Baseline Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 RNA Research Articles

Four years data of raltegravir-based salvage therapy in HIV-1-infected, treatment-experienced patients: the SALIR-E Study

Apart from the BENCHMRK study, there are no large observational experiences describing the long-term efficacy and safety of rescue regimens for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Antiretroviral-experienced patients with detectable viraemia starting a raltegravir (RAL)-based regimen between March 2007 and June 2009 were consecutively enrolled and followed for ≥4 years. Data were censored at Week 206 for homogeneity. Of 333 patients, 258 (77.5%) were still on RAL-based therapy at Week 206, and 241 had undetectable HIV-1 RNA (73% in intention-to-treat analysis). Of the 75 subjects who discontinued RAL therapy, 36 were lost to follow-up, 15 changed their regimen due to virological failure, 2 simplified their regimen stopping RAL, 9 stopped all antiretrovirals and 13 died. Overall, 100 subjects (30.0%) had at least one detectable viraemia, but only 32 (9.6%) had true viral failure. Seventeen patients continued their failing regimen. ‘Blips’ were experienced by 53 patients (15.9%), whilst 15 (4.5%) had confirmed viral rebound due to adherence issues and were re-suppressed upon treatment re-introduction. In a multivariate analysis of predictors of interruption or failure, each baseline HIV-1 RNA log10 increase was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio for failure of 1.6; having more than 13 previous treatment courses also emerged as a predictor. Overall, adverse events were rare (n=64), with 13 deaths. Tumours were mainly early events, often fatal (7/15), mainly non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (8), followed by hepatocarcinoma (2). RAL proved effective and well tolerated in this cohort, and few patients experienced viral failure after 4 years.

Cobicistat Versus Ritonavir as a Pharmacoenhancer of Atazanavir Plus Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Treatment-Naive HIV Type 1–Infected Patients: Week 48 Results

Cobicistat (COBI) is a pharmacoenhancer with no antiretroviral activity in vitro. An international, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of COBI versus ritonavir (RTV) as a pharmacoenhancer of atazanavir (ATV) in combination with emtricitabine (FTC)/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in treatment-naive patients. The primary end point was a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA load of <50 copies/mL at week 48 by the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm; the noninferiority margin was 12%. A total of 692 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment arm and received study drug (344 in the COBI group vs 348 in the RTV group). At week 48, virologic success was achieved in 85% of COBI recipients and 87% of RTV recipients (difference, -2.2% [95% confidence interval, -7.4% to 3.0%]); among patients with a baseline HIV-1 RNA load of >100 000 copies/mL, rates were similar (86% vs 86%). Similar percentages of patients in both groups had serious adverse events (10% of COBI recipients vs 7% of RTV recipients) and adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment with the study drug (7% vs 7%). Median increases in the serum creatinine level were 0.13 and 0.09 mg/dL, respectively, for COBI and RTV recipients. COBI was noninferior to RTV in combination with ATV plus FTC/TDF at week 48. Both regimens achieved high rates of virologic success. Safety and tolerability profiles of the 2 regimens were comparable. Once-daily COBI is a safe and effective pharmacoenhancer of the protease inhibitor ATV.

Peripheral and Central Fat Changes in Subjects Randomized to Abacavir-Lamivudine or Tenofovir-Emtricitabine With Atazanavir-Ritonavir or Efavirenz: ACTG Study A5224s

