Darunavir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in a Rapid-Initiation Model of Care for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection: Primary Analysis of the DIAMOND Study.

BACKGROUND: Most guidelines recommend rapid treatment initiation for patients with newly diagnosed human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but prospective US data are limited. The DIAMOND (NCT03227861) study using darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg is a phase 3 prospective study evaluating efficacy/safety of a single-tablet regimen in a rapid-initiation model of care. METHODS: Adults aged ≥18 years began D/C/F/TAF ≤14 days from diagnosis without screening/baseline results; as results became available, participants not meeting predefined safety/resistance stopping rules continued. Primary endpoint was virologic response (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL; intent-to-treat; US Food and Drug Administration [FDA] snapshot) at week 48; participant satisfaction was measured via the HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status version (HIVTSQs). RESULTS: Of 109 participants, 87% were male, 32% black/African American, median (range) age was 28 (range, 19-66) years, 25% of participants had HIV-1 RNA ≥100 000 copies/mL, 21% had CD4+ cell count <200 cells/µL, and 31% enrolled ≤48 hours from diagnosis. At week 48, 97 (89%) participants completed the study and 92 (84%) achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (FDA snapshot). There were no protocol-defined virologic failures; incidences of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (33%) were low, no serious AEs were study drug related, and 1 (<1%) participant discontinued due to study drug related AE(s). The overall HIVTSQs score at week 48 was 58 (maximum: 60). CONCLUSIONS: At week 48, a high proportion of participants starting D/C/F/TAF achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and very few discontinued therapy. D/C/F/TAF was well tolerated, no participants discontinued due to baseline resistance stopping criteria, and high treatment satisfaction among participants was recorded. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03227861.

Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, coformulated with elvitegravir, cobicistat, and emtricitabine, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: two randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate can cause renal and bone toxic effects related to high plasma tenofovir concentrations. Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug with a 90% reduction in plasma tenofovir concentrations. Tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimens can have improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens. METHODS: In these two controlled, double-blind phase 3 studies, we recruited treatment-naive HIV-infected patients with an estimated creatinine clearance of 50 mL per min or higher from 178 outpatient centres in 16 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily oral tablets containing 150 mg elvitegravir, 150 mg cobicistat, 200 mg emtricitabine, and 10 mg tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide) or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) with matching placebo. Randomisation was done by a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4) and was stratified by HIV-1 RNA, CD4 count, and region (USA or ex-USA). Investigators, patients, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. All participants who received one dose of study drug were included in the primary intention-to-treat efficacy and safety analyses. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 as defined by the the US Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA) snapshot algorithm (pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 12%) and pre-specified renal and bone endpoints at 48 weeks. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01780506 and NCT01797445. FINDINGS: We recruited patients from Jan 22, 2013, to Nov 4, 2013 (2175 screened and 1744 randomly assigned), and gave treatment to 1733 patients (866 given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide and 867 given E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate). E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, with 800 (92%) of 866 patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group and 784 (90%) of 867 patients in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group having plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted difference 2·0%, 95% CI -0·7 to 4·7). Patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide had significantly smaller mean serum creatinine increases than those given E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·08 vs 0·12 mg/dL; p<0·0001), significantly less proteinuria (median % change -3 vs 20; p<0·0001), and a significantly smaller decrease in bone mineral density at spine (mean % change -1·30 vs -2·86; p<0·0001) and hip (-0·66 vs -2·95; p<0·0001) at 48 weeks. INTERPRETATION: Through 48 weeks, more than 90% of patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide or E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate had virological success. Renal and bone effects were significantly reduced in patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide. Although these studies do not have the power to assess clinical safety events such as renal failure and fractures, our data suggest that E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide will have a favourable long-term renal and bone safety profile. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Cobicistat-boosted darunavir in HIV-1-infected adults: week 48 results of a Phase IIIb, open-label single-arm trial.

