First prospective comparison of genotypic versus phenotypic tropism assays in predicting virologic responses to maraviroc in a phase 3 study.

Maraviroc (MVC, a CCR5 antagonist) is only fully active against CCR5 tropic [R5] HIV-1, and tropism testing is required prior to initiating treatment. The MODERN study prospectively compared genotypic (GTT) and phenotypic (Trofile®) tropism testing with treatment-naive HIV-1-infected participants randomized 1:1 to either GTT or Trofile tropism assessments. Participants with R5 virus were randomized 1:1 to receive darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) with either MVC or tenofovir/emtricitabine. Screening samples were also retrospectively tested using the alternative assay. Positive predictive values (PPVs) for each assay were estimated using both the observed MVC+DRV/r response rate (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at Week 48) and model-based response estimates. The observed MVC+DRV/r response rate was 146/181 (80.7%) for GTT versus 160/215 (74.4%) for Trofile, with a stratification adjusted difference of 6.6% (95% CI, -1.5% to 14.7%) in favor of GTT. The model-based PPV estimates (±standard error) were 80.5% (±2.38) and 78.0% (±2.35) for GTT and Trofile, respectively (difference, 2.5%; 95% CI, -2.0% to 7.0%). Most participants had R5 results using both assays (285/396; 72%) and, of those, 79.3% (226/285) had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at Week 48. Both the genotypic and phenotypic tropism assays evaluated can effectively predict treatment response to MVC.

The maraviroc expanded access program - safety and efficacy data from an open-label study.

PURPOSE: The maraviroc (MVC) expanded access program (EAP) was initiated to increase MVC availability to patients with limited treatment options. Darunavir (DRV), raltegravir (RAL), and etravirine (ETV) were either recently approved or under regulatory review at study initiation and available for coadministration with MVC. Thus, the safety of MVC in combination with new antiretroviral therapies (ARVs) could be assessed. This open-label safety study of MVC was conducted at 262 sites worldwide in 1032 R5 HIV-positive treatment-experienced patients with limited/no therapeutic options. METHODS: Study visits included screening, baseline, end of study or early discontinuation, and follow-up 30 days after last dose. Interim visits for HIV-1 RNA and CD4 cell counts occurred according to local HIV infection management guidelines. Safety data were analyzed overall and by subgroup based on ARV combination [MVC+optimized background therapy (OBT), MVC ± OBT+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL, MVC ± OBT+RAL+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL+ETV ± DRV/r]. RESULTS: Most (90.3%) adverse events (AEs) were of mild or moderate severity with few grade 3/4 events, discontinuations, or temporary discontinuations/dose reductions due to AEs or serious AEs. Similar results were observed across subgroups. Of treated patients, 79.9% and 50% had HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/ml and < 50 copies/ml respectively, at the end of the study, early termination visits, or at last known status. Tropism changes and selection of MVC-resistant R5 virus, including high-level MVC dependence, were mechanisms of viral escape. CONCLUSION: MVC was well tolerated with virologic suppression observed in most patients.

Hepatic safety in subjects with HIV-1 and hepatitis C and/or B virus: a randomized, double-blind study of maraviroc versus placebo in combination with antiretroviral agents.

BACKGROUND: One of the more clinically relevant co-morbidities in HIV-infected patients is the development of progressive liver disease due to hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV). In addition, hepatotoxicity has been observed with prolonged use of antiretroviral agents. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the hepatic safety of maraviroc in combination with other antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected subjects co-infected with HCV and/or HBV. METHODS: In this 148-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (NCT01327547), subjects received maraviroc twice daily (n = 70) or placebo (n = 67) in combination with other antiretroviral agents. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: the percentage at week 48 of subjects with Grade 3 and Grade 4 ALT abnormalities, defined as >5 × upper limit of normal (ULN) if baseline ALT ≤ ULN or >3.5 × baseline if baseline ALT>ULN in the maraviroc versus the placebo arm. RESULTS: At week 48, one subject in each group had met the primary endpoint definition. No subjects met protocol-defined liver stopping criteria and there were no cases of Hy's law or treatment-related hepatobiliary serious adverse events. No significant difference in change from baseline in enhanced liver fibrosis or hepatic elastography was observed between groups. Treatment-related hepatobiliary adverse events were reported in one and two subjects receiving maraviroc and placebo, respectively; discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs occurred in four and two subjects receiving maraviroc and placebo, respectively; two deaths were reported in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The use of maraviroc does not increase hepatotoxicity in HIV-1-infected subjects co-infected with HCV and/or HBV through 48 weeks of treatment.

Efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance: a randomized phase 2B trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine in patients with HIV-1 and prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. METHODS: In this 96-week, phase 2b study, 97 patients were randomized and treated with lersivirine 750 mg qd (n = 31), lersivirine 1,000 mg qd (n = 32), and etravirine 200 mg bid (n = 34), plus one optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg bid. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24. RESULTS: At week 24, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (48.4%) and 1,000 mg (43.8%) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg qd (67.7%) (intention to treat [ITT], missing/switch/discontinuation equals failure [MSDF]). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and <400 copies/mL were also achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (41.9% and 41.9%, respectively) and 1,000 mg (31.3% and 34.4%, respectively) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg bid (61.8% and 70.6%, respectively) (ITT, MSDF). Least squares means (SE) change from baseline in log transformed HIV-1 RNA at week 48 was -1.42 (0.27) and -0.95 (0.28) copies/mL for lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd, respectively, versus -2.02 (0.26) copies/mL for etravirine 200 mg bid (ITT). Lersivirine and etravirine were generally safe and well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd was associated with lower rates of viral suppression at week 24 and week 48 versus etravirine in patients with prior NNRTI use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. No new safety signals were detected.

Use of cellular HIV DNA to predict virologic response to maraviroc: performance of population-based and deep sequencing.

BACKGROUND: A tropism test is required before administration of the antiretroviral drug maraviroc. However, plasma RNA testing is not possible in patients with undetectable plasma viral loads. Here we assess genotypic testing of cellular human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) DNA from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) to predict virologic responses in treatment-experienced patients beginning maraviroc-containing regimens. METHODS: PBMC samples from 181 maraviroc recipients at study entry in MOTIVATE or A4001029 (51% R5 by original Trofile). The V3 loop was amplified in triplicate from cellular HIV DNA, and matching plasma RNA (n = 156). Sequencing was performed using standard population-based methods and next-generation deep sequencing, with tropism assessment as previously defined. RESULTS: Genotypic DNA-based tropism testing from the cellular compartment had 78%-81% sensitivity relative to RNA-based Trofile at the same time point. Cell-based genotypic tropism methods and plasma-based phenotypic and genotypic methods were predictive of virologic response. However, when classifications were discordant, the outcomes favored the plasma predictions over the DNA ones. CONCLUSIONS: Genotypic determination of HIV tropism can be performed using cell-derived viral DNA, and is a predictor of virologic success on maraviroc in therapy-experienced patients. However, the PBMC compartment appears to be a suboptimal predictor compared to plasma.

Pharmacokinetic interaction between maraviroc and fosamprenavir-ritonavir: an open-label, fixed-sequence study in healthy subjects.