We compare the effect of 4 different antiretroviral regimens on limb and visceral fat. A5224s was a substudy of A5202, a trial of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected, treatment-naive subjects randomized to blinded abacavir-lamivudine (ABC-3TC) or tenofovir DF-emtricitabine (TDF-FTC) with open-label efavirenz (EFV) or atazanavir-ritonavir (ATV-r). The primary endpoint was the presence of lipoatrophy (≥ 10% loss of limb fat) at week 96 by intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Secondary endpoints included changes in limb and visceral fat. Statistical tests included linear regression, binomial, two-sample t test, and Fisher's exact test. A5224s enrolled 269 subjects; 85% were male, and 47% were white non-Hispanic. The subjects had a median baseline HIV-1 RNA level of 4.6 log(10) copies/mL, a median age of 38 years, a median CD4+ cell count of 233 cells/μL, median limb fat of 7.4 kg, median visceral adipose tissue (VAT) of 84.1 cm(2), and VAT: total adipose tissue (TAT) ratio of 0.31. At week 96, estimated prevalence of lipoatrophy (upper 95% confidence interval [CI]) was 18% (25%) for ABC-3TC and 15% (22%) for TDF-FTC (P = .70); this was not significantly less than the hypothesized 15% for both (P ≥ .55 for both). The secondary as-treated (AT) analysis showed similar results. At week 96, the estimated mean percentage change from baseline in VAT was higher for the ATV-r group than for the EFV group (26.6% vs 12.4%; P = .090 in ITT analysis and 30.0% vs 14.5%; P = .10 in AT analysis); however, the percentage change in VAT:TAT was similar by ITT and AT analysis (P ≥ .60 for both). Results were similar for absolute changes in VAT and VAT:TAT. ABC-3TC- and TDF-FTC-based regimens increased limb and visceral fat at week 96, with a similar prevalence of lipoatrophy. Compared to the EFV group, subjects assigned to ATV-r had a trend towards higher mean percentage increase in VAT. NCT00118898.

CD4+T Cell Count Recovery in HIV Type 1–Infected Patients Is Independent of Class of Antiretroviral Therapy

In recent years, treatment options for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection have changed from nonboosted protease inhibitors (PIs) to nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and boosted PI-based antiretroviral drug regimens, but the impact on immunological recovery remains uncertain. During January 1996 through December 2004 [corrected] all patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort were included if they received the first combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and had known baseline CD4(+) T cell counts and HIV-1 RNA values (n = 3293). For follow-up, we used the Swiss HIV Cohort Study database update of May 2007 [corrected] The mean (+/-SD) duration of follow-up was 26.8 +/- 20.5 months. The follow-up time was limited to the duration of the first cART. CD4(+) T cell recovery was analyzed in 3 different treatment groups: nonboosted PI, NNRTI, or boosted PI. The end point was the absolute increase of CD4(+) T cell count in the 3 treatment groups after the initiation of cART. Two thousand five hundred ninety individuals (78.7%) initiated a nonboosted-PI regimen, 452 (13.7%) initiated an NNRTI regimen, and 251 (7.6%) initiated a boosted-PI regimen. Absolute CD4(+) T cell count increases at 48 months were as follows: in the nonboosted-PI group, from 210 to 520 cells/muL; in the NNRTI group, from 220 to 475 cells/muL; and in the boosted-PI group, from 168 to 511 cells/muL. In a multivariate analysis, the treatment group did not affect the response of CD4(+) T cells; however, increased age, pretreatment with nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, serological tests positive for hepatitis C virus, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stage C infection, lower baseline CD4(+) T cell count, and lower baseline HIV-1 RNA level were risk factors for smaller increases in CD4(+) T cell count. CD4(+) T cell recovery was similar in patients receiving nonboosted PI-, NNRTI-, and boosted PI-based cART.

Maraviroc for Previously Treated Patients with R5 HIV-1 Infection

CC chemokine receptor 5 antagonists are a new class of antiretroviral agents. We conducted two double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies--Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2--with patients who had R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) only. They had been treated with or had resistance to three antiretroviral-drug classes and had HIV-1 RNA levels of more than 5000 copies per milliliter. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three antiretroviral regimens consisting of maraviroc once daily, maraviroc twice daily, or placebo, each of which included optimized background therapy (OBT) based on treatment history and drug-resistance testing. Safety and efficacy were assessed after 48 weeks. A total of 1049 patients received the randomly assigned study drug; the mean baseline HIV-1 RNA level was 72,400 copies per milliliter, and the median CD4 cell count was 169 per cubic millimeter. At 48 weeks, in both studies, the mean change in HIV-1 RNA from baseline was greater with maraviroc than with placebo: -1.66 and -1.82 log(10) copies per milliliter with the once-daily and twice-daily regimens, respectively, versus -0.80 with placebo in MOTIVATE 1, and -1.72 and -1.87 log(10) copies per milliliter, respectively, versus -0.76 with placebo in MOTIVATE 2. More patients receiving maraviroc once or twice daily had HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (42% and 47%, respectively, vs. 16% in the placebo group in MOTIVATE 1; 45% in both maraviroc groups vs. 18% in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). The change from baseline in CD4 counts was also greater with maraviroc once or twice daily than with placebo (increases of 113 and 122 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 54 in MOTIVATE 1; increases of 122 and 128 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 69 in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). Frequencies of adverse events were similar among the groups. Maraviroc, as compared with placebo, resulted in significantly greater suppression of HIV-1 and greater increases in CD4 cell counts at 48 weeks in previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 who were receiving OBT. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00098306 and NCT00098722.)

