A pseudo-response approach to constructing confidence intervals for the subset of patients expected to benefit from a new treatment.

In precision medicine, there is much interest in estimating the expected-to-benefit (EB) subset, i.e. the subset of patients who are expected to benefit from a new treatment based on a collection of baseline characteristics. There are many statistical methods for estimating the EB subset, most of which produce a 'point estimate' without a confidence statement to address uncertainty. Confidence intervals for the EB subset have been defined only recently, and their construction is a new area for methodological research. This article proposes a pseudo-response approach to EB subset estimation and confidence interval construction. Compared to existing methods, the pseudo-response approach allows us to focus on modelling a conditional treatment effect function (as opposed to the conditional mean outcome given treatment and baseline covariates) and is able to incorporate information from baseline covariates that are not involved in defining the EB subset. Simulation results show that incorporating such covariates can improve estimation efficiency and reduce the size of the confidence interval for the EB subset. The methodology is applied to a randomized clinical trial comparing two drugs for treating HIV infection.

Antiretrovirals and Weight Change: Weighing the Evidence.

Body weight is influenced by an interplay of individual and environmental factors. In people with HIV (PWH), weight is also influenced by disease status with loss accompanying disease progression that is reversed with effective antiretroviral therapy (ART). Weight changes in comparative ART trials differ by regimen, with greater gains observed with the integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) dolutegravir and bictegravir, particularly when co-administered with tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), compared to regimens that include agents such as tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) that attenuate weight gain. We review weight changes in major randomized trials of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and initial and switch HIV therapy, highlighting the challenges to assessing the role of ART in weight change. This examination forms the basis for a model that questions assumptions regarding an association between INSTI and TAF and excessive weight gain and calls for more careful consideration of these data when making HIV treatment decisions.

Corrigendum: Translating the observed differences in interleukin-6 levels between some antiretroviral regimens into potential long-term risk of serious non-AIDS events: A modeling study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.976564.].

Translating the observed differences in interleukin-6 levels between some antiretroviral regimens into potential long-term risk of serious non-AIDS events: A modeling study.

Introduction: Variable levels of systemic inflammation are observed in people with HIV (PWH), but the clinical significance of differences among antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens on associated levels of inflammatory markers is unclear. Based on data from previous epidemiologic studies that defined the predicted change in risk of serious non-AIDS events (SNAEs)/death by changes in interleukin-6 (IL-6) and D-dimer, we modeled the effects of differences in these markers between specific ART regimens on the long-term risk of clinical outcomes. Methods: We used a Markov model to compare the risk of SNAEs/death with differences in IL-6 and D-dimer levels associated with remaining on specific three-drug regimens versus switching to specific two-drug ART regimens over 5 years of treatment. We used IL-6 and D-dimer data based on trajectories over time from the randomized TANGO and observational AIR studies. Age at model entry was set at 39 years. The primary endpoint was the number needed to treat for one additional SNAE/death. Results: Over 144 weeks, PWH on one of the three-drug regimens studied were predicted to spend 22% more time in the low IL-6 quartile and 13% less time in the high IL-6 quartile compared with those on one of the two-drug regimens. Over 144 weeks, the predicted mean number of SNAEs/deaths per 100 PWH was 5.6 for a three-drug regimen associated with lower IL-6 levels versus 6.8 for a two-drug regimen associated with higher IL-6 levels. The number needed to treat for one additional SNAE/death among PWH receiving a two-drug versus three-drug regimen for 240 weeks was 43. Approximately 2,900 participants would be required for a 240-week clinical study to evaluate the accuracy of the model. Conclusions: Our Markov model suggests that higher IL-6 levels associated with switching from specific three- to two- drug ART regimens may be associated with an increase in the risk of SNAEs/death. Clinical studies are warranted to confirm or refute these results.

