Primary Protease Inhibitor Mutations Research Articles

Week 96 efficacy and safety results of the phase 3, randomized EMERALD trial to evaluate switching from boosted-protease inhibitors plus emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimens to the once daily, single-tablet regimen of darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) in treatment-experienced, virologically-suppressed adults living with HIV-1

Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg was investigated through 96 weeks in EMERALD (NCT02269917).Virologically-suppressed, HIV-1-positive treatment-experienced adults (previous non-darunavir virologic failure [VF] allowed) were randomized (2:1) to D/C/F/TAF or boosted protease inhibitor (PI) plus emtricitabine/tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (F/TDF) over 48 weeks. At week 52 participants in the boosted PI arm were offered switch to D/C/F/TAF (late-switch, 44 weeks D/C/F/TAF exposure). All participants were followed on D/C/F/TAF until week 96. Efficacy endpoints were percentage cumulative protocol-defined virologic rebound (PDVR; confirmed viral load [VL] ≥50 copies/mL) and VL < 50 copies/mL (virologic suppression) and ≥50 copies/mL (VF) (FDA-snapshot analysis).Of 1141 randomized patients, 1080 continued in the extension phase. Few patients had PDVR (D/C/F/TAF: 3.1%, 24/763 cumulative through week 96; late-switch: 2.3%, 8/352 week 52–96). Week 96 virologic suppression was 90.7% (692/763) (D/C/F/TAF) and 93.8% (330/352) (late-switch). VF was 1.2% and 1.7%, respectively. No darunavir, primary PI, tenofovir or emtricitabine resistance-associated mutations were observed post-baseline. No patients discontinued for efficacy-related reasons. Few discontinued due to adverse events (2% D/C/F/TAF arm). Improved renal and bone parameters were maintained in the D/C/F/TAF arm and observed in the late-switch arm, with small increases in total cholesterol/high-density-lipoprotein-cholesterol ratio. A study limitation was the lack of a control arm in the week 96 analysis.Through 96 weeks, D/C/F/TAF resulted in low PDVR rates, high virologic suppression rates, very few VFs, and no resistance development. Late-switch results were consistent with D/C/F/TAF week 48 results. EMERALD week 96 results confirm the efficacy, high genetic barrier to resistance and safety benefits of D/C/F/TAF.

554. Does Protease Inhibitor (PI) Monotherapy Select Primary PI Resistance?

BackgroundCombination drug therapy is the standard of care for HIV treatment. PI monotherapy is considered experimental in the United States. However, some patients end up receiving PI monotherapy secondary to resistance and/or drug intolerance to other antiretroviral (cART) classes. This study will discuss real-life clinical results in patients on PI monotherapy and examine the potential for the development of primary PI mutations.MethodsAn observational retrospective study conducted in an inner-city HIV clinic identified 10 patients on PI monotherapy who each had two GenoSure Archive® (Labcorp) resistance profiles performed. Gender, race, prior cART, and baseline VL and CD4+ count were captured. VL and CD4+ count were trended in the time period between resistance tests. These profiles were then compared checking for the emergence of new primary PI mutations.ResultsSeven out of 10 patients were African American, two were Hispanic, one was Caucasian, and half were male. The mean time interval between archived resistance tests was 6.87 months. During the time between resistance profiles, nine were on darunavir and one switched from lopinavir to darunavir for less pill burden. Eight had an undetectable VL (defined by <50 copies/mL) at the first resistance test, seven had undetectable VL at the second resistance test, and six remained undetectable over the entire period between profiles. There were three that demonstrated blips in VL and one that experienced virological failure between the two sets of resistance tests. One patient had an initial resistance profile showing primary resistance to lopinavir. No patients gained any primary PI mutations to darunavir.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that mainly darunavir-based PI monotherapy has good genetic barrier, even in the setting of virological failure. Larger studies examining similar data over longer durations are needed to confirm this finding.Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

The PROTEA trial: darunavir/ritonavir with or without nucleoside analogues, for patients with HIV-1 RNA below 50 copies/mL.

