Ritonavir-boosted darunavir is rarely associated with nephrolithiasis compared with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in HIV-infected patients

Use of Contemporary Protease Inhibitors and Risk of Incident Chronic Kidney Disease in Persons With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: the Data Collection on Adverse Events of Anti-HIV Drugs (D:A:D) Study

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether use of contemporary protease inhibitors pose a similar risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) as use of older protease inhibitors.

METHODS

Participants in the Data Collection on Adverse Events of Anti-HIV Drugs (D:A:D) study were followed up until the earliest occurrence of CKD, the last visit plus 6 months, or 1 February 2016. Adjusted Poisson regression was used to assess associations between CKD and the use of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r).

RESULTS

The incidence of CKD (10.0/1000 person-years of follow-up; 95% confidence interval, 9.5-10.4/1000 person-years of follow-up) increased gradually with increasing exposure to ATV/r, but the relation was less clear for DRV/r. After adjustment, only exposure to ATV/r (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.6), but not exposure to DRV/r (1.0; .8-1.3), remained significantly associated with CKD.

CONCLUSION

While DRV/r use was not significantly associated with CKD an increasing incidence with longer ATV/r use was confirmed.

Autoimmune Kidney Diseases Associated with Chronic Viral Infections

Autoimmune kidney diseases triggered by viruses are an important cause of kidney disease in patients affected by chronic viral infection. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is associated with membranous nephropathy and polyarteritis nodosa. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of cryoglobulinemic glomerulonephritis. Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) may develop HIV-associated nephropathy, a form of collapsing focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, or various forms of immune-complex-mediated kidney diseases. This article summarizes what is known about the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of immune-mediated kidney diseases in adults with chronic HBV, HCV, and HIV infections.

Renal effects of non-tenofovir antiretroviral therapy in patients living with HIV

A review of literature published regarding non-tenofovir antiretroviral agents causing renal adverse effects was conducted. The literature involving renal adverse effects and antiretroviral therapy is most robust with protease inhibitors, specifically atazanavir and indinavir, and includes reports of crystalluria, leukocyturia, nephritis, nephrolithiasis, nephropathy and urolithiasis. Several case reports describe potential nephropathy (including Fanconi syndrome) secondary to administration of abacavir, didanosine, lamivudine and stavudine. Case reports documented renal events such as acute renal failure, nephritis, proteinuria and renal stones with efavirenz administration. Regarding rilpivirine, a small increase of serum creatinine levels (SCr) was found in clinical trials; however, the clinical significance and impact on actual renal function is unknown. The integrase strand transfer inhibitors and enfuvirtide have a relatively safe renal profile, although studies have shown dolutegravir and raltegravir cause mild elevations in SCr without an impact on actual renal function. This is similar to the reaction observed with cobicistat, the pharmacokinetic enhancer frequently given with elvitegravir.

Acute Care Management of the HIV-Infected Patient: A Report from the HIV Practice and Research Network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy

OBJECTIVE

Patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) admitted to the hospital have complex antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens with an increased medication error rate upon admission. This report provides a resource for clinicians managing HIV-infected patients and ART in the inpatient setting.

METHODS

A survey of the authors was conducted to evaluate common issues that arise during an acute hospitalization for HIV-infected patients. After a group consensus, a review of the medical literature was performed to determine the supporting evidence for the following HIV-associated hospital queries: admission/discharge orders, antiretroviral hospital formularies, laboratory monitoring, altered hepatic/renal function, drug-drug interactions (DDIs), enteral administration, and therapeutic drug monitoring.

