Catherine Orrell

Efficacy of 400 mg efavirenz versus standard 600 mg dose in HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive adults (ENCORE1): A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial

Background: The optimum dose of key antiretroviral drugs is often overlooked during product development. The ENCORE1 study compared the efficacy and safety of reduced dose efavirenz with standard dose efavirenz in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine as first-line treatment for HIV infection. An effective and safe reduced dose could yield meaningful cost savings. Methods: ENCORE1 is a continuing non-inferiority trial in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive adults in 38 clinical sites in 13 countries. Participants (plasma HIV-RNA >1000 log copies per mL, CD4 T-cell count 50-500 cells per μL) were randomly assigned by a computer-generated sequence with a blocking factor of four (stratified by clinical site and by screening viral load) to receive tenofovir plus emtricitabine with either a reduced daily dose (400 mg) or a standard dose (600 mg) of efavirenz. Participants, physicians, and all other trial staffwere masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the difference in proportions of participants with plasma HIV-RNA of less than 200 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Treatment groups were regarded as non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in viral load was less than-10% by modified intention-to-treat analysis. Adverse events were summarised by treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01011413. Findings: The modified intention-to-treat analysis consisted of 630 patients (efavirenz 400=321; efavirenz 600=309). 32% were women; 37% were African, 33% were Asian, and 30% were white. The mean baseline CD4 cell count was 273 cells per μL (SD 99) and median plasma HIV-RNA was 4.75 log copies per mL (IQR 0.88). The proportion of participants with a viral load below 200 copies per mL at week 48 was 94.1% for efavirenz 400 mg and 92.2% for 600 mg (difference 1.85%, 95% CI-2.1 to 5.79). CD4 T-cell counts at week 48 were significantly higher for the 400 mg group than for the 600 mg group (mean difference 25 cells per μL, 95% CI 6-44; p=0.01). We recorded no difference in grade or number of patients reporting adverse events (efavirenz 400=89.1%, efavirenz 600=88.4%; difference 0.75%, 95% CI-4.19 to 5.69; p=0.77). Study drug-related adverse events were significantly more frequent in the 600 mg group than in the 400 mg group (146% [47] vs 118 [37]), difference-10.5%, 95% CI-18.2 to-2.8; p=0.01) and significantly fewer patients with these events stopped treatment (400 mg=6 [2%], 600 mg=18 [6%], difference-3.96%, 95% CI-6.96 to -0.95; p=0.01). Interpretation: Our findings suggest that a reduced dose of 400 mg efavirenz is non-inferior to the standard dose of 600 mg, when combined with tenofovir and emtricitabine during 48 weeks in ART-naive adults with HIV-1 infection. Adverse events related to the study drug were more frequent with 600 mg efavirenz than with 400 mg. Lower dose efavirenz should be recommended as part of routine care.BACKGROUNDnThe optimum dose of key antiretroviral drugs is often overlooked during product development. The ENCORE1 study compared the efficacy and safety of reduced dose efavirenz with standard dose efavirenz in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine as first-line treatment for HIV infection. An effective and safe reduced dose could yield meaningful cost savings.nnnMETHODSnENCORE1 is a continuing non-inferiority trial in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive adults in 38 clinical sites in 13 countries. Participants (plasma HIV-RNA >1000 log10 copies per mL, CD4 T-cell count 50-500 cells per μL) were randomly assigned by a computer-generated sequence with a blocking factor of four (stratified by clinical site and by screening viral load) to receive tenofovir plus emtricitabine with either a reduced daily dose (400 mg) or a standard dose (600 mg) of efavirenz. Participants, physicians, and all other trial staff were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the difference in proportions of participants with plasma HIV-RNA of less than 200 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Treatment groups were regarded as non-inferior if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in viral load was less than -10% by modified intention-to-treat analysis. Adverse events were summarised by treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01011413.nnnFINDINGSnThe modified intention-to-treat analysis consisted of 630 patients (efavirenz 400=321; efavirenz 600=309). 32% were women; 37% were African, 33% were Asian, and 30% were white. The mean baseline CD4 cell count was 273 cells per μL (SD 99) and median plasma HIV-RNA was 4·75 log10 copies per mL (IQR 0·88). The proportion of participants with a viral load below 200 copies per mL at week 48 was 94·1% for efavirenz 400 mg and 92·2% for 600 mg (difference 1·85%, 95% CI -2·1 to 5·79). CD4 T-cell counts at week 48 were significantly higher for the 400 mg group than for the 600 mg group (mean difference 25 cells per μL, 95% CI 6-44; p=0·01). We recorded no difference in grade or number of patients reporting adverse events (efavirenz 400=89·1%, efavirenz 600=88·4%; difference 0·75%, 95% CI -4·19 to 5·69; p=0·77). Study drug-related adverse events were significantly more frequent in the 600 mg group than in the 400 mg group (146% [47] vs 118 [37]), difference -10·5%, 95% CI -18·2 to -2·8; p=0·01) and significantly fewer patients with these events stopped treatment (400 mg=6 [2%], 600 mg=18 [6%], difference -3·96%, 95% CI -6·96 to -0·95; p=0·01).nnnINTERPRETATIONnOur findings suggest that a reduced dose of 400 mg efavirenz is non-inferior to the standard dose of 600 mg, when combined with tenofovir and emtricitabine during 48 weeks in ART-naive adults with HIV-1 infection. Adverse events related to the study drug were more frequent with 600 mg efavirenz than with 400 mg. Lower dose efavirenz should be recommended as part of routine care.nnnFUNDINGnBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, University of New South Wales.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Comparison of Once-Daily Efavirenz (400 mg vs. 600 mg) in Treatment-Naïve HIV-Infected Patients: Results of the ENCORE1 Study.