BACKGROUND: Cobicistat is an alternative pharmacoenhancer to ritonavir. In healthy volunteers, darunavir exposure was comparable when darunavir 800 mg once daily was co-administered with cobicistat 150 mg once daily (as single agents or a fixed-dose combination) vs. with ritonavir 100 mg once daily. METHODS: This 48-week, Phase IIIb, single-arm, US multicenter study (NCT01440569) evaluated safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg once daily (as single agents) plus two investigator-selected nucleoside/tide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (N[t]RTIs) in HIV-1-infected adults. Patients had no darunavir resistance-associated mutations (RAMs), plasma viral load (VL) ≥1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml, eGFR ≥80 ml/min and genotypic sensitivity to the two N[t]RTIs. The primary endpoint was any treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) through Week 24. RESULTS: The majority of the 313 intent-to-treat patients were treatment-naïve (295/313; 94%), male (89%), White (60%) and received a tenofovir-based regimen (99%). Median baseline VL and CD4(+) count overall were 4.8 log10 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml and 361 cells/mm(3), respectively. Overall, 86% of patients (268/313) completed the study. The majority of discontinuations were for AEs (15/313; 5%). The incidence of treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs regardless of causality was 6% through Week 24 and 8% through Week 48. Most common AEs through Week 48 were diarrhea (27%) and nausea (23%), which were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Week 48 virologic response rates (% with VL <50 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml; Snapshot analysis) were 81% overall and 83% in treatment-naïve patients; median increases in CD4(+) count at 48 weeks were 167 and 169 cells/mm(3), respectively. Of 15/313 patients who met the criteria for resistance analysis, one developed a darunavir RAM as a mixture with wild-type (I84I/V), without phenotypic resistance to darunavir. The mean population pharmacokinetic-derived darunavir areas under the plasma concentration-time curve were 102,000 overall and 100,620 ng•h/ml in treatment-naïve patients. No clinically relevant relationships were seen between darunavir exposure and virologic response, AEs or laboratory parameters. CONCLUSION: Darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg once daily was generally well tolerated through Week 48, with no new safety concerns. Pharmacokinetics, virologic and immunologic responses for darunavir/cobicistat were similar to previous data for darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once daily.

