A5224s compared fat changes with abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) or TenofovirDF/Emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) with efavirenz (EFV) or atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r). TDF/FTC- and ABC/3TC-regimens similarly increased limb and visceral fat. ATV/r led to greater gains in limb fat, and a trend towards greater gains in visceral fat than EFV.
Background. We compare the effect of 4 different antiretroviral regimens on limb and visceral fat.
Methods. 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.
Results. 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 log10 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 cm2, 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.
Conclusions. 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.
Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00118898.
(See the editorial commentary by Yin and Overton, on pages 1705-7.)
Background. Long-term effects of abacavir (ABC)–lamivudine (3TC), compared with tenofovir (TDF)–emtricitabine (FTC) with efavirenz (EFV) or atazanavir plus ritonavir (ATV/r), on bone mineral density (BMD) have not been analyzed.
Methods. A5224s was a substudy of A5202, in which HIV-infected treatment-naive participants were randomized and blinded to receive ABC-3TC or TDF-FTC with open-label EFV or ATV/r. Primary bone end points included Dual-emission X-ray absorbtiometry (DXA)-measured percent changes in spine and hip BMD at week 96. Primary analyses were intent-to-treat. Statistical tests used the factorial design and included linear regression, 2-sample t, log-rank, and Fisher's exact tests.
Results. Two hundred sixty-nine persons randomized to 4 arms of ABC-3TC or TDF-FTC with EFV or ATV/r. At baseline, 85% were male, and 47% were white non-Hispanic; the median HIV-1 RNA load was 4.6 log10 copies/mL, the median age was 38 years, the median weight was 76 kg, and the median CD4 cell count was 233 cells/μL. At week 96, the mean percentage changes from baseline in spine and hip BMD for ABC-3TC versus TDF-FTC were -1.3% and -3.3% (P = .004) and -2.6% and -4.0% (P = .024), respectively; and for EFV versus ATV/r were -1.7% and -3.1% (P = .035) and -3.1% and -3.4% (P = .61), respectively. Bone fracture was observed in 5.6% of participants. The probability of bone fractures and time to first fracture were not different across components.
Conclusions. Compared with ABC-3TC, TDF-FTC–treated participants had significantly greater decreases in spine and hip BMD, whereas ATV/r led to more significant losses in spine, but not hip, BMD than EFV.
Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00118898.
Once-daily (QD) ritonavir 100 mg-boosted fosamprenavir 1400 mg (FPV/r100) or atazanavir 300 mg (ATV/r100), plus tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) 300 mg/200 mg, have not been compared as initial antiretroviral treatment. To address this data gap, we conducted an open-label, multicenter 48-week study (ALERT) in 106 antiretroviral-naïve, HIV-infected patients (median HIV-1 RNA 4.9 log10 copies/mL; CD4+ count 191 cells/mm3) randomly assigned to the FPV/r100 or ATV/r100 regimens.
At baseline, the FPV/r100 or ATV/r100 arms were well-matched for HIV-1 RNA (median, 4.9 log10 copies/mL [both]), CD4+ count (mean, 176 vs 205 cells/mm3). At week 48, intent-to-treat: missing/discontinuation = failure analysis showed similar responses to FPV/r100 and ATV/r100 (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL: 75% (40/53) vs 83% (44/53), p = 0.34 [Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test]); mean CD4+ count change-from-baseline: +170 vs +183 cells/mm3, p = 0.398 [Wilcoxon rank sum test]). Fasting total/LDL/HDL-cholesterol changes-from-baseline were also similar, although week 48 median fasting triglycerides were higher with FPV/r100 (150 vs 131 mg/dL). FPV/r100-treated patients experienced fewer treatment-related grade 2–4 adverse events (15% vs 57%), with differences driven by ATV-related hyperbilirubinemia. Three patients discontinued TDF/FTC because their GFR decreased to <50 mL/min.
The all-QD regimens of FPV/r100 and ATV/r100, plus TDF/FTC, provided similar virologic, CD4+ response, and fasting total/LDL/HDL-cholesterol changes through 48 weeks. Fewer FPV/r100-treated patients experienced treatment-related grade 2–4 adverse events.
Although ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) is known to be associated with nephrolithiasis, little is known about the incidence of nephrolithiasis in patients treated with ritonavir-boosted Darunavir (DRV/r), the other preferred protease inhibitor.
In a single-center cohort, the incidence of nephrolithiasis was compared between HIV-infected patients who commenced DRV/r-containing antiretroviral therapy and those on ATV/r. The effects of ATV/r use over DRV/r were estimated by univariate and multivariate Cox hazards models.
Renal stones were diagnosed in only one patient (0.86 per 1000 person-years) of the DRV/r group (n=540) and 37 (20.2 per 1000 person-years) of the ATV/r group (n=517). The median [interquartile (IQR)] observation period in the DRV/r group was 27.1 months (IQR 18.1-38.4 months), and 40.6 months (IQR 17.5-42.7) for the ATV/r group. The total observation period was 1,163.6 person-years and 1,829.6 person-years for the DRV/r group and for the ATV/r group, respectively. In the 37 patients on ATV/r who developed nephrolithiasis, the median time from commencement of ATV/r to diagnosis was 28.1 months (IQR 18.4–42.7), whereas nephrolithiasis in the single patient of the DRV/r group occurred 11.2 month after the introduction of DRV/r. ATV/r use over DRV/r was significantly associated with nephrolithiasis by uni- and multivariate analyses (HR=26.01; 95% CI, 3.541–191.0; p=0.001) (adjusted HR=21.47; 95% CI, 2.879–160.2; p=0.003).
