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.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIa trial of efruxifermin for patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis.

Background & Aims: Efruxifermin has shown clinical efficacy in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and F1-F3 fibrosis. The primary objective of the BALANCED Cohort C was to assess the safety and tolerability of efruxifermin in patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis. Methods: Patients with NASH and stage 4 fibrosis (n = 30) were randomized 2:1 to receive efruxifermin 50 mg (n = 20) or placebo (n = 10) once-weekly for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of efruxifermin. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included evaluation of non-invasive markers of liver injury and fibrosis, glucose and lipid metabolism, and changes in histology in a subset of patients who consented to end-of-study liver biopsy. Results: Efruxifermin was safe and well-tolerated; most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1 (n = 7, 23.3%) or grade 2 (n = 19, 63.3%). The most frequent AEs were gastrointestinal, including transient, mild to moderate diarrhea, and/or nausea. Significant improvements were noted in key markers of liver injury (alanine aminotransferase) and glucose and lipid metabolism. Sixteen-week treatment with efruxifermin was associated with significant reductions in non-invasive markers of fibrosis including Pro-C3 (least squares mean change from baseline [LSMCFB] -9 µg/L efruxifermin vs. -3.4 µg/L placebo; p = 0.0130) and ELF score (-0.4 efruxifermin vs. +0.4 placebo; p = 0.0036), with a trend towards reduced liver stiffness (LSMCFB -5.7 kPa efruxifermin vs. -1.1 kPa placebo; n.s.). Of 12 efruxifermin-treated patients with liver biopsy after 16 weeks, 4 (33%) achieved fibrosis improvement of at least one stage without worsening of NASH, while an additional 3 (25%) achieved resolution of NASH, compared to 0 of 5 placebo-treated patients. Conclusions: Efruxifermin appeared safe and well-tolerated with encouraging improvements in markers of liver injury, fibrosis, and glucose and lipid metabolism following 16 weeks of treatment, warranting confirmation in larger and longer term studies. Lay summary: Cirrhosis resulting from non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), the progressive form of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, represents a major unmet medical need. Currently there are no approved drugs for the treatment of NASH. This proof-of-concept randomized, double-blind clinical trial demonstrated the potential therapeutic benefit of efruxifermin treatment compared to placebo in patients with cirrhosis due to NASH. Clinical Trial Number: NCT03976401.

Fenofibrate Mitigates Hypertriglyceridemia in Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Patients Treated With Cilofexor/Firsocostat.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with advanced fibrosis due to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are at high risk of morbidity and mortality. We previously found that a combination of the farnesoid X receptor agonist cilofexor (CILO) and the acetyl-CoA carboxylase inhibitor firsocostat (FIR) improved liver histology and biomarkers in NASH with advanced fibrosis but was associated with hypertriglyceridemia. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of icosapent ethyl (Vascepa) and fenofibrate to mitigate triglyceride elevations in patients with NASH treated with CILO and FIR. METHODS: Patients with NASH with elevated triglycerides (≥150 and <500 mg/dL) were randomized to Vascepa 2 g twice daily (n = 33) or fenofibrate 145 mg daily (n = 33) for 2 weeks, followed by the addition of CILO 30 mg and FIR 20 mg daily for 6 weeks. Safety, lipids, and liver biochemistry were monitored. RESULTS: All treatments were well-tolerated; most treatment-emergent adverse events were Grade 1 to 2 severity, and there were no discontinuations due to adverse events. At baseline, median (interquartile range [IQR]) triglycerides were similar in the Vascepa and fenofibrate groups (median, 177 [IQR, 154-205] vs 190 [IQR, 144-258] mg/dL, respectively). Median changes from baseline in triglycerides for Vascepa vs fenofibrate after 2 weeks of pretreatment were -12 mg/dL (IQR, -33 to 7 mg/dL; P = .09) vs -32 mg/dL (IQR, -76 to 6 mg/dL; P = .012) and at 6 weeks were +41 mg/dL (IQR, 16-103 mg/dL; P < .001) vs -2 mg/dL (IQR, -42 to 54 mg/dL; P = .92). In patients with baseline triglycerides <250 mg/dL, fenofibrate was more effective vs Vascepa in mitigating triglyceride increases after 6 weeks of combination treatment (+6 vs +39 mg/dL); similar trends were observed in patients with baseline triglycerides ≥250 mg/d (-61 vs +99 mg/dL). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NASH with hypertriglyceridemia treated with CILO and FIR, fenofibrate was safe and effectively mitigated increases in triglycerides associated with acetyl-CoA carboxylase inhibition. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT02781584.

