Long-term outcomes of highly experienced people with HIV undergoing salvage therapy with raltegravir

Raltegravir and other third-line drugs have shown promise in improving outcomes in treatment-experienced patients. However, the efficacy and tolerability of these agents vary. This study assessed real-life virologic success, long-term survival, and adverse events in patients receiving raltegravir or other third-line drugs as salvage regimens. This retrospective cohort study included adults who experienced treatment failure (human immunodeficiency syndrome-1 RNA plasma viral load >1000 copies/mL) and subsequently initiated raltegravir or other third-line drugs (darunavir/ritonavir, maraviroc, or etravirine). Propensity score matching methods were employed to account for differences at the time of switching from failing antiretroviral therapy regimens. The matched subset was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Generalized Wilcoxon tests to evaluate the probability of achieving virologic suppression (plasma viral load <50 copies/mL). Mortality rates, toxicity, treatment interruption, virologic failure, and loss to follow-up were determined using Poisson regression. One hundred and sixty-eight patients initiating salvage regimens were included, with 123 receiving raltegravir and 45 other third-line drugs. Propensity score matching resulted in a subset of 90 patients, 45 in each group. During the follow-up period, there were no significant differences observed between the groups in terms of virologic suppression (77.8% vs 82.2%, P = .73), mortality rates (4.04 vs 6.18 persons per 100 person-years [p-y]; P = .67), drug toxicity (0.00 vs 2.06 persons per 100 p-y; P = .49), treatment interruption (8.07 vs 0.00 persons per 100 p-y; P = .06), virologic failure (2.02 vs 4.12 persons per 100 p-y; P = .61), and loss of follow-up (6.05 vs 4.12 persons per 100 p-y; P = .70). Our findings indicate comparable survival and virological success rates between raltegravir and other drugs used in salvage regimens. Similar rates of drug toxicity, treatment interruption, virologic failure, and loss of follow-up were also observed. These results suggest that raltegravir may be a viable option for salvage therapy, demonstrating outcomes comparable to other third-line drugs in real life.

Drug-induced liver injury secondary to increased levonorgestrel exposure in a patient taking ritonavir

We report the first published case of a drug induced liver injury (DILI) presumed secondary to a drug-drug interaction between ritonavir and levonorgestrel progestogen-only emergency contraception (POEC). Our patient is a 25-year-old female living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), taking antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine and darunavir/ritonavir. She was found to have elevated transaminases at a routine clinic appointment consistent with hepatocellular DILI. Further investigation found the most likely cause of this was a drug-drug interaction (DDI) between the ritonavir component of her ART and recent use of levonorgestrel POEC 3 days earlier. Evidence suggests that ritonavir increases levonorgestrel exposure, yet our patient received double the usual dose as per dispensing guidance at the time. We review the pharmacokinetics of ritonavir-levonorgestrel DDIs and highlight the need for consistent guidelines on this topic.

A four-drug combination oral tablet of darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults

INTRODUCTION

Darunavir (DRV)/cobicistat (COBI)/emtricitabine (FTC)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is the only protease inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen (STR) approved for the treatment of HIV infection of adults and pediatric patients weighing at least 40 kg. DRV/COBI/FTC/TAF has demonstrated to be an effective regimen, to have a high genetic barrier to resistance, and to be well tolerated.

AREAS COVERED

The authors summarize the chemistry and pharmacology of DRV, COBI, FTC, and TAF and discuss trials conducted on antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve and -experienced people living with HIV designed to evaluate safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the STR. This work also reports studies comparing DRV/COBI/FTC/TAF with competitive agents in real-world settings.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the availability of newer antiretroviral drugs and strategies in the management of HIV infection, including long-acting therapies, DRV/COBI/FTC/TAF is still considered an alternative regimen for the treatment of ART-naïve adults. DRV/COBI/FTC/TAF is an effective, well-tolerated, and safe antiretroviral regimen and represents a valid option for people who need to switch therapy due to tolerability issues, such as the onset of neuropsychiatric effects related to integrase strand transfer inhibitors, or virological failure.

Observational study to evaluate discontinuation of monotherapy with cobicistat-boosted darunavir in patients with human immunodeficiency virus

To evaluate the reasons for changing to monotherapy with protease inhibitors, together with the proportion and reasons for the interruption to treatment, in patients who have been treated at some point with cobicistat-boosted darunavir (DRV/c). Outpatients in a tertiary hospital. Observational retrospective study to evaluate monotherapy with DRV/c (800 mg/150 mg) in adult patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection, from December 2014 to July 2022. Demographic variables, viral load, cluster of differentiation 4 lymphocyte lymphocyte count, and antiretroviral therapy were assessed. 42 patients were included. 36% of the patients were undergoing monotherapy at the time of the analysis. The main reason for discontinuation was poor adherence. At time of analysis, 80% of the patients in monotherapy had an undetectable viral load. Antiretroviral therapy recommendations advise against exposing the patient to functional monotherapy with a single drug due to the high risk of virological failure and the onset of resistance to a single drug. Following the analysis of the results, DRV/c in monotherapy is not an effective strategy in the medium and long term due to factors such as lack of adherence or virological failure, although it can be maintained in specific circumstances. Therefore, patients undergoing monotherapy require close monitoring.

