Cindy Vavro

The KLEAN study of fosamprenavir-ritonavir versus lopinavir-ritonavir, each in combination with abacavir-lamivudine, for initial treatment of HIV infection over 48 weeks : a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Lopinavir-ritonavir is a preferred protease inhibitor co-formulation for initial HIV-1 treatment. Fosamprenavir-ritonavir has shown similar efficacy and safety to lopinavir-ritonavir when each is combined with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We compared the two treatments directly in antiretroviral-naive patients. METHODS This open-label, non-inferiority study included 878 antiretroviral-naive, HIV-1-infected patients randomised to receive either fosamprenavir-ritonavir 700 mg/100 mg twice daily or lopinavir-ritonavir 400 mg/100 mg twice daily, each with the co-formulation of abacavir-lamivudine 600 mg/300 mg once daily. Primary endpoints were proportion of patients achieving HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL at week 48 and treatment discontinuations because of an adverse event. The intent-to-treat analysis included all patients exposed to at least one dose of randomised study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00085943. FINDINGS At week 48, non-inferiority of fosamprenavir-ritonavir to lopinavir-ritonavir (95% CI around the treatment difference -4.84 to 7.05) was shown, with 315 of 434 (73%) patients in the fosamprenavir-ritonavir group and 317 of 444 (71%) in the lopinavir-ritonavir group achieving HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL. Treatment discontinuations due to an adverse event were few and occurred with similar frequency in the two treatment groups (fosamprenavir-ritonavir 53, 12%; lopinavir-ritonavir 43, 10%). Diarrhoea, nausea, and abacavir hypersensitivity were the most frequent drug-related grade 2-4 adverse events. Treatment-emergent drug resistance was rare; no patient had virus that developed reduced susceptibility to fosamprenavir-ritonavir or lopinavir-ritonavir. INTERPRETATION Fosamprenavir-ritonavir twice daily in treatment-naive patients provides similar antiviral efficacy, safety, tolerability, and emergence of resistance as lopinavir-ritonavir, each in combination with abacavir-lamivudine.

Randomized comparison of renal effects, efficacy, and safety with once-daily abacavir/lamivudine versus tenofovir/emtricitabine, administered with efavirenz, in antiretroviral-naive, HIV-1-infected adults: 48-week results from the ASSERT study

Background:Abacavir/lamivudine and tenofovir/emtricitabine fixed-dose combinations are commonly used first-line antiretroviral therapies, yet few studies have comprehensively compared their safety profiles. Methods:Forty-eight-week data are presented from this multicenter, randomized, open-label study comparing the safety profiles of abacavir/lamivudine and tenofovir/emtricitabine, both administered with efavirenz, in HLA-B*5701-negative HIV-1-infected adults. Results:Three hundred eighty-five subjects were enrolled in the study. The overall rate of withdrawal was high (28%). Changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline were similar between arms [difference 0.953 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 (95% confidence interval: −1.445 to 3.351), P = 0.435]. Urinary excretion of retinol-binding protein and β-2 microglobulin increased significantly more in the tenofovir/emtricitabine arm (+50%; +24%) compared with the abacavir/lamivudine arm (no change; −47%) (P < 0.0001). A lower proportion achieved viral load <50 copies per milliliter in the abacavir/lamivudine arm (114 of 192, 59%) compared with the tenofovir/emtricitabine arm (137 of 193, 71%) [difference 11.6% (95% confidence interval: 2.2 to 21.1)]. The overall virological failure rate was low. The adverse event rate was similar between arms (except drug hypersensitivity, reported more in the abacavir/lamivudine arm). Conclusions:The study showed no difference in estimated glomerular filtration rate between the arms, however, increases in markers of tubular dysfunction were observed in the tenofovir/emtricitabine arm, the long-term consequence of which is unclear. A significant difference in efficacy favoring tenofovir/emtricitabine was observed.