Daily efavirenz 400 mg (EFV400) was virologically noninferior to 600 mg (EFV600) at 48 weeks in treatment‐naïve patients. We evaluated EFV400 and EFV600 pharmacokinetics (NONMEM v. 7.2), assessing patient demographics and genetic polymorphisms (CYP2B6, CYP2A6, CYP3A4, NR1I3) as covariates and explored relationships with efficacy (plasma HIV‐RNA (pVL) <200 copies/mL) and safety outcomes at 48 weeks in 606 randomized ENCORE1 patients (female = 32%, African = 37%, Asian = 33%; EFV400 = 311, EFV600 = 295). CYP2B6 516G>T/983T>C/CYP2A6*9B/*17 and weight were associated with efavirenz CL/F. Exposure was significantly lower for EFV400 (geometric mean ratio, GMR; 90% confidence interval, CI: 0.73 (0.68–0.78)) but 97% (EFV400) and 98% (EFV600) of evaluable pVL was <200 copies/mL at 48 weeks (P = 0.802). Four of 20 patients with mid‐dose concentrations <1.0 mg/L had pVL ≥200 copies/mL (EFV400 = 1; EFV600 = 3). Efavirenz exposure was similar between those with and without efavirenz‐related side effects (GMR; 90% CI: 0.95 (0.88–1.02)). HIV suppression was comparable between doses despite significantly lower EFV400 exposure. Comprehensive evaluation of efavirenz pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics revealed important limitations in the accepted threshold concentration.

Comprehensive Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic and Pharmacogenetic Evaluation of Once-Daily Efavirenz 400 and 600 mg in Treatment-Naïve HIV-Infected Patients at 96 Weeks: Results of the ENCORE1 Study

BackgroundENCORE1 demonstrated non-inferiority of daily efavirenz 400xa0mg (EFV400) versus 600xa0mg (EFV600) to 96xa0weeks in treatment-naïve, HIV-infected adults but concerns regarding lower EFV400 concentrations remained. Therefore, relationships between EFV pharmacokinetics (PK) and key genetic polymorphisms with 96-week efficacy and safety were investigated.MethodsRelationships between EFV PK parameters and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP; CYP2B6,CYP2A6, CYP3A4, NR1I3, NR1I2, ABCB1) with plasma HIV-RNA (pVL) <200 copies/mL and EFV discontinuation and adverse events at 96xa0weeks were explored. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis evaluated the predictability of mid-dose interval (C12) cutoffs and 96-week pVL.ResultsA total of 606 patients (32xa0% female; 37xa0% African, 33xa0% Asian; nxa0=xa0311 EFV400, nxa0=xa0295 EFV600) were included. EFV PK parameters, including C12, were not associated with pVL <200 copies/mL at 96xa0weeks (odds ratio [OR] 5.25, 95xa0% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–67.90, pxa0=xa00.204). Lower risk of CNS-related adverse events was associated with CYP2B6 983TC/CC (OR 0.35, 95xa0% CI 0.15–0.81, pxa0=xa00.015) and higher risk was associated with CYP2B6 15582CT/TT and ABCB1 3435TT (OR 1.46, 95xa0% CI 1.02–2.09, pxa0=xa00.040; OR 2.31, 95xa0% CI 1.33–4.02, pxa0=xa00.003, respectively). Discontinuation due to adverse events (clinician decision) was independently associated with dose (OR 2.54, 95xa0% CI 1.19–5.43, pxa0=xa00.016). C12 between 0.47 and 0.76xa0mg/L provided sensitivity/specificity >90xa0% (100xa0%/92.3 to 98.9xa0%/92.3xa0%) for achieving pVL <200 copies/mL at 96xa0weeks.ConclusionsA higher rate of EFV-related adverse events and discontinuations due to these events for EFV600 were not driven by polymorphisms assessed. Although a single threshold concentration associated with HIV suppression may be clinically useful, it was not viable for ENCORE1. Implementation of EFV400 would improve toxicity management whilst still maintaining good efficacy.