Dolutegravir in Pregnancy as Compared with Current HIV Regimens in the United States

BACKGROUND

Data on the effectiveness and safety of dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection in pregnancy as compared with other ART regimens commonly used in the United States and Europe, particularly when initiated before conception, are limited.

METHODS

We conducted a study involving pregnancies in persons with HIV-1 infection in the Pediatric HIV/AIDS Cohort Study whose initial ART in pregnancy included dolutegravir, atazanavir-ritonavir, darunavir-ritonavir, oral rilpivirine, raltegravir, or elvitegravir-cobicistat. Viral suppression at delivery and the risks of infants being born preterm, having low birth weight, and being small for gestational age were compared between each non-dolutegravir-based ART regimen and dolutegravir-based ART. Supplementary analyses that included participants in the Swiss Mother and Child HIV Cohort Study were conducted to improve the precision of our results.

RESULTS

Of the pregnancies in the study, 120 were in participants who received dolutegravir, 464 in those who received atazanavir-ritonavir, 185 in those who received darunavir-ritonavir, 243 in those who received rilpivirine, 86 in those who received raltegravir, and 159 in those who received elvitegravir-cobicistat. The median age at conception was 29 years; 51% of the pregnancies were in participants who started ART before conception. Viral suppression was present at delivery in 96.7% of the pregnancies in participants who received dolutegravir; corresponding percentages were 84.0% for atazanavir-ritonavir, 89.2% for raltegravir, and 89.8% for elvitegravir-cobicistat (adjusted risk differences vs. dolutegravir, -13.0 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, -17.0 to -6.1], -17.0 percentage points [95% CI, -27.0 to -2.4], and -7.0 percentage points [95% CI, -13.3 to -0.0], respectively). The observed risks of preterm birth were 13.6 to 17.6%. Adjusted risks of infants being born preterm, having low birth weight, or being small for gestational age did not differ substantially between non-dolutegravir-based ART and dolutegravir. Results of supplementary analyses were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Atazanavir-ritonavir and raltegravir were associated with less frequent viral suppression at delivery than dolutegravir. No clear differences in adverse birth outcomes were observed with dolutegravir-based ART as compared with non-dolutegravir-based ART, although samples were small. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others.).

Associations of modern initial antiretroviral drug regimens with all-cause mortality in adults with HIV in Europe and North America: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens that include integrase strand inhibitors (INSTIs) have become the most commonly used for people with HIV starting ART. Although trials and observational studies have compared virological failure on INSTI-based with other regimens, few data are available on mortality in people with HIV treated with INSTIs in routine care. Therefore, we compared all-cause mortality between different INSTI-based and non-INSTI-based regimens in adults with HIV starting ART from 2013 to 2018.

METHODS

This cohort study used data on people with HIV in Europe and North America from the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC) and UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC). We studied the most common third antiretroviral drugs (additional to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor) used from 2013 to 2018: rilpivirine, darunavir, raltegravir, elvitegravir, dolutegravir, efavirenz, and others. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs; adjusted for clinical and demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, and other drugs in the regimen) for mortality were estimated using Cox models stratified by ART start year and cohort, with multiple imputation of missing data.

FINDINGS

62 500 ART-naive people with HIV starting ART (12 422 [19·9%] women; median age 38 [IQR 30-48]) were included in the study. 1243 (2·0%) died during 188 952 person-years of follow-up (median 3·0 years [IQR 1·6-4·4]). There was little evidence that mortality rates differed between regimens with dolutegravir, elvitegravir, rilpivirine, darunavir, or efavirenz as the third drug. However, mortality was higher for raltegravir compared with dolutegravir (aHR 1·49, 95% CI 1·15-1·94), elvitegravir (1·86, 1·43-2·42), rilpivirine (1·99, 1·49-2·66), darunavir (1·62, 1·33-1·98), and efavirenz (2·12, 1·60-2·81) regimens. Results were similar for analyses making different assumptions about missing data and consistent across the time periods 2013-15 and 2016-18. Rates of virological suppression were higher for dolutegravir than other third drugs.

INTERPRETATION

This large study of patients starting ART since the introduction of INSTIs found little evidence that mortality rates differed between most first-line ART regimens; however, raltegravir-based regimens were associated with higher mortality. Although unmeasured confounding cannot be excluded as an explanation for our findings, virological benefits of first-line INSTIs-based ART might not translate to differences in mortality.

FUNDING

US National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism and UK Medical Research Council.

Body mass index increase and weight gain among people living with HIV-1 initiated on single-tablet darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide or bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in the United States

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated body mass index (BMI) and weight changes in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1; PLWH) initiated on single-tablet darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (DRV/c/FTC/TAF) or bictegravir/FTC/TAF (BIC/FTC/TAF).