This open-label, fixed-sequence, phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction between maraviroc (MVC) and ritonavir-boosted fosamprenavir (FPV/r) in healthy subjects. In period 1, subjects received 300 mg of MVC twice daily (BID; cohort 1) or once daily (QD; cohort 2) for 5 days. In period 2, cohort 1 subjects received 700/100 mg of FPV/r BID alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 700/100 mg BID plus MVC at 300 mg BID on days 11 to 20; cohort 2 subjects received FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD plus MVC at 300 mg QD on days 11 to 20. Pharmacokinetic parameters, assessed on day 5 of period 1 and on days 10 and 20 of period 2, included the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), the concentration at end of dosing interval (Cτ), and the area under the curve over dosing interval (AUCτ). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. MVC geometric mean AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ were increased by 149, 52, and 374%, respectively, after BID dosing with FPV/r, and by 126, 45, and 80%, respectively, after QD dosing. Amprenavir (the active form of the prodrug fosamprenavir) and ritonavir exposures were decreased in the presence of MVC with amprenavir AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ decreased by 34 to 36% in the presence of FPV/r plus maraviroc BID and by 15 to 30% with FPV/r plus MVC QD both compared to FPV/r alone. The overall all-causality adverse-event (AE) incidence rate was 96.4%; all AEs were of mild or moderate severity. Commonly reported treatment-related AEs (>20% of patients overall) included diarrhea, fatigue, abdominal discomfort, headache, and nausea. No serious AEs or deaths occurred. In summary, maraviroc exposure increased in the presence of FPV/r, whereas MVC coadministration decreased amprenavir and ritonavir exposures. MVC dosed at 300 mg BID with FPV/r is not recommended due to concerns of lower amprenavir exposures; however, no dose adjustment is warranted with MVC at 150 mg BID in combination with FPV/r based on the available clinical data. MVC plus FPV/r was generally well tolerated; no new safety signals were detected.

Genotypic analysis of the V3 region of HIV from virologic nonresponders to maraviroc-containing regimens reveals distinct patterns of failure.

Changes in HIV tropism from R5 to non-R5 or development of drug resistance is often associated with virologic failure in patients treated with maraviroc, a CCR5 antagonist. We sought to examine changes in HIV envelope sequences and inferred tropism in patients who did not respond to maraviroc-based regimens. We selected 181 patients who experienced early virologic failure on maraviroc-containing therapy in the MOTIVATE trials. All patients had R5 HIV by the original Trofile assay before entry. We used population-based sequencing methods and the geno2pheno algorithm to examine changes in tropism and V3 sequences at the time of failure. Using deep sequencing, we assessed whether V3 sequences observed at failure emerged from preexisting subpopulations. From population genotyping data at failure, 90 patients had R5 results, and 91 had non-R5 results. Of the latter group, the geno2pheno false-positive rate (FPR) value fell from a median of 20 at screening to 1.1 at failure. By deep sequencing, the median percentage of non-R5 variants in these patients rose from 1.4% to 99.5% after a median of 4 weeks on maraviroc. In 70% of cases, deep sequencing could detect a pretreatment CXCR4-using subpopulation, which emerged at failure. Overall, there were two distinct patterns of failure of maraviroc. Patients failing with R5 generally had few V3 substitutions and low non-R5 prevalence by deep sequencing. Patients with non-R5 HIV who were failing developed very-high-prevalence non-R5 HIV (median, 99%) and had very low geno2pheno values.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of maraviroc in HIV-negative subjects with impaired renal function.

PURPOSE: This open-label, nonrandomized, parallel-group study was conducted to explore the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of maraviroc in renally impaired subjects. METHODS: Subjects with normal renal function; mild, moderate, or severe renal impairment; or end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (n = 6 per group) were enrolled. Subjects with normal function (period 1), severe impairment, and ESRD received a single 300 mg dose of maraviroc. Subjects with normal function (period 2), mild impairment, and moderate impairment received 150 mg for 7 days at adjusted intervals of twice daily, once daily, and every 48 hours, respectively, with saquinavir/ritonavir (SQV/r). Maraviroc was quantified in plasma, urine, and dialysate by tandem high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. RESULTS: With SQV/r, geometric mean steady-state maraviroc area under the plasma concentration-time curve for the dosing interval (AUCtau) was 5,341 (coefficient of variation [CV], 27%), 8,119 (35%), and 6,193 (27%) h•ng/mL, in normal function, mild, and moderate impairment groups, respectively. Without SQV/r, 2% to 3% of the maraviroc dose was recovered in urine versus 15% to 25% of steady-state dose when given with SQV/r. Moderate to high intersubject variability in exposure was noted. AUC from zero to infinity (AUCinf) was similar to historical single-dose data in subjects with ESRD: low in those with normal function, and high in those with severe impairment. Dialysis did not influence maraviroc exposure. Maraviroc was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that no dosing interval adjustments are required in subjects with renal impairment when maraviroc is administered alone. However, maraviroc dosing interval adjustment is warranted in renally impaired patients receiving potent CYP3A4 inhibitors. Reference to local prescribing information is recommended, because dose recommendations in renally impaired patients may differ between regions.