Adult antiretroviral therapy guidelines 2014 : guideline

These guidelines are intended as an update to those published in the Southern African Journal of HIV Medicine in 2012. Since the release of the previous guidelines, the scale-up of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in southern Africa has continued. Cohort studies from the region show excellent clinical outcomes; however, ART is still being initiated late (in advanced disease) in some patients, resulting in relatively high early mortality rates. New data on antiretroviral drugs have become available. Although currently few, there are patients in the region who are failing protease-inhibitor-based second-line regimens. To address this, guidelines on third-line therapy have been expanded.

Treatment Interruption and Variation in Tablet Taking Behaviour Result in Viral Failure: A Case-Control Study from Cape Town, South Africa

Background Understanding of the impact of non-structured treatment interruption (TI) and variation in tablet-taking on failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) is limited in a resource-poor setting. Methods A retrospective matched case-control analysis. Individuals failing ART were matched by time on ART with 4 controls. Viral load (VL) and CD4 count were completed 4-monthly. Adherence percentages, from tablet returns, were calculated 4-monthly (interval) and from ART start (cumulative). Variation between intervals and TI (>27 days off ART) were recorded. Conditional multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the effect of cumulative adherence <90%, at least one episode of adherence variation >10% and TI on virological failure. Age, gender, baseline log VL and CD4 were included as possible confounders in the multivariate model. Results 244 patients (44 cases, 200 controls) were included. Median age was 32 years (IQR28–37), baseline CD4 108 cells/mm3 (IQR56–151), VL 4.82 log (IQR4.48–5.23). 94% (96% controls, 86% failures) had cumulative adherence >90%. The odds of failure increased 3 times (aOR 3.01, 95%CI 0.81–11.21) in individuals with cumulative adherence <90%, 2.2 times (aOR 2.20, 95%CI 1.04–4.64) in individuals with at least one episode of fluctuating adherence of >10% and 4.01 times (aOR 4.01, 95%CI 1.45–11.10) in individuals with TIs. For individuals with TI and cumulative adherence >95%, the odds of failing were 5.65 (CI 1.40–22.85). Conclusion It is well known that poor cumulative adherence increases risk of virological failure, but less well understood that TI and variations in tablet-taking also play a key role, despite otherwise excellent adherence.

Southern African HIV Clinicians Society adult antiretroviral therapy guidelines: Update on when to initiate antiretroviral therapy

The most recent version of the Southern African HIV Clinicians Society’s adult antiretroviral therapy (ART) guidelines was published in December 2014. In the 27 August 2015 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine, two seminal randomised controlled trials that addressed the optimal timing of ART in HIV-infected patients with high CD4 counts were published: Strategic timing of antiretroviral therapy (START) and TEMPRANO ANRS 12136 (Early antiretroviral treatment and/or early isoniazid prophylaxis against tuberculosis in HIV-infected adults). The findings of these two trials were consistent: there was significant individual clinical benefit from starting ART immediately in patients with CD4 counts higher than 500 cells/μL rather than deferring until a certain lower CD4 threshold or clinical indication was met. The findings add to prior evidence showing that ART reduces the risk of onward HIV transmission. Therefore, early ART initiation has the public health benefits of potentially reducing both HIV incidence and morbidity. Given this new and important evidence, the Society took the decision to provide a specific update on the section of the adult ART guidelines relating to when ART should be initiated.

Efficacy, safety, bone and metabolic effects of HIV nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor BMS-986001 (AI467003): a phase 2b randomised, controlled, partly blinded trial

