Anthony Mills

Co-formulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus co-formulated efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, analysis of results after 48 weeks

BACKGROUNDnThe integrase inhibitor elvitegravir (EVG) has been co-formulated with the CYP3A4 inhibitor cobicistat (COBI), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in a single tablet given once daily. We compared the efficacy and safety of EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF with standard of care-co-formulated efavirenz (EFV)/FTC/TDF-as initial treatment for HIV infection.nnnMETHODSnIn this phase 3 trial, treatment-naive patients from outpatient clinics in North America were randomly assigned by computer-generated allocation sequence with a block size of four in a 1:1 ratio to receive EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF, once daily, plus matching placebo. Patients and study staff involved in giving study treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting and analysing data were masked to treatment allocation. Eligibility criteria included screening HIV RNA concentration of 5000 copies per mL or more, and susceptibility to efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir. The primary endpoint was HIV RNA concentration of fewer than 50 copies per mL at week 48. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01095796.nnnFINDINGSn700 patients were randomly assigned and treated (348 with EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF, 352 with EFV/FTC/TDF). EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF was non-inferior to EFV/FTC/TDF; 305/348 (87·6%) versus 296/352 (84·1%) of patients had HIV RNA concentrations of fewer than 50 copies per mL at week 48 (difference 3·6%, 95% CI -1·6% to 8·8%). Proportions of patients discontinuing drugs for adverse events did not differ substantially (13/348 in the EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF group vs 18/352 in the EFV/FTC/TDF group). Nausea was more common with EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF than with EFV/FTC/TDF (72/348 vs 48/352) and dizziness (23/348 vs 86/352), abnormal dreams (53/348 vs 95/352), insomnia (30/348 vs 49/352), and rash (22/348 vs 43/352) were less common. Serum creatinine concentration increased more by week 48 in the EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF group than in the EFV/FTC/TDF group (median 13 μmol/L, IQR 5 to 20 vs 1 μmol/L, -6 to 8; p<0·001).nnnINTERPRETATIONnIf regulatory approval is given, EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF would be the only single-tablet, once-daily, integrase-inhibitor-based regimen for initial treatment of HIV infection.nnnFUNDINGnGilead Sciences.

Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO): a phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial

BACKGROUNDnEfavirenz with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine is a preferred antiretroviral regimen for treatment-naive patients infected with HIV-1. Rilpivirine, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown similar antiviral efficacy to efavirenz in a phase 2b trial with two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rilpivirine versus efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine.nnnMETHODSnWe did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial, in patients infected with HIV-1 who were treatment-naive. The patients were aged 18 years or older with a plasma viral load at screening of 5000 copies per mL or greater, and viral sensitivity to all study drugs. Our trial was done at 112 sites across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated interactive web response system to receive either once-daily 25 mg rilpivirine or once-daily 600 mg efavirenz, each with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Our primary objective was to show non-inferiority (12% margin) of rilpivirine to efavirenz in terms of the percentage of patients with confirmed response (viral load <50 copies per mL intention-to-treat time-to-loss-of-virological-response [ITT-TLOVR] algorithm) at week 48. Our primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. We also used logistic regression to adjust for baseline viral load. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00540449.nnnFINDINGSn346 patients were randomly assigned to receive rilpivirine and 344 to receive efavirenz and received at least one dose of study drug, with 287 (83%) and 285 (83%) in the respective groups having a confirmed response at week 48. The point estimate from a logistic regression model for the percentage difference in response was -0.4 (95% CI -5.9 to 5.2), confirming non-inferiority with a 12% margin (primary endpoint). The incidence of virological failures was 13% (rilpivirine) versus 6% (efavirenz; 11%vs 4% by ITT-TLOVR). Grade 2-4 adverse events (55 [16%] on rilpivirine vs 108 [31%] on efavirenz, p<0.0001), discontinuations due to adverse events (eight [2%] on rilpivirine vs 27 [8%] on efavirenz), rash, dizziness, and abnormal dreams or nightmares were more common with efavirenz. Increases in plasma lipids were significantly lower with rilpivirine.nnnINTERPRETATIONnRilpivirine showed non-inferior efficacy compared with efavirenz, with a higher virological-failure rate, but a more favourable safety and tolerability profile.nnnFUNDINGnTibotec.

