Cabotegravir + Rilpivirine Long-Acting: Overview of Injection Guidance, Injection Site Reactions, and Best Practices for Intramuscular Injection Administration.

Background: Cabotegravir (CAB) + rilpivirine (RPV) dosed monthly or every 2 months is a complete long-acting (LA) regimen for the maintenance of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 virologic suppression. Across the phase 3/3b trials, the most frequently reported adverse events were injection site reactions (ISRs). Methods: We present pooled ISR characteristics and outcomes for participants receiving CAB + RPV LA through week 96 of the FLAIR and ATLAS-2M studies, and survey results from healthcare providers (HCPs) giving injections (eg, injectors) in the ATLAS, FLAIR, and ATLAS-2M studies to determine optimal injection techniques. Surveys were anonymous, self-administered online questionnaires that queried provider demographics, injection experience, and techniques to minimize pre-/postinjection discomfort. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: Overall, 8453 ISRs were reported by 801 participants receiving ≥1 injection of CAB LA/RPV LA. Most ISRs were mild to moderate in severity (grade 1-2, 99%), with a median duration of 3 days (interquartile range, 2-4 days), and rarely led to withdrawal (2%). Surveys were completed by 181 HCPs across 113 sites. Pushing the intramuscular injection at slow speed (66%), bringing the medication to room temperature (58%), and relaxing the gluteus muscle before injecting (53%) were ranked as effective preinjection/injection procedure practices for minimizing pain. Most injectors (60%) indicated that a prone position provided optimal patient comfort, and 41% had no preference on injection medication order. Conclusions: Taken together, the data demonstrate favorable tolerability with CAB + RPV LA injections over the long term and simple techniques routinely used by injectors to help optimize the administration of CAB + RPV LA injections.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine versus continuing fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed adults with HIV, 12-month results (SOLAR): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine is the only approved complete long-acting regimen for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression dosed every 2 months. The SOLAR study aimed to compare long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine every 2 months with continued once-daily bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression in adults living with HIV. METHODS: SOLAR is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study. The study was done in 118 centres across 14 countries. Participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL were randomly assigned (2:1), stratified by sex at birth and BMI, to either long-acting cabotegravir (600 mg) plus rilpivirine (900 mg) dosed intramuscularly every 2 months or to continue daily oral bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Participants randomly assigned to long-acting therapy had a choice to receive cabotegravir (30 mg) plus rilpivirine (25 mg) once daily as an optional oral lead-in for approximately 1 month. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological non-response (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, 4% non-inferiority margin; modified intention-to-treat exposed population) at month 11 (long-acting start with injections group) and month 12 (long-acting with oral lead-in group and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04542070, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: 837 participants were screened between Nov 9, 2020, and May 31, 2021, and 687 were randomly assigned to switch treatment or continue existing treatment. Of 670 participants (modified intention-to-treat exposed population), 447 (67%) switched to long-acting therapy (274 [61%] of 447 start with injections; 173 [39%] of 447 with oral lead-in) and 223 (33%) continued bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Baseline characteristics were similar; median age was 37 years (range 18-74), 118 (18%) of 670 were female sex at birth, 207 (31%) of 670 were non-White, and median BMI was 25·9 kg/m2 (IQR 23·3-29·5). At month 11-12, long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine showed non-inferior efficacy versus bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL, five [1%] of 447 vs one [<1%] of 223), with an adjusted treatment difference of 0·7 (95% CI -0·7 to 2·0). Excluding injection site reactions, adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between groups. No treatment-related deaths occurred. More long-acting group participants had adverse events leading to withdrawal (25 [6%] of 454 vs two [1%] of 227). Injection site reactions were reported by 316 (70%) of 454 long-acting participants; most (98%) were grade 1 or 2. INTERPRETATION: These data support the use of long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine dosed every 2 months as a complete antiretroviral regimen that has similar efficacy to a commonly used integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based first-line regimen, while addressing unmet psychosocial issues associated with daily oral treatment. FUNDING: ViiV Healthcare.

Factors Associated with Health Care Providers' Preference for Forgoing an Oral Lead-In Phase When Initiating Long-Acting Injectable Cabotegravir and Rilpivirine in the SOLAR Clinical Trial.

Cabotegravir and rilpivirine long-acting (LA) antiretroviral therapy (ART) demonstrated similar safety and efficacy in maintaining viral suppression among participants switching from daily oral to LA ART in the Extension Phase of the FLAIR trial. The Phase IIIb SOLAR study comparing efficacy and safety of daily oral versus LA ART every 2 months allowed participants and health care providers (HCPs) to choose an oral lead-in (OLI) before LA initiation or proceed by immediately starting with injections (SWI). We conducted an online survey among SOLAR HCPs (n = 110) in 13 countries to assess reasons for choosing OLI versus SWI. Logistic regression was used to identify factors influencing this decision. Thirty-two percent of HCPs reported a future preference to use OLI, whereas 54% reported a future preference for SWI. HCPs had greater odds of reporting future intentions for SWI if they were from Continental Europe versus North America [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.83, p < 0.05], from sites with a greater number of participants who initiated LA ART without OLI (aOR: 1.56, p < 0.01), and those who reported comfort with the medication safety profile (aOR: 6.39, p < 0.01). HCPs who participated in LA ART trials before SOLAR had decreased odds of reporting a preference for SWI compared to those with no prior LA ART trial experience (aOR: 0.11; p < 0.01). Results indicated higher intentions to SWI over OLI among HCPs initiating participants on LA ART. A major factor associated with SWI was provider comfort with safety data, reinforcing the role of continued training regarding an SWI approach.