Early Virologic Nonresponse to Tenofovir, Abacavir, and Lamivudine in HIV‐Infected Antiretroviral‐Naive Subjects

Antiretroviral combinations that reduce the number of pills and dosing frequency have the potential to simplify therapy. We compared 2 regimens dosed as 2 pills once daily. This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter study of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz, both administered once daily with the abacavir/lamivudine fixed-dose combination in treatment-naive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected subjects. After reports of early nonresponse, an unplanned interim analysis was performed. Virologic nonresponse was defined as (1) a <2.0-log(10) copies/mL decrease in HIV-1 RNA level by week 8, (2) an HIV-1 RNA rebound of > or =1.0 log(10) copies/mL above the nadir, or (3) for subjects with 2 consecutive HIV-1 RNA measurements <50 copies/mL, a subsequent increase to >400 copies/mL on 2 consecutive occasions. We randomized 340 subjects. Median baseline HIV-1 RNA level and CD4+ cell count were 4.7 log(10) copies/mL and 251 cells/mm3, respectively; 194 subjects with HIV-1 RNA data from > or =8 weeks were included in the interim analysis. Virologic nonresponse occurred in 50 (49%) of 102 subjects in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate arm, compared with 5 (5%) of 92 of subjects in the efavirenz arm (P<.001). Within 12 weeks, viral genotypes for nonresponders in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate arm showed M184V or I/M/V mixtures in 40 (98%) of 41 subjects and K65R and M184V or mixtures in 22 (54%) of 41 subjects. The protocol was immediately amended to modify the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate arm. The efavirenz arm continued unchanged; after 48 weeks, 120 (71%) of 169 subjects achieved HIV-1 RNA levels <50 copies/mL. The tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/abacavir/lamivudine regimen resulted in an unexpected and unacceptably high rate of nonresponse and incidence of K65R and M184V/I. This 3-drug regimen should not be used.

Prediction of HIV-1 RNA Suppression and its Durability during Treatment with Zidovudine/Lamivudine

To predict the probability of long-term viral suppression during treatment with zidovudine and lamivudine, human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA values were retrospectively pooled for 1083 patients from six randomized, double-blind clinical trials. All analyses of HIV-1 RNA were obtained using the Roche Amplicor assay or its earlier prototype. Time to loss of response was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the influence of baseline variables. Among 523 patients with < or = 6 months of prior zidovudine treatment, the probability of HIV-1 RNA suppression below 400 copies/ml at 48 weeks was 71% in those with baseline HIV-1 RNA < 5000 copies/ml, but only 14% in those with HIV-1 RNA between 50,000 and 200,000 copies/ml. Among 560 patients with > 6 months of prior zidovudine treatment, the rates of sustained viral suppression were lower, but also significantly associated with the baseline HIV-1 RNA. Multivariate analyses showed no independent effect of CD4 cell count, age, sex, race, or CDC disease stage on the probability of sustained HIV-1 RNA suppression. When patients with < or = 6 months of prior therapy were stratified based on the magnitude of HIV-1 RNA nadir achieved during treatment, those who reached a nadir of < 400 copies/ml retained this response for significantly longer time periods than the ones who only achieved partial viral suppression. In conclusion, baseline HIV-1 RNA levels and the duration of prior zidovudine therapy strongly predict the antiretroviral efficacy of zidovudine/lamivudine. The baseline parameters should influence the choice of the antiretroviral regimen.