Daclatasvir plus Sofosbuvir for HCV in Patients Coinfected with HIV-1

BACKGROUNDnThe combination of daclatasvir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5A inhibitor, and the NS5B inhibitor sofosbuvir has shown efficacy in patients with HCV monoinfection. Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of this combination in patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1).nnnMETHODSnThis was an open-label study involving 151 patients who had not received HCV treatment and 52 previously treated patients, all of whom were coinfected with HIV-1. Previously untreated patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 12 weeks or 8 weeks of daclatasvir at a standard dose of 60 mg daily (with dose adjustment for concomitant antiretroviral medications) plus 400 mg of sofosbuvir daily. Previously treated patients were assigned to undergo 12 weeks of therapy at the same doses. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at week 12 after the end of therapy among previously untreated patients with HCV genotype 1 who were treated for 12 weeks.nnnRESULTSnPatients had HCV genotypes 1 through 4 (83% with genotype 1), and 14% had compensated cirrhosis; 98% were receiving antiretroviral therapy. Among patients with genotype 1, a sustained virologic response was reported in 96.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.8 to 99.2) who were treated for 12 weeks and in 75.6% (95% CI, 59.7 to 87.6) who were treated for 8 weeks among previously untreated patients and in 97.7% (95% CI, 88.0 to 99.9) who were treated for 12 weeks among previously treated patients. Rates of sustained virologic response across all genotypes were 97.0% (95% CI, 91.6 to 99.4), 76.0% (95% CI, 61.8 to 86.9), and 98.1% (95% CI, 89.7 to 100), respectively. The most common adverse events were fatigue, nausea, and headache. There were no study-drug discontinuations because of adverse events. HIV-1 suppression was not compromised.nnnCONCLUSIONSnAmong previously untreated HIV-HCV coinfected patients receiving daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir for HCV infection, the rate of sustained virologic response across all genotypes was 97.0% after 12 weeks of treatment and 76.0% after 8 weeks. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ALLY-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02032888.).

Once-daily darunavir/ritonavir vs. lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected patients: 96-week analysis.

Objective:Present 96-week data from ongoing ARTEMIS (AntiRetroviral Therapy with TMC114 ExaMined In Naive Subjects) trial. Methods:Randomized, open-label, phase III trial of antiretroviral-naive patients with HIV-1 RNA at least 5000 copies/ml (stratified by HIV-1 RNA and CD4 cell count) receiving darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg once daily or lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 800/200 mg total daily dose (twice daily or once daily) and fixed-dose tenofovir/emtricitabine. Primary outcome measure was noninferiority of DRV/r vs. LPV/r in virologic response (<50 copies/ml, time-to-loss of virologic response) at 96 weeks (secondary outcome: superiority). Results:Six hundred eighty-nine patients were enrolled. At week 96, significantly more DRV/r (79%) than LPV/r patients (71%) had viral load less than 50 copies/ml, confirming statistical noninferiority (estimated difference: 8.4%; 95% confidence interval 1.9–14.8; P < 0.001; per-protocol) and superiority (P = 0.012; intent-to-treat) in virologic response. Median CD4 cell count increases from baseline were 171 and 188 cells/μl for DRV/r and LPV/r, respectively (P = 0.57; noncompleter=failure). Overall, 4% of DRV/r patients and 9% of LPV/r patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Lower rates of grade 2–4 treatment-related diarrhea were seen with DRV/r (4%) vs. LPV/r (11%; P < 0.001), whereas grade 2–4 treatment-related rash occurred infrequently in both arms (3 vs. 1%, respectively; P = 0.273). DRV/r patients had smaller median increases in triglycerides (0.1 and 0.6 mmol/l, respectively, P < 0.0001) and total cholesterol (0.6 and 0.9 mmol/l, respectively; P < 0.0001) than LPV/r patients; levels remained below National Cholesterol Education Program cut-offs for DRV/r. Conclusion:At week 96, once-daily DRV/r was both statistically noninferior and superior in virologic response to LPV/r, with a more favorable gastrointestinal and lipid profile, confirming DRV/r as an effective, well tolerated, and durable option for antiretroviral-naive patients.