HIV-1 sensitivity to zidovudine and clinical outcome in children

In adults with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, long-term monotherapy with zidovudine selects for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) strains with substantially reduced in-vitro susceptibility to the drug. We have assessed the relation between in-vitro resistance to zidovudine and clinical outcome in children, in whom disease progression is more rapid than in adults. We studied 23 children with symptoms of HIV-1 disease during extended monotherapy with zidovudine. An in-vitro assay was used to determine the concentration of zidovudine required to inhibit by 50% the replication of viral isolates (IC50) obtained after 9 to 39 months of treatment. Viral stocks of high enough titre to yield reproducible results were obtained from 19 of the children. During the following 6 months of therapy, 9 children were stable, 7 deteriorated, and 3 died. There was a highly significant relation between decreased zidovudine susceptibility and poor clinical outcome (p less than 0.001) but no relation between IC50 and age at start of therapy or length of time on treatment. Age-adjusted CD4 lymphocyte counts were lower at the start of treatment (p = 0.02) and at the time of sampling (p = 0.01) in children whose viral isolates had an increased zidovudine IC50. Initial serum p24 antigen levels were not predictive of subsequent emergence of resistant virus, but at the time of sampling for viral sensitivity higher p24 antigen levels were associated with raised IC50 (p = 0.004). The findings suggest that most children who become unresponsive to monotherapy with zidovudine, as judged by clinical criteria, will have changes in in-vitro sensitivity to the drug. In these children, an alternative antiretroviral therapy should be considered.

Abacavir and lamivudine fixed-dose combination tablet once daily compared with abacavir and lamivudine twice daily in HIV-infected patients over 48 weeks (ESS30008, seal)

Background:Abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC) administered twice daily were compared with an ABC + 3TC fixed-dose combination (Epzicom, Kivexa; EPZ) administered once daily, both in combination with a protease inhibitor (PI) or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). Methods:Two hundred sixty HIV-infected subjects with more than 6 months of ABC and 3TC administered twice daily plus a PI or NNRTI with an HIV-1 RNA level less than 400 copies/mL for more than 3 months and a CD4+ count greater than 50 cells/mm3 were randomized 1:1 to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily or EPZ administered once daily. Results:At baseline, median time on ABC and 3TC administered twice daily was 22 months, and median CD4+ count and HIV-1 RNA level were 554 cells/mm3 and <50 copies/mL, respectively. EPZ administered once daily was established as not inferior to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily based on the proportion of nonvirologic failures (confirmed HIV-1 RNA level ≥1265 copies/mL; 90% confidence interval: −3.4 to 6.4; (intent to treat [ITT]: missing [M] = failure [F]). Proportions with an HIV-1 RNA level <50 copies/mL were 81% of those taking EPZ once daily and 82% of those taking ABC + 3TC twice daily at week 48 (ITT: M = F). Virologic failure was rare (2 patients taking the once-daily regimen, 4 patients taking the twice-daily regimen). There was a low incidence of grade 2 through 4 adverse events (AEs) and no drug-related serious AEs or hypersensitivity reactions. Conclusions:EPZ administered once daily was established as not inferior to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily in a regimen containing an NNRTI or a PI over 48 weeks. A dual-nucleoside backbone of ABC and 3TC administered once or twice daily is effective, durable, and well tolerated.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Fosamprenavir plus Ritonavir Versus Lopinavir/Ritonavir in Combination with Abacavir/Lamivudine over 144 Weeks

