
Immunosuppressive agents. Because there has been inter-
est in “turning off” excessive immune activation, various im-
munosuppressive agents have been investigated [98–103]. In
addition to providing positive data on the efficacious control
of immune activation, these trials have also demonstrated an
immunological benefit in terms of increases in the CD4+ T cell
count [99, 101]. Unfortunately, trials assessing the benefit of
administration of immunosuppressive drugs to INRs are still
lacking, the major concern being the potential risk of admin-
istering immunosuppressive agents to patients with a highly
depleted CD4+ T cell compartment. In our opinion, a prom-
ising approach may be the identification of targeted interven-
tions to interact with pathways of immune activation that are
specific to INRs, thus allowing for a more efficacious and less
dangerous intervention.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The absence of a recovery in the CD4+ T cell count during
long-term, virologically suppressive HAART is an unquestion-
able source of anxiety to HIV-infected patients and their treat-
ing clinicians, given the long-term risks of disease progression
and death, underscoring the need for means of identifying early
predictive factors and treatment options. Furthermore, INRs
may be viewed as a merging point between clinical practice
and basic science: while HIV/AIDS clinicians investigate which
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
HIV/AIDS • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • 335
treatment most effectively sustains peripheral the CD4+ T cell
count, bench scientists, by investigating the immunovirological
pathways behind insufficient recovery of the CD4+ T cell count,
may provide tools both to forecast immunological failure and
to investigate new therapeutic strategies.
Unfortunately, even though several approaches have been
suggested and investigated, no consensus has been reached yet
on the most efficacious treatment for immunological nonre-
sponse. Thus, we are now facing a dichotomy, whereby the
ever-growing list of new-class antiretrovirals provides us with
the most potent weapons against HIV/AIDS, while we still lack
a full grasp on the most proper means of administering them
to INRs. However, even though such research has not yet pro-
vided a unique treatment protocol, research has revealed diverse
immunovirological and even genetic patterns behind impaired
CD4+ T cell count recovery, indicating the need for novel treat-
ment scenarios tailored to different INRs, possibly including
antiretrovirals and immunomodulants. Thus, with regard to
the frustrating lack of concrete therapeutic options, we strongly
advocate the continuous investigation of the correlates of the
failure of CD4+ T cell counts to recover during HAART to aid
HIV/AIDS clinicians who treat INRs today, to find the most
effective and timely therapeutic options in the future.
Acknowledgments
We thank Tiziana Formenti for providing invaluable proofreading andediting. We are particularly thankful to all the staff members of the Clinicof Infectious Diseases, “San Paolo” Hospital, University of Milan.
Financial support. Fondo Interno Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica2007–Universita degli Studi di Milano; Istituto Superiore di Sanita, “Na-tional research program on AIDS”; and Fondazione Romeo and EnricaInvernizzi.
Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: no conflicts.
References
1. Palella FJ Jr, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, et al. Declining morbidityand mortality among patients with advanced human immunodefi-ciency virus infection. HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. N Engl JMed 1998; 338:853–60.
2. Sepkowitz KA. Effect of HAART on natural history of AIDS-relatedopportunistic disorders. Lancet 1998; 351:228–30.
3. Autran B, Carcelain G, Li TS, et al. Restoration of the immune systemwith anti-retroviral therapy. Immunol Lett 1999; 66:207–11.
4. Piketty C, Castiel P, Belec L, et al. Discrepant responses to triplecombination antiretroviral therapy in advanced HIV disease. AIDS1998; 12:745–50.
5. Dronda F, Moreno S, Moreno A, Casado JL, Perez-Elias MJ, AntelaA. Long-term outcomes among antiretroviral-naive human immu-nodeficiency virus–infected patients with small increases in CD4+ cellcounts after successful virologic suppression. Clin Infect Dis 2002;35:1005–9.
6. Yeni PG, Hammer SM, Hirsch MS, et al. Treatment for adult HIVinfection: 2004 recommendations of the International AIDS Soci-ety–USA Panel. JAMA 2004; 292:251–65.
7. Kaufmann GR, Furrer H, Ledergerber B, et al. Characteristics, de-terminants, and clinical relevance of CD4 T cell recovery to !500cells/mL in HIV type 1–infected individuals receiving potent antiret-roviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:361–72.
8. d’Arminio Monforte A, Testori V, Adorni F, et al. CD4 cell counts at
the third month of HAART may predict clinical failure. AIDS 1999;13:1669–76.