METHODS

Electronic medical record (EMR) data for treatment-naïve or virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 who initiated treatment with DRV/c/FTC/TAF or BIC/FTC/TAF (index date) were obtained from Decision Resources Group's EMRs (17 July 2017-1 March 2020). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics between the two cohorts. BMI and weight changes from pre-index to 3, 6, 9 and 12 months following the index date were compared using weighted mean differences (MDs). The time until an increase in BMI or weight ≥5% or ≥10% was compared using weighted hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

The weighted DRV/c/FTC/TAF and BIC/FTC/TAF cohorts comprised 1116 and 1134 PLWH, respectively (mean age = ∼49 years, females: ∼28%). Larger increases in BMI and weight from pre-index to each post-index time point were observed in PLWH initiating BIC/FTC/TAF vs DRV/c/FTC/TAF (12 months: MD in BMI = 1.23 kg/m², p < .001; MD in weight = 2.84 kg [6.26 lbs], p = .008). PLWH receiving BIC/FTC/TAF were significantly more likely to experience weight gain ≥5% (HR = 1.76, p = .004) and ≥10% (HR = 2.01, p = .020), and BMI increase ≥5% (HR = 1.77, p = .004) and ≥10% (HR = 1.76, p = .044) than those receiving DRV/c/FTC/TAF.

CONCLUSIONS

BIC/FTC/TAF was associated with greater BMI and weight increases compared to DRV/c/FTC/TAF. Weight gain and its sequelae may add to the clinical burden of PLWH and should be considered among other factors when selecting antiretroviral single-tablet regimens.

Changes in lipidomic profile by anti-retroviral treatment regimen: An ACTG 5257 ancillary study

High cardiovascular disease risk in people living with HIV is partly attributed to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Lipid response to ART has been extensively studied, yet, little is known how small molecule lipids respond to Integrase inhibitor-based (INSTI-based) compared to Protease inhibitor-based (PI-based) ART regimens.Ancillary study to a phase 3, randomized, open-label trial [AIDS Clinical Trial Group A5257 Study] in treatment-naive HIV-infected patients randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r), ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r) (both PI-based), or raltegravir with Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate-TDF plus emtricitabine (RAL, INSTI-based).We examined small molecule lipid response in a subcohort of 75 participants. Lipidomic assays of plasma samples collected pre- and post-ART treatment (48 weeks) were conducted using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled to time-of-flight mass spectrometry. The effect of ART regimens was regressed on lipid species response adjusting for the baseline covariates (lipids, age, sex, race, CD4 level, BMI, and smoking). Results were validated in the Centers for AIDS Research Network of Integrated Clinical Systems study (N = 16).Out of 417 annotated lipids, glycerophospholipids (P = .007) and sphingolipids (P = .028) had a higher response to ATV/r and DRV/r compared to RAL. The lysophosphatidylcholine (LPCs(16:1),(17:1),(20:3)) and phosphophatidylcholine species (PCs(40:7),(38:4)) had an opposite response to RAL versus ATV/r in the discovery and validation cohort. The INSTI-based regimen had an opposite response of ceramide species ((d38:1), (d42:2)), PCs((35:2), (38:4)), phosphatidylethanolamines (PEs(38:4), (38:6)), and sphingomyelin(SMd38:1) species compared with the PI-based regimens. There were no differences observed between 2 PI-based regimens.We observed differences in response of small molecule lipid species by ART regimens in treatment-naive people living with HIV.

Dolutegravir or Darunavir in Combination with Zidovudine or Tenofovir to Treat HIV

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization recommends dolutegravir with two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Evidence is limited for the efficacy of this regimen when NRTIs are predicted to lack activity because of drug resistance, as well as for the recommended switch of an NRTI from tenofovir to zidovudine.

METHODS

In a two-by-two factorial, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients for whom first-line therapy was failing (HIV-1 viral load, ≥1000 copies per milliliter) to receive dolutegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir and to receive tenofovir or zidovudine; all patients received lamivudine. The primary outcome was a week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter, assessed with the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm (noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the primary outcome, 12 percentage points).

RESULTS

We enrolled 464 patients at seven sub-Saharan African sites. A week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in 90.2% of the patients in the dolutegravir group (212 of 235) and in 91.7% of those in the darunavir group (210 of 229) (difference, -1.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.7 to 3.7; P = 0.58; indicating noninferiority of dolutegravir, without superiority) and in 92.3% of the patients in the tenofovir group (215 of 233) and in 89.6% of those in the zidovudine group (207 of 231) (difference, 2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.32; indicating noninferiority of tenofovir, without superiority). In the subgroup of patients with no NRTIs that were predicted to have activity, a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in more than 90% of the patients in the dolutegravir group and the darunavir group. The incidence of adverse events did not differ substantially between the groups in either factorial comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

Dolutegravir in combination with NRTIs was effective in treating patients with HIV-1 infection, including those with extensive NRTI resistance in whom no NRTIs were predicted to have activity. Tenofovir was noninferior to zidovudine as second-line therapy. (Funded by Janssen; NADIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03988452.).