Abstract Purpose: The KLEAN study extension assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of fosamprenavir-ritonavir (FPV/r) and lopinavir-ritonavir (LPV/r), both administered with abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) fixed dose combination, over 144 weeks. Methods: KLEAN was an open-label, noninferiority study that randomised antiretroviral-naïve patients to FPV/r twice daily (bid) or LPV/r bid with ABC/3TC once daily (qd). Patients with a viral load of <400 copies/mL at Week 48 were eligible to participate in the KLEAN study extension (up to 144 weeks) and continued with their previously randomised therapy. Results: The KLEAN study extension (48 to 144 weeks) randomized 199 patients. The proportion of TLOVR responders (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) at Week 144 was 73% and 60% in the FPV/r and LPV/r arms, respectively. The proportion of TLOVR responders (<50 copies/mL) was the same irrespective of baseline HIV-1 RNA (>100,000 or ⩽100,000 copies/mL). The Week 144 median (interquartile range) change from baseline CD4+ cell count was 300 (236–433) cells/mm3 and 335 (225–444) cells/mm3 in the FPV/r and LPV/r arms, respectively. Diarrhea was the most frequently reported adverse event. A small proportion of patients (FPV/r, 13%; LPV/r, 9%) discontinued study medication due to adverse events. Three patients (FPV/r, 1; LPV/r, 2) experienced virological failure between Week 48 and Week 144. Conclusion: The findings of the KLEAN study extension (48 to 144 weeks) support durable viral suppression with both FPV/r and LPV/r treatment regimens when used in combination with ABC/3TC irrespective of viral load at baseline. Both regimens were well tolerated and had similar safety profiles.

Dolutegravir versus placebo in subjects harbouring HIV-1 with integrase inhibitor resistance associated substitutions: 48-week results from VIKING-4, a randomized study.

BACKGROUND The Phase III VIKING-3 study demonstrated that dolutegravir (DTG) 50 mg twice daily was efficacious in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced subjects harbouring raltegravir- and/or elvitegravir-resistant HIV-1. VIKING-4 (ING116529) included a placebo-controlled 7-day monotherapy phase to demonstrate that short-term antiviral activity was attributable to DTG. METHODS VIKING-4 is a Phase III randomized, double-blind study in therapy-experienced adults with integrase inhibitor (INI)-resistant virus randomized to DTG 50 mg twice daily or placebo while continuing their failing regimen (without raltegravir or elvitegravir) for 7 days (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01568892). At day 8, all subjects switched to open-label DTG 50 mg twice daily and optimized background therapy including ≥1 fully active drug. The primary end point was change from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA at day 8. RESULTS The study population (n=30) was highly ART-experienced with advanced HIV disease. Patients had extensive baseline resistance to all approved antiretroviral classes. Adjusted mean change in HIV-1 RNA at day 8 was 
-1.06 log10 copies/ml for the DTG arm and 0.10 log10 copies/ml for the placebo arm (treatment difference -1.16 log10 copies/ml [-1.52, -0.80]; P<0.001). Overall, 47% and 57% of subjects had plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 and <400 copies/ml at week 24, and 40% and 53% at week 48, respectively. No discontinuations due to drug-related adverse events occurred in the study. CONCLUSIONS The observed day 8 antiviral activity in this highly treatment-experienced population with INI-resistant HIV-1 was attributable to DTG. Longer-term efficacy (after considering baseline ART resistance) and safety during the open-label phase were in-line with the results of the larger VIKING-3 study.

Prevalent Polymorphisms in Wild-Type HIV-1 Integrase Are Unlikely To Engender Drug Resistance to Dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572)

ABSTRACT The majority of HIV-1 integrase amino acid sites are highly conserved, suggesting that most are necessary to carry out the critical structural and functional roles of integrase. We analyzed the 34 most variable sites in integrase (>10% variability) and showed that prevalent polymorphic amino acids at these positions did not affect susceptibility to the integrase inhibitor dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572), as demonstrated both in vitro (in site-directed mutagenesis studies) and in vivo (in a phase IIa study of dolutegravir monotherapy in HIV-infected individuals). Ongoing clinical trials will provide additional data on the virologic activity of dolutegravir across subject viruses with and without prevalent polymorphic substitutions.