The incidence of nephrolithiasis was substantially lower in patients on DRV/r than those on ATV/r. The results suggest that DRV/r should be selected for treatment of HIV-infected patients at risk of chronic kidney disease.
To explore darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) plus raltegravir (RAL) combination therapy in antiretroviral-naive patients.
Phase IIb, single-arm, open-label, multicenter study.
One hundred and twelve antiretroviral-naive, HIV-1-infected patients received DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily and RAL 400 mg twice daily. Primary endpoint was virologic failure by week 24. Virologic failure was defined as confirmed viral load of 1000 copies/ml or more at week 12, or an increase of more than 0.5 log10 copies/ml in viral load from week 4 to 12, or a confirmed viral load of more than 50 copies/ml at or after week 24. Protease and integrase genes were sequenced in patients experiencing virologic failure.
Virologic failure rate was 16% [95% confidence interval (CI) 10–24] by week 24 and 26% (95% CI 19–36) by week 48 in an intent-to-treat analysis. Viral load at virologic failure was 51–200 copies/ml in 17/28 failures. Adjusting for age and sex, virologic failure was associated with baseline viral load of more than 100 000 copies/ml [hazard ratio 3.76, 95% CI (1.52–9.31), P =0.004] and lower CD4 cell count [0.77 per 100 cells/μl increase (95% CI 0.61–0.98), P =0.037]. When trough RAL concentrations were included as a time-varying covariate in the analysis, virologic failure remained associated with baseline viral load more than 100 000 copies/ml [hazard ratio =4.67 (95% CI 1.93–11.25), P <0.001], whereas RAL level below detection limit in plasma at one or more previous visits was associated with increased hazard [hazard ratio =3.42 (95% CI 1.41–8.26), P =0.006]. All five participants with integrase mutations during virologic failure had baseline viral load more than 100 000 copies/ml.
DRV/r plus RAL was effective and well tolerated in most patients, but virologic failure and integrase resistance were common, particularly in patients with baseline viral load more than 100 000 copies/ml.
antiretroviral therapy; darunavir; nucleoside sparing; raltegravir
Population genotyping (PG) can underestimate resistance if resistance-containing low abundance variants go undetected. PG and clonal analysis (CA) results were compared in virologic failures (VFs) from a 48-week clinical trial that evaluated once-daily fosamprenavir/ritonavir (FPV/r) 1400 mg/100 mg or atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) 300 mg/100 mg, each combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine, in antiretroviral-naive patients. VF was defined as confirmed HIV-1 RNA ≥400 copies/ml at ≥24 weeks or viral rebound >400 copies/ml any time following viral suppression. All patients had baseline PG. One hundred and six patients enrolled (53/arm). Baseline resistance mutations were more prevalent in patients receiving FPV/r (10/53) than ATV/r (3/53). Seven patients (7%) were VFs-four on FPV/r and three on ATV/r. In the four FPV/r-treated VFs, baseline HIV TAMs combinations and/or PI mutations were detected in one by PG at VF (RT: L210W + T215C; PR: M46I + L76V) and three others by CA alone (RT: L210W + T215Y; RT: M41L; RT: K65R + K70R; PR: I47V); all four had study drug-associated mutations (CA detecting more HIV-1 resistance mutations than PG). In the three ATV/r VFs, no baseline drug-associated mutations were detected by PG; for one patient CA detected RT: K65R; PR: I84V. Phylogenetic analysis revealed tight clustering for FPV/r-treated VFs with highly related clones, whereas HIV-1 from ATV/r-treated VFs had no outgrowth from baseline of low abundance resistance-containing variants. In conclusion, low-abundance HIV resistance-containing variants were detected in baseline samples from patients with VF. The archived viruses that reemerged under selection pressure and acquired additional mutations were found primarily in patients in the FPV/r arm. Despite this and a baseline resistance imbalance between the two arms, FPV/r and ATV/r provided similar virologic suppression through 48 weeks; however, these findings highlight the necessity for the development of quick and inexpensive methods for detection of minority species to better guide therapy selection.
The effect of specific antiretrovirals on inflammation is unclear.
A5224 s was a substudy of A5202, which randomized HIV-infected treatment-naïve subjects to blinded abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) or tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) with open-label efavirenz (EFV) or atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) in a factorial design. Our analysis compared changes in inflammation markers from baseline to week 24 between ABC/3TC and TDF/FTC. Secondary analyses included changes at week 96 and comparisons of EFV vs. ATV/r.
Analyses included 244 subjects (85% male, 48% white non-Hispanic), median age 39 years, HIV-1 RNA 4.6 log10 copies/mL, CD4 240 cells/µL. TNF-α, sTNFR-I and -II, sVCAM-1 and sICAM-1 decreased significantly at weeks 24 and 96, without significant differences between components (p ≥ 0.44). At week 24, ABC/3TC had a greater hsCRP mean fold change than TDF/FTC (1.43 vs. 0.88, estimated mean fold change percent difference (Δ) 61.5% [95% CI 13.6%, 129.5%]; p = 0.008). Similar results were seen at week 96 (p = 0.021). At week 24 (but not 96), EFV had a greater hsCRP mean fold change than ATV/r (1.41 vs. 0.88; Δ = 60.2% [12.6%, 127.7%]; p = 0.009). IL-6 decreased significantly at week 24 with TDF/FTC but not with ABC/3TC (between-components p = 0.019). At week 96, IL-6 decreased significantly in both NRTI components (between-components p = 0.11). IL-6 changes were not significantly different between ATV/r and EFV at either time point (p ≥ 0.89).