Relevance of Interleukin-6 and D-Dimer for Serious Non-AIDS Morbidity and Death among HIV-Positive Adults on Suppressive Antiretroviral Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Despite effective antiretroviral treatment (ART), HIV-positive individuals are at increased risk of serious non-AIDS conditions (cardiovascular, liver and renal disease, and cancers), perhaps due in part to ongoing inflammation and/or coagulation. To estimate the potential risk reduction in serious non-AIDS conditions or death from any cause that might be achieved with treatments that reduce inflammation and/or coagulation, we examined associations of interleukin-6 (IL-6), D-dimer, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels with serious non-AIDS conditions or death in 3 large cohorts. METHODS: In HIV-positive adults on suppressive ART, associations of IL-6, D-dimer, and hsCRP levels at study entry with serious non-AIDS conditions or death were studied using Cox regression. Hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for age, gender, study, and regression dilution bias (due to within-person biomarker variability) were used to predict risk reductions in serious non-AIDS conditions or death associated with lower "usual" levels of IL-6 and D-dimer. RESULTS: Over 4.9 years of mean follow-up, 260 of the 3766 participants experienced serious non-AIDS conditions or death. IL-6, D-dimer and hsCRP were each individually associated with risk of serious non-AIDS conditions or death, HR = 1.45 (95% CI: 1.30 to 1.63), 1.28 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.44), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.26) per 2x higher biomarker levels, respectively. In joint models, IL-6 and D-dimer were independently associated with serious non-AIDS conditions or death, with consistent results across the 3 cohorts and across serious non-AIDS event types. The association of IL-6 and D-dimer with serious non-AIDS conditions or death was graded and persisted throughout follow-up. For 25% lower "usual" IL-6 and D-dimer levels, the joint biomarker model estimates a 37% reduction (95% CI: 28 to 46%) in the risk of serious non-AIDS conditions or death if the relationship is causal. CONCLUSIONS: Both IL-6 and D-dimer are independently associated with serious non-AIDS conditions or death among HIV-positive adults with suppressed virus. This suggests that treatments that reduce IL-6 and D-dimer levels might substantially decrease morbidity and mortality in patients on suppressive ART. Clinical trials are needed to test this hypothesis.

Cost-Effectiveness of Single- Versus Generic Multiple-Tablet Regimens for Treatment of HIV-1 Infection in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The possibility of incorporating generics into combination antiretroviral therapy and breaking apart once-daily single-tablet regimens (STRs), may result in less efficacious medications and/or more complex regimens with the expectation of marked monetary savings. A modeling approach that assesses the merits of such policies in terms of lifelong costs and health outcomes using adherence and effectiveness data from real-world U.S. settings. METHODS: A comprehensive computer-based microsimulation model was developed to assess the lifetime health (life expectancy and quality adjusted life-years--QALYs) and economic outcomes in HIV-1 infected patients initiating STRs compared with multiple-table regimens including generic medications where possible (gMTRs). The STRs considered included tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and efavirenz or rilpivirine or elvitegravir/cobicistat. gMTRs substitutions included each counterpart to STRs, including generic lamivudine for emtricitabine and generic versus branded efavirenz. RESULTS: Life expectancy is estimated to be 1.301 years higher (discounted 0.619 QALY gain) in HIV-1 patients initiating a single-tablet regimen in comparison to a generic-based multiple-table regimen. STRs were associated with an average increment of $26,547.43 per patient in medication and $1,824.09 in other medical costs due to longer survival which were partially offset by higher inpatients costs ($12,035.61) with gMTRs treatment. Overall, STRs presented incremental lifetime costs of $16,335.91 compared with gMTRs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $26,383.82 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: STRs continue to represent good value for money under contemporary cost-effectiveness thresholds despite substantial price reductions of generic medications in the U. S.

Patient-reported outcomes in the single-tablet regimen (STaR) trial of rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in antiretroviral treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 through 48 weeks of treatment.

