CRISPR editing of CCR5 and HIV-1 facilitates viral elimination in antiretroviral drug-suppressed virus-infected humanized mice

Treatment of HIV-1ADA-infected CD34+ NSG-humanized mice with long-acting ester prodrugs of cabotegravir, lamivudine, and abacavir in combination with native rilpivirine was followed by dual CRISPR-Cas9 C-C chemokine receptor type five (CCR5) and HIV-1 proviral DNA gene editing. This led to sequential viral suppression, restoration of absolute human CD4+ T cell numbers, then elimination of replication-competent virus in 58% of infected mice. Dual CRISPR therapies enabled the excision of integrated proviral DNA in infected human cells contained within live infected animals. Highly sensitive nucleic acid nested and droplet digital PCR, RNAscope, and viral outgrowth assays affirmed viral elimination. HIV-1 was not detected in the blood, spleen, lung, kidney, liver, gut, bone marrow, and brain of virus-free animals. Progeny virus from adoptively transferred and CRISPR-treated virus-free mice was neither detected nor recovered. Residual HIV-1 DNA fragments were easily seen in untreated and viral-rebounded animals. No evidence of off-target toxicities was recorded in any of the treated animals. Importantly, the dual CRISPR therapy demonstrated statistically significant improvements in HIV-1 cure percentages compared to single treatments. Taken together, these observations underscore a pivotal role of combinatorial CRISPR gene editing in achieving the elimination of HIV-1 infection.

Reasons People Living with HIV Might Prefer Oral Daily Antiretroviral Therapy, Long-Acting Formulations, or Future HIV Remission Options

A growing body of research is beginning to elucidate reasons people living with HIV (PLWHIV) might prefer oral daily antiretroviral treatment (ART) compared with emerging long-acting ART (LA-ART) or HIV remission strategies under investigation. Our objective is to provide qualitative insights into the reasons why PLWHIV might prefer one of these HIV control therapies over others. From May to August 2018, we implemented a semistructured cross-sectional survey of PLWHIV in the United States to better understand patient preferences around various HIV treatment and remission options. Using free text, respondents were asked to explain why they preferred one HIV control option over the other two. We analyzed responses to the open-ended survey questions on reasons for preferring oral daily ART versus LA-ART versus HIV remission strategies using conventional content analysis. The results showed that PLWHIV preferred oral daily ART because of its familiarity and known safety and efficacy profile, whereas those who preferred LA-ART would value the convenience it offers. Finally, HIV remission strategies would be preferred to avoid taking ART altogether. The qualitative results provide insights into reasons why PLWHIV in the United States might prefer oral daily ART versus novel therapies. More importantly, they provide information to better align HIV virological control strategies with end-user perspectives. To make informed choices around evolving HIV therapeutics, PLWHIV and HIV care providers would benefit from decision tools to better assess options and trade-offs. More research is needed on how best to effectively support PLWHIV and HIV care providers in shared decision-making.

The Dose Response: Perceptions of People Living with HIV in the United States on Alternatives to Oral Daily Antiretroviral Therapy

There are two concurrent and novel major research pathways toward strategies for HIV control: (1) long-acting antiretroviral therapy (ART) formulations and (2) research aimed at conferring sustained ART-free HIV remission, considered a step toward an HIV cure. The importance of perspectives from people living with HIV on the development of new modalities is high, but data are lacking. We administered an online survey in which respondents selected their likelihood of participation or nonparticipation in HIV cure/remission research based on potential risks and perceived benefits of these new modalities. We also tested the correlation between perceptions of potential risks and benefits with preferences of virologic control strategies and/or responses to scenario choices, while controlling for respondent characteristics. Of the 282 eligible respondents, 42% would be willing to switch from oral daily ART to long-acting ART injectables or implantables taken at 6-month intervals, and 24% to a hypothetical ART-free remission strategy. We found statistically significant gender differences in perceptions of risk and preferences of HIV control strategies, and possible psychosocial factors that could mediate willingness to switch to novel HIV treatment or remission options. Our study yielded data on possible desirable product characteristics for future HIV treatment and remission options. Findings also revealed differences in motivations and preferences across gender and other sociodemographic characteristics that may be actionable as part of research recruitment efforts. The diversity of participant perspectives reveals the need to provide a variety of therapeutic options to people living with HIV and to acknowledge their diverse experiential expertise when developing novel HIV therapies.