Safety of teropavimab and zinlirvimab with lenacapavir once every 6 months for HIV treatment: a phase 1b, randomised, proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting treatment for HIV has potential to improve adherence, provide durable viral suppression, and have long-term individual and public health benefits. We evaluated treatment with two antibodies that broadly and potently neutralise HIV (broadly neutralising antibodies; bNAbs), combined with lenacapavir, a long-acting capsid inhibitor, as a long-acting regimen. METHODS: This ongoing, randomised, blind, phase 1b proof-of-concept study conducted at 11 HIV treatment centres in the USA included adults with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration below 50 copies per mL who had at least 18 months on oral antiretroviral therapy (ART), CD4 counts of at least 500 cells per µL, and protocol-defined susceptibility to bNAbs teropavimab (3BNC117-LS) and zinlirvimab (10-1074-LS). Participants stopped oral ART and were randomly assigned (1:1) to one dose of 927 mg subcutaneous lenacapavir plus an oral loading dose, 30 mg/kg intravenous teropavimab, and 10 mg/kg or 30 mg/kg intravenous zinlirvimab on day 1. Investigational site personnel and participants were masked to treatment assignment throughout the randomised period. The primary endpoint was incidence of serious adverse events until week 26 in all randomly assigned participants who received one dose or more of any study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04811040. FINDINGS: Between June 29 and Dec 8, 2021, 21 participants were randomly assigned, ten in each group received the complete study regimen and one withdrew before completing the regimen on day 1. 18 (86%) of 21 participants were male; participants ranged in age from 25 years to 61 years and had a median CD4 cell count of 909 (IQR 687-1270) cells per µL at study entry. No serious adverse events occurred. Two grade 3 adverse events occurred (lenacapavir injection-site erythaema and injection-site cellulitis), which had both resolved. The most common adverse events were symptoms of injection-site reactions, reported in 17 (85%) of 20 participants who received subcutaneous lenacapavir; 12 (60%) of 20 were grade 1. One (10%; 95% CI 0-45) participant had viral rebound (confirmed HIV-1 RNA concentration of ≥50 copies per mL) in the zinlirvimab 10 mg/kg group, which was resuppressed on ART, and one participant in the zinlirvimab 30 mg/kg group withdrew at week 12 with HIV RNA <50 copies per mL. INTERPRETATION: Lenacapavir with teropavimab and zinlirvimab 10 mg/kg or 30 mg/kg was generally well tolerated with no serious adverse events. HIV-1 suppression for at least 26 weeks is feasible with this regimen at either zinlirvimab dose in selected people with HIV-1. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Lenacapavir administered every 26 weeks or daily in combination with oral daily antiretroviral therapy for initial treatment of HIV: a randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral agents with novel mechanisms and dosing intervals could expand treatment options for people with HIV. Lenacapavir, an inhibitor of capsid protein that makes use of a unique mechanism, can be administered orally or subcutaneously. We sought to explore the efficacy of lenacapavir in various combination regimens as initial and maintenance therapy for HIV. METHODS: In a phase 2, randomised, open-label, ongoing study at 41 investigational sites in the USA and Dominican Republic, we randomly assigned adults with HIV who had not previously received antiretrovirals to four groups (2:2:2:1). Randomisation was stratified by plasma HIV-1 RNA load (≤100 000 or >100 000 copies per mL) at screening. Groups 1 and 2 both received lenacapavir (927 mg) subcutaneously every 26 weeks (after 2 weeks of oral loading [600 mg on days 1 and 2, followed by 300 mg on day 8]) with oral daily emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) for 28 weeks followed by subcutaneous lenacapavir (927 mg) plus oral daily tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg, group 1) or bictegravir (75 mg, group 2). Group 3 received oral daily lenacapavir (600 mg on days 1 and 2, followed by 50 mg daily) with emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Group 4 received oral daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 54, analysed in the full analysis set (all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug) using only on-treatment data. The safety outcome measures were incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events and graded laboratory abnormalities, analysed in the full analysis set. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04143594. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2019, and Aug 27, 2020, 249 people with HIV were screened, 183 participants were randomly assigned and 182 received a dose of antiretroviral drugs (52 in group 1, 53 in group 2, 52 in group 3, and 25 in group 4). 22 participants did not complete the full study course (five in group 1, 12 in group 2, four in group 3, and one in group 4). At week 54, virological suppression was 90% (47 of 52 patients) for group 1 (difference vs group 4: -2·6%, 95% CI -18·4 to 13·2), 85% (45 of 53) for group 2 (-7·1%, -23·4 to 9·3), 85% (44 of 52) for group 3 (-7·2%, -23·5 to 9·1), and 92% (23 of 25) for group 4. The most frequent non-injection-site adverse events with lenacapavir (subcutaneous or oral) were headache (13%, 21 of 157) and nausea (13%, 21 of 157). The most common lenacapavir-related injection-site reactions were erythema (27%, 28 of 105), swelling (23%, 24 of 105), and pain (19%, 20 of 105), which were generally mild or moderate. No serious adverse event related to study treatment occurred. Three participants discontinued subcutaneous lenacapavir because of grade 1 injection-site reactions (two for induration and one for erythema or swelling). INTERPRETATION: Lenacapavir warrants further investigation as a potential antiretroviral used orally and as injection in combination with other antiretroviral drugs. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Phase 2/3 Trial of Molnupiravir for Treatment of Covid-19 in Nonhospitalized Adults.

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective oral treatments are needed to improve clinical outcomes for nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19. Molnupiravir is an orally administered, small-molecule ribonucleoside prodrug shown to inhibit replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in vitro and in animal models. METHODS: MOVe-OUT is an ongoing, phase 2/3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study evaluating the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of molnupiravir in nonhospitalized adults. In the phase 2 component, participants had mild or moderate, laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 with sign/symptom onset up to (and including) 7 days before randomization. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to receive 200, 400, or 800 mg of molnupiravir or placebo twice daily for 5 days, stratified by time since sign/symptom onset and by being at increased risk for severe illness from Covid-19. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of participants who were hospitalized and/or died through day 29. RESULTS: The phase 2 component randomly assigned 302 participants to treatment; baseline characteristics were comparable across treatment groups. Molnupiravir had no apparent dose-related effect on adverse events, and no clinically meaningful abnormalities in laboratory test results were observed in relation to dose or treatment. Eleven participants were hospitalized or died through day 29. Of 225 participants in the combined molnupiravir group, 7 (3.1%) were hospitalized or died, compared with 4 of 74 participants (5.4%) in the placebo group. Subgroup analyses suggested lower incidences of hospitalization and/or death in the molnupiravir versus placebo groups in participants older than 60 years of age, those with increased risk for severe illness, those with symptom onset up to (and including) 5 days before randomization, and those with both symptom onset up to (and including) 5 days before randomization and increased risk for severe illness. CONCLUSIONS: These interim study results support further evaluation of molnupiravir as a potential treatment to reduce hospitalizations and/or death in nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04575597.)

Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, tenofovir alafenamide after initial treatment with bictegravir or dolutegravir and emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide.

: A phase 2, randomized, active-controlled study of initial antiretroviral therapy with bictegravir or dolutegravir in combination with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide showed excellent efficacy. After 60 weeks of blinded treatment, participants switched to a single-tablet regimen of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Switching maintained viral suppression in all participants who remained on the study through 12 weeks in the open-label phase, and was safe and well tolerated.

Tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine versus abacavir plus lamivudine for treatment of virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected adults: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Abacavir and tenofovir alafenamide offer reduced bone toxicity compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. We aimed to compare safety and efficacy of tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine with that of abacavir plus lamivudine. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial, HIV-1-positive adults (≥18 years) were screened at 79 sites in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Eligible participants were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) and on a stable three-drug regimen containing abacavir plus lamivudine. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4) to switch to fixed-dose tablets of tenofovir alafenamide (10 mg or 25 mg) plus emtricitabine (200 mg) or remain on abacavir (600 mg) plus lamivudine (300 mg), with matching placebo, while continuing to take the third drug. Randomisation was stratified by the third drug (boosted protease inhibitor vs other drug) at screening. Investigators, participants, and study staff giving treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 48 (assessed by snapshot algorithm), with a 10% non-inferiority margin. We analysed the primary endpoint in participants enrolled before May 23, 2016 (when target sample size was reached), and we analysed safety in all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study drug (including patients enrolled after these dates). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02469246. FINDINGS: Study enrolment began on June 29, 2015, and the cutoff enrolment date for the week 48 primary endpoint analysis was May 23, 2016. 501 participants were randomly assigned and treated. At week 48, virological suppression was maintained in 227 (90%) of 253 participants receiving tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine compared with 230 (93%) of 248 receiving abacavir plus lamivudine (difference -3·0%, 95% CI -8·2 to 2·0), showing non-inferiority. Few participants discontinued treatment because of adverse events: 12 (4%) of 280 participants in the tenofovir alafenimide plus emtricitabine group and nine (3%) of 276 in the abacavir plus lamivudine group. Three participants had serious, treatment-related adverse events: one each with renal colic and neutropenia in the tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine group, and one myocardial infarction in the abacavir plus lamivudine group. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Tenofovir alafenamide, in combination with emtricitabine and various third drugs, maintained high efficacy with a renal and bone safety profile similar to that of abacavir. In virologically suppressed patients, a regimen containing tenofovir alafenamide could be an alternative to those containing abacavir, without concern for new onset of renal or bone toxicities or hyperlipidaemia. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences Inc.