RESULTS

With any hospital admission for an HIV-infected patient, a specific set of procedures should be followed including a thorough admission medication history and communication with the ambulatory HIV provider to avoid omissions or substitutions in the ART regimen. DDIs are common and should be reviewed at all transitions of care during the hospital admission. ART may be continued if enteral nutrition with a feeding tube is deemed necessary, but the entire regimen should be discontinued if no oral access is available for a prolonged period. Therapeutic drug monitoring is not generally recommended but, if available, should be considered in unique clinical scenarios where antiretroviral pharmacokinetics are difficult to predict. ART may need adjustment if hepatic or renal insufficiency ensues.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of hospitalized patients with HIV is highly complex. HIV-infected patients are at high risk for medication errors during various transitions of care. Baseline knowledge of the principles of antiretroviral pharmacotherapy is necessary for clinicians managing acutely ill HIV-infected patients to avoid medication errors, identify DDIs, and correctly dose medications if organ dysfunction arises. Timely ambulatory follow-up is essential to prevent readmissions and facilitate improved transitions of care.

Comparison of atazanavir/ritonavir and darunavir/ritonavir based antiretroviral therapy for antiretroviral naïve patients

BACKGROUND

Atazanavir/ritonavir and darunavir/ritonavir are common protease inhibitor-based regimens for treating patients with HIV. Studies comparing these drugs in clinical practice are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of antiretroviral naïve participants in the Canadian Observational Cohort (CANOC) collaboration initiating atazanavir/ritonavir- or darunavir/ritonavir-based treatment. We used separate Fine and Gray competing risk regression models to compare times to regimen failure (composite of virologic failure or discontinuation for any reason). Additional endpoints included virologic failure, discontinuation due to virologic failure, discontinuation for other reasons, and virologic suppression.

RESULTS

We studied 222 patients treated with darunavir/ritonavir and 1791 patients treated with atazanavir/ritonavir. Following multivariable adjustment, there was no difference between darunavir/ritonavir and atazanavir-ritonavir in the risk of regimen failure (adjusted hazard ratio 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03) Darunavir/ritonavir-treated patients were at lower risk of virologic failure relative to atazanavir/ritonavir treated patients (aHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.91), findings driven largely by high rates of virologic failure among atazanavir/ritonavir-treated patients in the province of British Columbia. Of 108 discontinuations due to virologic failure, all occurred in patients starting atazanavir/ritonavir. There was no difference between regimens in time to discontinuation for reasons other than virologic failure (aHR 0.93; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33) or virologic suppression (aHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.21).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of regimen failure was similar between patients treated with darunavir/ritonavir and atazanavir/ritonavir. Although darunavir/ritonavir was associated with a lower risk of virologic failure relative to atazanavir/ritonavir, this difference varied substantially by Canadian province and likely reflects regional variation in prescribing practices and patient characteristics.

Improved kidney function in patients who switch their protease inhibitor from atazanavir or lopinavir to darunavir

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Objective:

Atazanavir (ATV) and lopinavir (LPV) have been associated with kidney disease progression in HIV positive patients, with no data reported for darunavir (DRV). We examined kidney function in patients who switched their protease inhibitor from ATV or LPV to DRV.

Design:

Cohort study.

Methods:

Data were from the UK CHIC study. We compared pre and post switch estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slopes (expressed in ml/min per 1.73 m² per year) in all switchers and those with rapid eGFR decline (>5 ml/min per 1.73 m² per year) on ATV or LPV. Mixed-effects models were adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity, eGFR at switch and time updated CD4⁺ cell count, HIV RNA and cumulative tenofovir (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) exposure.

Results:

Data from 1430 patients were included. At the time of switching to DRV, median age was 45 years, 79% were men, 76% had an undetectable viral load, and median eGFR was 93 ml/min per 1.73 m². Adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) pre and post switch eGFR slopes were −0.84 (−1.31, −0.36) and 1.23 (0.80, 1.66) for ATV (P < 0.001), and −0.57 (−1.09, −0.05) and 0.62 (0.28, 0.96) for LPV (P < 0.001). Stable or improved renal function was observed in patients with rapid eGFR decline on ATV or LPV who switched to DRV [−15.27 (−19.35, −11.19) and 3.72 (1.78, 5.66), P < 0.001 for ATV, −11.93 (−14.60, −9.26) and 0.87 (−0.54, 2.27), P < 0.001 for LPV]. Similar results were obtained if participants who discontinued tenofovir disoproxil fumarate at the time of switch were excluded.