Soluble TNF-receptors and adhesion molecules decreased following treatment initiation and did not differ by regimens. Differences were seen on hsCRP and IL-6 changes with ABC/3TC vs. TDF/FTC and on hsCRP with EFV vs. ATV/r.
abacavir; C-reactive protein; endothelial activation markers; Inflammation markers; interleukin-6; TNF alpha
To examine whether the overall results of the CASTLE study pertain to both genders, we analysed the efficacy and safety of atazanavir/ritonavir and lopinavir/ritonavir in 277 female and 606 male patients in the open-label, multinational trial over 96 weeks. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00272779.
Treatment-naive patients aged ≥18 years with HIV-1 RNA ≥5000 copies/mL were randomized to receive either atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg once daily or lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily, with fixed-dose tenofovir/emtricitabine 300/200 mg once daily.
At week 96, confirmed virological response rates (HIV RNA <50 copies/mL; intent-to-treat analysis) were higher in women and men receiving atazanavir/ritonavir than those receiving lopinavir/ritonavir and lower in women than men in both treatment arms (67% of women and 77% of men on atazanavir/ritonavir and 63% of women and 71% of men on lopinavir/ritonavir). These differences were not observed in the on-treatment analysis. Mean change in CD4 cell count from baseline to week 96 was 265 cells/mm3 for women and 269 cells/mm3 for men on atazanavir/ritonavir and 298 cells/mm3 for women and 286 cells/mm3 for men on lopinavir/ritonavir. Discontinuation rates were higher in women than men in each treatment arm (22% of women and 15% of men on atazanavir/ritonavir and 29% of women and 18% of men on lopinavir/ritonavir). In women and men, grade 2–4 nausea and diarrhoea were more frequent in the lopinavir/ritonavir group; jaundice and hyperbilirubinaemia occurred more frequently in the atazanavir/ritonavir group.
Once-daily atazanavir/ritonavir is an effective and well-tolerated therapeutic option for women and men with HIV-1 infection. The sex-based differences in response may be due to higher discontinuation rates in women.
antiretroviral therapy; protease inhibitors; HIV
The primary aim of the study was to compare the metabolic side effects of a nucleoside analogue-containing regimen with a nucleoside analogue-sparing double protease inhibitor regimen. A secondary goal was to test for efficacy of a double-PI regimen.
Multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III clinical trial.
Adult HIV-1-infected individuals naïve to antiretroviral therapy with viral load above 400 HIV-RNA copies/ml were randomized (1:1) to either 400 mg lopinavir /100 mg ritonavir (LPV/r) BID plus 150 mg lamivudine/300 mg zidovudine (CBV) BID versus LPV/r BID plus 300 mg atazanavir (ATV) QD. Main outcome measure was the virologic failure in both groups, defined as viral load ≥50 copies/ml at week 48.
In the CBV/LPV/r-arm, 29 out of 35 patients [(83%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 66.9-92.2%] and 18 out of 40 patients (45%; 95% CI 29.7-61.5%) in the ATV/LPV/r-arm had a HIV-RNA level <50 copies/ml at week 48. The intent-to-treat analysis revealed inferior virologic response in the ATV/LPV/r arm (Chi-Q and Fisher´s Exact Test p<0.001) and resulted in premature termination of the trial. Eleven patients in the ATV/LPV/r-arm discontinued therapy because of virological failure. These failures mostly presented with low level replication (<1,000 copies/ml). Increases in CD4 cell counts was significantly more rapid in the ATV/LPV/r arm (p=0.02), but comparable at week 48.
ATV/LPV/r had less virologic efficacy than the conventional RTI-based regimen and resulted in a high virological failure rate with low level replication.
HIV-therapy; double-protease-inhibitor; Therapy-naïve patients.
Whether tenofovir nephrotoxicity is reversible after its withdrawal is unknown. Furthermore, there are no data on the viral efficacy of raltegravir (RAL) plus ritonavir-boosted Darunavir (DRV/r) in patients with suppressed viral load.
This multicenter, randomized trial compared renal function and viral efficacy in patients with suppressed viral load treated with RAL+DRV/r and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) plus tenofovir/emtricitabine (TVD), who had been previously on LPV/r+TVD. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with >10% improvement in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 48 weeks calculated with Cockcroft-Gault equation.
58 randomized and treatment-exposed patients were analyzed (28 on RAL+DRV/r and 30 on LPV/r+TVD). Greater than 10% improvement in eGFR was noted in 6 (25%) out of 24 with RAL+DRV/r and 3 (11%) of 28 with LPV/r+TVD, and the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.272, 95% CI -0.067 to 0.354). Sensitivity analyses using three other equations for eGFR showed the same results. Urinary β2 microglobulin, a sensitive marker of tenofovir tubulopathy, significantly improved with RAL+DRV/r than with LPV/r+TVD (-271 versus -64 µg/gCr, p=0.026). Per protocol analysis showed that the HIV-RNA was <50 copies/mL at week 48 in all patients of both arms (24 in RAL+DRV and 29 in LPV/r+TVD).