This 96-week, randomized, open-label study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of two single-tablet regimens in treatment naïve HIV-1-infected adults: rilpivirine (RPV) + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) and efavirenz (EFV) + FTC/TDF. Assessments included patient-reported Medication Adherence Self-Report Inventory, SF-12v2 Quality of Life assessment, HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, and HIV Symptom Index Questionnaire through Week 48. Additional evaluations included study drug discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). A total of 786 participants (n=394 RPV/FTC/TDF, n=392 EFV/FTC/TDF) were included. Fewer RPV/FTC/TDF-treated than EFV/FTC/TDF-treated participants discontinued study drug due to TEAEs (2.5% vs. 8.7%), with 41% (14/34) TEAE-related discontinuations in the EFV/FTC/TDF group occurring within the first four weeks of treatment. Treatment adherence and satisfaction remained high through Week 48 and quality of life improved from baseline in both groups. There were no significant between-group differences in virologic success (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) regardless of adherence (<95% or ≥95%). Significant between-group differences favouring RPV/FTC/TDF were observed for the HIV SIQ symptoms of difficulty falling or staying asleep (p = .022) and diarrhea or loose bowel movements (p = .002). In conclusion, 48-week treatment with RPV/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF was associated with high adherence, high treatment satisfaction, and improved quality of life. TEAE-related discontinuations and patient-reported symptoms indicate that RPV/FTC/TDF may be somewhat better tolerated than EFV/FTC/TDF.

Rilpivirine vs. efavirenz-based single-tablet regimens in treatment-naive adults: week 96 efficacy and safety from a randomized phase 3b study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare efficacy, safety, tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes between two single-tablet regimens, rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (RPV/FTC/TDF) and efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EFV/FTC/TDF), in HIV-1-infected, treatment-naive adults. DESIGN: This was a phase 3b, 96-week, randomized, open-label, international, noninferiority trial. METHODS: A total of 799 participants were randomized (1 : 1) to receive RPV/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF. The primary efficacy endpoint evaluated proportions of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml using the Snapshot algorithm. Additional assessments included CD4 cell counts, genotypic/phenotypic resistance, adverse events, patient-reported outcomes, and quality of life questionnaires. RESULTS: At week 96, trial completion rates were 80.2% (316/394; RPV/FTC/TDF) and 74.0% (290/392; EFV/FTC/TDF). Overall, RPV/FTC/TDF was noninferior to EFV/FTC/TDF [HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml: 77.9 vs. 72.4%, respectively; difference -5.5; 95%CI (-0.6, 11.5); P = 0.076]. RPV/FTC/TDF was significantly more efficacious compared with EFV/FTC/TDF in participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA equal to or less than 100 000 copies/ml (78.8 vs. 71.2%; P = 0.046) and in those with CD4 cell count greater than 200 cells/µl (80.6 vs. 73.0%; P = 0.018). There was no significant between-group difference in the CD4 cell count increase (278 ±â€Š189 vs. 259 ±â€Š191 cells/µl; P = 0.17). Few participants developed resistance after week 48 (1.0% RPV/FTC/TDF; 0.3% EFV/FTC/TDF). Compared with EFV/FTC/TDF, RPV/FTC/TDF was associated with fewer adverse event-related discontinuations (3.0 vs. 11.0%; P<0.001), significantly fewer adverse events due to central nervous system issues and rash, greater improvements in patient-reported symptoms, and significant improvements in the SF-12v2 quality of life questionnaire mental health composite score (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: In treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected participants, 96-week RPV/FTC/TDF treatment demonstrated noninferior efficacy and better tolerability than EFV/FTC/TDF.

Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients with HIV-1 RNA ≤100,000 copies/mL: week 96 pooled ECHO/THRIVE subanalysis.