IntroductionIn previous studies, protease inhibitor (PI) monotherapy has shown trends for higher low-level elevations in HIV-1 RNA compared to triple therapy, but no increase in the risk of drug resistance.MethodsA total of 273 patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL for over 24 weeks on current antiretrovirals switched to DRV/r (darunavir/ritonavir) 800/100 mg once-daily, either as monotherapy (n=137) or with 2NRTIs (nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors) (n=136), after a 4 week run-in phase with DRV/r + 2NRTI. Treatment failure was defined as HIV-1 RNA levels above 50 copies/mL (FDA Snapshot method) by Week 48, or switches off study treatment. Patients with elevations in HIV-1 RNA on DRV/r monotherapy could be re-intensified with NRTIs. The trial had 80% power to show non-inferiority for the monotherapy arm (delta = − 12%).ResultsPatients were 83% male and 87% Caucasian, with mean age 42 years; 10% were HCV antibody positive. In the DRV/r monotherapy arm, there were more patients with nadir CD4 count below 200 cells/µL (30% versus 22%). In the primary efficacy analysis, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL by Week 48 (intent-to-treat (ITT)) was 118/137 (86.1%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm versus 129/136 (94.9%) in the triple therapy arm; DRV/r monotherapy did not show non-inferiority versus triple therapy in the primary analysis (difference=− 8.7%, 95% CI −15.5 to −1.8%). In the multivariate analysis, the main predictor of treatment failure was nadir CD4 count. For patients with nadir CD4 counts <200 cells/µL, HIV-1 RNA suppression rates at Week 48 were 27/41 (66%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 29/30 (97%) in the triple therapy arm; for patients with CD4 nadir at least 200 cells/µL, HIV-1 RNA suppression rates were 91/96 (95%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 100/106 (94%) in the triple therapy arm. In the overall population, by a switch included analysis, efficacy was 92.0% versus 96.3%, showing non-inferiority (difference=− 4.3%, 95% CI=−9.7 to +1.2%). No treatment-emergent primary PI mutations were detected in three patients with sustained elevations in HIV-1 RNA at least 400 copies/mL (two on PI monotherapy, one on triple therapy). CD4 counts remained stable during the trial in both arms.ConclusionsIn this study for patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at baseline, switching to DRV/r monotherapy showed lower efficacy versus triple antiretroviral therapy at Week 48 in the primary switch equals failure analysis (86% versus 95%). However, this lower efficacy was seen mainly in patients with CD4 nadir levels below 200 cells/µL. There was no development of PI resistance.

Virologic and immunologic effectiveness of darunavir-based salvage therapy in HIV-1-infected adults in a Brazilian clinical practice setting: results of a multicenter and retrospective cohort study

BackgroundDarunavir has been proven efficacious for antiretroviral-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in randomized trials. However, effectiveness of darunavir-based salvage therapy is understudied in routine care in Brazil. MethodsRetrospective cohort study of HIV-1-infected patients from three public referral centers in Belo Horizonte, who received a darunavir-based therapy between 2008 and 2010, after virologic failure. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with viral load<50copies/mL at week 48. Change in CD4 cell count was also evaluated. Outcome measures were analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis applied to observational studies. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of missing data at week 48. Predictors of virologic failure were examined using rare-event, finite sample, bias-corrected logistic regression. ResultsAmong 108 patients, the median age was 44.2 years, and 72.2% were male. They had long-standing HIV-1 infection (median 11.6 years) and advanced disease (76.9% had an AIDS-defining event). All patients had previously received protease inhibitors and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 75% nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and 4.6% enfuvirtide. The median length of protease inhibitor use was 8.9 years, and 90.8% of patients had prior exposure to unboosted protease inhibitor. Genotypic resistance profile showed a median of three primary protease inhibitor mutations and 10.2% had three or more darunavir resistance-associated mutations. Virologic success at week 48 was achieved by 78.7% (95% CI=69.7–86%) of patients and mean CD4 cell count increase from baseline was 131.5cells/μL (95% CI=103.4–159.6). In multiple logistic regression analysis, higher baseline viral load (RR=1.04 per 10,000copies/mL increase; 95% CI=1.01–1.09) and higher number of darunavir resistance-associated mutations (RR=1.23 per each; 95% CI=0.95–1.48) were independently associated with virologic failure. ConclusionVirologic suppression is a realistic endpoint for most treatment-experienced patients who begin a darunavir-based therapy outside the controlled conditions of a randomized trial, at routine care settings.