Unveiling the basis of antiretroviral therapy-induced osteopenia: the effects of Dolutegravir, Darunavir and Atazanavir on osteogenesis

OBJECTIVES

Osteopenia is frequent in HIV-infected patients treated with antiretroviral therapy (ART) and has been linked to increased osteoclastogenesis. Little is known about the effects of ART on osteogenesis.

DESIGN

We investigated the effect on human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSC) and osteoblasts of Darunavir and Dolutegravir, the most highly used as anchor drugs within a three-drug regimen, and Atazanavir, which was widely utilized in the past.

RESULTS

We found that Atazanavir and Dolutegravir delay the osteogenic differentiation of hMSC, impair the activity of osteoblasts and inhibit their conversion into osteocytes, whereas Darunavir exerts no effect.

CONCLUSION

Atazanavir and Dolutegravir impair osteogenesis. It is essential to diagnose impaired osteogenesis early and to devise effective therapeutic interventions to preserve bone health in ART-treated HIV patients, putting it in the context of a correct antiretroviral combination.

Use of Darunavir-Cobicistat as a Treatment Option for Critically Ill Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection

We retrospectively reviewed patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections who were admitted to an intensive care unit in Daegu, South Korea. The outcomes of patients who did (cases) or did not (controls) receive darunavir-cobicistat (800-150 mg) therapy were compared. Fourteen patients received darunavir-cobicistat treatment, and 96 received other antiviral therapy (controls). Overall, the darunavir-cobicistat group comprised patients with milder illness, and the crude mortality rate of all patients in the darunavir-cobicistat group was lower than that in the controls [odds ratio (OR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.89, p=0.035]. After 1:2 propensity-score matching, there were 14 patients in the darunavir-cobicistat group, and 28 patients in the controls. In propensity score-matched analysis, the darunavir-cobicistat group had lower mortality than the controls (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.52, p=0.009). In conclusion, darunavir-cobicistat therapy was found to be associated with a significant survival benefit in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Direct oral anticoagulant plasma levels' striking increase in severe COVID-19 respiratory syndrome patients treated with antiviral agents: The Cremona experience

BACKGROUND

Antiviral drugs are administered in patients with severe COVID-19 respiratory syndrome, including those treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Concomitant administration of antiviral agents has the potential to increase their plasma concentration. A series of patients managed in the Cremona Thrombosis Center were admitted at Cremona Hospital for SARS-CoV-2 and started antiviral drugs without stopping DOAC therapy. DOAC plasma levels were measured in hospital and results compared with those recorded before hospitalization.

METHODS

All consecutive patients on DOACs were candidates for administration of antiviral agents (lopinavir, ritonavir, or darunavir). Plasma samples for DOAC measurement were collected 2to 4 days after starting antiviral treatment, at 12 hours from the last dose intake in patients on dabigatran and apixaban, and at 24 hours in those on rivaroxaban and edoxaban. For each patient, C-trough DOAC level, expressed as ng/mL, was compared with the one measured before hospitalization.

RESULTS

Of the 1039 patients hospitalized between February 22 and March 15, 2020 with COVID-19 pneumonia and candidates for antiviral therapy, 32 were on treatment with a DOAC. DOAC was stopped in 20 and continued in the remaining 12. On average, C-trough levels were 6.14 times higher during hospitalization than in the pre-hospitalization period.

CONCLUSION

DOAC patients treated with antiviral drugs show an alarming increase in DOAC plasma levels. In order to prevent bleeding complications, we believe that physicians should consider withholding DOACs from patients with SARS-CoV-2 and replacing them with alternative parenteral antithrombotic strategies for as long as antiviral agents are deemed necessary and until discharge.

Pharmacokinetic profile and safety of adjusted doses of darunavir/ritonavir with rifampicin in people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Darunavir/ritonavir is better tolerated than lopinavir/ritonavir and has a higher genetic barrier to resistance. Co-administration with rifampicin has been contraindicated as a significant reduction in darunavir exposure is expected. This is a barrier to darunavir/ritonavir use where TB is endemic.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of adjusted doses of darunavir/ritonavir with rifampicin.

METHODS

Virally suppressed participants on second-line lopinavir/ritonavir-based ART were switched to darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg q24h. In sequence: rifampicin was added; the dose of ritonavir was escalated; and darunavir was increased (darunavir/ritonavir 1600/200 mg q24h and 800/100 mg q12h were given in randomized sequence with rifampicin). Darunavir plasma concentrations were measured on the seventh/last day of each treatment period. To prevent viral rebound, dolutegravir (50 mg q12h) was added during rifampicin administration and for 1 week thereafter. Clinical events, ALT and bilirubin were monitored every 2-3 days during rifampicin administration.

