Dolutegravir or Darunavir in Combination with Zidovudine or Tenofovir to Treat HIV.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends dolutegravir with two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Evidence is limited for the efficacy of this regimen when NRTIs are predicted to lack activity because of drug resistance, as well as for the recommended switch of an NRTI from tenofovir to zidovudine. METHODS: In a two-by-two factorial, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients for whom first-line therapy was failing (HIV-1 viral load, ≥1000 copies per milliliter) to receive dolutegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir and to receive tenofovir or zidovudine; all patients received lamivudine. The primary outcome was a week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter, assessed with the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm (noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the primary outcome, 12 percentage points). RESULTS: We enrolled 464 patients at seven sub-Saharan African sites. A week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in 90.2% of the patients in the dolutegravir group (212 of 235) and in 91.7% of those in the darunavir group (210 of 229) (difference, -1.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.7 to 3.7; P = 0.58; indicating noninferiority of dolutegravir, without superiority) and in 92.3% of the patients in the tenofovir group (215 of 233) and in 89.6% of those in the zidovudine group (207 of 231) (difference, 2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.32; indicating noninferiority of tenofovir, without superiority). In the subgroup of patients with no NRTIs that were predicted to have activity, a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in more than 90% of the patients in the dolutegravir group and the darunavir group. The incidence of adverse events did not differ substantially between the groups in either factorial comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Dolutegravir in combination with NRTIs was effective in treating patients with HIV-1 infection, including those with extensive NRTI resistance in whom no NRTIs were predicted to have activity. Tenofovir was noninferior to zidovudine as second-line therapy. (Funded by Janssen; NADIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03988452.).

Efficacy and safety of dolutegravir or darunavir in combination with lamivudine plus either zidovudine or tenofovir for second-line treatment of HIV infection (NADIA): week 96 results from a prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: WHO guidelines recommend dolutegravir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line HIV therapy, with NRTI switching from first-line tenofovir to zidovudine. We aimed to examine whether dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir, the best-in-class protease inhibitor drug, and whether maintaining tenofovir in second-line therapy is non-inferior to switching to zidovudine. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial (NADIA), participants with confirmed HIV first-line treatment failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies per mL) were recruited at seven clinical sites in Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Following a 2 × 2 factorial design and stratified by site and screening HIV-1 RNA concentration, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive a 96-week regimen containing either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (800 mg of darunavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir once daily) in combination with either tenofovir (300 mg once daily) plus lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or zidovudine (300 mg twice daily) plus lamivudine (150 mg twice daily). The NRTI drugs allocated by randomisation were administered orally in fixed-dose combination pills; other drugs were administered orally as separate pills. The previously reported primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Here, we report the main secondary outcome: the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 96 weeks (non-inferiority margin 12%). We analysed this outcome and safety outcomes in the intention-to-treat population, which excluded only those who were randomly assigned in error and withdrawn before receiving trial drugs. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03988452, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between July 30 and Dec 18, 2019, we screened 783 patients and enrolled 465. One participant was randomly assigned in error and immediately withdrawn. The remaining 464 participants were randomly assigned to receive either dolutegravir (n=235) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=229) and to receive lamivudine plus either tenofovir (n=233) or zidovudine (n=231). At week 96, 211 (90%) of 235 participants in the dolutegravir group and 199 (87%) of 229 participants in the darunavir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 2·9, 95% CI -3·0 to 8·7), indicating non-inferiority. Nine (4%) participants (all in the dolutegravir group) developed dolutegravir resistance; no participants developed darunavir resistance (p=0·0023). In the other randomised comparison, 214 (92%) of 233 patients in the tenofovir group and 196 (85%) of 231 patients in the zidovudine group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 7·0, 95% CI 1·2 to 12·8), showing non-inferiority and indicating the superiority of tenofovir (p=0·019). The proportions of participants with any grade 3-4 adverse event were similar between the dolutegravir (26 [11%]) and darunavir (28 [12%]) groups and between the tenofovir (22 [9%]) and zidovudine (32 [14%]) groups. There were no deaths related to study medication. INTERPRETATION: Dolutegravir-based and darunavir-based regimens maintain good viral suppression during 96 weeks; dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir but is at greater risk of resistance in second-line therapy. Tenofovir should be continued in second-line therapy, rather than being switched to zidovudine. FUNDING: Janssen.