Virological Analysis of Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Darunavir/Ritonavir in the Odin Trial of Treatment-Experienced Patients

The aim of this analysis was to characterize viral resistance in the Phase III, randomized ODIN trial, which demonstrated non-inferiority of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg to DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily, each combined with an optimized background regimen in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at screening. Virological failure (VF) was defined as never achieving or losing confirmed virological suppression after week 12, with patients being classed as 'never suppressed' (never achieved HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml) or 'rebounders' (achieved two consecutive HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml but then ≥ 50 copies/ml). Phenotypes and genotypes of plasma HIV-1 viruses, using population-based sequencing and Antivirogram(®), were determined at screening/baseline and on samples from VFs with HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/ml. Mean baseline HIV-1 RNA was 4.16 log10 copies/ml and 53.9% of patients were protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced at enrolment. VF rate was similar in both arms. A similar proportion of virologically failing patients in both arms developed PI RAMs (11.7% versus 9.5%, respectively) or nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor RAMs (6.7% versus 7.1%). One patient with VF (once-daily arm) developed four primary PI mutations, three of which were also DRV RAMs. This patient was also the only VF to lose susceptibility to DRV. Loss of susceptibility to other PIs (once daily 3.4%; twice daily 0%) and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (once daily 13.6%; twice daily 9.8%) in VF patients was infrequent and comparable between treatment arms. These analyses showed once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg was associated with similar rates of VF and emergence of resistance as DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV RAMs.

Week 48 analysis of once-daily vs. twice-daily darunavir/ritonavir in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients

ODIN (Once-daily Darunavir In treatment-experieNced patients) was a phase III, 48-week, open-label study comparing once-daily vs. twice-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at screening. Patients with no DRV RAMs and receiving stable HAART for at least 12 weeks were stratified by HIV-1 RNA (≤ or > 50 000 copies/ml) and randomized to once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg or twice-daily DRV/r 600/100 mg and an optimized background regimen (≥2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors). Primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of once-daily vs. twice-daily DRV/r in confirmed virologic response (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/ml) at week 48. Five hundred and ninety patients received once-daily (n = 294) or twice-daily (n = 296) DRV/r. Mean baseline HIV-1 RNA was 4.16 log10 copies/ml; median CD4 cell count was 228 cells/μl; and 53.9% had previously used at least one protease inhibitor. At week 48, 72.1% of once-daily and 70.9% of twice-daily patients achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml (intent-to-treat/time-to-loss of virologic response). The difference in response between once-daily and twice-daily arms was 1.2% (95% confidence interval -6.1 to 8.5%; P < 0.001), establishing noninferiority of once-daily DRV/r versus twice-daily DRV/r. Median CD4 cell count increase was 100 (once-daily) and 94 cells/μl (twice-daily). Virologic failure rate was low and similar for both arms; only one patient (once-daily arm) developed primary protease inhibitor mutations. Once-daily DRV/r had a lower incidence of grade 2-4 triglyceride increases (5.2 vs. 11.0%, P < 0.05). Once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg was noninferior in virologic response to twice-daily DRV/r 600/100 mg at 48 weeks in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV RAMs, and with a more favorable lipid profile. These findings support use of once-daily DRV/r in this population.

Cost Effectiveness of Darunavir/Ritonavir 600/100mg bid in Treatment-Experienced, Lopinavir-Naive, Protease Inhibitor-Resistant, HIV-Infected Adults in Belgium, Italy, Sweden and the UK

Using data from the phase IIb POWER trials, darunavir boosted with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r; 600/100 mg twice daily; bid)-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was shown to be significantly more efficacious and cost effective than other protease inhibitor (PI)-based therapy in highly treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected adults. Furthermore, in the phase III TITAN trial (TMC114-C214), DRV/r 600/100 mg bid-based HAART generated a superior 48-week virological response rate compared with standard-of-care lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r; 400/100 mg bid)-based therapy in treatment-experienced, lopinavir-naive patients, and in particular those with one or more International AIDS Society - USA (IAS-USA) primary PI resistance-associated mutations at baseline. These patients had a broader degree of previous PI use/failure (0 - ≥ 2) than the POWER patients. To determine whether DRV/r 600/100 mg bid-based HAART is cost effective compared with LPV/r-based therapy, from the perspective of Belgian, Italian, Swedish and UK reimbursement authorities, when used in treatment-experienced patients similar to TITAN patients with one or more IAS-USA primary PI mutations at baseline. An existing Markov model containing health states defined by CD4 cell count ranges (>500, 351-500, 201-350, 101-200, 51-100 and 0-50 cells/mm³) and an absorbing state of death was adapted for use in the above-mentioned healthcare settings. Baseline demographics, CD4 cell count distribution, antiretroviral drug usage, virological/immunological response rates and matching transition probabilities were based on data collected during the first 48 weeks of therapy in the modelled subgroup of TITAN patients and the published literature. After treatment failure, patients were assumed to switch to a follow-on combination regimen. For each health state, utility values and mortality rates were obtained from the published literature. Data from local observational studies (Belgium, Sweden and Italy) or the published literature (UK) were used to determine resource-use patterns and costs associated with each CD4 cell count range. Unit costs were derived from official local sources; a lifetime horizon was taken and discount rates were chosen based on local guidelines. The base-case analysis predicted quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains of 0.785 in Belgium, 0.608 in Italy, 0.584 in Sweden and 0.550 in the UK when DRV/r-based therapy was used instead of LPV/r-based treatment. The estimated base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were €6964/QALY gained in Belgium, €9277/QALY gained in Italy, €6868 (SEK69,687)/QALY gained in Sweden and €14,778 (£12 612)/QALY gained in the UK. Assuming a threshold of €30,000/QALY gained, DRV/r-based therapy remained cost effective over most parameter ranges tested in extensive one-way sensitivity analyses. The variation of immunological response rates and the time horizon were identified as important drivers of cost effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a greater than 70% probability of achieving an ICER below this threshold in all four healthcare settings. From the perspective of Belgian, Italian, Swedish and UK payers, DRV/r 600/100 mg bid-based HAART is predicted to be cost effective compared with LPV/r 400/100 mg bid-based therapy, when used to manage treatment experienced, lopinavir-naive, PI-resistant, HIV-infected adults with a broad range of previous PI use/failure.