Efficacy and safety of switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Switching from therapy based on a boosted protease inhibitor to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide could avoid drug interactions and unwanted side-effects in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection, while maintaining a high barrier to resistance and providing a simplified once-daily, single-tablet regimen. Here, we report 48 week results of a phase 3 study investigating this switch. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were enrolled at 121 outpatient centres in ten countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or higher, had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or more before screening, and were on a regimen consisting of boosted atazanavir or darunavir plus either emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated once-daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg), herein known as the bictegravir group, or to remain on their baseline boosted protease inhibitor regimen, herein known as the boosted protease inhibitor group, for 48 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir at screening. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting patients and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603107. FINDINGS: Between Dec 2, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 578 participants were randomly assigned and 577 were treated (290 in the bictegravir group and 287 in the boosted protease inhibitor group). At week 48, five participants (2%) in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher (difference 0·0%, 95·002% CI -2·5 to 2·5), thus switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy. The overall incidence and severity of adverse events was similar between groups, although headache occurred more frequently in the bictegravir group than in the boosted protease inhibitor group. 233 (80%) participants in the bictegravir group and 226 (79%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had an adverse event. Only two (1%) participants in the bictegravir group and one (<1%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. 54 participants (19%) in the bictegravir group had drug-related adverse events compared with six (2%) in the protease inhibitor group. INTERPRETATION: Fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might be a safe and efficacious alternative to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Bictegravir versus dolutegravir, each with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: All recent treatment guidelines recommend integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) as components of initial HIV therapy. Bictegravir, a novel, once-daily, unboosted INSTI, showed potent activity in a 10 day monotherapy study and has a high in-vitro resistance barrier. On the basis of these results, we did a phase 2 trial comparing bictegravir with dolutegravir. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial, we recruited previously untreated adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 infections from 22 outpatient centres in the USA. Eligible patients had HIV-1 RNA concentrations of at least 1000 copies per mL, CD4 counts of at least 200 cells per µL, estimated glomerular filtration rates of at least 70 mL per min, and HIV-1 genotypes showing sensitivity to emtricitabine and tenofovir. We excluded patients if they were hepatitis B-co-infected or hepatitis C-co-infected, had new AIDS-defining conditions within 30 days of screening, or were pregnant. We randomly allocated participants (2:1) to receive oral once-daily 75 mg bictegravir or 50 mg dolutegravir with matching placebo plus the fixed-dose combination of 200 mg emtricitabine and 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide for 48 weeks. We randomly allocated participants via an interactive web system, stratified by HIV-1 RNA concentration. Investigators, patients, study staff giving treatment, collecting data, and assessing outcomes, and the funder were masked to treatment group. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of less than 50 copies per mL at week 24 according to the US Food and Drug Administration-defined snapshot algorithm. We included all participants receiving one dose of study drug in analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02397694. FINDINGS: Between March 23, 2015, and May 21, 2015, we screened 125 patients, randomly allocating and giving study drug to 98 (65 received bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide and 33 received dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide). At week 24, 63 (96·9%) of 65 in the bictegravir group had HIV-1 RNA loads of less than 50 copies per mL compared with 31 (93·9%) of 33 in the dolutegravir group (weighted difference 2·9%, 95% CI -8·5 to 14·2; p=0·50). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 55 (85%) of 65 participants in the bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group versus 22 (67%) of 33 in the dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (eight [12%] of 65 vs four [12%] of 33) and nausea (five [8%] of 65 vs four [12%] of 33). One participant taking bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide discontinued because of a drug-related adverse event (urticaria) after week 24. No treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide and dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide both showed high efficacy up to 24 weeks. Both treatments were well tolerated. Administration of bictegravir, a novel, potent, once-daily INSTI designed to improve on existing INSTI options with the backbone of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, might provide an advantage to patients. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Switching from efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide coformulated with rilpivirine and emtricitabine in virally suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide is a prodrug that reduces tenofovir plasma concentrations by 90% compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, thereby decreasing bone and renal risks. The coformulation of rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide has recently been approved, and we aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to this regimen compared with remaining on coformulated efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial, HIV-1-infected adults were enrolled at 120 hospitals and outpatient clinics in eight countries in North America and Europe. Participants were virally suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) on efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for at least 6 months before enrolment and had creatinine clearance of at least 50 mL/min. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a single-tablet regimen of rilpivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) or to continue a single-tablet regimen of efavirenz (600 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg), with matching placebo. Investigators, participants, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 (assessed by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 8%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02345226. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2015, and Aug 27, 2015, 875 participants were randomly assigned and treated (438 with rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide and 437 with efavirenz, emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate). Viral suppression at week 48 was maintained in 394 (90%) of 438 participants assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide regimen and 402 (92%) of 437 assigned to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimen (difference -2·0%, 95·001% CI -5·9 to 1·8), demonstrating non-inferiority. 56 (13%) of 438 in participants in the rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group experienced treatment-related adverse events compared with 45 (10%) of 437 in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. INTERPRETATION: Switching to rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was non-inferior in maintaining viral suppression and was well tolerated at 48 weeks. These findings support guidelines recommending tenofovir alafenamide-based regimens, including coformulation with rilpivirine and emtricitabine, as initial and ongoing treatment for HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide coformulated with rilpivirine and emtricitabine in virally suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide, a tenofovir prodrug, results in 90% lower tenofovir plasma concentrations than does tenofovir disproxil fumarate, thereby minimising bone and renal risks. We investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to a single-tablet regimen containing rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with remaining on rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial, HIV-1-infected adults were screened and enrolled at 119 hospitals in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Participants were virally suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) on rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for at least 6 months before enrolment and had creatinine clearance of at least 50 mL/min. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a single-tablet regimen of either rilpivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) or to remain on a single-tablet regimen of rilpivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg), with matching placebo, once daily for 96 weeks. Investigators, participants, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. All participants who received one dose of study drug and were on the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimen before screening were included in primary efficacy analyses. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with less than 50 copies per mL of plasma HIV-1 RNA at week 48 (by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 8%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01815736. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2015, and Aug 25, 2015, 630 participants were randomised (316 to the tenofovir alafenamide group and 314 to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). At week 48, 296 (94%) of 316 participants on tenofovir alafenamide and 294 (94%) of 313 on tenofovir disoproxil fumarate had maintained less than 50 copies per mL HIV-1 RNA (difference -0·3%, 95·001% CI -4·2 to 3·7), showing non-inferiority of tenofovir alafenamide to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Numbers of adverse events were similar between groups. 20 (6%) of 316 participants had study-drug related adverse events in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with 37 (12%) of 314 in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group; none of these were serious. INTERPRETATION: Switching to rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to continuing rilpivirine, emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in maintaining viral suppression and was well tolerated at 48 weeks. These findings support guidelines recommending tenofovir alafenamide-based regimens, including coformulation with rilpivirine and emtricitabine, as initial and ongoing treatment for HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Brief Report: Efficacy and Safety of Switching to a Single-Tablet Regimen of Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in HIV-1/Hepatitis B-Coinfected Adults.

Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) has high efficacy and improved renal and bone safety in multiple phase 3 trials; TAF single agent is being studied in 2 phase 3 trials in patients with chronic hepatitis B. We report the results of an open-label, noncomparative switch study evaluating the efficacy and safety of E/C/F/TAF in HIV/hepatitis B virus (HBV)-coinfected adults. At 48 weeks, 91.7% of the 72 participants maintained or achieved virologic suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL; HBV DNA <29 IU/mL). Seroconversion occurred in 2.9% of hepatitis B surface antigen-positive participants and in 3.3% of HBV e antigen-positive participants; 40% of those with abnormal alanine aminotransferase normalized. E/C/F/TAF was associated with improved renal function and reduced bone turnover. These data support the use of E/C/F/TAF in treating HIV/HBV coinfection.

Switching to Tenofovir Alafenamide, Coformulated With Elvitegravir, Cobicistat, and Emtricitabine, in HIV-Infected Patients With Renal Impairment: 48-Week Results From a Single-Arm, Multicenter, Open-Label Phase 3 Study.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is a novel tenofovir prodrug with improved renal and bone safety compared with TDF-containing regimens. We report the 48 week safety and efficacy of a once-daily single tablet regimen of elvitegravir 150 mg (E), cobicistat 150 mg (C), emtricitabine 200 mg (F), and TAF 10 mg (E/C/F/TAF) in HIV-1-infected patients with mild to moderate renal impairment. METHODS: We enrolled virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected subjects with estimated creatinine clearance (CrCl) 30-69 mL/min in a single-arm, open-label study to switch regimens to E/C/F/TAF. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in glomerular filtration rate estimated using various formulae. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01818596. FINDINGS: We enrolled and treated 242 patients with mean age 58 years, 18% Black, 39% hypertension, 14% diabetes. Through week 48, no significant change in estimated CrCl was observed. Two patients (0.8%) discontinued study drug for decreased creatinine clearance, neither had evidence of renal tubulopathy and both had uncontrolled hypertension. Subjects had significant improvements in proteinuria, albuminuria, and tubular proteinuria (P < 0.001 for all). Hip and spine bone mineral density significantly increased from baseline to week 48 (mean percent change +1.47 and +2.29, respectively, P < 0.05). Ninety-two percent (222 patients) maintained HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter at week 48. INTERPRETATION: Switch to E/C/F/TAF was associated with minimal change in GFR. Proteinuria, albuminuria and bone mineral density significantly improved. These data support the efficacy and safety of once daily E/C/F/TAF in HIV+ patients with mild or moderate renal impairment without dose adjustment.