Capsid Inhibition with Lenacapavir in Multidrug-Resistant HIV-1 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection have limited treatment options. Lenacapavir is a first-in-class capsid inhibitor that showed substantial antiviral activity in a phase 1b study. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection in two cohorts, according to the change in the plasma HIV-1 RNA level between the screening and cohort-selection visits. In cohort 1, patients were first randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral lenacapavir or placebo in addition to their failing therapy for 14 days; during the maintenance period, starting on day 15, patients in the lenacapavir group received subcutaneous lenacapavir once every 6 months, and those in the placebo group received oral lenacapavir, followed by subcutaneous lenacapavir; both groups also received optimized background therapy. In cohort 2, all the patients received open-label oral lenacapavir with optimized background therapy on days 1 through 14; subcutaneous lenacapavir was then administered once every 6 months starting on day 15. The primary end point was the percentage of patients in cohort 1 who had a decrease of at least 0.5 log10 copies per milliliter in the viral load by day 15; a key secondary end point was a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 26. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were enrolled, with 36 in each cohort. In cohort 1, a decrease of at least 0.5 log10 copies per milliliter in the viral load by day 15 was observed in 21 of 24 patients (88%) in the lenacapavir group and in 2 of 12 patients (17%) in the placebo group (absolute difference, 71 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 35 to 90). At week 26, a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter was reported in 81% of the patients in cohort 1 and in 83% in cohort 2, with a least-squares mean increase in the CD4+ count of 75 and 104 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively. No serious adverse events related to lenacapavir were identified. In both cohorts, lenacapavir-related capsid substitutions that were associated with decreased susceptibility developed in 8 patients during the maintenance period (6 with M66I substitutions). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection, those who received lenacapavir had a greater reduction from baseline in viral load than those who received placebo. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; CAPELLA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04150068.).

Aldafermin in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ALPINE 2/3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is characterised by hepatic steatosis, inflammation, and injury, and is associated with an increased risk of liver transplantation and death. NASH affects more than 16 million people in the USA, and there is no approved therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of aldafermin, an engineered analogue of the gut hormone fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19). METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study (ALPINE 2/3) in patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and stage 2 or 3 fibrosis, we randomly assigned patients stratified by fibrosis stage in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive placebo, aldafermin 0·3 mg, 1·0 mg, or 3·0 mg once daily for 24 weeks at 30 study sites in the USA. Patients, investigators, the funder, and all other staff, were masked to treatment assignment throughout the study. The primary endpoint was an improvement in liver fibrosis of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH at week 24. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03912532, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2019, and Sept 4, 2020, 786 patients were screened, of whom 171 were randomly assigned to a treatment group and included in the intention-to-treat population: 43 in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group, 42 in the 1·0 mg group, 43 in the 3·0 mg group, and 43 in the placebo group. In total, 145 (85%) of patients completed treatment. At week 24, among patients with biopsies at both baseline and week 24, was seven (19%) of 36 patients in the placebo group, 11 (31%) of 36 in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group (difference 90% CI 12% [-9 to 33]; p=0·11), five (15%) of 34 patients in the 1·0 mg group (difference -5% [-24 to 13]; p=0·80), and 11 (30%) of 37 patients in the 3·0 mg group (difference 10% [-9 to 30]; p=0·12) had an improvement in liver fibrosis of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH, without meeting the prespecified significance for dose response (p=0·55). Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Diarrhoea occurred in six (14%) of 43 patients in the placebo group, three (7%) of 43 patients in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group, five (12%) of 41 patients in the 1·0 mg group, and ten (23%) of 43 patients in the 3·0 mg group. Incidences of serious adverse events and discontinuations owing to adverse events were similar between groups. INTERPRETATION: Aldafermin was generally well tolerated but did not produce a significant dose response on fibrosis improvement of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH, despite positive effects on a number of secondary endpoints. The findings of this trial may have implications for the design of future NASH trials. FUNDING: NGM Biopharmaceuticals.