US Cost Effectiveness of Darunavir/Ritonavir 600/100mg bid in Treatment-Experienced, HIV-Infected Adults with Evidence of Protease Inhibitor Resistance Included in the TITAN Trial

The phase III TITAN trial evaluated the use of darunavir with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) 600/100 mg twice daily (bid) compared with lopinavir with low-dose ritonavir (LPV/r) in treatment-experienced, lopinavir-naive patients. This study estimates the cost effectiveness of DRV/r from a US societal perspective when compared with LPV/r in treatment-experienced patients with a profile similar to those TITAN patients who had one or more International AIDS Society - USA (IAS-USA) primary protease inhibitor (PI) resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at baseline. This population had less advanced HIV disease and a broader range of previous PI exposure/failure (0 - ≥ 2 PIs) at enrollment than those in the darunavir phase IIb POWER trials. An existing Markov model containing six health states defined by CD4 cell count range (>500, 351-500, 201-350, 101-200, 51-100 and 0-50 cells/mm³) and an absorbing state of death was adapted. Baseline demographics, CD4 cell count distribution and antiretroviral drug usage, virological response (at week 24), and immunological response estimates and matching transition probabilities were based on data collected directly from the one or more IAS-USA PI mutation subpopulation during the first 48 weeks of the TITAN trial, as well as from published literature. Patients were assumed to switch to a regimen containing tipranavir plus an optimized background regimen after treatment failure. For each CD4 cell count range or health state, the utility values, HIV and non-HIV-related mortality rates, and non-antiretroviral-related cost of HIV care estimates were derived from published literature. Unit costs were derived from official local sources. A lifetime horizon was taken in the base-case analysis. The base-case analysis predicted discounted quality-adjusted survival gains of 0.493 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for DRV/r compared with LPV/r, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$23,057 per QALY gained over a lifetime horizon. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 0.754 probability of an ICER below the threshold of US$50,000 per QALY gained. DRV/r remained cost effective over all parameter ranges tested in extensive one-way sensitivity analyses and variability analyses, which examined the impact of input parameter uncertainty and changes in model assumptions and treatment patterns, respectively. Shortening the model time horizon had the largest impact on the ICER, reducing it most notably to US$4919 with a 10-year time horizon. From a US societal perspective and based on an analysis of the patients with primary IAS-USA PI RAMs enrolled in the darunavir phase III TITAN trial, a highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen containing DRV/r 600/100 mg bid is estimated to be a cost-effective therapy when compared with a HAART regimen containing LPV/r, for the management of treatment-experienced, PI-resistant, HIV-infected adults with a broad range of previous PI use/failure.