Safety profile of maraviroc in patients coinfected with HIV-1 and hepatitis B or C included in the maraviroc expanded access program.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of maraviroc with other antiretrovirals in patients with HIV-1 coinfected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV). METHODS: This was a multicenter, noncomparative, open-label, expanded access program (EAP) initiated in February 2007. Patients with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 and HIV-1 RNA ≥ 1000 copies/mL on their current treatment received maraviroc 300 mg (150 mg with protease inhibitors) twice daily with optimized background therapy (OBT), which could include the newer agents raltegravir, etravirine, and darunavir. The adverse event (AE) profile was compared with the active and placebo arms of the maraviroc phase III clinical trials MOTIVATE 1 and 2, where the OBT did not include these agents. RESULTS: A total of 1,032 patients were enrolled: 51 HIV/HBV coinfected; 149 HIV/HCV coinfected, 9 HIV/HBV/HCV coinfected, and 823 HIV-1 monoinfected. Most (76%) received at least 1 newer agent. Overall AE frequency was comparable across coinfection groups (63%-72%). Hepatobiliary events were more common in HIV/HCV coinfection than in HIV monoinfection or HIV/HBV coinfection (10.0, 4.8, and 3.1 per 100 patient-years, respectively). Across all coinfection groups, there was a trend toward lower exposure-adjusted rates of serious and hepatobiliary AEs in the EAP than in the MOTIVATE studies. Grade 3/4 transaminase elevations in patients receiving maraviroc in the EAP and MOTIVATE were comparable with those seen in the MOTIVATE placebo arm. CONCLUSION: Maraviroc plus an OBT did not increase the incidence of AEs or severe laboratory liver abnormalities in HIV-1-infected patients coinfected with HBV or HCV.

Deep sequencing to infer HIV-1 co-receptor usage: application to three clinical trials of maraviroc in treatment-experienced patients.

BACKGROUND: The Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) studies compared maraviroc versus placebo in treatment-experienced patients with CCR5-using (R5) human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), screened using the original Trofile assay. A subset with non-R5 HIV infection entered the A4001029 trial. We retrospectively examined the performance of a genotypic tropism assay based on deep sequencing of the HIV env V3 loop in predicting virologic response to maraviroc in these trials. METHODS: V3 amplicons were prepared from 1827 screening plasma samples and sequenced on a Roche/454 GS-FLX to a depth of >3000 sequences/sample. Samples were considered non-R5 if ≥2% of their viral population scored greater than or equal to -4.75 or ≤3.5 using the PSSM(x4/R5) or geno2pheno algorithms, respectively. RESULTS: Deep sequencing identified more than twice as many maraviroc recipients as having non-R5 HIV, compared with the original Trofile. With use of genotyping, we determined that 49% of maraviroc recipients with R5 HIV at screening had a week 48 viral load <50 copies/mL versus 26% of recipients with non-R5. Corresponding percentages were 46% and 23% with screening by Trofile. In cases in which screening assays differed, median week 8 log10 copies/mL viral load decrease favored 454. Other parameters predicted by genotyping included likelihood of changing to non-R5 tropism. CONCLUSIONS: This large study establishes deep V3 sequencing as a promising tool for identifying treatment-experienced individuals who could benefit from CCR5-antagonist-containing regimens.