9. Grabar S, Le Moing V, Goujard C, et al. Clinical outcome of patientswith HIV-1 infection according to immunologic and virologic re-sponse after 6 months of highly active antiretroviral therapy. AnnIntern Med 2000; 133:401–10.
10. Moore DM, Hogg RS, Yip B, et al. Discordant immunologic andvirologic responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy are associ-ated with increased mortality and poor adherence to therapy. J AcquirImmune Defic Syndr 2005; 40:288–93.
11. Nicastri E, Chiesi A, Angeletti C, et al. Clinical outcome after 4 yearsfollow-up of HIV-seropositive subjects with incomplete virologic orimmunologic response to HAART. J Med Virol 2005; 76:153–60.
12. Gutierrez F, Padilla S, Masia M, et al. Patients’ characteristics andclinical implications of suboptimal CD4 T-cell gains after 1 year ofsuccessful antiretroviral therapy. Curr HIV Res 2008; 6:100–7.
13. Tan R, Westfall AO, Willig JH, et al. Clinical outcome of HIV-infectedantiretroviral-naive patients with discordant immunologic and viro-logic responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy. J Acquir Im-mune Defic Syndr 2008; 47:553–8.
14. Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guide-lines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1 infected adults andadolescents. Washington, DC: Department of Health and HumanServices, 2008.
15. Lau B, Gange SJ, Moore RD. Risk of non-AIDS-related mortality mayexceed risk of AIDS-related mortality among individuals enrollinginto care with CD4+ counts greater than 200 cells/mm3. J AcquirImmune Defic Syndr 2007; 44:179–87.
16. Kaufmann GR, Bloch M, Finlayson R, Zaunders J, Smith D, CooperDA. The extent of HIV-1-related immunodeficiency and age predictthe long-term CD4 T lymphocyte response to potent antiretroviraltherapy. AIDS 2002; 16:359–67.
17. Florence E, Lundgren J, Dreezen C, et al. Factors associated with areduced CD4 lymphocyte count response to HAART despite full viralsuppression in the EuroSIDA study. HIV Med 2003; 4:255–62.
18. Viard JP, Mocroft A, Chiesi A, et al. Influence of age on CD4 cellrecovery in human immunodeficiency virus–infected patients receiv-ing highly active antiretroviral therapy: evidence from the EuroSIDAstudy. J Infect Dis 2001; 183:1290–4.
19. Lederman MM, McKinnis R, Kelleher D, et al. Cellular restorationin HIV infected persons treated with abacavir and a protease inhibitor:age inversely predicts naive CD4 cell count increase. AIDS 2000; 14:2635–42.
20. Collaboration of Observational HIV Epidemiological Research Europe(COHERE) Study Group. Response to combination antiretroviraltherapy: variation by age. AIDS 2008; 22:1463–73.
21. Phillips A. Short-term risk of AIDS according to current CD4 cellcount and viral load in antiretroviral drug-naive individuals and thosetreated in the monotherapy era. AIDS 2004; 18:51–8.
22. Miller MF, Haley C, Koziel MJ, Rowley CF. Impact of hepatitis Cvirus on immune restoration in HIV-infected patients who start highlyactive antiretroviral therapy: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:713–20.
23. Laskus T, Radkowski M, Wang LF, Vargas H, Rakela J. The presenceof active hepatitis C virus replication in lymphoid tissue in patientscoinfected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Infect Dis1998; 178:1189–92.
24. Laskus T, Radkowski M, Piasek A, et al. Hepatitis C virus in lymphoidcells of patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus type1: evidence of active replication in monocytes/macrophages and lym-phocytes. J Infect Dis 2000; 181:442–8.
25. Greub G, Ledergerber B, Battegay M, et al. Clinical progression, sur-vival, and immune recovery during antiretroviral therapy in patientswith HIV-1 and hepatitis C virus coinfection: the Swiss HIV CohortStudy. Lancet 2000; 356:1800–5.
26. De Luca A, Bugarini R, Lepri AC, et al. Coinfection with hepatitisviruses and outcome of initial antiretroviral regimens in previouslynaive HIV-infected subjects. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162:2125–32.
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
336 • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • HIV/AIDS
27. Chung RT, Evans SR, Yang Y, et al. Immune recovery is associatedwith persistent rise in hepatitis C virus RNA, infrequent liver testflares, and is not impaired by hepatitis C virus in co-infected subjects.AIDS 2002; 16:1915–23.