Immunogenicity and Safety of a 3-Antigen Hepatitis B Vaccine vs a Single-Antigen Hepatitis B Vaccine: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There is a need for improved immunogenicity of hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines among young adults with risk of infection. Objectives: To demonstrate manufacturing equivalence of a 3-antigen (3A) HBV vaccine, evaluate noninferiority of seroprotection rate (SPR) of 3A-HBV vs single-antigen (1A) HBV after 2 and 3 vaccine doses, and compare safety and reactogenicity between 3A-HBV and 1A-HBV vaccines. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial included healthy adults aged 18 to 45 years randomized to 1 of three 3A-HBV groups or 1 control group receiving 1A-HBV. The trial was conducted at 37 community clinics and academic hospitals in Canada, Europe, the United Kingdom, and the United States between December 2017 and October 2019. Participants were followed up for 48 weeks after the first vaccination. Interventions: Intramuscular administration of 3A-HBV (10 µg) or 1A-HBV (20 µg) on days 0, 28, and 168. Main Outcomes and Measures: Geometric mean concentration (GMC) of serum hepatitis B surface antibodies (anti-HBs) and proportion of participants achieving seroprotection. Results: Of 2838 participants, 1638 (57.8%) were women, 2595 (91.5%) were White, and 161 (5.7%) were Black or African American. A total of 712 participants (25.1%) were randomized to the 1A-HBV group and 2126 (74.9%) to 3A-HBV. The mean (SD) age at informed consent was 33.5 (8.0) years. The study demonstrated 3A-HBV lot-to-lot consistency, as the 2-sided 95% CIs for each pairwise comparison for the anti-HBs GMC ratios were within 0.67 and 1.50 (eg, adjusted GMC ratio, lot A vs lot B: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00; lot A vs lot C: 0.95; 95% CI, 0.78-1.15; lot B vs lot C: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.95-1.41). The SPR of the pooled 3A-HBV was noninferior to 1A-HBV and higher than 1A-HBV after 2 vaccinations at day 168 (90.4% [95% CI, 89.0%-91.8%] vs 51.6% [95% CI, 47.5%-55.6%]) and 3 vaccinations at day 196 (99.3% [95% CI, 98.7%-99.6%] vs 94.8% [95% CI, 92.7%-96.4%]). The mean GMC of anti-HBs with 3A-HBV was 7.9 times higher after 2 vaccinations at day 168 and 3.5 times higher after 3 vaccinations at day 196 compared with 1A-HBV (after 2 vaccinations, 3A-HBV: GMC, 118.7 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 108.0-129.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; 1A-HBV: GMC, 15.0 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 12.9-17.5 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; after 3 vaccinations, 3A-HBV: GMC, 5442.4 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 4967.0-5963.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL; 1A-HBV: 1567.2 mIU/mL; 95% CI, 1338.0-1834.0 mIU/mL; SE, 1.0 mIU/mL). Rates of local and systemic reactogenicities were higher with 3A-HBV compared with 1A-HBV (local: 1805 of 2124 [85.0%] vs 469 of 712 [65.9%]; systemic: 1445 [68.0%] vs 428 [60.1%]). Vaccine discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) was uncommon, and serious AEs were infrequent, reported in 42 participants (2.0%) and 3 participants (0.4%) in the 3A-HBV and 1A-HBV groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, consistently higher antibody concentrations and SPRs were found with 3A-HBV after 2 and 3 doses vs 1A-HBV in adults aged 18 to 45 years old. The safety and efficacy of 3A-HBV shows its usefulness for the prevention of hepatitis B in young healthy adults. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03408730; EU Clinical Trials Number: 2017-001820-22.

Efruxifermin in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a trial.

Preclinical and clinical data suggest that fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) is anti-fibrotic, improves metabolic status and has potential to treat non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We assessed the safety and efficacy of efruxifermin, a long-acting Fc-FGF21 fusion protein, for the treatment of NASH. BALANCED was a randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with NASH conducted at 27 centers in the United States (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03976401 ). Eighty patients, stratified by hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stage, were randomized using a centrally administered minimization algorithm 1:1:1:1 to receive placebo (n = 21) or efruxifermin 28 mg (n = 19), efruxifermin 50 mg (n = 20) or efruxifermin 70 mg (n = 20) via weekly subcutaneous injection for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint-absolute change from baseline in HFF measured as magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction at week 12-was met. For the full analysis set, the least squares mean absolute changes (one-sided 97.5% confidence interval) from baseline in HFF were -12.3% (-infinity (-inf), -10.3), -13.4% (-inf, -11.4) and -14.1% (-inf, -12.1) in the 28-, 50- and 70-mg groups, respectively, versus 0.3% (-inf, 1.6) in the placebo group, with statistically significant differences between efruxifermin groups and placebo (P < 0.0001 each). Overall, 70 of 79 patients who received the study drug (89%) experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), with the majority grade 1-2 (64 (81%)), five (6%) grade 3 and one grade 4. The most commonly reported drug-related TEAEs were grade 1-2 gastrointestinal (36 (46%)). Treatment with efruxifermin significantly reduced HFF in patients with F1-F3 stage NASH, with an acceptable safety profile.

