Loss Of Virological Response Algorithm Research Articles

Effectiveness of Switching to Darunavir/Cobicistat in Virologically Suppressed HIV-Positive Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitor-Based Regimen: The "STORE" Study.

Objective:This study investigates the effectiveness and tolerability of switching to a darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c)-based antiretroviral regimen from a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r)-based regimen in virologically suppressed HIV-positive patients. DRV trough values were also investigated.Setting:Prospective, multicenter, single-country, noninterventional cohort study.Methods:This study included patients on a PI/r-based ART for at least 12 months having plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL since at least 6 months. The primary endpoint, defined as HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL, was measured at 48 ± 6 weeks from baseline. A secondary analysis was performed using the time to loss of virological response algorithm. Biochemical parameters, including DRV trough samples, were collected as per clinical practice and measured using high-performance liquid chromatography.Results:Of 336 patients enrolled, 282 completed the study: 70.8% had plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at 48 weeks; using the time to loss of virological response algorithm, 82.7% maintained virological suppression. Virological failure was observed in 6 patients (1.8%). Adverse event–related discontinuations were 4.5%. After 48 weeks, we found a significant improvement in both triglycerides (median, 130 to 113.5 mg/dL, P = 0.0254) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (48 to 49 mg/dL, P < 0.0001) but no change in other biomarkers. DRV trough concentrations in 56 subjects showed a median value of 2862.5 (1469.5–4439) ng/mL, higher in women than in men (4221 vs. 2634 ng/mL, P = 0.046).Conclusions:In stable HIV-1 positive virologically suppressed patients, the switch to DRV/c-based ART was beneficial in terms of low rates of virological failure and adverse events due to its high tolerability and improvement in triglycerides.

Twenty‐four‐week efficacy and safety of switching virologically suppressed HIV‐1‐infected patients from nevirapine immediate release 200 mg twice daily to nevirapine extended release 400 mg once daily (TRANxITION)

Once-daily (qd) antiretroviral therapies improve convenience and adherence. If found to be effective, nevirapine extended release (NVP XR) will confer this benefit. The TRANxITION trial examined the efficacy and safety of switching virologically suppressed patients from NVP immediate release (NVP IR) 200 mg twice daily to NVP XR 400 mg qd. An open-label, parallel-group, noninferiority, randomized (2:1 NVP XR:NVP IR) study was performed. Adult HIV-1-infected patients receiving NVP IR plus a fixed-dose nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) combination of lamivudine (3TC)/abacavir (ABC), tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) or 3TC/zidovudine (ZDV) with undetectable viral load (VL) were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was continued virological suppression with VL < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL up to week 24 (calculated using a time to loss of virological response algorithm). Cochran's statistic (background regimen adjusted) was used to test noninferiority. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Among 443 randomized patients, continued virological suppression was observed in 93.6% (276 of 295) of NVP XR- and 92.6% (137 of 148) of NVP IR-treated patients, an observed difference of 1% [95% confidence interval (CI) -4.3, 6.0] at 24 weeks of follow-up. Noninferiority (adjusted margin of -10%) of NVP XR to NVP IR was robust and further supported by SNAPSHOT analysis. Division of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (DAIDS) grade 3 and 4 events were similar for the NVP XR and NVP IR groups (3.7 vs. 4.1%, respectively), although overall AEs were higher in the NVP XR group (75.6 vs. 60.1% for the NVP-IR group). NVP XR administered once daily resulted in continued virological suppression at week 24 that was noninferior to that provided by NVP IR, with similar rates of moderate and severe AEs. The higher frequency of overall AEs with NVP XR may be a consequence of the open-label design.

Efficacy and Safety of Nevirapine Extended-Release Once Daily versus Nevirapine Immediate-Release Twice-Daily in Treatment-Naive HIV-1-Infected Patients

This study (VERxVE) compared the efficacy and safety of the new nevirapine extended-release (NVP XR) formulation dosed once daily with NVP immediate release (IR) twice daily in treatment-naive patients. Randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study of HIV-1-infected adult patients with baseline viral load (VL) ≥ 1,000 copies/ml and CD4(+) T-cell count of >50-<400 (males) and >50-<250 cells/mm(3) (females). Patients stratified by baseline VL (≤ 100,000/>100,000 copies/ml) were randomized 1:1 to NVP XR 400 mg once daily (plus placebo) or NVP IR 200 mg twice daily (plus placebo), both combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) 300 mg and emtricitabine 200 mg once daily. Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (<50 copies/ml) through week 48 using the time to loss of virological response algorithm. Non-inferiority of NVP XR to NVP IR was tested using Cochran's statistic incorporating baseline VL stratum with pre-specified, non-inferiority margin of -10%. Among 1,011 patients randomized and treated, virological response at week 48 was 81.0% (409/505) for NVP XR and 75.9% (384/506) for NVP IR with adjusted difference of 4.9% in favour of NVP XR (95% CI -0.1-10.0%), demonstrating non-inferiority of NVP XR to NVP IR. This finding was supported by secondary endpoints. The safety profile of NVP XR was similar to NVP IR, but showed numerically fewer treatment-related adverse events. NVP XR in combination with TDF and emtricitabine was shown to be non-inferior in efficacy to NVP IR with a similar safety and adverse event profile, with the potential for the added convenience of once-daily dosing. ClinicalTrials (NCT): NCT00561925.