28. Sullivan PS, Hanson DL, Teshale EH, Wotring LL, Brooks JT. Effectof hepatitis C infection on progression of HIV disease and early re-sponse to initial antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 2006; 20:1171–9.
29. Wood E, Hogg RS, Yip B, Harrigan PR, O’Shaughnessy MV, MontanerJS. The impact of adherence on CD4 cell count responses amongHIV-infected patients. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2004; 35:261–8.
30. Wood E, Montaner JS, Yip B, et al. Adherence to antiretroviral therapyand CD4 T-cell count responses among HIV-infected injection drugusers. Antivir Ther 2004; 9:229–35.
31. Moore RD, Keruly JC. CD4+ cell count 6 years after commencementof highly active antiretroviral therapy in persons with sustained vi-rologic suppression. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44:441–6.
32. Egger M, May M, Chene G, et al. Prognosis of HIV-1-infected patientsstarting highly active antiretroviral therapy: a collaborative analysisof prospective studies. Lancet 2002; 360:119–29.
33. Ferraris L, Bellistri GM, Pegorer V, et al. Untangling the immuno-logical implications of nadir on CD4+ cell recovery during suppressivehighly active antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:149–50.
34. Spritzler J, Mildvan D, Russo A, et al. Can immune markers predictsubsequent discordance between immunologic and virologic re-sponses to antiretroviral therapy? Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group.Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37:551–8.
35. Benveniste O, Flahault A, Rollot F, et al. Mechanisms involved in thelow-level regeneration of CD4+ cells in HIV-1–infected patients re-ceiving highly active antiretroviral therapy who have prolonged un-detectable plasma viral loads. J Infect Dis 2005; 191:1670–9.
36. Moses A, Nelson J, Bagby GC Jr. The influence of human immu-nodeficiency virus-1 on hematopoiesis. Blood 1998; 91:1479–95.
37. Isgro A, Aiuti A, Mezzaroma I, et al. Improvement of interleukin 2production, clonogenic capability and restoration of stromal cell func-tion in human immunodeficiency virus-type-1 patients after highlyactive antiretroviral therapy. Br J Haematol 2002; 118:864–74.
38. Isgro A, Aiuti A, Leti W, et al. Immunodysregulation of HIV diseaseat bone marrow level. Autoimmun Rev 2005; 4:486–90.
39. Aiuti F, Mezzaroma I. Failure to reconstitute CD4+ T-cells despitesuppression of HIV replication under HAART. AIDS Rev 2006; 8:88–97.
40. Isgro A, Leti W, De Santis W, et al. Altered clonogenic capability andstromal cell function characterize bone marrow of HIV-infected sub-jects with low CD4+ T cell counts despite viral suppression duringHAART. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:1902–10.
41. Badolato R. Immunological nonresponse to highly active antiretroviraltherapy in HIV-infected subjects: is the bone marrow impairmentcausing CD4 lymphopenia? Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:1911–2.
42. Kolte L, Dreves AM, Ersboll AK, et al. Association between largerthymic size and higher thymic output in human immunodeficiencyvirus–infected patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy.J Infect Dis 2002; 185:1578–85.
43. Franco JM, Rubio A, Martinez-Moya M, et al. T-cell repopulationand thymic volume in HIV-1-infected adult patients after highly activeantiretroviral therapy. Blood 2002; 99:3702–6.
44. Fry TJ, Mackall CL. What limits immune reconstitution in HIV in-fection? Divergent tools converge on thymic function. AIDS 2001;15:1881–2.
45. Douek DC, McFarland RD, Keiser PH, et al. Changes in thymicfunction with age and during the treatment of HIV infection. Nature1998; 396:690–5.
46. Teixeira L, Valdez H, McCune J, et al. Poor CD4 T cell restorationafter suppression of HIV-1 replication may reflect lower thymic func-tion. AIDS 2001; 15:1749–56.
47. Marziali M, De Santis W, Carello R, et al. T-cell homeostasis alterationin HIV-1 infected subjects with low CD4 T-cell count despite un-detectable virus load during HAART. AIDS 2006; 20:2033–41.
48. Marchetti G, Gori A, Casabianca A, et al. Comparative analysis of T-
cell turnover and homeostatic parameters in HIV-infected patientswith discordant immune-virological responses to HAART. AIDS2006; 20:1727–36.