Deep V3 sequencing for HIV type 1 tropism in treatment-naive patients: a reanalysis of the MERIT trial of maraviroc.

BACKGROUND: Deep sequencing is a highly sensitive technique that can detect and quantify the proportion of non-R5 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) variants, including small minorities, that may emerge and cause virologic failure in patients who receive maraviroc-containing regimens. We retrospectively tested the ability of deep sequencing to predict response to a maraviroc-containing regimen in the Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients (MERIT) trial. Results were compared with those obtained using the Enhanced Sensitivity Trofile Assay (ESTA), which is widely used in clinical practice. METHODS: Screening plasma samples from treatment-naive patients who received maraviroc and efavirenz in the MERIT trial were assessed. Samples were extracted, and the V3 region of HIV type 1 glycoprotein 120 was amplified in triplicate and combined in equal quantities before sequencing on a Roche/454 Genome Sequencer-FLX (n = 859). Tropism was inferred from third variable (V3) sequences, with samples classified as non-R5 if ≥2% of the viral population scored ≤3.5 using geno2pheno. RESULTS: Deep sequencing distinguished between responders and nonresponders to maraviroc. Among patients identified as having R5-HIV by deep sequencing, 67% of maraviroc recipients and 69% of efavirenz recipients had a plasma viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48, similar to the ESTA results: 68% and 68%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Reanalysis of the MERIT trial using deep V3 loop sequencing indicates that, had patients originally been screened using this method, the maraviroc arm would have likely been found to be noninferior to the efavirenz arm.

Maraviroc versus efavirenz, both in combination with zidovudine-lamivudine, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive subjects with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: The MERIT (Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients) study compared maraviroc and efavirenz, both with zidovudine-lamivudine, in antiretroviral-naive patients with R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. METHODS: Patients screened for R5 HIV-1 were randomized to receive efavirenz (600 mg once daily) or maraviroc (300 mg once or twice daily) with zidovudine-lamivudine. Coprimary end points were proportions of patients with a viral load <400 and <50 copies/mL at week 48; the noninferiority of maraviroc was assessed. RESULTS: The once-daily maraviroc arm was discontinued for not meeting prespecified noninferiority criteria. In the primary 48-week analysis (n = 721), maraviroc was noninferior for <400 copies/mL (70.6% for maraviroc vs 73.1% for efavirenz) but not for <50 copies/mL (65.3% vs 69.3%) at a threshold of -10%. More maraviroc patients discontinued for lack of efficacy (11.9% vs 4.2%), but fewer discontinued for adverse events (4.2% vs 13.6%). In a post hoc reanalysis excluding 107 patients (15%) with non-R5 screening virus by the current, more sensitive tropism assay, the lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the difference between treatment groups was above -10% for each end point. CONCLUSIONS: Twice-daily maraviroc was not noninferior to efavirenz at <50 copies/mL in the primary analysis. However, 15% of patients would have been ineligible for inclusion by a more sensitive screening assay. Their retrospective exclusion resulted in similar response rates in both arms Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: (NCT00098293) .

Efficacy and safety of maraviroc versus efavirenz, both with zidovudine/lamivudine: 96-week results from the MERIT study.

BACKGROUND: The MERIT study evaluated maraviroc versus efavirenz, both with zidovudine/lamivudine, in treatment-naïve patients with CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV-1. Post hoc analyses previously assessed week 48 outcomes in patients rescreened with R5 virus by a more sensitive tropism assay. METHODS: Week 96 efficacy (post hoc, n = 614) and safety (n = 721) were assessed. RESULTS: Proportions of subjects <50 copies/mL (58.8% maraviroc, 62.7% efavirenz) and time to loss of virologic response (TLOVR) responders (<50 copies/mL: 60.5% vs 60.7%) were similar. Maraviroc recipients had greater CD4 increases (+ 212 vs + 171 cells/mm(3)) and fewer adverse event discontinuations (6.1% vs 15.5%), malignancies, and category C events. CONCLUSION: Week 96 data confirm week 48 observations in MERIT.