RESULTS

A total of 17/28 participants started study treatment. Six (35.3%) were withdrawn for symptomatic hepatitis with severe ALT elevations, developing after 9-11 days of rifampicin and 2-4 days of ritonavir 200 mg. The study was stopped prematurely due to this high rate of hepatotoxicity. Only four participants completed the study. All hepatotoxicity resolved on withdrawal of study treatment. All participants were successfully re-established on their lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimen. After doubling the darunavir/ritonavir doses on rifampicin, darunavir pre-dose concentrations approached those on standard doses without rifampicin for q12h doses, but not for q24h doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted doses of darunavir/ritonavir with rifampicin had unacceptable risk of hepatotoxicity. Darunavir trough concentrations were markedly reduced with the daily adjusted dose.

Third-line antiretroviral therapy in low-income and middle-income countries (ACTG A5288): a prospective strategy study

BACKGROUND

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) management is challenging for individuals in resource-limited settings presenting for third-line treatment because of complex resistance patterns, partly due to reduced access to viral load monitoring. We aimed to evaluate use of newer antiretroviral drugs and contemporary management approaches, including population-based sequencing, to select appropriate antiretrovirals, plasma viral load monitoring, and interventions to improve adherence in individuals presenting with second-line viral failure.

METHODS

A5288 was a phase 4, third-line ART strategy study done at 19 urban sites in ten countries that enrolled adult participants with confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA (viral load) of 1000 copies per mL or more after more than 24 weeks of protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. The primary objective was to use antiretrovirals (raltegravir, etravirine, and ritonavir-boosted darunavir) and diagnostic monitoring technologies, including viral load, genotyping, and adherence support to achieve viral load suppression (defined as ≤200 copies per mL) in 65% or more of participants. ART history and real-time drug resistance genotypes were used to assign participants to one of four cohorts: cohort A (no lopinavir resistance) stayed on second-line ART and cohorts B (B1, best available nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs] plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir; B2, ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus etravirine; B3, ritonavir-boosted darunavir, raltegravir, and either tenofovir plus emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), C (ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus tenofovir-emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), and D (best available NRTIs plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir) were defined by increasing levels of resistance and received appropriate regimens, including new antiretrovirals. Participants in Cohort B without detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned by blocked randomisation to cohorts B1 and B2, and those with detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned to cohort B3. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01641367.

FINDINGS

From Jan 10, 2013, to Sept 10, 2015, 545 participants were enrolled. 287 (53%) were assigned to cohort A, 74 (14%) to B1, 72 (13%) to B2, eight (1%) to B3, 70 (13%) to C, and 34 (6%) to D. Overall, 349 (64%, 95% CI 60-68) participants achieved viral suppression at week 48, with proportions varying from 125 (44%) of 287 in cohort A to 65 (88%) of 74 in cohort B1, 63 (88%) of 72 in B2, eight (100%) of eight in B3, 63 (90%) of 70 in C, and 25 (74%) of 34 in D. Participants in cohort A remained on their second-line protease inhibitor, and had the most participants with grade 3 or higher adverse events (147 [51%]).

INTERPRETATION

Targeted real-time genotyping to select third-line ART can appropriately allocate more costly antiretrovirals to those with greater levels of HIV drug resistance.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health.

Tolerability of Current Antiretroviral Single-Tablet Regimens

The advent of protease inhibitors (PI) in the mid-nineties and its use as part of triple combinations revolutionized the management of HIV infection. Since then, progression to AIDS and AIDS-related deaths can be prevented. However, antiretroviral therapy based on PI has been discouraged for a while given its lower tolerability compared to alternative options; and only recent improvements in pharmacotherapy have renewed the interest for the newest agents within this class. First, the tolerability of the latest PI darunavir (DRV) and atazanavir is much better than for older PI, such as indinavir or lopinavir. Second, metabolic abnormalities and/or drug interactions associated to ritonavir boosting have been ameliorated using cobicistat. Third, adding safer accompanying nucleos(t)ides, such as tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), have minimized further toxicity concerns of PI. Finally, the unique barrier to resistance and new single-tablet regimen (STR) presentation makes DRV, especially attractive for long-term therapy. The recent coformulation of DRV, cobicistat, TAF, and emtricitabine (DRV/c/TAF/FTC) within a single pill to be given once daily (Symtuza^®) has positioned PI again at the frontline of HIV therapeutics. In this review, we discuss the results of studies that have assessed the efficacy and safety of the newest STR. In view of the current data, it seems worthy expanding the consideration of Symtuza® for a wider range of clinical scenarios, beyond the treatment of antiretroviral failures including first-line therapy and switching of otherwise virologically suppressed patients. The good tolerability and robust resistance profile should reward Symtuza^® and position it among the preferred contemporary STRs.