Conclusions:

We report improved kidney function in patients who switched from ATV or LPV to DRV, suggesting that DRV may have a more favourable renal safety profile.

Projected Uptake of New Antiretroviral (ARV) Medicines in Adults in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Forecast Analysis 2015-2025

With anti-retroviral treatment (ART) scale-up set to continue over the next few years it is of key importance that manufacturers and planners in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) hardest hit by the HIV/AIDS pandemic are able to anticipate and respond to future changes to treatment regimens, generics pipeline and demand, in order to secure continued access to all ARV medicines required. We did a forecast analysis, using secondary WHO and UNAIDS data sources, to estimate the number of people living with HIV (PLHIV) and the market share and demand for a range of new and existing ARV drugs in LMICs up to 2025. UNAIDS estimates 24.7 million person-years of ART in 2020 and 28.5 million person-years of ART in 2025 (24.3 million on first-line treatment, 3.5 million on second-line treatment, and 0.6 million on third-line treatment). Our analysis showed that TAF and DTG will be major players in the ART regimen by 2025, with 8 million and 15 million patients using these ARVs respectively. However, as safety and efficacy of dolutegravir (DTG) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) during pregnancy and among TB/HIV co-infected patients using rifampicin is still under debate, and ART scale-up is predicted to increase considerably, there also remains a clear need for continuous supplies of existing ARVs including TDF and EFV, which 16 million and 10 million patients-respectively-are predicted to be using in 2025. It will be important to ensure that the existing capacities of generics manufacturers, which are geared towards ARVs of higher doses (such as TDF 300mg and EFV 600mg), will not be adversely impacted due to the introduction of lower dose ARVs such as TAF 25mg and DTG 50mg. With increased access to viral load testing, more patients would be using protease inhibitors containing regimens in second-line, with 1 million patients on LPV/r and 2.3 million on ATV/r by 2025. However, it will remain important to continue monitoring the evolution of ARV market in LMICs to guarantee the availability of these medicines.

Treatment response to unboosted atazanavir in combination with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and lamivudine in human immunodeficiency virus-1-infected patients who have achieved virological suppression: A therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacogenetic study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Treatment response to switch regimens containing unboosted atazanavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/lamivudine guided by therapeutic drug monitoring in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients is rarely investigated.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with plasma human immunodeficiency virus RNA load < 200 copies/mL switching to unboosted atazanavir plus zidovudine-lamivudine (coformulated), abacavir-lamivudine (coformulated), or TDF/lamivudine > 3 months were included for determinations of treatment response, plasma atazanavir concentrations, and single-nucleotide polymorphisms of MDR1, PXR, and UGT1A1 genes from 2010 to 2014. Treatment failure was defined as either discontinuation of atazanavir for any reason or plasma viral load ≥ 200 copies/mL within 96 weeks.

RESULTS

During the study period, 128 patients switched to unboosted atazanavir with TDF/lamivudine (TDF group) and 186 patients switched to unboosted atazanavir with two other nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (non-TDF group). There were no statistically significant differences in the distributions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms of MDR1 (2677 and 3435), PXR genotypes (63396), and UGT1A1*28 between the two groups. Recommended plasma atazanavir concentrations were achieved in 83.5% and 64.9% of the TDF group and non-TDF group, respectively (p < 0.01). After a median follow-up duration of 96.0 weeks, treatment failure occurred in 19 (14.9%) and 34 (18.3%) patients in the TDF group and non-TDF group, respectively (p = 0.60). Low-level viremia (40-200 copies/mL) before switch (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-4.01) and without therapeutic drug monitoring (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-3.73) were risk factors for treatment failure.

CONCLUSION

Switch to unboosted atazanavir with TDF/lamivudine achieves a similar treatment response to that with two other nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors in patients achieving virological suppression with the guidance of therapeutic drug monitoring.