49. Fry T, Connick E, Falloon J, et al. A potential role for interleukin-7in T-cell homeostasis. Blood 2001; 97:2983–90.
50. Napolitano L, Grant R, Deeks S, et al. Increased production of IL-7accompanies HIV-1-mediated T-cell depletion: implications for T-cellhomeostasis. Nature Medicine 2001; 7:73–9.
51. Fry TJ, Mackall CL. The many faces of IL-7: from lymphopoiesis toperipheral T cell maintenance. J Immunol 2005; 174:6571–6.
52. Valdez H, Connick E, Smith KY, et al. Limited immune restorationafter 3 years’ suppression of HIV-1 replication in patients with mod-erately advanced disease. AIDS 2002; 16:1859–66.
53. Hunt PW, Martin JN, Sinclair E, et al. T cell activation is associatedwith lower CD4+ T cell gains in human immunodeficiency vi-rus–infected patients with sustained viral suppression during anti-retroviral therapy. J Infect Dis 2003; 187:1534–43.
54. Pitrak DL, Bolanos J, Hershow R and Novak RM. Discordant CD4T lymphocyte responses to antiretroviral therapy for HIV infectionare associated with ex-vivo rates of apoptosis. AIDS 2001; 15:1317–9.
55. Ostrowski SR, Katzenstein TL, Thim PT, Pedersen BK, Gerstoft J,Ullum H. Low-level viremia and proviral DNA impede immune re-constitution in HIV-1–infected patients receiving highly active anti-retroviral therapy. J Infect Dis 2005; 191:348–57.
56. Chun T-W, Shawn Justement J, Pandya P, et al. Relationship betweenthe size of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) res-ervoir in peripheral blood CD4+ T cells and CD4+:CD8+ T cell ratiosin aviremic HIV-1–infected individuals receiving long-term highlyactive antiretroviral therapy. J Infect Dis 2002; 185:1672–6.
57. Brenchley JM, Price DA, Douek DC. HIV disease: fallout from amucosal catastrophe? Nat Immunol 2006; 7:235–9.
58. Douek D. HIV disease progression: immune activation, microbes, anda leaky gut. Top HIV Med 2007; 15:114–7.
59. Brenchley JM, Price DA, Schacker TW, et al. Microbial translocationis a cause of systemic immune activation in chronic HIV infection.Nat Med 2006; 12:1365–71.
60. Marchetti G, Bellistri GM, Borghi E, et al. Microbial translocation isassociated with sustained failure in CD4+ T-cell reconstitution in HIV-infected patients on long-term highly active antiretroviral therapy.AIDS 2008; 22:2035–8.
61. Guadalupe M, Sankaran S, George MD, et al. Viral suppression andimmune restoration in the gastrointestinal mucosa of human im-munodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients initiating therapy dur-ing primary or chronic infection. J Virol 2006; 80:8236–47.
62. Guadalupe M, Reay E, Sankaran S, et al. Severe CD4+ T-cell depletionin gut lymphoid tissue during primary human immunodeficiencyvirus type 1 infection and substantial delay in restoration followinghighly active antiretroviral therapy. J Virol 2003; 77:11708–17.
63. Estes J, Baker JV, Brenchley JM, et al. Collagen deposition limitsimmune reconstitution in the gut. J Infect Dis 2008; 198:456–64.
64. Paiardini M, Frank I, Pandrea I, Apetrei C, Silvestri G. Mucosal im-mune dysfunction in AIDS pathogenesis. AIDS Rev 2008; 10:36–46.
65. Read SW, Sereti I. HIV infection and the gut: scarred for life? J InfectDis 2008; 198:453–5.
66. Sakaguchi S. Naturally arising Foxp3-expressing CD25+CD4+ regu-latory T cells in immunological tolerance to self and non-self. NatImmunol 2005; 6:345–52.
67. Haas DW, Geraghty DE, Andersen J, et al. Immunogenetics of CD4lymphocyte count recovery during antiretroviral therapy: an AIDSClinical Trials Group study. J Infect Dis 2006; 194:1098–107.
68. O’Brien TR, McDermott DH, Ioannidis JP, et al. Effect of chemokinereceptor gene polymorphisms on the response to potent antiretroviraltherapy. AIDS 2000; 14:821–6.
69. Puissant B, Roubinet F, Massip P, et al. Analysis of CCR5, CCR2,CX3CR1, and SDF1 polymorphisms in HIV-positive treated patients:impact on response to HAART and on peripheral T lymphocytecounts. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 2006; 22:153–62.