BACKGROUNDnBMS-986001 is a thymidine analogue nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) designed to maintain in-vitro antiviral activity while minimising off-target effects. We assessed the efficacy and safety of BMS-986001 versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naive patients with HIV-1.nnnMETHODSnIn this phase 2b, randomised, active-controlled trial (AI467003), we recruited treatment-naive (no current or previous exposure to an antiretroviral drug for >1 week) adults (aged at least 18 years) with HIV-1 from 47 sites across Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, South Africa, and South America. Patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA greater than 5000 copies per mL and CD4 counts greater than 200 cells per μL were randomly assigned (2:2:2:3) to receive BMS-986001 100 mg, 200 mg, or 400 mg once a day or to receive tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg once a day; each allocation was given with efavirenz 600 mg once a day and lamivudine 300 mg once a day. Both patients and investigators were masked to BMS-986001 dose (achieved with similar looking placebo tablets), but not allocation up to and including week 48. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL and safety events (serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation) through week 24; the main analysis was with a modified intention-to-treat population. Resistance analysis was a secondary endpoint, and additional safety parameters were exploratory endpoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01489046, and the European Clinical Trials Database, number EudraCT 2011-003329-89.nnnFINDINGSnPatients were recruited between Jan 25, 2012, and Oct 3, 2012; 757 patients were assessed for eligibility and 301 were randomly assigned to receive either BMS-986001 once a day (67 patients to 100 mg, 67 to 200 mg, and 66 to 400 mg) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=101). 297 patients received at least one dose of study drug. At week 24, 57 (88%) of 65 patients for whom there were data in the 100 mg group, 54 (81%) of 67 in the 200 mg group, 62 (94%) of 66 in the 400 mg group achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL, compared with 88 (89%) of 99 in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (modified intention-to-treat population). BMS-986001 was generally well tolerated through week 48. Two patients had BMS-986001-related serious adverse events (atypical drug eruption and thrombocytopenia) and two in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group had study drug-related serious adverse events (potential drug-induced liver injury and depression or lipodystrophy) that led to discontinuation. NRTI resistance-associated mutations were reported in four (2%) of 198 patients, and non-NRTI mutations in 17 (9%) of 198 patients receiving BMS-986001 versus none of 99 and one (1%) of 99 patients receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, respectively. Compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, individuals in the BMS-986001 groups showed a smaller decrease in lumbar spine and hip bone mineral density but greater accumulation of limb and trunk fat, subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue, and increased total cholesterol.nnnINTERPRETATIONnBMS-986001 had similar efficacy to that of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and was associated with a smaller decrease in bone mineral density; however, greater resistance and gains in both peripheral and central fat accumulation were recorded for the investigational drug. Bristol-Myers Squibb has discontinued its involvement in the development of BMS-986001, and future decisions on development will be made by Oncolys BioPharma.nnnFUNDINGnBristol-Myers Squibb.

Pharmacokinetic analysis of nevirapine extended release 400 mg once daily vs nevirapine immediate release 200 mg twice daily formulation in treatment-naïve patients with HIV-1 infection

Background: VERxVE data showed non-inferior virologic efficacy with extended release nevirapine (NVP-XR) dosed 400 mg once daily (QD) versus immediate release nevirapine (NVP-IR) 200 mg twice daily in a double-blind, non-inferiority study in treatment-naïve HIV-1-positive patients. Objective: To study the pharmacokinetics (PK) of the NVP formulations and identify possible associations with demographic factors. Methods: Patients with viral load ≥1000 copies/mL and CD4+ count > 50– <400 cells/mm3 (males) and >50– <250 cells/mm3 (females) at screening received NVP-IR 200 mg QD during a 14-day lead-in and were then stratified by baseline viral load and randomized to NVP-XR or -IR. NVP trough concentrations at steady state (SS) (Cpre,ss,N) were measured up to week 48 for all participating patients. In a PK sub-study, SS parameters – AUC0–24, Cmax, Cmin, and peak-to-trough fluctuation were obtained and analyzed with relative bioavailability assessed at week 4 by plasma collection over 24 h. Results: Trough concentrations were stable from week 4 to week 48 for all patients (n = 1011) with both formulations, with NVP-XR/IR ratios of 0.77–0.82. Overall, 49 patients completed the PK sub-study: 24 XR and 25 IR. NVP-XR showed less peak-to-trough fluctuation (34.5%) than IR (55.2%), and lower AUC0–24, Cmin, Cmax, and trough concentrations than IR. However, no effect of SS trough concentrations was found on the virologic response proportion at least up to 1000 ng/mL. No significant association was found between NVP PK and gender, race, and viral load. Conclusion: These data suggest NVP-XR achieves lower but effective NVP exposure compared with NVP-IR.

Efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance: a randomized phase 2B trial.

Abstract Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine in patients with HIV-1 and prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. Methods: In this 96-week, phase 2b study, 97 patients were randomized and treated with lersivirine 750 mg qd (n = 31), lersivirine 1,000 mg qd (n = 32), and etravirine 200 mg bid (n = 34), plus one optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg bid. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24. Results: At week 24, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (48.4%) and 1,000 mg (43.8%) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg qd (67.7%) (intention to treat [ITT], missing/switch/discontinuation equals failure [MSDF]). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and <400 copies/mL were also achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (41.9% and 41.9%, respectively) and 1,000 mg (31.3% and 34.4%, respectively) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg bid (61.8% and 70.6%, respectively) (ITT, MSDF). Least squares means (SE) change from baseline in log transformed HIV-1 RNA at week 48 was -1.42 (0.27) and -0.95 (0.28) copies/mL for lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd, respectively, versus -2.02 (0.26) copies/mL for etravirine 200 mg bid (ITT). Lersivirine and etravirine were generally safe and well-tolerated. Conclusions: Lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd was associated with lower rates of viral suppression at week 24 and week 48 versus etravirine in patients with prior NNRTI use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. No new safety signals were detected.