Long-term safety and efficacy of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In DISCOVER, a multinational, randomised controlled trial, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide compared with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate showed non-inferior efficacy for HIV prevention and improved bone mineral density and renal safety biomarkers at week 48. We report outcomes analysed after all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. METHODS: This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in Europe and North America. Adult cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV as determined by self-reported sexual behaviour or recent sexually transmitted infections, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (200/25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (200/300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection. Incidence of HIV-1 infection per 100 person-years was assessed when the last participant had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02842086. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 participants were randomly assigned to receive emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693), contributing 10 081 person-years of follow-up. At 96 weeks of follow-up, there were eight HIV infections in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·07-0·31]) and 15 in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·30 infections per 100 person-years [0·17-0·49]). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide maintained its non-inferiority to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention (IRR 0·54 [95% CI 0·23-1·26]). Approximately 78-82% of participants reported taking study medication more than 95% of the time across all study visits. Rates of sexually transmitted infections remained high and similar across groups (21 cases per 100 person-years for rectal gonorrhoea and 28 cases per 100 person-years for rectal chlamydia). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide continued to show superiority over emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all but one of the six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarkers. There was more weight gain among participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (median weight gain 1·7 kg vs 0·5 kg, p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide is safe and effective for longer-term pre-exposure prophylaxis in cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (DISCOVER): primary results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide shows high antiviral efficacy and improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate when used for HIV treatment. Here, we report primary results from a blinded phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention. METHODS: This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in regions of Europe and North America, where there is a high incidence of HIV or prevalence of people living with HIV, or both. We enrolled adult cisgender men who have sex with men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV on the basis of their self-reported sexual behaviour in the past 12 weeks or their recent history (within 24 weeks of enrolment) of bacterial sexually transmitted infections. Participants with current or previous use of PrEP with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate were not excluded. We used a computer-generated random allocation sequence to randomly assign (1:1) participants to receive either emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine (200 mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). As such, all participants were given two tablets. The trial sponsor, investigators, participants, and the study staff who provided the study drugs, assessed the outcomes, and collected the data were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection, which was assessed when all participants had completed 48 weeks of follow-up and half of all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This full analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug and had at least one post-baseline HIV test. Non-inferiority of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was established if the upper bound of the 95·003% CI of the HIV incidence rate ratio (IRR) was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62. We prespecified six secondary bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints to evaluate using the safety analysis set. This analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02842086, and is no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 (92%) of 5857 participants were randomly assigned and received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693). At the time of the primary efficacy analysis (ie, when all participants had completed 48 weeks and 50% had completed 96 weeks) emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of the IRR, was less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·62 (IRR 0·47 [95% CI 0·19-1·15]). After 8756 person-years of follow-up, 22 participants were diagnosed with HIV, seven participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·06-0·33]), and 15 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (0·34 infections per 100 person-years [0·19-0·56]). Both regimens were well tolerated, with a low number of participants reporting adverse events that led to discontinuation of the study drug (36 [1%] of 2694 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group vs 49 [2%] of 2693 participants in the emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide was superior to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarker safety endpoints. INTERPRETATION: Daily emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide shows non-inferior efficacy to daily emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention, and the number of adverse events for both regimens was low. Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide had more favourable effects on bone mineral density and biomarkers of renal safety than emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Long-term Benefits of Sustained Virologic Response for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections who achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR) to treatment have improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We compared post-treatment PRO scores between patients with chronic HCV infection who did and did not achieve an SVR to treatment. METHODS: Patients who completed treatment in clinical trials were enrolled in 2 registries, depending on the treatment outcome (NCT01457755, NCT01457768), from 2016 to 2017 in 17 countries in North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. PRO scores (scale, 0-100) were collected at pretreatment (baseline); the last day of treatment; the post-treatment week 12 follow-up visit (in patients with SVR only); the registry baseline; and on registry weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, and 96 (the non-SVR registry) or every 24 weeks until week 96 (SVR registry), using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) instrument. RESULTS: Our analysis included 4234 patients with an SVR and 242 without an SVR from whom pretreatment PRO data were available (mean age, 54 ± 10 y; 63% male; 65% enrolled in the United States; 17% with cirrhosis; 12% with human immunodeficiency virus co-infection). Upon registry enrollment, patients with an SVR had significant increases in all PRO scores compared with pretreatment baseline levels (all P < .05). Patients without an SVR had mean reductions of 9.2 points or less in PRO scores while followed up on the registry (P < .05 for 4-8 of 8 PRO domains measured by the SF-36). In contrast, patients with an SVR had sustained increases in PRO scores (mean increase, ≤7.0 points) while on the registry. In multivariate analysis, achieving an SVR was associated independently with superior scores in all SF-36 domains at all registry time points (ß, +4.8 to +15.9 points, all P ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: In a follow-up analysis of participants in clinical trials, we found that those with an SVR to treatment for HCV infection had significant increases in well-being, based on PRO scores. Patients without an SVR had decreasing PRO scores over the follow-up period.

Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in patients with chronic HCV genotype 3 infection: An integrated phase 2/3 analysis.