Evaluation of Cardiovascular Disease Risk in HIV-1-Infected Patients Treated with Darunavir

Introduction

We evaluated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk associated with darunavir treatment and examined the demographic/clinical characteristics of darunavir users based on data from Janssen-sponsored clinical trials, post-marketing pharmacovigilance databases, and administrative claims databases.

Methods

First, selected CVD events [myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden death, invasive cardiovascular procedures (coronary artery angioplasty or bypass, or carotid endarterectomy)] were analyzed in 19 Janssen-sponsored phase 2–4 studies (incidence rates estimated from pooled data; 95% confidence intervals derived from Poisson distribution). Second, analyses were conducted to identify spontaneously reported CVD events in post-marketing pharmacovigilance databases and evaluate disproportional reporting of CVD events for darunavir (using Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean scores). Third, baseline demographic/clinical characteristics of human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1)–infected patients in general and new users of darunavir and atazanavir were explored using three US administrative claims databases.

Results

Among 19 Janssen-sponsored clinical trials (treatment durations ≤ 6 years), the CVD event rate (95% CI) per 1000 person-years (pooled population; n = 5713) was 6.15 (2.91–11.89), and was lower for patients who used once-daily darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg [0.71 (0.16–3.05); n = 1326] versus twice-daily darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg [9.21 (4.94–16.04); n = 3058]. Trend analysis of post-marketing pharmacovigilance data showed that cumulative CVD event reporting rates for darunavir users (any dose) generally declined over time. Spontaneously reported CVD events were not disproportionately reported with darunavir versus other protease inhibitors. Compared with the general HIV-1–infected population and atazanavir users, higher proportions of darunavir users were male, older, and had comorbidities associated with CVD risk based on results from US administrative claims databases.

Conclusions

This comprehensive review of Janssen-sponsored clinical trial, post-marketing, and epidemiological data does not suggest that CVD should be considered an important risk for users of darunavir.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40268-018-0238-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Short-term cost analysis of raltegravir versus atazanavir + ritonavir or darunavir + ritonavir for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in the United States

The head-to-head AIDS Clinical Trial Group (ACTG) 5257 clinical trial found raltegravir (RAL) to be superior to atazanavir + ritonavir (ATV/r) and darunavir + ritonavir (DRV/r), when used in combination with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) by treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection, in a 96-week composite endpoint combining virologic efficacy and tolerability. The objective of this study was to estimate the total HIV treatment costs associated with these three regimens in the United States.

Effect of monotherapy with darunavir/cobicistat on viral load and semen quality of HIV-1 patients

Many patients previously using darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) (800/100mg) have switched to darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/C) (800/150 mg) either as part of triple therapy (ART) or as monotherapy with DRV (mDRV). The latter approach continues to be used in some countries for patients receiving long-term treatment. However, to date, the behaviour of DRV/C in the seminal compartment has not been analysed. This study explores how the combination behaves in monotherapy, with respect to the control of viral load and seminal quality. To this end, we studied 20 patients who were treated with mDRV/C after previous treatment with mDRV/r for at least 24 weeks. A viral load control in seminal plasma similar to that published in the literature was observed after 24 weeks of treatment with mDRV/C (viral load positivity in 20% of patients). Similarly, semen quality was confirmed (70% normozoospermic) in patients treated with this formulation, as has previously been reported for ART and mDRV/r. The DRV levels measured in seminal plasma were above EC50, regardless of whether the seminal viral load was positive or negative. We conclude that this mDRV/C co-formulation behaves like mDRV/r in seminal plasma in terms of viral load control and semen quality.

Switch to maraviroc with darunavir/r, both QD, in patients with suppressed HIV-1 was well tolerated but virologically inferior to standard antiretroviral therapy: 48-week results of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Primary study outcome was absence of treatment failure (virological failure, VF, or treatment interruption) per protocol at week 48.

METHODS

Patients on 3-drug ART with stable HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and CCR5-tropic virus were randomized 1:1 to maraviroc with darunavir/ritonavir qd (study arm) or continue current ART (continuation arm).

RESULTS

In June 2015, 115 patients were evaluable for the primary outcome (56 study, 59 continuation arm). The study was discontinued due to excess of VF in the study arm (7 cases, 12.5%, vs 0 in the continuation arm, p = 0.005). The proportion free of treatment failure was 73.2% in the study and 59.3% in the continuation arm. Two participants in the study and 10 in the continuation arm discontinued therapy due to adverse events (p = 0.030). At VF, no emergent drug resistance was detected. Co-receptor tropism switched to non-R5 in one patient. Patients with VF reported lower adherence and had lower plasma drug levels. Femoral bone mineral density was significantly improved in the study arm.

CONCLUSION

Switching to maraviroc with darunavir/ritonavir qd in virologically suppressed patients was associated with improved tolerability but was virologically inferior to 3-drug therapy.