No Clinical Impact of CYP3A5 Gene Polymorphisms on the Pharmacokinetics and/or Efficacy of Maraviroc in Healthy Volunteers and HIV-1-Infected Subjects.

Maraviroc is a C-C chemokine receptor type-5 antagonist approved for the treatment of HIV-1. Previous studies show that cytochrome P450 3A5 (CYP3A5) plays a role in maraviroc metabolism. CYP3A5 is subject to a genetic polymorphism. The presence of 2 functional alleles (CYP3A5*1/*1) confers the extensive metabolism phenotype, which is rare in whites but common in blacks. The effect of CYP3A5 genotype on maraviroc and/or metabolite pharmacokinetics was evaluated in 2 clinical studies: a post hoc analysis from a phase 2b/3 study (NCT00098293) conducted in 494 HIV-1-infected subjects (study 1) in which the impact on maraviroc efficacy in 303 subjects was also assessed, and a study conducted in 47 healthy volunteers (study 2). In study 2 (NCT02625207), extensive metabolizers had 26% to 37% lower mean area under the concentration-time curve compared with poor metabolizers (no CYP3A5*1 alleles). This effect diminished to 17% in the presence of potent CYP3A inhibition. The effect of CYP3A5 genotype was greatest in the formation of the metabolite (1S,2S)-2-hydroxymaraviroc. In study 1, the CYP3A5*1/*1 genotype unexpectedly had higher maraviroc area under the curve predictions (20%) compared with those with no CYP3A5*1 alleles. The reason for this disparity remains unclear. The proportions of subjects with viral loads <50 and <400 copies/mL for maraviroc were comparable among all 3 CYP3A5 genotypes. In both studies maraviroc exposures were in the range of near-maximal viral inhibition in the majority of subjects. These results demonstrate that although CYP3A5 contributes to the metabolism of maraviroc, CYP3A5 genotype does not affect the clinical response to maraviroc in combination treatment of HIV-1 infection at approved doses.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Efficacy of Maraviroc in Treatment-experienced Pediatric Patients Infected With CCR5-Tropic HIV-1.

BACKGROUND: Maraviroc is a CC-chemokine receptor 5 antagonist approved to treat adults infected with CC-chemokine receptor 5-tropic (R5) HIV-1. Study A4001031 was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of maraviroc in combination with optimized background therapy in treatment-experienced pediatric patients infected with R5 HIV-1 and support registration of maraviroc for pediatric use. METHODS: This is an open-label, 2-stage, age-stratified, noncomparative multicenter study. One-hundred and three participants were enrolled into 4 age/formulation cohorts and dosed twice daily. Initial doses were determined by body surface area and optimized background therapy, based on drug interactions with maraviroc in adults. Dose adjustment and pharmacokinetic reevaluation occurred if the average concentrations (Cavg) at Week 2 were <100 ng/mL (Stage 1-dose finding). RESULTS: Data from the Week 48 analysis demonstrated that 49/50 Stage 1 participants rolling over into Stage 2 (safety and efficacy) achieved Cavg ≥100 ng/mL. Doses were identified that achieved similar concentration ranges to those seen in adults. The majority (90/103) received optimized background therapy containing potent cytochrome P450 3A inhibitors. Maraviroc was well tolerated and the safety and efficacy were comparable to those of adults. All cohorts had a mean decrease from baseline in HIV-1 RNA of >1 log10. Increases from baseline in the median CD4+ cell count and percentage were seen for all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The maraviroc dosing strategy resulted in participants achieving the target Cavg, with exposure ranges similar to those observed in adults on approved doses. The safety and efficacy of maraviroc in this pediatric population were comparable to those seen in adults.