Switching LPV/r+TVD to RAL+DRV/r did not significantly increase the proportion of patients who showed >10% improvement in renal function among those with relatively preserved eGFR. However, the switch improved urinary β2 microglobulin, suggesting that discontinuation of TDF might be beneficial in the long-term. RAL+DRV/r showed favorable viral efficacy in patients with suppressed viral load.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01294761 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01294761?term=SPARE&rank=2, Umin Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000005116 http://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr.cgi?function=brows&action=brows&type=summary&recptno=R000006083&language=J)
HIV-infected children are treated with tenofovir in combination with other, potentially interacting, antiretroviral agents. We report the pharmacokinetic parameters of tenofovir in combination with efavirenz, darunavir-ritonavir, or atazanavir-ritonavir in HIV-infected children. HIV-infected patients 8 to 18 years of age receiving a tenofovir (300 mg)-based regimen containing efavirenz (300 or 600 mg) once daily (group 1), darunavir (300 or 600 mg)-ritonavir (100 mg) twice daily (group 2), or atazanavir (150 to 400 mg)-ritonavir (100 mg) once daily (group 3) were enrolled. Plasma samples were collected over a 24-h time interval. The 90% confidence intervals (90% CI) of the geometric means for the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and the minimum concentration of drug in serum (Cmin) of each antiretroviral were computed and checked for overlap with intervals bracketing published values obtained in adult or pediatric studies demonstrating safety and/or efficacy. Group 1 efavirenz plasma concentrations were observed to be higher in patients receiving fixed-dose combination tablets compared with subjects receiving the individual formulation. In group 2, tenofovir and darunavir exposure was observed to be lower than expected. In group 3, tenofovir and atazanavir administered concomitantly produced exposures similar to those published for adult patients. The 90% CI of AUC and Cmin for tenofovir overlapped the target range for all combinations. Informal comparisons of treatment groups did not indicate any advantage to any combination with respect to tenofovir exposure. Further study of exposures achieved with antiretrovirals administered in combination is warranted.
Mycobacterium tuberculosis is a concern in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Rifampin (RIF), an agent used against M. tuberculosis, is contraindicated with most HIV protease inhibitors. Atazanavir (ATV) has clinical efficacy comparable to a standard of care regimen in naive patients and, when dosed with low-dose ritonavir (RTV), also in treatment-experienced patients. We evaluated here the safety and pharmacokinetics of ATV, resulting from three regimens of ATV, RTV, and RIF in 71 healthy subjects. The pharmacokinetics for ATV and RTV were assessed after 6 and 10 days of dosing with ATV 400 mg (n = 53) and with ATV-RTV at 300 and 100 mg (ATV/RTV 300/100; n = 52), respectively. Steady-state pharmacokinetics for ATV, RTV, RIF, and desacetyl-rifampin (des-RIF) were measured after 10 days of dosing of ATV/RTV/RIF 300/100/600 (n = 17), ATV/RTV/RIF 300/200/600 (n = 17), or ATV/RTV/RIF 400/200/600 (n = 14). An RIF 600-alone arm was enrolled as a control group (n = 18). With ATV/RTV/RIF 400/200/600, ATV area under the concentration-time curve values were comparable, but the Cmin values were lower relative to ATV 400 alone. ATV exposures were substantially reduced for the other RIF-containing regimens relative to ATV 400 alone and for all regimens relative to ATV/RTV 300/100 alone. RIF and des-RIF exposures were 1.6- to 2.5-fold higher than with RIF 600 alone. The incidence of grade 3/4 alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase values was limited to 1 subject each in both the ATV/RTV/RIF 300/200/600 and the ATV/RTV/RIF 400/200/600 treatments. Coadministration of ATV with RIF was safe and generally well tolerated. Since ATV exposures were reduced in all regimens, ATV and RIF should not be coadministered at the dosing regimens studied.
To determine the effects of switching from lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) to atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) on muscle glucose uptake, glucose homeostasis, lipids, and body composition.
Fifteen HIV-infected men and women on a regimen containing LPV/r and with evidence of hyperinsulinemia and/or dyslipidemia were randomized to continue LPV/r or to switch to ATV/r (ATV 300mg and ritonavir 100mg daily) for six months. The primary endpoint was change in thigh muscle glucose uptake as measured by positron emission tomography (PET). Secondary endpoints included abdominal visceral adipose tissue, fasting lipids and safety parameters. The difference over time between treatment groups (treatment effect of ATV/r relative to LPV/r) was determined by repeated measures ANCOVA.
After six months, anterior thigh muscle glucose uptake increased significantly (treatment effect +18.2 ± 5.9 μmol/kg/min, ATV/r vs. LPV/r, p=0.035), and visceral adipose tissue (VAT) area decreased significantly in subjects who switched to ATV/r (treatment effect -31 ± 11cm2, ATV/r vs. LPV/r, p=0.047). Switching to ATV/r significantly decreased triglyceride (treatment effect -182 ± 64 mg/dL, ATV/r vs. LPV/r, p=0.02) and total cholesterol (treatment effect -23 ± 8 mg/dL, ATV/r vs. LPV/r, p=0.01), whereas HDL and LDL did not change significantly. Fasting glucose also decreased significantly following switch to ATV/r (treatment effect -15 ± 4 mg/dL, ATV/r vs. LPV/r, p=0.002).
Switching from LPV/r to ATV/r significantly increases glucose uptake by muscle, decreases abdominal visceral adipose tissue, improves lipid parameters and decreases fasting glucose over 6 months.