Efficacy and safety of switching from boosted protease inhibitors plus emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimens to single-tablet darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide at 48 weeks in adults with virologically suppressed HIV-1 (EMERALD): a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Simplified regimens with reduced pill burden and fewer side-effects are desirable for people living with HIV. We investigated the efficacy and safety of switching to a single-tablet regimen of darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus continuing a regimen of boosted protease inhibitor, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

METHODS

EMERALD was a phase-3, randomised, active-controlled, open-label, international, multicentre trial, done at 106 sites across nine countries in North America and Europe. HIV-1-infected adults were eligible to participate if they were treatment-experienced and virologically suppressed (viral load <50 copies per mL for ≥2 months; one viral load of 50-200 copies per mL was allowed within 12 months before screening), and patients with a history of virological failure on non-darunavir regimens were allowed. Randomisation was by computer-generated interactive web-response system and stratified by boosted protease inhibitor use at baseline. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to switch to the open-label study regimen or continue the control regimen. The study regimen consisted of a fixed-dose tablet containing darunavir 800 mg, cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg, which was taken once per day for 48 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with virological rebound (confirmed viral load ≥50 copies per mL or premature discontinuations, with last viral load ≥50 copies per mL) cumulative through week 48; we tested non-inferiority (4% margin) of the study regimen versus the control regimen in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02269917.

FINDINGS

The study began on April 1, 2015, and the cutoff date for the week 48 primary analysis was Feb 24, 2017. Of 1141 patients (763 in the study group and 378 in the control group), 664 (58%) had previously received five or more antiretrovirals, including screening antiretrovirals, and 169 (15%) had previous virological failure on a non-darunavir regimen. The study regimen was non-inferior to the control for virological rebound cumulative through week 48 (19 [2·5%] of 763 patients in the study group vs eight (2·1%) of 378 patients in the control group; difference 0·4%, 95% CI -1·5 to 2·2; p<0·0001). No resistance to any study drug was observed. Numbers of discontinuations related to adverse events (11 [1%] of 763 patients in the study group vs four [1%] of 378 patients in the control group) and grade 3-4 adverse events (52 [7%] patients vs 31 [8%] patients) were similar between the two groups. There was a small non-clinically relevant but statistically significant (0·2 [SD 1·1] vs 0·1 [1·1], p=0.010) difference between the two groups in change from baseline in total cholesterol to HDL-cholesterol ratio. Only one serious adverse event (pancreatitis in the study group) was deemed as possibly related to the study regimen.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings show the safety and efficacy of single-tablet darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a potential switch option for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults with viral suppression.

FUNDING

Janssen.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Darunavir/Ritonavir in HIV-Infected Pregnant Women

The dosage of darunavir/ritonavir is 800/100 mg once daily for treatment-naive patients or treatment-experienced patients with no prior darunavir resistance associated mutations, and 600/100 mg twice daily for treatment-experienced patients with one or more darunavir resistance associated mutations. Results from the five available pharmacokinetic studies show reductions in total darunavir plasma concentrations of between 20-50% during the third trimester of pregnancy. The unbound darunavir concentrations have been measured only in subsets of patients in two of the five pharmacokinetic studies. The unbound concentrations were 11% higher during pregnancy in one study of the 600/100 mg twice-daily dosage, and 13-38% lower during pregnancy for the 800/100 mg once-daily dosage. Ratios of darunavir concentration in cord blood compared to maternal plasma are in the range of 0.11-0.18, suggesting that darunavir does not have high trans-placental penetration. Despite the decrease in exposure, the darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once-daily regimen in HIV-positive pregnant women in combination with background antiretroviral therapy has been effective in preventing mother-to-child transmission in the studies included in this review. Among the 137 infants born across the five studies, there was one case of mother-to-child transmission, which was in a mother taking the 600/100 mg twice-daily dose but who had documented poor adherence to treatment.

[Darunavir/cobicistat monotherapy. Experience in a tertiary hospital]

OBJECTIVE

Ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (IP/r) monotherapy: darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) or lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy is only provided in the major treatment guidelines in pretreated patients to prevent toxicity associated with nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI), reduce costs and simplify antiretroviral treatment. To start IP/r monotherapy, according to GESIDA guidelines 2016, patients need to meet the following criteria: absence of chronic hepatitis B, plasma viral load <50 copies/ mL for at least 6 months and absence of protease inhibitors mutations or previous virologic failures to IP/r. Currently, there are no studies that evaluate the efficacy and safety of darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/COBI) monotherapy.

METHODS

This prospective study analyzed pretreated HIV patients with DRV/r monotherapy that were switched to DRV/COBI monotherapy. The aim of the study is to describe the effectiveness and safety of the DRV/COBI monotherapy.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were evaluated. Patients had a median of 31.29 months of DRV/r monotherapy before DRV/COBI monotherapy. Nine of the 78 patients developed "blips" (plasma viral load: 50-200 copies/ml) and four patients had plasma viral load ≥200 copies/mL. An 83.3% (65/78) of the patients remained with undetectable plasma viral load. As for safety, there were no significant differences in lipid profile, liver function (transaminases) and renal function between DRV/r and DRV/COBI monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

DRV/COBI monotherapy seems to be effective and safe (lipid profile, liver and kidney function). However, it will be necessary to design specific studies comparing DRV/r vs DRV/COBI monotherapy to confirm these results.