70. Rauch A, Nolan D, Furrer H, et al. HLA-Bw4 homozygosity is as-
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from
HIV/AIDS • CID 2009:48 (1 February) • 337
sociated with an impaired CD4 T cell recovery after initiation ofantiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:1921–5.
71. Arno A, Ruiz L, Juan M, et al. Efficacy of low-dose subcutaneousinterleukin-2 to treat advanced human immunodeficiency virus type1 in persons with �250/mL CD4 T cells and undetectable plasma virusload. J Infect Dis 1999; 180:56–60.
72. Marchetti G, Meroni L, Varchetta S, et al. Low-dose prolonged in-termittent interleukin-2 adjuvant therapy: results of a randomizedtrial among human immunodeficiency virus–positive patients withadvanced immune impairment. J Infect Dis 2002; 186:606–16.
73. Katlama C, Carcelain G, Duvivier C, et al. Interleukin-2 acceleratesCD4 cell reconstitution in HIV-infected patients with severe immu-nosuppression despite highly active antiretroviral therapy: the ILSTIMstudy–ANRS 082. AIDS 2002; 16:2027–34.
74. Levy Y, Durier C, Krzysiek R, et al. Effects of interleukin-2 therapycombined with highly active antiretroviral therapy on immune res-toration in HIV-1 infection: a randomized controlled trial. AIDS2003; 17:343–51.
75. Sullivan A, Hardy G, Nelson M, Gotch F, Gazzard B, Imami N. In-terleukin-2 associated viral breakthroughs induce HIV-1-specific CD4T cell responses in patients on fully suppressive highly active anti-retroviral therapy. AIDS 2003; 17:628–9.
76. Blattman J, Grayson J, Wherry E, Kaech S, Smith K, Ahmed R. Ther-apeutic use of IL-2 to enhance antiviral T-cell responses in vivo.Nature Medicine 2003; 9:540–7.
77. Marchetti G, Franzetti F, Gori A. Partial immune reconstitution fol-lowing highly active antiretroviral therapy: can adjuvant interleukin-2 fill the gap? J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55:401–9.
78. Farel CE, Chaitt DG, Hahn BK, et al. Induction and maintenancetherapy with intermittent interleukin-2 in HIV-1 infection. Blood2004; 103:3282–6.
79. Sereti I, Aga E, Spritzler J, et al.; ACTG 5214 team. rhIL7 in HIV-1-infected subjects with CD4 T-cell count 1100 cells/mL and viral load!50,000 copies/mL: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled,double-blinded study (ACTG5214) [abstract 128]. In: Program andabstracts of the 14th Conference on Retroviruses and OpportunisticInfections (Los Angeles). Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Retrovi-rology and Human Health, 2007:112.
80. Levy Y, Weiss L, Viard JP, et al. Repeated r-hIL-7 doses improve T-cell recovery in HIV-1-infected patients enrolled in a phase i/ii mul-ticentric study [abstract 127]. In: Program and abstracts of the 14thConference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (Los An-geles). Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Retrovirology and HumanHealth, 2007:112.
81. Levy Y, Weiss L, Goujard C, et al. Sustained immunological efficacyof repeated r-hIL-7 doses in HIV-1-infected patients: long-term fol-low-up of a phase i/ii multicentric study [abstract 708]. In: Programand abstracts of the 15th Conference on Retroviruses and Oppor-tunistic Infections (Boston). Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Retro-virology and Human Health, 2008:325.
82. Chougnet CA, Shearer GM. Regulatory T cells (Treg) and HIV/AIDS:summary of the September 7–8, 2006 workshop. AIDS Res HumRetroviruses 2007; 23:945–52.
83. Sereti I, Imamichi H, Natarajan V, et al. In vivo expansion ofCD4CD45RO-CD25 T cells expressing foxP3 in IL-2-treated HIV-infected patients. J Clin Invest 2005; 115:1839–47.
84. Rosenberg SA, Sportes C, Ahmadzadeh M, et al. IL-7 administrationto humans leads to expansion of CD8+ and CD4+ cells but a relativedecrease of CD4+ T-regulatory cells. J Immunother 2006; 29:313–9.
85. MacArthur RD, Novak RM, Peng G, et al. A comparison of threehighly active antiretroviral treatment strategies consisting of non-nu-cleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, protease inhibitors, or bothin the presence of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as initialtherapy (CPCRA 058 FIRST Study): a long-term randomised trial.Lancet 2006; 368:2125–35.
86. Riddler SA, Haubrich R, DiRienzo AG, et al. Class-sparing regimensfor initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:2095–106.