HIV; lipodystrophy; atazanavir; lopinavir; glucose; intra-abdominal fat; lipids
Infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and treatment with HIV-protease inhibitor (PI)-based highly active antiretroviral therapies (HAART) is associated with dysregulated fatty acid and lipid metabolism. Enhanced lipolysis, increased circulating fatty acid levels, and hepatic and intramuscular lipid accumulation appear to contribute to insulin resistance in HIV-infected people treated with PI-based HAART. However, it is unclear whether currently prescribed HIV-PIs directly alter skeletal muscle fatty acid transport, oxidation, and storage. We find that ritonavir (r, 5 μmol/l) plus 20 μmol/l of atazanavir (ATV), lopinavir (LPV), or darunavir (DRV) reduce palmitate oxidation(16-21%) in differentiated C2C12 myotubes. Palmitate oxidation was increased following exposure to high fatty acid media but this effect was blunted when myotubes were pre-exposed to the HIV-PIs. However, LPV/r and DRV/r, but not ATV/r suppressed palmitate uptake into myotubes. We found no effect of the HIV-PIs on FATP1, FATP4, or FABPpm but both CD36/FAT and carnitine palmitoyltransferase I (CPTI) were reduced by all three regimens though ATV/r caused only a small decrease in CPT1, relative to LPV/r or DRV/r. In contrast, sterol regulatory element binding protein-1 was increased by all 3 HIV-PIs. These findings suggest that HIV-PIs suppress fatty acid oxidation in murine skeletal muscle cells and that this may be related to decreases in cytosolic- and mitochondrial-associated fatty acid transporters. HIV-PIs may also directly impair fatty acid handling and partitioning in skeletal muscle, and this may contribute to the cluster of metabolic complications that occur in people living with HIV.
HIV-PIs; fatty acid uptake; fatty acid oxidation; CD36, CPT1; metabolic dysregulation
The aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetic behavior of atazanavir-ritonavir when it is coadministered with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. Eleven patients enrolled in Agence Nationale de Recherche sur le SIDA (National Agency for AIDS Research, Paris, France) trial 107 were included in this pharmacokinetic study. They received atazanavir at 300 mg and ritonavir at 100 mg once a day (QD) from day 1 to the end of study. For the first 2 weeks, their nucleoside analog reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) treatments remained unchanged. Tenofovir DF was administered QD from day 15 to the end of the study. Ongoing NRTIs were selected according to the reverse transcriptase genotype of the HIV isolates from each patient. The values of the pharmacokinetic parameters for atazanavir and ritonavir were measured before (day 14 [week 2]) and after (day 42 [week 6]) initiation of tenofovir DF and are reported for the 10 patients who completed the study. There was a significant decrease in the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) for atazanavir with the addition of tenofovir DF (AUC0-24 ratio, 0.75; 90% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.97; P = 0.05). There was a trend for a decrease in the minimum concentrations of atazanavir and ritonavir in plasma when they were combined with tenofovir, but none of the differences reached statistical significance. The median decreases in the HIV RNA loads at week 2 and week 6 were 0.1 and 0.2 log copies/ml, respectively. In summary, our data are consistent with the existence of a significant interaction between atazanavir and tenofovir DF.
The drug-drug interaction between rifabutin (RFB) and darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) was examined in a randomized, three-way crossover study of HIV-negative healthy volunteers who received DRV/r 600/100 mg twice a day (BID) (treatment A), RFB 300 mg once a day (QD) (treatment B), and DRV/r 600/100 mg BID plus RFB 150 mg every other day (QOD) (treatment C). The sequence of treatments was randomized, and each treatment period lasted 12 days. Full pharmacokinetic profiles were determined for DRV, ritonavir, and RFB and its active metabolite, 25-O-desacetylrifabutin (desRFB), on day 13. The DRV and ritonavir areas under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to 12 h (AUC12h) increased by 57% and 66%, respectively, in the presence of RFB. The RFB exposure was comparable between treatment with RFB QD alone (treatment B) and treatment with DRV/r plus RFB QOD (treatment C); however, based on least-square means ratios, the minimum plasma concentration (Cmin) increased by 64% and the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) decreased by 28%, respectively. The exposure (AUC within the dosage interval and at steady state [AUCτ]) to desRFB was considerably increased (by 881%) following treatment with DRV/r/RFB. The exposure to the parent drug plus the metabolite increased 1.6-fold in the presence of DRV/r. Adverse events (AEs) were more commonly reported during combined treatment (83% versus 44% for RFB and 28% for DRV/r); similarly, grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 17% versus 11% and 0%, respectively, of volunteers. Eighteen of 27 volunteers (66.7%) prematurely discontinued the trial; all volunteers discontinuing for safety reasons (n = 9) did so during RFB treatment phases. These results suggest that DRV/r may be coadministered with RFB with a dose adjustment of RFB to 150 mg QOD and increased monitoring for RFB-related AEs. Based on the overall safety profile of DRV/r, no dose adjustment of DRV/r is considered to be warranted. Given the safety profile seen with the combination of RFB with a boosted protease inhibitor in this and other studies, it is not recommended to conduct further studies with this combination in healthy volunteers.
(See the editorial commentary by Hull and Montaner, on pages 1154–6.)
Background. AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5202 compared blinded abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) to tenofovir DF/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) with efavirenz (EFV) or atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected treatment-naive patients, stratified by screening HIV RNA (< or ≥105 copies/mL). Due to higher virologic failure with ABC/3TC in the high HIV RNA stratum, blinded treatment was stopped in this group, but study follow-up continued for all patients.