Efficacy and safety of etravirine in treatment-experienced, HIV-1 patients: pooled 48 week analysis of two randomized, controlled trials

To evaluate the efficacy, safety and virologic resistance profile of etravirine (TMC125), a next-generation nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, over 48 weeks in treatment-experienced adults infected with HIV-1 strains resistant to a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and other antiretrovirals. DUET-1 (NCT00254046) and DUET-2 (NCT00255099) are two identically designed, randomized, double-blind phase III trials. Patients received twice-daily etravirine 200 mg or placebo, each plus a background regimen of darunavir/ritonavir, investigator-selected nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and optional enfuvirtide. Eligible patients had documented nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance, at least three primary protease inhibitor mutations at screening and were on a stable but virologically failing regimen for at least 8 weeks, with plasma viral load more than 5000 copies/ml. Pooled 48-week data from the two trials are presented. Patients (1203) were randomized and treated (n = 599, etravirine; n = 604, placebo). Significantly more patients in the etravirine than in the placebo group achieved viral load less than 50 copies/ml at week 48 (61 vs. 40%, respectively; P < 0.0001). Significantly fewer patients in the etravirine group experienced at least one confirmed or probable AIDS-defining illness/death (6 vs. 10%; P = 0.0408). Safety and tolerability in the etravirine group was comparable to the placebo group. Rash was the only adverse event to occur at a significantly higher incidence in the etravirine group (19 vs. 11%, respectively, P < 0.0001), occurring primarily in the second week of treatment. At 48 weeks, treatment-experienced patients receiving etravirine plus background regimen had statistically superior and durable virologic responses (viral load less than 50 copies/ml) than those receiving placebo plus background regimen, with comparable tolerability and no new safety signals reported since week 24.

High Rate of Virologic Suppression with Raltegravir plus Etravirine and Darunavir/Ritonavir among Treatment‐Experienced Patients Infected with Multidrug‐Resistant HIV: Results of the ANRS 139 TRIO Trial

The introduction of 2 or 3 fully active drugs in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients receiving failing antiretroviral therapy is a key determinant of subsequent treatment efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a regimen containing raltegravir, etravirine, and darunavir/ritonavir for treatment-experienced patients infected with multidrug-resistant HIV. Patients enrolled in this phase II, noncomparative, multicenter trial were naive to the investigational drugs and had plasma HIV RNA levels >1000 copies/mL, a history of virologic failure while receiving nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI), > or =3 primary protease inhibitor and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations, and < or =3 darunavir and NNRTI mutations. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with plasma HIV RNA levels <50 copies/mL at 24 weeks. A total of 103 patients enrolled in the study. At baseline, genotypic resistance profiles showed a median of 4 primary protease inhibitor mutations, 1 NNRTI mutation, and 6 NRTI mutations. In addition to the investigational drugs, 90 patients (87%) received optimized background therapy that included NRTIs (86 patients) or enfuvirtide (12 patients). At week 24, 90% of patients (95% confidence interval, 85%-96%) had an HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL. At week 48, 86% (95% confidence interval, 80%-93%) had an HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL. The median CD4 cell count increase was 108 cells/mm(3). Grade 3 or 4 clinical adverse events were reported in 15 patients (14.6%). Only 1 patient discontinued the investigational antiretroviral regimen, because of an adverse event. In patients infected with multidrug-resistant virus who have few remaining treatment options, the combination of raltegravir, etravirine, and darunavir/ritonavir is well tolerated and is associated with a rate of virologic suppression similar to that expected in treatment-naive patients.

Characterization of virologic failure patients on darunavir/ritonavir in treatment-experienced patients

Characterization of resistance development in virologic failure patients on the protease inhibitor darunavir administered with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) in the 48-week analysis of TMC114/r In Treatment-experienced pAtients Naive to lopinavir (TITAN). TITAN is a randomized, controlled, open-label, phase III, noninferiority trial comparing the efficacy and safety of DRV/r with that of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in HIV-1-infected, treatment-experienced, LPV-naive patients. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies/ml at week 48. Patients received DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily (n = 298) or LPV/r 400/100 mg twice daily (n = 297), and an optimized background regimen. Patients who lost or never achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies/ml after week 16 were considered virologic failure patients. Genotyping and phenotyping were performed. The virologic failure rate in the DRV/r arm (10%, n = 31) was lower than in the LPV/r arm (22%, n = 65). Furthermore, fewer virologic failure patients in the DRV/r arm than in the LPV/r arm developed primary protease inhibitor mutations (6 vs. 20) or nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance-associated mutations (4 vs. 15). In addition, fewer virologic failure patients on DRV/r than on LPV/r lost susceptibility to the protease inhibitor (3 vs. 13) or nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor(s) (3 vs. 14) used in the treatment regimen or to other protease inhibitors. Most DRV/r-treated virologic failure patients retained susceptibility to all protease inhibitors. In treatment-experienced, LPV-naive patients, the overall virologic failure rate in the DRV/r arm was low and was associated with limited resistance development. These findings showed that the use of DRV/r in earlier lines of treatment was less likely to lead to cross-resistance to other protease inhibitors compared with LPV/r.

Efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir in treatment-experienced HIV type-1 patients in the POWER 1, 2 and 3 trials at week 96

Long-term (96-week) efficacy and safety of the protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) was evaluated in HIV type-1 (HIV-1)-infected patients with extensive prior treatment experience in the POWER 1, 2 and 3 trials. Patients with HIV-1 RNA>or=1,000 copies/ml and >or=1 primary PI mutation were randomized to receive either DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily plus an optimized background regimen (OBR), or an investigator-selected control PI (CPI) plus OBR (POWER 3 was a DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily single-arm study). The proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 96 was assessed (intent-to-treat [ITT], time-to-loss of virological response algorithm). In total, 467 patients received DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily; 124 patients received CPI(s). At week 96, 39% of DRV/r patients in POWER 1 and 2 (pooled analysis) versus 9% of CPI patients achieved HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml (ITT, time-to-loss of virological response algorithm; P<0.001). A similar proportion of DRV/r patients (42%) in POWER 3 achieved HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 96. Mean absolute CD4(+) T-cell count increase for DRV/r at 96 weeks was 133 cells/mm(3) in POWER 1 and 2 and 103 cells/mm(3) in POWER 3. Grade 2-4 treatment-emergent adverse events at least possibly related to DRV/r (>or=2% incidence, excluding laboratory abnormalities) were diarrhoea (3%), vomiting (3%), nausea (2%) and headache (2%). Treatment with DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily was well tolerated and led to sustained virological and immunological responses in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients over 96 weeks.

Darunavir

Darunavir

Primary drug resistance in antiretroviral-naïve injection drug users

We evaluated the prevalence of primary HIV drug resistance in a population of 128 injection drug users (48 female) prior to initiating antiretroviral therapy. Genotypic and phenotypic profiles were obtained retrospectively for the period June 1996 to February 2007. Genotypic drug resistance was defined as the presence of a major mutation (IAS-USA table, 2007 revision), adding revertants at reverse transcriptase (RT) codon 215. Phenotypic drug resistance was defined as the fold change associated with >or=80% loss of the wild type virologic response due to viral resistance based on virtual phenotype analysis. Genotypic drug resistance was uncommon, and was only identified in six (4.7%) cases, all in the RT gene (L100I, K103N, Y181C, M184V, Y188L, and T215D). There were no cases of multi-class or protease inhibitor (PI) resistance. However, polymorphisms in the protease and RT genes were extremely common. Phenotypic drug resistance was also identified in six (4.7%) patients, four in the RT gene (in patients with mutations K103N, Y181C, M184V and Y188L) and two the protease gene (in two patients with minor PI mutations). In addition, 25 (19.5%) of the patients had reduced susceptibility to PIs, defined as resistance>20% but <80% of the wild type virologic response, with no primary PI mutations detected in all these patients. The prevalence of primary HIV drug resistance was low in this population of injection drug users.

Long-Term Immunologic and Virologic Responses in Patients with Highly Resistant HIV Infection Who Are Treated with an Incompletely Suppressive Antiretroviral Regimen

Some treatment-experienced patients with highly drug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection have no option but to continue to receive an incompletely suppressive regimen (ISR). We performed a study to determine their long-term immunologic and virologic responses to ISR, to investigate risks for immunologic or virologic failure, and to examine for the occurrence of new drug-resistance mutations. Antiretroviral treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients with a genotype sensitivity score < or = 1, an HIV load > 1000 copies/mL, and no available optimized regimen were included in the study. The proportion of patients treated with ISR who developed immunologic failure (defined as a 25% reduction in the CD4 cell count from the baseline level) and virologic failure (defined as a > or = 0.5-log10 increase in the HIV load from the baseline level) was determined. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to investigate variables associated with immunologic or virologic failure. New drug-resistant mutations were calculated in 27 patients with sequential genotypes available. Forty-seven patients (median duration of prior antiretroviral therapy, 89 months; median CD4 cell count, 277 cells/mm3; and median HIV load, 19,728 copies/mL) had multiple HIV mutations (a median of 5 nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor mutations, 1 nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor mutation, and 6 protease inhibitor mutations; median genotype sensitivity score, 0) at baseline. By 48 months after ISR use, 43% had developed immunologic failure, and 22% had developed virologic failure. None of the studied variables (i.e., age, < 50 years; baseline HIV load, > 100,000 copies/mL; baseline CD4 cell count, < 200 cells/mm3; or inclusion of lamivudine in the treatment regimen) were associated with immunologic or virologic failure. New nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor mutations occurred in 63% of patients, and new primary protease inhibitor mutations occurred in 52.6% of protease inhibitor recipients. No deaths occurred. A total of 8.5% of patients experienced a new AIDS-defining event. Most patients with highly drug-resistant HIV infection who were treated with an ISR maintain durable immunologic and virologic responses. New drug-resistant mutations occur frequently.