Dolutegravir in Antiretroviral-Experienced Patients With Raltegravir- and/or Elvitegravir-Resistant HIV-1: 24-Week Results of the Phase III VIKING-3 Study

Background.u2003The pilot phase IIb VIKING study suggested that dolutegravir (DTG), a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) integrase inhibitor (INI), would be efficacious in INI-resistant patients at the 50 mg twice daily (BID) dose. Methods.u2003VIKING-3 is a single-arm, open-label phase III study in which therapy-experienced adults with INI-resistant virus received DTG 50 mg BID while continuing their failing regimen (without raltegravir or elvitegravir) through day 7, after which the regimen was optimized with ≥1 fully active drug and DTG continued. The primary efficacy endpoints were the mean change from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA at day 8 and the proportion of subjects with HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL at week 24. Results.u2003Mean change in HIV-1 RNA at day 8 was −1.43 log10 c/mL, and 69% of subjects achieved <50 c/mL at week 24. Multivariate analyses demonstrated a strong association between baseline DTG susceptibility and response. Response was most reduced in subjects with Q148 + ≥2 resistance-associated mutations. DTG 50 mg BID had a low (3%) discontinuation rate due to adverse events, similar to INI-naive subjects receiving DTG 50 mg once daily. Conclusions.u2003DTG 50 mg BID–based therapy was effective in this highly treatment-experienced population with INI-resistant virus. Clinical Trials Registration.u2003www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01328041) and http://www.gsk-clinicalstudywww.gsk-clinicalstudyregister.com (112574).

A randomized double-blind comparison of coformulated elvitegravir/ cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: Analysis of week 96 results

Abstract:We report week 96 results from a phase 3 trial of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF, n = 348) vs efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EFV/FTC/TDF, n = 352). At week 48, EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF was noninferior to EFV/FTC/TDF (88% vs 84%, difference +3.6%, 95% confidence interval: −1.6% to 8.8%). Virologic success (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) was maintained at week 96 (84% vs 82%, difference +2.7%, 95% CI: −2.9% to 8.3%). Discontinuation due to adverse events was low (5% vs 7%). Median changes in serum creatinine (mg/dL) at week 96 were similar to week 48. These results support the durable efficacy and long-term safety of EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF.

Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in antiretroviral regimens for virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, active-controlled, multicentre, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study

BACKGROUNDnAntiretroviral regimens containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate have been associated with renal toxicity and reduced bone mineral density. Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug that reduces tenofovir plasma concentrations by 90%, thereby decreasing off-target side-effects. We aimed to assess whether efficacy, safety, and tolerability were non-inferior in patients switched to a regimen containing tenofovir alafenamide versus in those remaining on one containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.nnnMETHODSnIn this randomised, actively controlled, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial, we recruited HIV-1-infected adults from Gilead clinical studies at 168 sites in 19 countries. Patients were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or greater, and were taking one of four tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens for at least 96 weeks before enrolment. With use of a third-party computer-generated sequence, patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive a once-a-day single-tablet containing elvitegravir 150 mg, cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg (tenofovir alafenamide group) or to carry on taking one of four previous tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group) for 96 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by previous treatment regimen in blocks of six. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to the assigned study regimen; outcome assessors were masked until database lock. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received at least one dose of study drug who had undetectable viral load (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 48. The non-inferiority margin was 12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01815736.nnnFINDINGSnBetween April 12, 2013 and April 3, 2014, we enrolled 1443 patients. 959 patients were randomly assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and 477 to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. Viral suppression at week 48 was noted in 932 (97%) patients assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and in 444 (93%) assigned to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (adjusted difference 4·1%, 95% CI 1·6-6·7), with virological failure noted in ten and six patients, respectively. The number of adverse events was similar between the two groups, but study drug-related adverse events were more common in the tenofovir alafenamide group (204 patients [21%] vs 76 [16%]). Hip and spine bone mineral density and glomerular filtration were each significantly improved in patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with those in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group.nnnINTERPRETATIONnSwitching to a tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimen from one containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was non-inferior for maintenance of viral suppression and led to improved bone mineral density and renal function. Longer term follow-up is needed to better understand the clinical impact of these changes.nnnFUNDINGnGilead Sciences.