87. Caron M, Auclairt M, Vissian A, Vigouroux C, Capeau J. Contributionof mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress to cellular pre-mature senescence induced by antiretroviral thymidine analogues.Antivir Ther 2008; 13:27–38.
88. Garcia F, Vidal C, Plana M, et al. Residual low-level viral replicationcould explain discrepancies between viral load and CD4+ cell responsein human immunodeficiency virus–infected patients receiving anti-retroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 30:392–4.
89. Giorgi JV, Majchrowicz MA, Johnson TD, Hultin P, Matud J, DetelsR. Immunologic effects of combined protease inhibitor and reversetranscriptase inhibitor therapy in previously treated chronic HIV-1infection. AIDS 1998; 12:1833–44.
90. Hejdeman B, Lenkei R, Leandersson AC, et al. Clinical and immu-nological benefits from highly active antiretroviral therapy in spite oflimited viral load reduction in HIV type 1 infection. AIDS Res HumRetroviruses 2001; 17:277–86.
91. Smith D, Zaunders J, Kauffman G, et al. Greater suppression of CD8activation with 4 vs. 3 drugs in early stages of primary HIV infection(PHI) despite similar virological decay rates [abstract 61]. In: Programand abstracts of the 1st International AIDS Society Conference onHIV Pathogenesis and Treatment (Buenos Aires, Argentina) Geneva:International AIDS Society, 2001:101.
92. Havlir DV, Strain MC, Clerici M, et al. Productive infection maintainsa dynamic steady state of residual viremia in human immunodefi-ciency virus type 1-infected persons treated with suppressive antiret-roviral therapy for five years. J Virol 2003; 77:11212–9.
93. Bourgarit A, Lascoux C, Palmer P, et al. First-line use of enfuvirtide-containing HAART regimen with dramatic clinical and immunolog-ical improvement in three cases. AIDS 2006; 20:471–3.
94. Soria A, Cavarelli M, Sala S, et al. Unexpected dramatic increase inCD4+ cell count in a patient with AIDS after enfuvirtide treatmentdespite persistent viremia and resistance mutations. J Med Virol2008; 80:937–41.
95. Watson C, Jenkinson S, Kazmierski W, Kenakin T. The CCR5 recep-tor-based mechanism of action of 873140, a potent allosteric non-competitive HIV entry inhibitor. Mol Pharmacol 2005; 67:1268–82.
96. Wilkin T, Ribaudo H, Gulick R. The relationship of CCR5 inhibitorsto CD4 cell count changes: a meta-analysis of recent clinical trials intreatment-experienced subjects [abstract 800]. In: Program and ab-stracts of the 15th Conference on Retroviruses and OpportunisticInfections (Boston). Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Retrovirologyand Human Health, 2008:362.
97. Hughes R, Sabin C, Sterne JAC,. Long-term trends in CD4 counts inpatients starting HAART: UK CHIC study [abstract P18.4/04/BPD].In: Program and abstracts of the 11th European AIDS Conference(Madrid). European AIDS Clinical Society, 2007:137.
98. Coull JJ, Turner D, Melby T, Betts MR, Lanier R, Margolis DM. Apilot study of the use of mycophenolate mofetil as a component oftherapy for multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection. J Acquir ImmuneDefic Syndr 2001; 26:423–34.
99. Rizzardi GP, Harari A, Capiluppi B, et al. Treatment of primary HIV-1 infection with cyclosporin A coupled with highly active antiretroviraltherapy. J Clin Invest 2002; 109:681–8.
100. Lederman MM, Smeaton L, Smith KY, et al. Cyclosporin A providesno sustained immunologic benefit to persons with chronic HIV-1infection starting suppressive antiretroviral therapy: results of a ran-domized, controlled trial of the AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5138. JInfect Dis 2006; 194:1677–85.
101. Wallis RS, Kyambadde P, Johnson JL, et al. A study of the safety,immunology, virology, and microbiology of adjunctive etanercept inHIV-1-associated tuberculosis. Aids 2004; 18:257–64.
102. Gori A, Rossi M, Trabattoni D, et al. Tumor necrosis factor–a in-creased production during thalidomide treatment in patients withtuberculosis and HIV coinfection. J Infect Dis 2000; 182:639–40.
103. De Maria A. Discordant responses to HAART in HIV-1 patients: theneed to focus on intervention. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2007; 5:523–7.
by guest on May 2, 2016
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/D
ownloaded from