Methods. Primary endpoints were times to virologic failure, regimen modification, and safety event.
Results. In the low HIV RNA stratum, time to virologic failure was similar for ABC/3TC vs TDF/FTC with ATV/r (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76, 2.05) or EFV (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.77, 1.96), with significantly shorter times to regimen modification for ABC/3TC with EFV or ATV/r and to safety events with EFV. Prior to stopping blinded treatment in the high stratum, higher virologic failure rates were seen with ABC/3TC with EFV (HR 2.46, 95% CI 1.20, 5.05) or ATV/r (HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.19, 4.14).
Conclusions. In the low HIV RNA stratum, times to virologic failure for ABC/3TC or TDF/FTC were not different with EFV or ATV/r. In the high stratum, virologic failure rate was significantly higher for ABC/3TC than for TDF/FTC when given with either EFV or ATV/r.
The use of fixed-dose combination nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) with a nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor is recommended as initial therapy in patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but which NRTI combination has greater efficacy and safety is not known.
In a randomized, blinded equivalence study involving 1858 eligible patients, we compared four once-daily anti retroviral regimens as initial therapy for HIV-1 infection: abacavir–lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)–emtricitabine plus efavirenz or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir. The primary efficacy end point was the time from randomization to virologic failure (defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA level ≥1000 copies per milliliter at or after 16 weeks and before 24 weeks, or ≥200 copies per milliliter at or after 24 weeks).
A scheduled interim review by an independent data and safety monitoring board showed significant differences in virologic efficacy, according to the NRTI combination, among patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more. At a median follow-up of 60 weeks, among the 797 patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more, the time to virologic failure was significantly shorter in the abacavir–lamivudine group than in the tenofovir DF–emtricitabine group (hazard ratio, 2.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.46 to 3.72; P<0.001), with 57 virologic failures (14%) in the abacavir–lamivudine group versus 26 (7%) in the tenofovir DF–emtricitabine group. The time to the first adverse event was also shorter in the abacavir–lamivudine group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the study groups in the change from the baseline CD4 cell count at week 48.
In patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more, the times to virologic failure and the first adverse event were both significantly shorter in patients randomly assigned to abacavir–lamivudine than in those assigned to tenofovir DF–emtricitabine. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00118898.)
Minocycline and valproic acid are potential adjuvant therapies for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to determine whether minocycline alone or in combination with valproic acid affected atazanavir plasma concentrations. Twelve adult HIV-infected subjects whose regimen included atazanavir (300 mg)-ritonavir (100 mg) daily for at least 4 weeks were enrolled. Each subject received atazanavir-ritonavir on day 1, atazanavir-ritonavir plus 100 mg minocycline twice daily on days 2 to 15, and atazanavir-ritonavir plus 100 mg minocycline twice daily and 250 mg valproic acid twice daily on days 16 to 30 with meals. The subjects had 11 plasma samples drawn over a dosing interval on days 1, 15, and 30. The coadministration of minocycline and valproic acid with atazanavir-ritonavir was well tolerated in all 12 subjects (six male; mean [± standard deviation] age was 43.1 [8.2] years). The geometric mean ratios (GMRs; 95% confidence interval [CI]) for the atazanavir area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h at steady state (AUC0-24), the plasma concentration 24 h after the dose (Cmin), and the maximum concentration during the dosing interval (Cmax) with and without minocycline were 0.67 (0.50 to 0.90), 0.50 (0.28 to 0.89), and 0.75 (0.58 to 0.95), respectively. Similar decreases in atazanavir exposure were seen after the addition of valproic acid. The GMRs (95% CI) for atazanavir AUC0-24, Cmin, and Cmax with and without minocycline plus valproic acid were 0.68 (0.43 to 1.06), 0.50 (0.24 to 1.06), and 0.66 (0.41 to 1.06), respectively. Coadministration of neither minocycline nor minocycline plus valproic acid appeared to influence the plasma concentrations of ritonavir (P > 0.2). Minocycline coadministration resulted in decreased atazanavir exposure, and there was no evidence that the addition of valproic acid mediated this effect.
Increased risk of fractures and osteoporosis have been associated with the use of antiretroviral drugs. There is a paucity of prospective evaluations of bone markers after the initiation of drugs currently recommended to treat HIV infection and results on the evolution of these markers are conflicting. Lastly, the effect of tenofovir on 1,25-(OH)2 vitamin D is uncertain.
We performed a prospective study on the evolution of bone markers, parathormone and 1,25-(OH)2 vitamin D before and after standard antiretroviral regimens. This was a sub-study of a trial conducted in antiretroviral-naïve patients randomized to tenofovir + emtricitabine in combination with either atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) or efavirenz (EFV). Follow-up lasted 48 weeks. The following bone markers were analyzed: C-terminal cross-laps (CTx), osteocalcin (OC), osteoprotegerin (OPG), and receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand (RANKL). Mixed-factorial analysis of variance with random-coefficient general linear model was used to compare their trends over time and linear multivariable regression was performed with a backward selection method to assess predictors of their variations from baseline to week 48. Trends of parathormone and 1,25-(OH)2 vitamin D were also evaluated.