Efficacy and safety of etravirine at week 96 in treatment-experienced HIV type-1-infected patients in the DUET-1 and DUET-2 trials.

BACKGROUNDnDurable efficacy and long-term safety of antiretroviral therapy are important goals in the management of treatment-experienced patients. The 96-week efficacy and safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) etravirine were evaluated in the Phase III DUET trials.nnnMETHODSnHIV type-1-infected treatment-experienced adults with viral loads >5,000 copies/ml and NNRTI and protease inhibitor resistance were randomized to receive etravirine 200 mg or placebo, each twice daily and in combination with a background regimen of darunavir/ritonavir twice daily, nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and optional enfuvirtide. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with viral load <50 copies/ml (intent-to-treat analysis, time-to-loss of virological response algorithm) at week 24. Results from both trials were combined in the pre-specified pooled 96-week analysis.nnnRESULTSnIn total, 599 patients received etravirine and 604 received placebo. At week 96, 57% of patients in the etravirine group versus 36% in the placebo group had a viral load <50 copies/ml (P<0.0001); 91% and 88% of patients, respectively, had maintained this response from week 48. Mean increases in CD4(+) T-cell count from baseline at week 96 were 128 cells/mm(3) with etravirine versus 86 cells/mm(3) with placebo (P<0.0001). With the exception of rash, which was reported more frequently with etravirine than placebo (21% versus 12%, respectively; P<0.0001), the safety and tolerability profile of etravirine was similar to placebo over the treatment period.nnnCONCLUSIONSnEtravirine, in combination with an antiretroviral background regimen, provided durable virological and immunological responses with no new safety concerns in treatment-experienced patients over 96 weeks in the DUET trials.

A Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Single-Tablet Regimen Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir DF Versus Single-Tablet Regimen Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir DF for Initial Treatment of HIV-1 Infection: Analysis of Week 144 Results

INTRODUCTION The first integrase inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen combines elvitegravir (an integrase inhibitor), cobicistat (a pharmacoenhancer), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir DF (TDF) (EVG/ COBI/FTC/TDF). In 2 phase 3 randomized trials, EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF demonstrated noninferior efficacy at week 48 to efavirenz (EFV)/FTC/TDF (study 102) and to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir ATV + RTV + FTC/TDF (study 103) with durable efficacy through week 96. We present week 144 data from study 102. METHODS A full description of the methods has been published. A brief description is provided below.

Tenofovir Alafenamide Versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in the First Protease Inhibitor-Based Single-Tablet Regimen for Initial HIV-1 Therapy: A Randomized Phase 2 Study.

Objectives:To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the novel tenofovir prodrug, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), as part of the first protease inhibitor–based single-tablet regimen (STR) for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. Methods:Antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥70 mL/min were randomized 2:1 to receive the darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) STR (TAF: N = 103) or darunavir + cobicistat + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF: N = 50) once daily with matched placebos for 48 weeks. Results:At week 24, viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) rates were similar (TAF 74.8% vs. TDF 74.0%). At week 48, rates were TAF 76.7% vs. TDF 84.0%; the difference was driven by higher rate of discontinuations in TAF (6.8%) vs. TDF (2%). Among those with virologic failure, none developed resistance. Most adverse events were of mild/moderate severity. The mean change in serum creatinine from baseline at week 48 was 0.06 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.04 to 0.08) for TAF vs. 0.09 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.14) for TDF (P = 0.053). The % change in retinol binding protein/Cr ratio was +9 (TAF) vs. +54 (TDF), P = 0.003; the % change in urine &bgr;-2 microglobulin/Cr ratio was −42.0 (TAF) vs. +2.3 (TDF), P = 0.002. The % change in hip bone mineral density (BMD) was −0.84 (TAF) vs. −3.82 (TDF), P < 0.001 and in spine BMD was −1.57 (TAF) vs. −3.62 (TDF), P = 0.003. There were no fractures in either group. Conclusions:The TAF arm had significantly improved renal and bone safety parameters: less proteinuria and less change in hip and spine BMD, consistent with results from a similarly designed study of the elvitegravir/C/F/TAF STR. This D/C/F/TAF STR offers a promising option for initial HIV treatment, with the high barrier to resistance of darunavir, and the potential for improved long-term renal and bone safety with TAF.