Simplification of Antiretroviral Therapy to a Single-Tablet Regimen Consisting of Efavirenz, Emtricitabine, and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Versus Unmodified Antiretroviral Therapy in Virologically Suppressed HIV-1-Infected Patients

To evaluate a simplification strategy for HIV-1-infected patients virologically suppressed on antiretroviral therapy (ART) by switching to a single-tablet regimen consisting of efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EFV/FTC/TDF). : Prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter study. Patients on stable ART with HIV-1 RNA <200 copies per milliliter for > or = 3 months were stratified by prior nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based or protease inhibitor-based therapy and randomized (2:1) to simplify treatment to EFV/FTC/TDF or to stay on their baseline regimen (SBR). Efficacy and safety assessments were performed at baseline and at weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48. Additional patient-reported outcomes included the following: adherence by visual analog scale, quality of life by SF-36 (v2) survey, HIV Symptom Index, and the Preference of Medication and Perceived Ease of the Regimen for Condition questionnaires. Three hundred patients (EFV/FTC/TDF 203, SBR 97) were evaluated (prior protease inhibitor-based ART, 53%; nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based ART, 47%). The arms were well balanced at baseline with 88% males, 29% blacks, and a mean age of 43 years; CD4 was 540 cells per cubic millimeter, 96% had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter, and 88% were on their first ART regimen. Through 48 weeks, 89% vs. 88% in the EFV/FTC/TDF vs. SBR arms, respectively, maintained HIV-1 RNA <200 copies per milliliter by time to loss of virologic response algorithm (intent to treat, noncompleters = failures) with the difference (95% confidence interval) between arms of 1.1% (-6.7% to 8.8%), indicating noninferiority of EFV/FTC/TDF vs. SBR. Similarly, maintenance of HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter by time to loss of virologic response algorithm was 87% vs. 85% for EFV/FTC/TDF vs. SBR, respectively [difference (95% confidence interval) 2.6% (-5.9% to 11.1%)]. Discontinuation rates were similar (EFV/FTC/TDF 11%, SBR 12%); more discontinuations for adverse events occurred in the EFV/FTC/TDF arm vs. SBR (5% vs. 1%), most commonly for nervous system symptoms. More patients withdrew consent in the SBR arm vs. EFV/FTC/TDF (7% vs. 2%). Estimated glomerular filtration rate (by Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) remained unchanged over 48 weeks in both arms (median change < 1 mL.min.1.73 m). A decrease in fasting triglycerides was observed at 48 weeks in the EFV/FTC/TDF vs. SBR arm (-20 vs. -3.0 mg/dL; P = 0.035). Adherence of > or = 96% was reported by visual analog scale in both arms at baseline and at all study visits. Simplification to EFV/FTC/TDF maintained high and comparable rates of virologic suppression vs. SBR through 48 weeks.

Erratum

A one-tablet, once-daily abacavir/lamivudine fixed-dose combination (FDC) has been recently approved to treat HIV-1 infection. A randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study to compare the efficacy and safety of the FDC group to the separate entities (SE) group, in combination with tenofovir and a new protease inhibitor or nonnucleoside reverse transcription inhibitor in antiretroviral-experienced adults experiencing virologic failure (VF). Eligible subjects had viral loads >1000 copies/mL with < or =3 nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitor-associated mutations. The primary efficacy end point was time-average changed from baseline (average area under the curve minus baseline) in plasma HIV-1 RNA over 48 weeks. A total of 186 subjects were enrolled. The average area under the curve minus baseline was -1.65 and -1.83 log10 copies/mL in the FDC and SE groups, respectively (intention to treat; 95% confidence interval: -0.13, 0.38). Patients in the FDC (50%) and SE groups (47%) achieved viral loads <50 copies/mL based on the time to loss of virologic response algorithm. VF was low and similar in both groups (FDC, 16%; SE, 18%). Tolerability was similar between the 2 groups. The FDC group had noninferior efficacy over 48 weeks to the SE group in treatment-experienced subjects with VF.