Seventy-five patients were studied: 33 received EFV and 42 ATV/r. Significant increases were found for all markers except for RANKL. There was a significant direct association between CTx and OC increases. Multivariable analysis showed that higher glomerular filtration rate (estimated through cystatin C clearance) predicted greater OPG increase, while older age, higher HIV RNA at baseline and use of ATV/r predicted greater CTx increase. A significant increase of parathormone accompanied the evolution of the study markers. 1,25-(OH)2 vitamin D remained stable, though a seasonality variation was demonstrated.
These data demonstrate CTx increase (bone resorption marker) corresponding to OC increase (bone formation marker) early upon HAART initiation. Moreover, predictors of bone marker increases have been suggested, possibly indicating that a stricter monitoring of bone health and pro-active interventions are needed in older patients, those with higher HIV RNA, prescribed ATV/r rather than EFV, and with decreased renal function at baseline. Further studies are needed to clarify the mechanisms responsible for up-regulation of bone turnover markers, as well as to understand if and what markers are best correlated or predictive of pathological fractures.
HIV; Antiretroviral therapy; Bone turnover; Osteoporosis; Vitamin D
Plasma concentrations of several protease inhibitors are decreased during pregnancy. Few data are available describing atazanavir exposure during pregnancy, especially when used in combination with tenofovir, whose coadministration with atazanavir results in decreased atazanavir exposure.
IMPAACT 1026s is an on-going, prospective, non-blinded study of antiretroviral pharmacokinetics in HIV-infected pregnant women that included two cohorts receiving atazanavir/ritonavir 300mg/100mg once daily during the third trimester through 6-12 weeks postpartum either with or without tenofovir.
Intensive steady-state 24-hour pharmacokinetic profiles were performed during the third trimester and at 6-12 weeks postpartum. Atazanavir was measured by reverse-phase HPLC with a detection limit of 0.13 mcg/mL. Pharmacokinetic targets were the estimated 10th percentile atazanavir AUC (29.4 mcg*hr/mL) in non-pregnant historical controls taking the standard dose (mean AUC=57 mcg*hr/mL) and a trough concentration of 0.15 mcg/mL, the concentration target used in therapeutic drug monitoring programs. Infant bilirubin concentrations were measured at 24-48 hours and 4-6 days after birth.
Atazanavir pharmacokinetic data were available for 38 women (18 without tenofovir, 20 with tenofovir. Median atazanavir AUC was reduced during the third trimester compared to postpartum for subjects not receiving tenofovir (41.9 vs 57.9 mcg*hr/mL, p=.02) and for subjects receiving tenofovir (28.8 vs. 39.6 mcg*hr/mL, p=.04). During the third trimester, AUC was below the target in 33% (6/18) of women not receiving tenofovir and 55% (11/20) of women receiving tenofovir. Trough concentration was below the target in 6% (1/18) of women not receiving tenofovir and 15% (3/20) of women receiving tenofovir. The median (range) ratio of cord blood/maternal atazanavir concentration in 29 paired samples was 0.18 (0 - 0.45). No excessive infant bilirubin concentrations were observed.
Atazanavir exposure is reduced by pregnancy and by concomitant tenofovir use. A dose increase of atazanavir/ritonavir to 400mg/100mg may be necessary in pregnant women to ensure atazanavir exposure equivalent to that seen in nonpregnant adults, especially for pregnant women who are antiretroviral-experienced and/or who are also receiving tenofovir.
atazanavir; tenofovir; pharmacokinetics; pregnancy; HIV; mother to child transmission
The object of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of darunavir-ritonavir and atazanavir-ritonavir once-daily dosing over 72 h (h) following drug intake cessation. Volunteers received darunavir-ritonavir at 800 and 100 mg, respectively, once daily for 10 days, followed by a 7-day washout period, and atazanavir-ritonavir at 300 and 100 mg, respectively, once daily for 10 days. Full pharmacokinetic profiles were assessed for each phase for the 72 h following day 10. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined over 24 h and to the last measurable concentration by noncompartmental methods. Seventeen subjects completed the study. The geometric mean (GM) terminal elimination half-life to 72 h of darunavir was 6.48 h, which was lower than the 0- to 24-h half-life (10.70 h). The terminal elimination half-life of atazanavir was 6.74 h, which was lower than the 0- to 24-h half-life (13.72 h). All subjects but one had darunavir concentrations higher than the target of 550 ng/ml for protease-resistant HIV isolates (equivalent to 10 times the protein-binding-corrected 50% inhibitory concentration [IC50] for wild-type virus) at 24 h postdose, and 14 out of 17 had concentrations higher than the target at 30 h postdose (GM of 1,088 and 851 ng/ml). All subjects had atazanavir concentrations above the suggested minimum effective concentration of 150 ng/ml (equivalent to 10 times the protein-binding-corrected IC50 for wild-type virus) at 24 and 30 h postdose (GM of 693 and 392 ng/ml). Two of 17 and 5 of 17 subjects were above target at 48 h postdose while on darunavir-ritonavir and atazanavir-ritonavir. Ritonavir half-life to 72 h was 6.84 h with darunavir and 6.07 with atazanavir. This study investigated the pharmacokinetic forgiveness of two boosted protease inhibitors. Although the rates of decline of darunavir and atazanavir slightly increased as ritonavir concentrations declined, most individuals had concentrations 6 h after the end of the ideal dosing interval of 24 h which were above the cutoff used to define therapeutic concentrations.