Fosamprenavir Clinical Study Meta-Analysis in ART-Naïve Subjects: Rare Occurrence of Virologic Failure and Selection of Protease-Associated Mutations

Abstract Background:In recent ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) studies, high efficacy rates have been observed, with few PI mutations detected. Method: To better understand the types of mutations observed and their phenotypic impact and the likelihood of virologic failure (VF) on a regimen that includes either a ritonavir-boosted or unboostedPI, fosamprenavir, a meta-analysis of three studies (NEAT, SOLO, and KLEAN) of 922 ART-naïve participants receiving boosted (FPV/r) or unboosted fosamprenavir (FPV) plus abacavir/lamivudine was performed. 70% of participants by the missing and discontinuation equals failure analysis and 95% by the observed analysis had HIV-RNA <400 copies/mL through 48 weeks. Paired genotypes (baseline and follow-up) were obtained for 74/85 participants meeting VF analysis criteria. Results: FPV-associated resistance mutations were detected in 5/74 patients with VF, with 4/5 receiving unboosted FPV; in four patients viruses developed I54L or M andone developed the V32I+I47V combination. No virus from patients with VF receiving FPV/r had reduced FPV susceptibility (RS), whereasvirus from 3/4 of participants with VF who received unboosted FPV and who acquired FPV mutations had FPV RS. Little PI cross-resistance was detected in the VF virus; RS was observed for lopinavir, saquinavir, nelfinavir, atazanavir, and indinavir in 0, 0, 2, 0, and 1 of 5 subjects, respectively. Conclusion: These data suggest that inclusion of FPV as part of an initial HIV-treatment regimen is associated with low rates of VF. Selection of FPV resistance-associated mutations is unlikely, especially for FPV/r-containing regimens. If selection of FPV-associated mutations does occur, a second-line PI-containing regimen can be easily constructed.

Similar virologic and immunologic efficacy with fosamprenavir boosted with 100 mg or 200 mg of ritonavir in HIV-infected patients: results of the LESS trial.

Abstract Purpose: Ritonavir (RTV) effectively boosts most protease inhibitors but is associated with significant dose-dependent adverse events (AEs). In an effort to better manage toxicities through a reduced dose of RTV, this study compared fosamprenavir (FPV) boosted with RTV 100 mg (FPV/r100) or with RTV 200 mg (FPV/r200) daily. Methods: This 24-week, open-label study enrolled patients taking a FPV/r200-containing regimen who had HIV RNA <400 copies/mL and randomized them 1:2 to continue that regimen or simplify to FPV/r100 once daily. Other medications were not altered. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients without suspected or confirmed virologic failure (HIV RNA ≥400 copies/mL) through week 24 by a missing/discontinuation equals failure (M/D=F) analysis. Noninferiority criteria were demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in the primary endpoint rates between groups was greater than −12. Results: The 2 regimens met prespecified noninferiority criteria (FPV/r100, 92%; FPV/r200, 94%; 95% CI, −9.36 to 5.12). At week 24, the percentage of patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL by M/ D=F was 83% in the FPV/r100 group and 85% in the FPV/r200 group. Drug-related grade 2−4 AEs were uncommon (FPV/r100, 4%; FPV/r200, 7%). Median changes in lipids were similar in both groups, with the exception of triglycerides (FPV/r100, −21 mg/dL; FPV/r200, −2 mg/dL). Conclusions: This 24-week study demonstrated that among previously suppressed patients, once-daily FPV/r100 was similar to FPV/r200 in virologic and immunologic effects but was associated with greater decreases from baseline in triglyceride levels.

Substitution of a commercially available, RNA extraction procedure in an HIV-1 genotyping system improves sensitivity and allows reduced sample volume.

The use is described of a commercially available, silica-based extraction procedure for HIV-1 RNA that can be substituted for the extraction procedure supplied with a commercially available, PCR-based genotyping kit for HIV-1. The advantages of using this alternative, commercially available extraction procedure include the following: (1) reduced safety concerns, due to inactivation of virus in the initial step of the extraction procedure; (2) enhanced sensitivity, allowing the use of plasma with HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 2000 copies/ml; (3) improved yield, allowing a 60% reduction in plasma volume; and (4) convenience and improved reproducibility, with a single extraction providing RNA suitable for PCR-based sequencing and for quantitation of HIV-1 RNA levels.