The once daily, single-tablet regimen (STR) combining rilpivirine (RPV), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) provides a simplified treatment option for antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve patients with baseline HIV-1 RNA (BLVL) of ≤100,000 copies/mL. The aim of this analysis is to compare long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of RPV+FTC/TDF vs. efavirenz (EFV)+FTC/TDF as individual components in subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL. Week 96 efficacy and safety data from subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL, who received daily RPV 25 mg or EFV 600 mg with FTC/TDF in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, registrational trials ECHO and THRIVE, were analyzed. Virologic response was evaluated by intent-to-treat, time to loss of virological response (ITT-TLOVR), and Snapshot algorithms. Through Week 96, RPV+FTC/TDF demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to EFV+FTC/TDF (84% vs. 81%, respectively; ITT-TLOVR) in 543 subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL, and overall rates of virologic failure (VF) were 5.9% vs. 2.4%, respectively. Resistance development was lower in Year 2 than Year 1. Subjects in both arms with suboptimal adherence (≤95%) had lower virologic responses (63% vs. 62%, respectively). Treatment with RPV+FTC/TDF was associated with significantly fewer treatment-related adverse events (AEs), grade 2-4 AEs, neurological and psychiatric AEs (including dizziness and abnormal dreams/nightmares), and rash. Additionally, grade 2-4 treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities and grade 1-3 lipid abnormalities were significantly less common with RPV+FTC/TDF than EFV+FTC/TDF. RPV+FTC/TDF demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to EFV+FTC/TDF in ART-naïve subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL and was associated with a higher rate of VF but a more favorable safety and tolerability profile through Week 96.

Week 48 results from a randomized clinical trial of rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs. efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of the two single-tablet regimens (STRs), rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (RPV/FTC/TDF) and efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (EFV/FTC/TDF), in HIV-1-infected, treatment-naive adults. DESIGN: This is a phase 3b, randomized, open-label, multicenter, international, 96-week study. METHODS: Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either RPV/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml at week 48 by the Snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 786 participants were randomized. RPV/FTC/TDF was noninferior to EFV/FTC/TDF (85.8 vs. 81.6%) at week 48 for HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml [difference 4.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.1 to 9.2%]. A statistically significant difference in efficacy favoring RPV/FTC/TDF was demonstrated for participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA 100000  copies/ml or less [(n=510) 88.8% RPV/FTC/TDF vs. 81.6% EFV/FTC/TDF (difference 7.2%, 95% CI 1.1-13.4%)]. In participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA more than 100000 copies/ml (n=276), RPV/FTC/TDF demonstrated noninferior efficacy compared with EFV/FTC/TDF (79.9 vs. 81.7%, respectively, difference -1.8%, 95% CI -11.1 to 7.5%). In the RPV/FTC/TDF arm, more virologic failure was observed as baseline HIV-1 RNA levels increased. There were more participants with emergent resistance in the RPV/FTC/TDF arm than in the EFV/FTC/TDF arm (4 vs. 1%, respectively). There were fewer discontinuations because of adverse events with RPV/FTC/TDF (2.5%) than with EFV/FTC/TDF (8.7%). CONCLUSION: In treatment-naive participants, RPV/FTC/TDF demonstrated noninferior efficacy and improved tolerability compared with EFV/FTC/TDF, as well as a statistically significant difference in efficacy for participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA 100000  copies/ml or less at week 48.

Efficacy and safety 48 weeks after switching from efavirenz to rilpivirine using emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based single-tablet regimens.

BACKGROUND: Due to ongoing neuropsychiatric adverse events in some efavirenz (EFV)-treated patients, a switch to an alternative non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor may be considered. Rilpivirine (RPV) has been coformulated as a single-tablet regimen (STR) with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF), and the components have demonstrated noninferior efficacy to EFV+FTC/TDF, good tolerability profile, and high adherence. After discontinuation, EFV has an extended inductive effect on cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 that, after switching, may reduce RPV exposures and adversely impact clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the clinical implications of reduced RPV exposures with concomitant FTC/TDF and declining EFV exposures when patients, intolerant to EFV, switch from EFV/FTC/TDF to RPV/FTC/TDF. METHODS: This 48-week, phase 2b, open-label, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching from EFV/FTC/TDF (≥3 months duration) to RPV/FTC/TDF. Virologic suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL), safety, and EFV and RPV pharmacokinetics were assessed. RESULTS: At weeks 12 and 24, all 49 dosed subjects remained suppressed on RPV/FTC/TDF. At week 48, 46 (93.9%) subjects remained suppressed and virologic failure occurred in 2/49 (4.1%) subjects with no emergence of resistance. EFV concentrations were above the 90th percentile for inhibitory concentration (IC90) for several weeks after EFV discontinuation, and RPV exposures were in the range observed in phase 3 studies by approximately 2 weeks post switch. No subjects discontinued the study due to an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from EFV/FTC/TDF to RPV/FTC/ TDF was a safe, efficacious option for virologically suppressed HIV-infected patients with EFV intolerance wishing to remain on an STR.