The primary objective of this study was to measure atazanavir-ritonavir and tenofovir pharmacokinetics when the drugs were used in combination in young adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). HIV-infected subjects ≥18 to <25 years old receiving (≥28 days) 300/100 mg atazanavir-ritonavir plus 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) plus one or more other nucleoside analogs underwent intensive 24-h pharmacokinetic studies following a light meal. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were obtained at 1, 4, and 24 h postdose for quantification of intracellular tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) concentrations. Twenty-two subjects were eligible for analyses. The geometric mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) atazanavir area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24), maximum concentration of drug in serum (Cmax), concentration at 24 h postdose (C24), and total apparent oral clearance (CL/F) values were 35,971 ng·hr/ml (30,853 to 41,898), 3,504 ng/ml (2,978 to 4,105), 578 ng/ml (474 to 704), and 8.3 liter/hr (7.2 to 9.7), respectively. The geometric mean (95% CI) tenofovir AUC0-24, Cmax, C24, and CL/F values were 2,762 ng·hr/ml (2,392 to 3,041), 254 ng/ml (221 to 292), 60 ng/ml (52 to 68), and 49.2 liter/hr (43.8 to 55.3), respectively. Body weight was significantly predictive of CL/F for all three drugs. For every 10-kg increase in weight, there was a 10%, 14.8%, and 6.8% increase in the atazanavir, ritonavir, and tenofovir CL/F, respectively (P ≤ 0.01). Renal function was predictive of tenofovir CL/F. For every 10 ml/min increase in creatinine clearance, there was a 4.6% increase in tenofovir CL/F (P < 0.0001). The geometric mean (95% CI) TFV-DP concentrations at 1, 4, and 24 h postdose were 96.4 (71.5 to 130), 93.3 (68 to 130), and 92.7 (70 to 123) fmol/million cells. There was an association between renal function, tenofovir AUC, and tenofovir Cmax and intracellular TFV-DP concentrations, although none of these associations reached statistical significance. In these HIV-infected young adults treated with atazanavir-ritonavir plus TDF, the atazanavir AUC was similar to those of older adults treated with the combination. Based on data for healthy volunteers, a higher tenofovir AUC may have been expected, but was not seen in these subjects. This might be due to faster tenofovir CL/F because of higher creatinine clearance in this age group. Additional studies of the exposure-response relationships of this regimen in children, adolescents, and adults would advance our knowledge of its pharmacodynamic properties.
Background: The POTENT trial compared the safety and efficacy of tipranavir/ritonavir (TPV/r) to darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r), each with an optimized background regimen (OBR) in triple-class experienced HIV-1-infected patients with resistance to more than one protease inhibitor (PI).
Methodology/Principal Findings: POTENT was a prospective, open-label study of triple-class (PI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NNRTI], nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTI]), treatment-experienced, HIVpositive patients. Subjects were randomized to either TPV/r (500/200mg twice daily) or DRV/r (600/100mg twice daily) on a genotype-guided, investigatorselected OBR. CD4+ counts andHIV viral loads were assayed at key timepoints. The primary endpoint was time to virologic failure (viral load >-500 copies/mL).
POTENT was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment. Thirty-nine patients were treated with either TPV/r (n= 19) or DRV/r (n= 20); 82% were male, 77%White, with mean age of 43.6 years. Mean baselineHIV RNA was 3.9 log10 copies/mL.Median prior antiretrovirals was 11, with no prior raltegravir or maraviroc exposure. Raltegravir was the most common novel class agent in the OBRs (n = 14 TPV/r; n = 12DRV/r). In both groups, patients achieved mean viral load decreases >-2 log10 copies/mL by week 8, and by week 12 mean CD4+ counts rose by 40–50 cells/mm3. Total observation time was 32 weeks. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 21% (TPV/r) and 25% (DRV/r) of patients.
Conclusions/Significance: TPV/r- and DRV/r-based regimens showed similar short-term safety and efficacy. These data support the use of next-generation PIs such as tipranavir or darunavir with novel class antiretroviral agents (integrase inhibitors, CCR5 antagonists, or fusion inhibitors).
Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00517192
Significant pharmacokinetic interactions can result between acid-suppressing agents and some protease inhibitors (PIs) in the management of HIV infection. In healthy subjects, famotidine, an H2-receptor antagonist, reduces exposures of atazanavir by 4–28% at doses of 20–40 mg twice daily. This study evaluated the effect of famotidine 20–40 mg twice daily on the pharmacokinetics of atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg once daily with and without tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) 300 mg in HIV-infected patients (n=40; 87.5% male; mean age 42, range 26–63 years; 55% white). Coadministration of famotidine 40 mg and atazanavir/ritonavir to HIV-infected patients reduced exposures of atazanavir by approximately 20%. This is comparable to reductions seen in HIV-uninfected subjects. Coadministration of famotidine 20 mg had less impact on atazanavir exposures, with no reduction of atazanavir geometric mean plasma concentration at 24 h postdose (Cmin). In the presence of TDF, administration of famotidine 20–40 mg twice daily 2 h after and 10 h before atazanavir/ritonavir reduced exposures of atazanavir by 19–25%. However, all individual atazanavir Cmin values remained at least five-fold above the population mean protein-binding adjusted 90% maximum effect (EC90) against wild-type HIV (14 ng/mL). No viral load rebound was observed at end of study. The results confirmed that coadministration of an H2-receptor antagonist with atazanavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected patients resulted in similar magnitude of reductions in atazanavir exposures as in healthy subjects. This supports the current dose recommendations for coadministration of an H2-receptor antagonist with atazanavir/ritonavir.