Short Communication: Efficacy and Safety of Treatment Simplification to Lopinavir/Ritonavir or Darunavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Antiretroviral treatment simplification strategies based on monotherapy with darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) or lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) have not been directly compared in clinical trials. We evaluated the 48-week efficacy and safety of DRV/r versus LPV/r monotherapy as a treatment simplification strategy in a multicenter, randomized open-label study. Maintenance of viral suppression in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and semen was also explored. An intention to treat efficacy analysis was performed considering missing equals to failure (ITT:M = F). Virological failure (VF) was defined as a confirmed increase in plasma HIV-1 RNA >50 copies/mL. A total of 75 patients were enrolled: 40 were allocated to DRVr and 33 to LPVr. In the ITT: M = F analysis, 77.5% of patients on DRV/r and 66.6% of patients on LPV/r maintained HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48 (p = .302, treatment difference 10.8% [95% CI,-12.6 to 34.2]). In the DRV/r arm, no patients developed VF and 15.0% discontinued treatment due to adverse events. In the LPV/r arm, 2 (6.1%) patients developed VF and 18.2% discontinued monotherapy due to adverse events. Gastrointestinal disturbances were experienced by 18.2% and 2.5% of patients in the LPV/r and DRV/r arms, respectively (p = .019). Two patients had detectable HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL in CSF or semen. Monotherapy with LPV/r or DRV/r seems to be virologically effective in selected HIV-1-infected patients with sustained viral suppression. Differences between both regimens seem driven mainly by the better tolerability profile of DRV/r.

Rezolsta® (Darunavir/Cobicistat): First Boosted Protease Inhibitor Co-formulated with Cobicistat

Rezolsta® (darunavir/cobicistat) is the first boosted protease inhibitor in a fixed-dose combination to be approved for the treatment of HIV infection. It contains darunavir, a protease inhibitor with a well-known safety and efficacy profile, and the new pharmacokinetic enhancer cobicistat. The convenience of this combination makes boosted darunavir easier to take, thus improving adherence. Exposure to darunavir is equivalent when it is administered with cobicistat or with ritonavir. Darunavir/cobicistat-based antiretroviral therapy has shown considerable efficacy and good tolerability in several clinical trials. Data from the single-arm, open-label, phase III GS-US-216-130 trial showed virological efficacy rates comparable to those from ARTEMIS and ODIN. Darunavir/cobicistat was well tolerated; most adverse events were mild and consisted of gastrointestinal disturbances. Cobicistat inhibits transporters of creatinine in kidney tubules, thus causing a minimal and reversible reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate. Like ritonavir, cobicistat is a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor and, as such, shares most of its drug interactions. However, inhibition by cobicistat seems to be more specific than with ritonavir, and cobicistat has no inducer effect; therefore, differences in its drug interaction profile may be observed.

Cost effectiveness of darunavir/ritonavir combination antiretroviral therapy for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in Canada

OBJECTIVE

The AntiRetroviral Therapy with TMC114 ExaMined In naive Subjects (ARTEMIS) clinical trial examined the efficacy and safety of two ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r), darunavir/r 800/100 mg once daily (QD) and lopinavir/r 800/200 mg daily, both used in combination with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. This study aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of the darunavir/r regimen compared with the lopinavir/r regimen in treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in Canada.

METHODS

A Markov model with a 3-month cycle time and six CD4 cell-count-based health states (>500, 351-500, 201-500, 101-200, 51-100, and 0-50 cells/mm(3)) followed a cohort of treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection through initial darunavir/r or lopinavir/r combination therapy and a common set of subsequent regimens over the course of their remaining lifetimes. Population characteristics and transition probabilities were estimated from the ARTEMIS clinical trial and other trials. Costs (in 2014 Canadian dollars), utilities, and mortality were estimated from Canadian sources and published literature. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 5% per year. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, including a simple indirect comparison of the darunavir/r initial regimen with an atazanavir/r-based regimen.

RESULTS

In the base-case lifetime analysis, individuals receiving initial therapy with the darunavir/r regimen experienced 0.25 more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with lower antiretroviral drug costs (-$14,246) and total costs (-$18,402) than individuals receiving the lopinavir/r regimen, indicating that darunavir/r dominated lopinavir/r. In an indirect comparison with an atazanavir/r-based regimen, the darunavir/r regimen remained the dominant choice, but with lower cost savings (-$2,303) and QALY gains (0.02). Results were robust to a wide range of other changes in input parameter values, population characteristics, and modeling assumptions. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the darunavir/r regimen was cost effective compared with the lopinavir/r regimen in over 86% of simulations for willingness-to-pay thresholds between $0 and $100,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Darunavir/r 800/100 mg QD may be a cost-effective PI/r component of initial antiretroviral therapy for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in Canada.