Tenofovir Alafenamide Versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in the First Protease Inhibitor-Based Single-Tablet Regimen for Initial HIV-1 Therapy: A Randomized Phase 2 Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the novel tenofovir prodrug, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), as part of the first protease inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen (STR) for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. METHODS: Antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 70 mL/min were randomized 2:1 to receive the darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) STR (TAF: N = 103) or darunavir + cobicistat + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF: N = 50) once daily with matched placebos for 48 weeks. RESULTS: At week 24, viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) rates were similar (TAF 74.8% vs. TDF 74.0%). At week 48, rates were TAF 76.7% vs. TDF 84.0%; the difference was driven by higher rate of discontinuations in TAF (6.8%) vs. TDF (2%). Among those with virologic failure, none developed resistance. Most adverse events were of mild/moderate severity. The mean change in serum creatinine from baseline at week 48 was 0.06 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.04 to 0.08) for TAF vs. 0.09 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.14) for TDF (P = 0.053). The % change in retinol binding protein/Cr ratio was +9 (TAF) vs. +54 (TDF), P = 0.003; the % change in urine ß-2 microglobulin/Cr ratio was -42.0 (TAF) vs. +2.3 (TDF), P = 0.002. The % change in hip bone mineral density (BMD) was -0.84 (TAF) vs. -3.82 (TDF), P < 0.001 and in spine BMD was -1.57 (TAF) vs. -3.62 (TDF), P = 0.003. There were no fractures in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The TAF arm had significantly improved renal and bone safety parameters: less proteinuria and less change in hip and spine BMD, consistent with results from a similarly designed study of the elvitegravir/C/F/TAF STR. This D/C/F/TAF STR offers a promising option for initial HIV treatment, with the high barrier to resistance of darunavir, and the potential for improved long-term renal and bone safety with TAF.

Phase IIIb, open-label single-arm trial of darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/COBI): Week 48 subgroup analysis of HIV-1-infected treatment-nave adults.

INTRODUCTION: COBI, a PK enhancer with no ARV activity is a more selective cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A inhibitor than ritonavir (RTV), does not induce CYP isozymes, and thus has less potential for drug-drug interactions. COBI boosts DRV PK as effectively as RTV in healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 48-week, phase IIIb, open-label, single-arm, US multicentre study (NCT01440569) included HIV-infected treatment-nave and experienced adults with no DRV RAMs, viral load (VL) ≥1000 c/mL, eGFR ≥80 mL/min and genotypic sensitivity to investigator-selected N[t]RTIs. Patients received DRV/COBI 800/150 mg qd (as single agents) plus two fully active N[t]RTIs. The primary endpoint was any treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs through Week 24. We report 48-week safety, efficacy and PK/PD results in treatment-nave patients. RESULTS: Of 313 ITT patients, 295 were treatment-nave (94%). In the treatment-nave cohort, 90% were male, 60% white and 294 (99.7%) received a TDF-containing regimen. Median baseline (BL) VL was 4.8 log10 c/mL and CD4(+) 370 cells/mm(3). Treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs regardless of causality were reported in 21 (7%) patients. AEs regardless of causality (any grade; ≥10% of patients) were: diarrhoea (27%), nausea (23%), URTI (15%) and headache (12%). Sixteen (5%) patients had AEs leading to study drug discontinuation, most frequently rash (three patients), hypersensitivity and nausea (two patients each). Consistent with the known inhibition of tubular creatinine secretion by COBI, there was a mean increase from BL in serum creatinine by week 2 (0.09 mg/dL), remaining stable through week 48 (mean 0.10 mg/dL increase from BL). At week 48, 83% of patients achieved VL<50 c/mL; FDA Snapshot); median increase in CD4(+) was 169 cells/mm(3). Eight patients met the criteria for resistance testing. M184V was detected in one pt receiving FTC. New primary RAMs were not detected in the other seven patients. The mean population PK-derived DRV AUC24h was 100,620 ng.h/mL and C0h 2,105 ng/mL (n=281). There were no clinically relevant relationships between DRV exposure and virologic response, AEs or laboratory parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The DRV PK of DRV/COBI was consistent with historical data for DRV/RTV. DRV/COBI 800/150 mg qd plus two N(t)RTIs had an 83% response and was well tolerated through Week 48. These results are similar to published data for DRV/RTV 800/100 mg qd, and support the use of DRV/COBI 800/150 mg qd in treatment-nave patients.