Efficacy and safety of TMC125 (etravirine) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in DUET-1: 24-week results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Antiretroviral agents active against drug-resistant HIV-1 are needed for treatment-experienced patients. The aim of this trial was to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of TMC125 (etravirine), a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). DUET-1 is a continuing, multinational randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. Treatment-experienced adult patients with virological failure on stable antiretroviral therapy, documented genotypic evidence of NNRTI resistance, viral load over 5000 copies per mL, and three or more primary protease inhibitor mutations were randomly assigned to receive 200 mg TMC125 or placebo twice daily. All patients also received darunavir with low-dose ritonavir and investigator-selected nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Enfuvirtide use was optional. The primary endpoint was a confirmed viral load below 50 copies per mL at week 24 (FDA time-to-loss of virological response algorithm). Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, with the number NCT00254046. 612 patients were randomised and treated (304 in the TMC125 group, 308 in the placebo group). By week 24, 42 (14%) patients in the TMC125 group and 56 (18%) in the placebo group had discontinued, mainly due to virological failure. At week 24, 170 (56%) patients in the TMC125 group and 119 (39%) patients in the placebo group achieved a confirmed viral load of less than 50 copies per mL (difference in response rates 17%; 95% CI 9-25; p=0.005). Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. The type and incidence of adverse events, including neuropsychiatric events, seen with TMC125 were generally comparable with placebo, with the exception of rash (61 [20%] patients on TMC125 vs 30 [10%] on placebo) and diarrhoea (36 [12%] patients on TMC125 vs 63 [20%] on placebo). In treatment-experienced patients with NNRTI resistance, treatment with TMC125 achieved better virological suppression at week 24 than did placebo. The safety and tolerability profile of TMC125 was generally comparable with placebo.

Efficacy and safety of TMC125 (etravirine) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in DUET-2: 24-week results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

TMC125 (etravirine) is a non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with activity against NNRTI-resistant HIV-1 in phase IIb trials. The aim of DUET-2 is to examine the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of TMC125 in treatment-experienced patients. In this continuing randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial, HIV-1-infected patients on failing antiretroviral therapy with evidence of resistance to currently available NNRTIs and at least three primary protease inhibitor mutations were eligible for enrolment if on stable (8 weeks unchanged) antiretroviral therapy with plasma HIV-1 RNA greater than 5000 copies per mL. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either TMC125 (200 mg) or placebo, each given twice daily with darunavir-ritonavir, investigator-selected nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and optional enfuvirtide. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with confirmed viral load below 50 copies per mL at week 24 (FDA time-to-loss of virological response algorithm). Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00255099. 591 patients were randomised and treated (295 patients in the TMC125 group and 296 in the placebo group). By week 24, 51 (17%) patients in the TMC125 group and 73 (25%) in the placebo group had discontinued, mainly because of virological failure. 183 (62%) patients in the TMC125 group and 129 (44%) in the placebo group achieved confirmed viral load below 50 copies per mL at week 24 (difference 18%, 95% CI 11-26; p=0.0003). The type and frequency of adverse events were much the same in the two groups. In treatment-experienced patients, treatment with TMC125 led to better virological suppression at week 24 than did placebo. The safety and tolerability profile of TMC125 was generally comparable with placebo.

Efficacy and safety of darunavir-ritonavir compared with that of lopinavir-ritonavir at 48 weeks in treatment-experienced, HIV-infected patients in TITAN: a randomised controlled phase III trial