Hepatic safety of maraviroc in patients with HIV-1 and hepatitis C and/or B virus: 144-week results from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the primary 48-week analysis of a hepatic safety trial in patients with HIV-1 coinfected with HBV and/or HCV, maraviroc-containing treatment regimens were not associated with increased hepatotoxicity. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, patients received maraviroc twice daily (n=70) or placebo (n=67) with concomitant antiretroviral therapy for 144 weeks (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT01327547). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with protocol-defined Grade 3/4 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) abnormalities through week 48. Key secondary end points included 144-week analysis of Grade 3/4 ALT abnormalities and liver fibrosis by enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) testing, hepatic elastography and an optional biopsy substudy. RESULTS: Through 144 weeks of treatment, two (maraviroc) and three (placebo) patients met the protocol-defined Grade 3/4 ALT end point. Similar to the 48-week results, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in change from baseline in ELF or hepatic elastography. However, decreased elastography scores were noted in the maraviroc group. Blinded pathologist review suggested that 2 of 11 paired biopsies (both on maraviroc) showed signs of decreased fibrosis. One (maraviroc) and two (placebo) patients experienced treatment-related hepatobiliary adverse events (AEs). Five patients in the maraviroc group discontinued because of treatment-related AEs versus three in the placebo group. One death in the maraviroc group and two deaths in the placebo group were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Use of maraviroc did not increase hepatotoxicity in this population through 144 weeks. Further investigation regarding possible beneficial effects of maraviroc on liver fibrosis may be warranted.

Once-daily maraviroc versus tenofovir/emtricitabine each combined with darunavir/ritonavir for initial HIV-1 treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of maraviroc along with darunavir/ritonavir, all once daily, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 infected individuals. DESIGN: MODERN was a multicentre, double-blind, noninferiority, phase III study in HIV-1 infected, antiretroviral-naive adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA at least 1000 copies/ml and no evidence of reduced susceptibility to study drugs. METHODS: At screening, participants were randomized 1 : 1 to undergo either genotypic or phenotypic tropism testing. Participants with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 were randomized 1 : 1 to receive maraviroc 150 mg once daily or tenofovir/emtricitabine once daily each with darunavir/ritonavir once daily for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml (Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm) at Week 48. A substudy evaluated bone mineral density, body fat distribution and serum bone turnover markers. RESULTS: Seven hundred and ninety-seven participants were dosed (maraviroc, n = 396; tenofovir/emtricitabine, n = 401). The Data Monitoring Committee recommended early study termination due to inferior efficacy in the maraviroc group. At Week 48, the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml was 77.3% for maraviroc and 86.8% for tenofovir/emtricitabine [difference of -9.54% (95% confidence interval: -14.83 to -4.24)]. More maraviroc participants discontinued for lack of efficacy, which was not associated with non-R5 tropism or resistance. Discontinuations for adverse events, Category C events, Grade 3/4 adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: A once-daily nucleos(t)ide-sparing two-drug regimen of maraviroc and darunavir/ritonavir was inferior to a three-drug regimen of tenofovir/emtricitabine and darunavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral-naive adults.

Use of procalcitonin and C-reactive protein to evaluate vaccine efficacy against pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia remains the leading cause of death in young children. The poor specificity of chest radiographs (CXRs) to diagnose pneumococcal pneumonia may underestimate the efficacy of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in preventing pneumococcal pneumonia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The efficacy of nine-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine among children not infected with HIV (21%; 95% confidence interval, 1%-37%) increased when CXR-confirmed pneumonia was associated with serum C-reactive protein of 120 mg/l (12 mg/dl) or more and procalcitonin of 5.0 ng/ml or more (64%; 95% confidence interval, 23%-83%). Similar results were observed in children infected with HIV. CONCLUSION: C-reactive protein and procalcitonin improve the specificity of CXR to diagnose pneumococcal pneumonia and may be useful for the future evaluation of the effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in preventing pneumococcal pneumonia.