Association between daily antiretroviral pill burden and treatment adherence, hospitalisation risk, and other healthcare utilisation and costs in a US medicaid population with HIV.

OBJECTIVES: Lower pill burden leads to improved antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence among HIV patients. Simpler dosing regimens have not been widely explored in real-world populations. We retrospectively assessed ART adherence, all-cause hospitalisation risk and costs, and other healthcare utilisation and costs in Medicaid enrollees with HIV treated with ART as a once-daily single-tablet regimen (STR) or two or more pills per day (2+PPD). DESIGN: Patients with an HIV diagnosis from 2005 to 2009 receiving complete ART (ie, two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus a third agent) for ≥60 days as STR or 2+PPD were selected and followed until the first of (1) discontinuation of the complete ART, (2) loss of enrolment or (3) end of database. Adherence was measured using the medication possession ratio. Monthly all-cause healthcare utilisation and costs were observed from regimen initiation until follow-up end. RESULTS: Of the 7381 patients who met inclusion criteria, 1797 were treated with STR and 5584 with 2+PPD. STR patients were significantly more likely to reach 95% adherence and had fewer hospitalisations than 2+PPD patients (both p<0.01). STR patients had mean (SD) total monthly costs of $2959 ($4962); 2+PPD patients had $3544 ($5811; p<0.001). Hospital costs accounted for 53.8% and pharmacy costs accounted for 32.5% of this difference. Multivariate analyses found that STR led to a 23% reduction in hospitalisations and a 17% reduction in overall healthcare costs. ART adherence appears to be a key mechanism mediating hospitalisation risk, as patients with ≥95% adherence (regardless of regimen type) had a lower hospitalisation rate compared with <95% adherence. CONCLUSIONS: While it was expected that STR patients would have lower pharmacy costs, we also found that STR patients had fewer hospitalisations and lower hospital costs than 2+PPD patients, resulting in significantly lower total healthcare costs for STR patients.

A randomized double-blind comparison of coformulated elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: analysis of week 96 results.

We report week 96 results from a phase 3 trial of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF, n = 348) vs efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EFV/FTC/TDF, n = 352). At week 48, EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF was noninferior to EFV/FTC/TDF (88% vs 84%, difference +3.6%, 95% confidence interval: -1.6% to 8.8%). Virologic success (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) was maintained at week 96 (84% vs 82%, difference +2.7%, 95% CI: -2.9% to 8.3%). Discontinuation due to adverse events was low (5% vs 7%). Median changes in serum creatinine (mg/dL) at week 96 were similar to week 48. These results support the durable efficacy and long-term safety of EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF.