Cholelithiasis and Nephrolithiasis in HIV-Positive Patients in the Era of Combination Antiretroviral Therapy

Objectives

This study aimed to describe the epidemiology and risk factors of cholelithiasis and nephrolithiasis among HIV-positive patients in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of HIV-positive patients who underwent routine abdominal sonography for chronic viral hepatitis, fatty liver, or elevated aminotransferases between January 2004 and January 2015. Therapeutic drug monitoring of plasma concentrations of atazanavir was performed and genetic polymorphisms, including UDP-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A1*28 and multidrug resistance gene 1 (MDR1) G2677T/A, were determined in a subgroup of patients who received ritonavir-boosted or unboosted atazanavir-containing combination antiretroviral therapy. Information on demographics, clinical characteristics, and laboratory testing were collected and analyzed.

Results

During the 11-year study period, 910 patients who underwent routine abdominal sonography were included for analysis. The patients were mostly male (96.9%) with a mean age of 42.2 years and mean body-mass index of 22.9 kg/m² and 85.8% being on antiretroviral therapy. The anchor antiretroviral agents included non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (49.3%), unboosted atazanavir (34.4%), ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (20.4%), and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (5.5%). The overall prevalence of cholelithiasis and nephrolithiasis was 12.5% and 8.2%, respectively. Among 680 antiretroviral-experienced patients with both baseline and follow-up sonography, the crude incidence of cholelithiasis and nephrolithiasis was 4.3% and 3.7%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the independent factors associated with incident cholelithiasis were exposure to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir for >2 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 6.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–35.16) and older age (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09). The positive association between duration of exposure to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir and incident cholelithiasis was also found (AOR, per 1-year exposure, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.05–2.10). The associated factors with incident nephrolithiasis were hyperlipidemia (AOR, 3.97; 95% CI, 1.32–11.93), hepatitis B or C coinfection (AOR, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.09–10.62), and exposure to abacavir (AOR, 12.01; 95% CI, 1.54–93.54). Of 180 patients who underwent therapeutic drug monitoring of plasma atazanavir concentrations and pharmacogenetic investigations, we found that the atazanavir concentrations and UGT 1A1*28 and MDR1 G2677T/A polymorphisms were not statistically significantly associated with incident cholelithiasis and nephrolithiasis.

Conclusions

In HIV-positive patients in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy, a high prevalence of cholelithiasis and nephrolithiasis was observed, and exposure to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir for >2 years was associated with incident cholelithiasis.

Relationships between Serum Levels of Atazanavir and Renal Toxicity or Lithiasis

The main aim of this study is to describe the relationship between serum levels of atazanavir, renal toxicity, and lithiasis. This is a prospective observational study of patients being treated with atazanavir (ATV) at Son Espases Teaching Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, between 2011 and 2013. The study includes 98 patients. Sixteen were found to have a history of urolithiasis. During a median monitoring period of 23 months, nine patients suffered renal colic, in three of whom ATV crystals were evidenced in urine. Cumulative incidence of renal colic was 9.2 per 100 patients. The variables related to having renal colic were the presence of alkaline urine pH and lower basal creatinine clearance. The mean serum level of ATV was slightly higher in patients with renal colic-1,303 μg/L versus 1,161 μg/L-but did not reach statistical significance. Neither were any significant differences detected by analysing the levels according to the timetable for ATV dosage. Cumulative incidence of renal colic was high in patients being treated with ATV, in 33% of whom the presence of ATV crystals was evidenced in urine. We were unable to demonstrate a relationship between ATV serum levels and renal colic or progression towards renal failure.

Monitoring of kidney function in HIV-positive patients

HIV-positive patients are at increased risk of developing chronic kidney disease. Although guidelines recommend regular monitoring of renal function in individuals living with HIV, the optimal frequency remains to be defined. In this review, we discuss the renal syndromes that may be identified at an earlier stage via routine assessment of kidney function, and provide guidance in terms of the frequency of monitoring, the most useful tests to perform, and their clinical significance. Specifically, we address whether annual monitoring of kidney function is appropriate for the majority of HIV-positive patients.