Glecaprevir coformulated with pibrentasvir (G/P) is approved to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and was highly efficacious in phase 2 and 3 studies. Treating HCV genotype (GT) 3 infection remains a priority, as these patients are harder to cure and at a greater risk for liver steatosis, fibrosis progression and hepatocellular carcinoma. Data were pooled from five phase 2 or 3 trials that evaluated 8-, 12- and 16-week G/P in patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection. Patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis were either treatment-naïve or experienced with interferon- or sofosbuvir-based regimens. Safety and sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12) were assessed. The analysis included 693 patients with GT3 infection. SVR12 was achieved by 95% of treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis receiving 8-week (198/208) and 12-week (280/294) G/P. Treatment-naïve patients with cirrhosis had a 97% (67/69) SVR12 rate with 12-week G/P. Treatment-experienced, noncirrhotic patients had SVR12 rates of 90% (44/49) and 95% (21/22) with 12- and 16-week G/P, respectively; 94% (48/51) of treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis treated for 16 weeks achieved SVR12. No serious adverse events (AEs) were attributed to G/P; AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were rare (<1%). G/P was well-tolerated and efficacious for patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection, regardless of cirrhosis status or prior treatment experience. Eight- and 12-week durations were efficacious for treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis and with compensated cirrhosis, respectively; 16-week G/P was efficacious in patients with prior treatment experience irrespective of cirrhosis status.

Glecaprevir-Pibrentasvir for 8 or 12 Weeks in HCV Genotype 1 or 3 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Glecaprevir and pibrentasvir are direct-acting antiviral agents with pangenotypic activity and a high barrier to resistance. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8-week and 12-week courses of treatment with 300 mg of glecaprevir plus 120 mg of pibrentasvir in patients without cirrhosis who had hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 or 3 infection. METHODS: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter trials. Patients with genotype 1 infection were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-daily glecaprevir-pibrentasvir for either 8 or 12 weeks. Patients with genotype 3 infection were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive 12 weeks of treatment with either glecaprevir-pibrentasvir or sofosbuvir-daclatasvir. Additional patients with genotype 3 infection were subsequently enrolled and nonrandomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir. The primary end point was the rate of sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of treatment. RESULTS: In total, 1208 patients were treated. The rate of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks among genotype 1-infected patients was 99.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98 to 100) in the 8-week group and 99.7% (95% CI, 99 to 100) in the 12-week group. Genotype 3-infected patients who were treated for 12 weeks had a rate of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks of 95% (95% CI, 93 to 98; 222 of 233 patients) with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir and 97% (95% CI, 93 to 99.9; 111 of 115) with sofosbuvir-daclatasvir; 8 weeks of treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir yielded a rate of 95% (95% CI, 91 to 98; 149 of 157 patients). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in no more than 1% of patients in any treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir for either 8 weeks or 12 weeks achieved high rates of sustained virologic response among patients with HCV genotype 1 or 3 infection who did not have cirrhosis. (Funded by AbbVie; ENDURANCE-1 and ENDURANCE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02604017 and NCT02640157 .).

Safety and efficacy of a fixed-dose combination regimen of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir with or without ribavirin in participants with and without cirrhosis with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1, 2, or 3 infection (C-CREST-1 and C-CREST-2, part B): two randomised, phase 2, open-label trials.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapies with excellent efficacy across genotypes and in diverse populations. Part A of the C-CREST-1 and C-CREST-2 trials led to the selection of a three-drug regimen of grazoprevir (MK-5172; an HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor; 100 mg/day) plus ruzasvir (MK-8408; an NS5A inhibitor; 60 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (MK-3682; an HCV NS5B polymerase inhibitor; 450 mg/day). Part B of the studies tested this combination as a single formulation in different treatment durations in a broader population. METHODS: Part B of these randomised, phase 2, open-label clinical trials enrolled individuals from 15 countries who were chronically infected with HCV genotypes 1-6 (HCV RNA ≥10 000 IU/mL) with or without compensated cirrhosis. Those with genotype 1, genotype 2, genotype 4, or genotype 6 were treatment-naive; those with genotype 3 could be treatment-naive or treatment-experienced with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. Randomisation occurred centrally using an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system. Participants were randomly assigned to receive treatment for 8, 12, or 16 weeks with a fixed-dose combination of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir with or without ribavirin. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy (SVR12), defined as HCV RNA less than the lower limit of quantification (either target detected unquantifiable or target not detected [<15 IU/mL]). The trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02332707 and NCT02332720. FINDINGS: 676 participants were randomly assigned between Feb 18, 2015, and Aug 16, 2016. In all 675 participants who received at least one dose of study drug (full analysis set), SVR12 for the 8-week regimen of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir with and without ribavirin was achieved in 39 (93% [95% CI 81-99]) of 42 participants with genotype 1a, 45 (98% [88-100]) of 46 with genotype 1b, 54 (86% [75-93]) of 63 with genotype 2, 98 (95% [89-98]) of 103 with genotype 3, and seven (100% [59-100]) of seven participants with genotype 4. SVR12 for the 12-week regimen with and without ribavirin was achieved in 87 (99% [95% CI 94-100]) of 88 participants with genotype 1, 61 (98% [91-100]) of 62 with genotype 2, and four (100% [40-100]) of four with genotype 6. Among participants with cirrhosis who were infected with genotype 3, SVR12 for the 12-week regimen with and without ribavirin was achieved in 28 (97% [95% CI 82-100]) of 29 of those who were treatment-naive and 29 (100% [88-100]) of 29 who were treatment-experienced. SVR12 for the 16-week regimen with and without ribavirin was achieved in 26 (100% [95% CI 87-100]) of 26 participants with genotype 2 infection and 72 (96% [89-99]) of 75 participants with genotype 3 infection. The most common adverse events were headache (143 [22%] of 664), fatigue (129 [19%] of 664), and nausea (83 [13%] of 664). 16 (2%) of 664 participants had serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The combined regimen of grazoprevir (100 mg/day), ruzasvir (60 mg/day), and uprifosbuvir (450 mg/day) has the potential to provide a simplified treatment for HCV that is effective and well tolerated in most individuals infected with HCV, as well as a shorter duration of treatment in many individuals. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Inc.