Week 96 efficacy and safety of rilpivirine in treatment-naive, HIV-1 patients in two Phase III randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: In the week 48 primary analysis of ECHO and THRIVE, rilpivirine demonstrated noninferior efficacy and more favourable tolerability versus efavirenz in treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected adults. Pooled 96-week results are presented. METHODS: Patients (N = 1368) received rilpivirine 25 mg once-daily (q.d.) or efavirenz 600 mg q.d., with two background nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors, in two randomized, double-blind, double-dummy Phase III trials. RESULTS: At week 96, response rate (% confirmed viral load <50 copies/ml; intent-to-treat, time-to-loss-of-virologic response) was 78% in both groups. Responses were similar for both treatments by background regimen, sex, race, and in patients with more than 95% adherence (M-MASRI) or baseline viral load 100,000 copies/ml or less. Responses were lower and virologic failure higher for rilpivirine versus efavirenz in patients with 95% or less adherence or baseline viral load more than 100,000 copies/ml. Beyond week 48, the incidence of virologic failure was comparable (3 versus 2%) between treatment groups, rilpivirine resistance-associated mutations were consistent with those observed in year 1, there were few adverse events in both groups and no new safety concerns. Over 96 weeks, discontinuations due to adverse events (4 versus 9%), treatment-related grade 2-4 adverse events (17 versus 33%), rash (4 versus 15%), dizziness (8 versus 27%) and abnormal dreams/nightmares (8 versus 13%), and grade 2-4 lipid abnormalities were lower with rilpivirine than efavirenz. Only 2 and 4% of patients in the rilpivirine and efavirenz treatment groups, respectively, reported at least possibly treatment-related grade 2-4 adverse events during the second year of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Rilpivirine 25 mg q.d. and efavirenz 600 mg q.d. had comparable responses at week 96. Rilpivirine had more virologic failures but improved tolerability versus efavirenz. The majority of virologic failures occurred in the first 48 weeks.

Cost-Effectiveness of Antiretroviral Therapy for Multidrug-Resistant HIV: Past, Present, and Future.

In the early years of the highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) era, HIV with resistance to two or more agents in different antiretroviral classes posed a significant clinical challenge. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) HIV was an important cause of treatment failure, morbidity, and mortality. Treatment options at the time were limited; multiple drug regimens with or without enfuvirtide were used with some success but proved to be difficult to sustain for reasons of tolerability, toxicity, and cost. Starting in 2006, data began to emerge supporting the use of new drugs from the original antiretroviral classes (tipranavir, darunavir, and etravirine) and drugs from new classes (raltegravir and maraviroc) for the treatment of MDR HIV. Their availability has enabled patients with MDR HIV to achieve full and durable viral suppression with more compact and cost-effective regimens including at least two and often three fully active agents. The emergence of drug-resistant HIV is expected to continue to become less frequent in the future, driven by improvements in the convenience, tolerability, efficacy, and durability of first-line HAART regimens. To continue this trend, the optimal rollout of HAART in both rich and resource-limited settings will require careful planning and strategic use of antiretroviral drugs and monitoring technologies.

Co-formulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus co-formulated efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, analysis of results after 48 weeks.