Clinical features and risk factors for atazanavir (ATV)-associated urolithiasis: a case-control study

OBJECTIVES

Clinical features and risk factors for atazanavir (ATV)-associated urolithiasis have not been fully investigated.

METHODS

We reviewed all cases of ATV-containing urolithiasis identified by infrared spectrophotometry among HIV-infected patients over a 5-year period to describe their clinical features and outcome. A case-control study was performed to identify risk factors associated with ATV-associated urolithiasis using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

30 cases of ATV-associated urolithiasis were analyzed. Patients were mostly men (87%), median age: 45.5 years, median CD4 cell count: 443 cells/µL and 97% had plasma HIV RNA level <50 cp/mL. Median time between the initiation of ATV-containing regimen and the diagnosis of urolithiasis was 3.1 years. Patients presented with flank pain in 90% and macroscopic hematuria in 82.6%, 34% had renal dysfunction and 44.8% needed ureteroscopic treatment. In univariate analysis, chronic hepatitis C, a history of urolithiasis, prior use of indinavir, ATV duration, undetectable plasma HIV RNA, use of ritonavir as a booster and serum free bilirubin level were associated with ATV-urolithiasis. Multivariate models retained serum free bilirubin level (OR: 2.31, p<0.02) and either ATV duration (OR:  = 1.42, p = <0.03) or a history of urolithiasis (OR = 4.79, p<0.02) when adjusting on serum free bilirubin level as risk factors associated with urolithiasis.

CONCLUSIONS

ATV-containing urolithiasis are associated with frank clinical symptoms and may require surgical intervention. A high serum bilirubin level, a long exposure to ATV and a history of urolithiasis are risk factors for this rare adverse event.

Single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the UDP-glucuronosyltransferase 1A-3' untranslated region are associated with atazanavir-induced nephrolithiasis in patients with HIV-1 infection: a pharmacogenetic study

OBJECTIVES

Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (atazanavir/ritonavir) is a widely used antiretroviral drug, though it can potentially cause nephrolithiasis. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between polymorphisms in genes encoding proteins involved in metabolism and transportation of atazanavir, and atazanavir/ritonavir-induced nephrolithiasis in HIV-1-infected patients treated with atazanavir/ritonavir.

METHODS

Nineteen SNPs in the ABCB1, NR1I2, UGT1A1, SLCO1B1 and CYP3A5 genes were examined in case patients with atazanavir/ritonavir-induced nephrolithiasis (n = 31) and controls (n = 47). Case patients were those with a clinical diagnosis of nephrolithiasis while on atazanavir/ritonavir, based on new-onset acute flank pain plus one of the following: (i) new-onset haematuria; (ii) documented presence of stones by either abdominal ultrasonography or CT; or (iii) confirmed stone passage. Control patients were consecutively enrolled among those with >2 years of atazanavir/ritonavir exposure free of nephrolithiasis. Genotyping was performed by allelic discrimination using TaqMan 5'-nuclease assays with standard protocols. Associations between alleles and atazanavir/ritonavir-induced nephrolithiasis were tested by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed a significant association between atazanavir/ritonavir-induced nephrolithiasis and genotype T/C versus C/C at position c.211 (adjusted OR = 3.7; 95% CI, 1.13-11.9; P = 0.030), genotype G/C versus C/C at 339 (adjusted OR = 5.8; 95% CI, 1.56-21.3; P = 0.009) and genotype G/G or G/C versus C/C at 440 (adjusted OR = 5.8; 95% CI, 1.56-21.3; P = 0.009) of the UGT1A-3' untranslated region (UTR).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first known study to identify the association between SNPs in the UGT1A-3'-UTR and atazanavir-induced nephrolithiasis. Further studies are warranted to confirm this association and to elucidate how these SNPs might influence atazanavir exposure.