Efficacy of 8 Weeks of Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and Voxilaprevir in Patients With Chronic HCV Infection: 2 Phase 3 Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) after 12 weeks of treatment with the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir combined with the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir. We assessed the efficacy of 8 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir plus the pangenotypic NS3/4A protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir). METHODS: In 2 phase 3, open-label trials, patients with HCV infection who had not been treated previously with a direct-acting antiviral agent were assigned randomly to groups given sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks. POLARIS-2, which enrolled patients infected with all HCV genotypes with or without cirrhosis, except patients with genotype 3 and cirrhosis, was designed to test the noninferiority of 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir using a noninferiority margin of 5%. POLARIS-3, which enrolled patients infected with HCV genotype 3 who had cirrhosis, compared rates of SVR in both groups with a performance goal of 83%. RESULTS: In POLARIS-2, 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-97%) of patients had an SVR to 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir; this did not meet the criterion to establish noninferiority to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, which produced an SVR in 98% of patients (95% CI, 96%-99%; difference in the stratum-adjusted Mantel-Haenszel proportions of -3.2%; 95% CI, -6.0% to -0.4%). The difference in the efficacy was owing primarily to a lower rate of SVR (92%) among patients with HCV genotype 1a infection receiving 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir. In POLARIS-3, 96% of patients (95% CI, 91%-99%) achieved an SVR in both treatment groups, which was significantly superior to the performance goal. Overall, the most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea; diarrhea and nausea were reported more frequently by patients receiving voxilaprevir. In both trials, the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events was low (range, 0%-1%). CONCLUSIONS: In phase 3 trials of patients with HCV infection, we did not establish that sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks was noninferior to sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks, but the 2 regimens had similar rates of SVR in patients with HCV genotype 3 and cirrhosis. Mild gastrointestinal adverse events were associated with treatment regimens that included voxilaprevir. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: POLARIS-2, NCT02607800; and POLARIS-3, NCT02639338.

Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir for HCV Genotype 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 Infection.

BACKGROUND: A simple treatment regimen that is effective in a broad range of patients who are chronically infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains an unmet medical need. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving untreated and previously treated patients with chronic HCV genotype 1, 2, 4, 5, or 6 infection, including those with compensated cirrhosis. Patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, 4, or 6 were randomly assigned in a 5:1 ratio to receive the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir in a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet or matching placebo for 12 weeks. Because of the low prevalence of genotype 5 in the study regions, patients with genotype 5 did not undergo randomization but were assigned to the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Of the 624 patients who received treatment with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, 34% had HCV genotype 1a, 19% genotype 1b, 17% genotype 2, 19% genotype 4, 6% genotype 5, and 7% genotype 6. A total of 8% of patients were black, 19% had cirrhosis, and 32% had been previously treated for HCV. The rate of sustained virologic response among patients receiving sofosbuvir-velpatasvir was 99% (95% confidence interval, 98 to >99). Two patients receiving sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, both with HCV genotype 1, had a virologic relapse. None of the 116 patients receiving placebo had a sustained virologic response. Serious adverse events were reported in 15 patients (2%) in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response among both previously treated and untreated patients infected with HCV genotype 1, 2, 4, 5, or 6, including those with compensated cirrhosis. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02201940.).

Daclatasvir plus Sofosbuvir for HCV in Patients Coinfected with HIV-1.