BACKGROUND: The integrase inhibitor elvitegravir (EVG) has been co-formulated with the CYP3A4 inhibitor cobicistat (COBI), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in a single tablet given once daily. We compared the efficacy and safety of EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF with standard of care-co-formulated efavirenz (EFV)/FTC/TDF-as initial treatment for HIV infection. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, treatment-naive patients from outpatient clinics in North America were randomly assigned by computer-generated allocation sequence with a block size of four in a 1:1 ratio to receive EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF, once daily, plus matching placebo. Patients and study staff involved in giving study treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting and analysing data were masked to treatment allocation. Eligibility criteria included screening HIV RNA concentration of 5000 copies per mL or more, and susceptibility to efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir. The primary endpoint was HIV RNA concentration of fewer than 50 copies per mL at week 48. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01095796. FINDINGS: 700 patients were randomly assigned and treated (348 with EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF, 352 with EFV/FTC/TDF). EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF was non-inferior to EFV/FTC/TDF; 305/348 (87·6%) versus 296/352 (84·1%) of patients had HIV RNA concentrations of fewer than 50 copies per mL at week 48 (difference 3·6%, 95% CI -1·6% to 8·8%). Proportions of patients discontinuing drugs for adverse events did not differ substantially (13/348 in the EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF group vs 18/352 in the EFV/FTC/TDF group). Nausea was more common with EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF than with EFV/FTC/TDF (72/348 vs 48/352) and dizziness (23/348 vs 86/352), abnormal dreams (53/348 vs 95/352), insomnia (30/348 vs 49/352), and rash (22/348 vs 43/352) were less common. Serum creatinine concentration increased more by week 48 in the EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF group than in the EFV/FTC/TDF group (median 13 µmol/L, IQR 5 to 20 vs 1 µmol/L, -6 to 8; p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: If regulatory approval is given, EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF would be the only single-tablet, once-daily, integrase-inhibitor-based regimen for initial treatment of HIV infection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Impact of Tai Chi exercise on multiple fracture-related risk factors in post-menopausal osteopenic women: a pilot pragmatic, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Tai Chi (TC) is a mind-body exercise that shows potential as an effective and safe intervention for preventing fall-related fractures in the elderly. Few randomized trials have simultaneously evaluated TC's potential to reduce bone loss and improve fall-predictive balance parameters in osteopenic women. METHODS: In a pragmatic randomized trial, 86 post-menopausal osteopenic women, aged 45-70, were recruited from community clinics. Women were assigned to either nine months of TC training plus usual care (UC) vs. UC alone. Primary outcomes were changes between baseline and nine months of bone mineral density (BMD) of the proximal femur and lumbar spine (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) and serum markers of bone resorption and formation. Secondary outcomes included quality of life. In a subsample (n = 16), quiet standing fall-predictive sway parameters and clinical balance tests were also assessed. Both intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were employed. RESULTS: For BMD, no intent-to-treat analyses were statistically significant; however, per protocol analyses (i.e., only including TC participants who completed ≥ 75% training requirements) of femoral neck BMD changes were significantly different between TC and UC (+0.04 vs. -0.98%; P = 0.05). Changes in bone formation markers and physical domains of quality of life were also more favorable in per protocol TC vs. UC (P = 0.05). Changes in sway parameters were significantly improved by TC vs. UC (average sway velocity, P = 0.027; anterior-posterior sway range, P = 0.014). Clinical measures of balance and function showed non-significant trends in favor of TC. CONCLUSIONS: TC training offered through existing community-based programs is a safe, feasible, and promising intervention for reducing multiple fracture risks. Our results affirm the value of a more definitive, longer-term trial of TC for osteopenic women, adequately powered to detect clinically relevant effects of TC on attenuation of BMD loss and reduction of fall risk in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01039012.

Efficacy and safety of rilpivirine (TMC278) versus efavirenz at 48 weeks in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients: pooled results from the phase 3 double-blind randomized ECHO and THRIVE Trials.

BACKGROUND: Pooled analysis of phase 3, double-blind, double-dummy ECHO and THRIVE trials comparing rilpivirine (TMC278) and efavirenz. METHODS: Treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults were randomized 1:1 to rilpivirine 25 mg once daily or efavirenz 600 mg once daily, with background tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) (ECHO) or TDF/FTC, zidovudine/lamivudine, or abacavir/lamivudine (THRIVE). The primary endpoint was confirmed response [viral load <50 copies per milliliter; intent-to-treat time-to-loss-of-virologic-response (ITT-TLOVR) algorithm] at week 48. The pooled data set enabled analyses of subgroups and predictors of response/virologic failure. RESULTS: Confirmed responses were 84% (rilpivirine) and 82% (efavirenz). The difference in response rates (95% confidence interval) was 2.0% (-2.0% to 6.0%). The incidence of virologic failure was 9% (rilpivirine) versus 5% (efavirenz). Responses in ITT-TLOVR and ITT-snapshot analyses were consistent. Responses were similar for rilpivirine and efavirenz by background regimen, gender, race and clade. Suboptimal adherence and higher baseline viral load resulted in lower responses, higher virologic failure, and development of resistance in both groups; the effects on virologic failure were more apparent with rilpivirine. CD4 cell count increased over time in both groups. Rilpivirine compared with efavirenz gave smaller incidences of adverse events leading to discontinuation (3% vs. 8%, respectively), treatment-related grade 2-4 adverse events (16% vs. 31%), rash (3% vs. 14%), dizziness (8% vs. 26%), abnormal dreams/nightmares (8% vs. 13%), and grade 2-4 lipid abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: At week 48, rilpivirine 25 mg once daily and efavirenz 600 mg once daily had comparable response rates. Rilpivirine had more virologic failures and improved tolerability versus efavirenz.