The protease inhibitor darunavir has been shown to be efficacious in highly treatment-experienced patients with HIV infection, but needs to be assessed in patients with a broader range of treatment experience. We did a randomised, controlled, phase III trial (TITAN) to compare 48-week efficacy and safety of darunavir-ritonavir with that of lopinavir-ritonavir in treatment-experienced, lopinavir-naive patients. Patients received optimised background regimen plus non-blinded treatment with darunavir-ritonavir 600/100 mg twice daily or lopinavir-ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority (95% CI lower limit for the difference in treatment response -12% or greater) for HIV RNA of less than 400 copies per mL in plasma at week 48 (per-protocol analysis). TITAN (TMC114-C214) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00110877. Of 595 patients randomised and treated, 187 (31%) were protease inhibitor naive; 476 of 582 (82%) were susceptible to four or more protease inhibitors. At week 48, significantly more darunavir-ritonavir than lopinavir-ritonavir patients had HIV RNA of less than 400 copies per mL (77% [220 of 286] vs 68% [199 of 293]; estimated difference 9%, 95% CI 2-16). Fewer virological failures treated with darunavir-ritonavir than with lopinavir-ritonavir developed primary protease inhibitor mutations (21% [n=6] vs 36% [n=20]) and nucleoside analogue-associated mutations (14% [n=4] vs 27% [n=15]). Safety data were generally similar between the groups; grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 80 (27%) darunavir-ritonavir and 89 (30%) lopinavir-ritonavir patients. In lopinavir-naive, treatment-experienced patients, darunavir-ritonavir was non-inferior to lopinavir-ritonavir treatment in terms of our virological endpoint, and should therefore be considered as a treatment option for this population.

Week 24 efficacy and safety of TMC114/ritonavir in treatment-experienced HIV patients

Agents for the treatment of HIV-1-infected patients with resistance to current antiretroviral (ART) drugs are needed. TMC114-C202 was a randomized, partially blinded, dose-finding study in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with one or more primary protease inhibitor (PI) mutations and HIV-1 RNA > 1000 copies/ml. Patients were randomized to receive one of four TMC114 doses given with ritonavir (TMC114/r) or investigator-selected control PI drug(s) (CPI); all received an optimized background regimen. The primary intent-to-treat analysis compared the proportion of patients achieving a >or= 1 log10 copies/ml HIV-1 RNA reduction at week 24 between the treatment arms using the time-to-loss of virological response algorithm. For 278 patients at baseline, mean HIV-1 RNA was 4.7 log10 copies/ml, median CD4 cell count was 106 cells/mul; HIV-1 isolates had a median of three primary PI mutations and a median fold change in lopinavir susceptibility of 80. Discontinuation rates were 23% for TMC114/r versus 64% for CPI. More patients in each TMC114/r dose group achieved >or= 1.0 log10 copies/ml reduction in HIV-1 RNA than in the CPI group (45-62% versus 14%; P <or= 0.003): patients taking TMC114/r twice daily had the greatest responses. HIV-1 RNA was < 50 copies/ml in 18-39% of TMC114/r patients versus 7% CPI (P < 0.001 for highest dose). Mean CD4 cell count increased by 59-75 versus 12 cells/mul (TMC114/r versus CPI: P <or= 0.005). Overall adverse event rates were similar in both arms, without significant differences among TMC114/r groups. TMC114/r treatment resulted in greater virological and immunological responses in ART-experienced patients compared with CPI at 24 weeks.

Efficacy and safety of TMC114/ritonavir in treatment-experienced HIV patients: 24-week results of POWER 1

The ongoing phase IIb POWER 1 (TMC114-C213) trial is designed to assess efficacy and safety of the protease inhibitor (PI) TMC114 (darunavir) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. This randomized, partially blinded, 24-week dose-finding study compared efficacy and safety of four doses of TMC114 plus low-dose ritonavir (TMC114/r) with investigator-selected control PI(s) (CPI[s]). Patients with one or more primary PI mutation and HIV RNA > 1000 copies/ml received optimized background therapy, plus TMC114/r 400/100 mg once daily, 800/100 mg once daily, 400/100 mg twice daily or 600/100 mg twice daily, or CPI(s). The primary endpoint (intent-to-treat) compared proportions of patients achieving viral load reduction >or= 1.0 log10 copies/ml from baseline. In total, 318 patients were treated. Baseline mean viral load was 4.48 log10 copies/ml; median CD4 cell count was 179 cells/microl. In the CPI arm 62% of patients discontinued (virological failure: 54%); 10% of TMC114/r patients discontinued. More TMC114/r (69-77%) than CPI patients (25%) reached the primary endpoint (P < 0.001); 43-53% of TMC114/r patients and 18% of the CPI arm achieved viral load < 50 copies/ml (P < 0.001). TMC114/r demonstrated greater mean CD4 cell count increases versus CPI(s) (68-124 versus 20 cells/microl; P < 0.05). TMC114/r 600/100 mg twice daily demonstrated the highest virological and immunological responses. Adverse event incidence was similar between treatments; headache and diarrhoea were more common with CPI(s). TMC114/r demonstrated statistically higher 24-week virological response rates and CD4 cell count increases than CPI(s). TMC114/r 600/100 mg twice daily has received regulatory approval in treatment-experienced patients.