BACKGROUND: The combination of daclatasvir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5A inhibitor, and the NS5B inhibitor sofosbuvir has shown efficacy in patients with HCV monoinfection. Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of this combination in patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). METHODS: This was an open-label study involving 151 patients who had not received HCV treatment and 52 previously treated patients, all of whom were coinfected with HIV-1. Previously untreated patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 12 weeks or 8 weeks of daclatasvir at a standard dose of 60 mg daily (with dose adjustment for concomitant antiretroviral medications) plus 400 mg of sofosbuvir daily. Previously treated patients were assigned to undergo 12 weeks of therapy at the same doses. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at week 12 after the end of therapy among previously untreated patients with HCV genotype 1 who were treated for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Patients had HCV genotypes 1 through 4 (83% with genotype 1), and 14% had compensated cirrhosis; 98% were receiving antiretroviral therapy. Among patients with genotype 1, a sustained virologic response was reported in 96.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.8 to 99.2) who were treated for 12 weeks and in 75.6% (95% CI, 59.7 to 87.6) who were treated for 8 weeks among previously untreated patients and in 97.7% (95% CI, 88.0 to 99.9) who were treated for 12 weeks among previously treated patients. Rates of sustained virologic response across all genotypes were 97.0% (95% CI, 91.6 to 99.4), 76.0% (95% CI, 61.8 to 86.9), and 98.1% (95% CI, 89.7 to 100), respectively. The most common adverse events were fatigue, nausea, and headache. There were no study-drug discontinuations because of adverse events. HIV-1 suppression was not compromised. CONCLUSIONS: Among previously untreated HIV-HCV coinfected patients receiving daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir for HCV infection, the rate of sustained virologic response across all genotypes was 97.0% after 12 weeks of treatment and 76.0% after 8 weeks. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ALLY-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02032888.).

Ombitasvir, paritaprevir co-dosed with ritonavir, dasabuvir, and ribavirin for hepatitis C in patients co-infected with HIV-1: a randomized trial.

IMPORTANCE: Patients co-infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) are at high risk for liver disease progression. However, interferon-based treatments for HCV infection have significant toxicities, limiting treatment uptake. OBJECTIVE: To assess the all-oral 3 direct-acting antiviral (3D) regimen of ombitasvir, paritaprevir (co-dosed with ritonavir [paritaprevir/r]), dasabuvir, and ribavirin in HCV genotype 1-infected adults with HIV-1 co-infection, including patients with cirrhosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: TURQUOISE-I is a randomized, open-label study. Part 1a of this pilot study was conducted at 17 sites in the United States and Puerto Rico between September 2013 and August 2014 and included 63 patients with HCV genotype 1 and HIV-1 co-infection who were HCV treatment-naive or had history of prior treatment failure with peginterferon plus ribavirin therapy. The study allowed enrollment of patients, including those with cirrhosis, with a CD4+ count of 200/mm3 or greater or CD4+ percentage of 14% or more and plasma HIV-1 RNA suppressed while taking a stable atazanavir- or raltegravir-inclusive antiretroviral regimen. INTERVENTIONS: Ombitasvir/paritaprevir/r, dasabuvir, and ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks of treatment as randomized. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary assessment was the proportion of patients with sustained virologic response (HCV RNA <25 IU/mL) at posttreatment week 12 (SVR12). RESULTS: Among patients receiving 12 or 24 weeks of 3D and ribavirin, SVR12 was achieved by 29 of 31 (94%; 95% CI, 79%-98%) and 29 of 32 patients (91%; 95% CI, 76%-97%), respectively. Of the 5 patients who did not achieve SVR, 1 withdrew consent, 2 had confirmed virologic relapse or breakthrough, and 2 patients had clinical history and phylogenetic evidence consistent with HCV reinfection. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (48%), insomnia (19%), nausea (18%), and headache (16%). Adverse events were generally mild, with none reported as serious or leading to discontinuation. No patient had a confirmed HIV-1 breakthrough of 200 copies/mL or greater during treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this open-label, randomized uncontrolled study, treatment with the all-oral, interferon-free 3D-plus-ribavirin regimen resulted in high SVR rates among patients co-infected with HCV genotype 1 and HIV-1 whether treated for 12 or 24 weeks. Further phase 3 studies of this regimen are warranted in patients with co-infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01939197.

Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for the treatment of chronic genotype 4 hepatitis C virus infection in patients of Egyptian ancestry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We conducted an open-label phase 2 study to assess the efficacy and safety of the oral nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir in combination with ribavirin in patients of Egyptian ancestry, chronically infected with genotype 4 hepatitis C virus (HCV). METHODS: Treatment-naive and previously treated patients with genotype 4 HCV were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir 400mg and weight-based ribavirin, for 12 or 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained virologic response (HCV RNA <25IU/ml) 12 weeks after cessation of therapy (SVR12). RESULTS: Thirty treatment-naive and thirty previously treated patients were enrolled and treated for 12 weeks (n=31) or 24 weeks (n=29). Overall, 23% of patients had cirrhosis and 38% had diabetes. 14% of treatment-naive patients were interferon ineligible and 63% of treatment-experienced patients had prior non-response. SVR12 was achieved by 68% of patients (95% CI, 49-83%) in the 12-week group, and by 93% of patients (95% CI, 77-99%) in the 24-week group. The most common adverse events were headache, insomnia, and fatigue. No patient discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from the present study suggest that 24 weeks of sofosbuvir plus ribavirin is an efficacious and well tolerated treatment in patients with HCV genotype 4 infection.

Safety and efficacy of ombitasvir - 450/r and dasabuvir and ribavirin in HCV/HIV-1 co-infected patients receiving atazanavir or raltegravir ART regimens.

OBJECTIVE: Whether concomitant HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) affects the safety and efficacy of interferon-free HCV therapies or whether HCV treatment may negatively affect HIV control is unclear. We assessed the 3 direct-acting antiviral (3D) regimen of ombitasvir, ABT-450 (identified by AbbVie and Enanta; co-dosed with ritonavir) and dasabuvir with ribavirin (RBV) in HCV/HIV-1 co-infected patients with and without cirrhosis, including HCV treatment-experienced, receiving atazanavir (ATV)- or raltegravir (RAL)-based ART therapy. METHODS: HCV genotype 1-positive treatment-naïve or pegIFN/RBV-experienced patients, with or without Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, CD4+ count ≥200 cells/mm(3) or CD4 + % ≥14%, and plasma HIV-1 RNA suppressed on stable ART received open-label 3D + RBV for 12 or 24 weeks. Rates of HCV-sustained virologic response at post-treatment weeks 4 and 12 (SVR4 and SVR12, respectively) and bilirubin-related adverse events (AEs) are reported from post-hoc analyses for subgroups defined by treatment duration and ART regimen. RESULTS: The SVR12 rate for patients receiving 12 weeks of 3D + RBV was 93.5% with comparable rates in patients receiving either ATV (93.8%) or RAL therapy (93.3%) (Table 1). The SVR4 rate for the 24-week arm was 96.9% with a single virologic breakthrough at treatment week 16 in a patient receiving RAL therapy. Patients receiving concomitant ATV had more AEs related to indirect hyperbilirubinemia including ocular icterus, jaundice and grade 3 or 4 elevations in total bilirubin (predominantly indirect). No patient discontinued the study due to AEs, and no serious AEs were reported during or after treatment. No patient had a confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA value ≥200 copies/mL during the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: In this first study to evaluate an IFN-free regimen in HCV genotype 1-positive treatment-naïve and experienced patients with HIV-1 co-infection, including those with cirrhosis, high rates of SVR were comparable to those with HCV monoinfection. Indirect hyperbilirubinemia was consistent with the known ABT-450 inhibition of the OATP1B1 bilirubin transporter, RBV-related haemolytic anaemia and inhibitory effect of ATV on bilirubin conjugation. The laboratory abnormalities and AEs observed did not negatively affect treatment response or lead to treatment discontinuation.

Antiviral activity, safety, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of tenofovir alafenamide as 10-day monotherapy in HIV-1-positive adults.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antiviral activity, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of short-term monotherapy with tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a next-generation tenofovir (TFV) prodrug. DESIGN: A phase 1b, randomized, partially blinded, active- and placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. METHODS: Treatment-naive and experienced HIV-1-positive adults currently off antiretroviral therapy were randomized to receive 8, 25, or 40 mg TAF, 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), or placebo, each once daily for 10 days. RESULTS: Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were similar across dose groups. Significant reductions in plasma HIV-1 RNA from baseline to day 11 were observed for all TAF dose groups compared with placebo (P < 0.01), with a median decrease of 1.08-1.73 log10 copies per milliliter, including a dose-response relationship for viral load decrease up to 25 mg. At steady state, 8, 25, and 40 mg TAF yielded mean TFV plasma exposures [area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUCtau)] of 97%, 86%, and 79% lower, respectively, as compared with the TFV exposures observed with 300 mg TDF. For 25 and 40 mg TAF, the mean intracellular peripheral blood mononuclear cell tenofovir diphosphate AUCtau was ∼7-fold and ∼25-fold higher, relative to 300 mg TDF. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 300 mg TDF, TAF demonstrated more potent antiviral activity, higher peripheral blood mononuclear cell intracellular tenofovir diphosphate levels, and lower plasma TFV exposures, at approximately 1/10th of the dose. This may translate into greater antiviral efficacy, a higher barrier to resistance, and an improved safety profile relative to TDF, supporting further investigation of TAF dosed once daily in HIV-infected patients.