Switching to Dolutegravir/Lamivudine Two-Drug Regimen: Durability and Virologic Outcomes by Age, Sex, and Race in Routine US Clinical Care.

Purpose: Two-drug regimens (2DR) may address drug-drug interactions and toxicity concerns. Dolutegravir/lamivudine (DTG/3TC) 2DR was approved in the US for both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced individuals with a viral load <50 copies/mL. This study describes real-world DTG/3TC 2DR treatment outcomes among treatment-experienced individuals, stratified by age, sex, and race. Methods: From the OPERA® cohort, people with HIV with a viral load <50 copies/mL who switched from a commonly used three-drug regimen to DTG/3TC 2DR as per the label between April 8, 2019 and April 30, 2021 were included. Incidence rates (Poisson regression) for loss of virologic control (first viral load ≥50 copies/mL), confirmed virologic failure (2 viral loads ≥200 copies/mL or discontinuation after 1 viral load ≥200 copies/mL), and DTG/3TC 2DR discontinuation were estimated overall and stratified by age, sex, and race. Results: The 787 individuals included were followed for a median of 13.6 months (IQR: 8.2, 22.3). Confirmed virologic failure occurred in ≤5 individuals. Loss of virologic control occurred at a rate of 14.0 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 11.7, 16.8). DTG/3TC 2DR discontinuation occurred at a rate of 17.5 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 15.0, 20.3); 4% discontinued for treatment-related reasons (viremia, adverse diagnosis, side effect, lab abnormality). For all outcomes, incidence rates were comparable across strata of age, sex, and race. Conclusion: This descriptive study demonstrates that DTG/3TC 2DR is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for people with HIV with a viral load <50 copies/mL at switch, regardless of their age, sex, or race.

Heavily treatment-experienced people living with HIV in the OPERA® cohort: population characteristics and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Multi-class resistance, intolerance, and drug-drug interactions can result in unique antiretroviral (ART) combinations for heavily treatment-experienced (HTE) people living with HIV (PLWH). We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between HTE and non-HTE PLWH. METHODS: Eligible ART-experienced PLWH in care in the OPERA® Cohort were identified in a cross-sectional manner on December 31, 2016 and observed from the date of initiation of the ART regimen taken on December 31, 2016 until loss to follow up, death, study end (December 31, 2018), or becoming HTE (non-HTE group only). In the absence of resistance data, HTE was defined based on the ART regimens used (i.e., exposed to ≥ 3 core agent classes or regimen suggestive of HTE). Time to virologic undetectability, failure, and immunologic preservation were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods; cumulative probabilities were compared between the two groups. Regimen changes, incident morbidities, and death were described. RESULTS: A total of 24,183 PLWH (2277 HTE PLWH, 21,906 non-HTE) were followed for a median of 28 months (IQR 21, 38). Viremic HTE PLWH (viral load [VL] ≥ 50 copies/mL) were less likely to achieve undetectability (VL < 50 copies/mL; 24-month cumulative probability: 80% [95% Confidence Interval 77-82]) than their non-HTE counterparts (85% [84-86]). No difference was observed in the probability of maintaining VLs < 200 copies/mL over the first 48 months after achieving suppression (< 50 copies/mL). HTE PLWH were less likely than non-HTE PLWH to maintain CD4 cell counts ≥ 200 cells/µL (24-month cumulative probability: 95% HTE [91-93]; 97% non-HTE [97-97]), and more likely to change regimens (45% HTE; 41% non-HTE). Incident non-AIDS defining event (ADE) morbidities were common in both populations, though more likely among HTE PLWH (45%) than non-HTE PLWH (35%). Incident ADE morbidities and deaths were uncommon among HTE (ADEs 5%; deaths 2%) and non-HTE (ADEs 2%; deaths 1%) PLWH. CONCLUSIONS: HTE PLWH were at greater risk of unfavorable treatment outcomes than non-HTE PLWH, suggesting additional therapeutic options are needed for this vulnerable population.

Incident type 2 diabetes mellitus after initiation of common HIV antiretroviral drugs.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence and incidence of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and evaluate the association between antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation with dolutegravir (DTG), elvitegravir/cobicistat (EVG/c), raltegravir (RAL), or boosted darunavir (bDRV) and incident T2DM. DESIGN: Longitudinal study based on electronic health records of 29 674 PLHIV from the Observational Pharmaco-Epidemiology Research and Analysis (OPERA) cohort. METHODS: Calculate prevalence of prediabetes and T2DM at regimen initiation. Among PLHIV without prevalent disease, estimate prediabetes and T2DM incidence (Poisson regression) and association between regimen and incident T2DM (multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression). Analyses stratified by ART experience. RESULTS: Among ART-naive and ART-experienced/suppressed PLHIV, the estimated prevalence of prediabetes was 8 and 11%; that of T2DM was 4 and 10%, respectively. The T2DM incidence rate was 9 per 1000 person-years [95% confidence interval (CI): 8-11] among ART-naive and 13 per 1000 person-years (95% CI: 12-15) among ART-experienced/suppressed PLHIV, with no statistically significant differences between regimens. Compared with DTG, no statistically significant association between T2DM risk and regimen was observed among ART-naive on EVG/c [adjusted hazard ratios: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.47-1.05)] or bDRV [0.53 (0.26-1.04)] and ART-experienced/suppressed on EVG/c [0.96 (0.70-1.33)], RAL [1.17 (0.70-1.96)] or bDRV [0.90 (0.57-1.42)]. CONCLUSION: No increased risk of T2DM was observed with EVG/c, RAL or bDRV compared with DTG in ART-naive and experienced PLHIV. However, despite a large cohort, there was a small number of events and differential risk cannot be excluded.

HLA-B*57:01 screening and hypersensitivity reaction to abacavir between 1999 and 2016 in the OPERA® observational database: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: HLA-B*57:01 screening was added to clinical care guidelines in 2008 to reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reaction from abacavir. The uptake of HLA-B*57:01 screening and incidence of hypersensitivity reaction were assessed in a prospective clinical cohort in the United States to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS: We included all patients initiating an abacavir-containing regimen for the first time in the pre-HLA-B*57:01 screening period (January 1, 1999 to June 14, 2008) or the post-HLA-B*57:01 screening period (June 15, 2008 to January 1, 2016). Yearly incidence of both HLA-B*57:01 screening and physician panel-adjudicated hypersensitivity reactions were calculated and compared. RESULTS: Of the 9619 patients eligible for the study, 33% initiated abacavir in the pre-screening period and 67% in the post-screening period. Incidence of HLA-B*57:01 screening prior to abacavir initiation increased from 43% in 2009 to 84% in 2015. The incidence of definite or probable hypersensitivity reactions decreased from 1.3% in the pre-screening period to 0.8% in 2009 and further to 0.2% in 2015 in the post-screening period. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of HLA-B*57:01 screening increased steadily since its first inclusion in treatment guidelines in the United States. This increase in screening was accompanied by a decreasing incidence of definite or probable hypersensitivity reactions over the same period. However, a considerable proportion of patients initiating abacavir were not screened, representing a failed opportunity to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Where HLA-B*57:01 screening is standard of care, patients should be confirmed negative for this allele before starting abacavir treatment.

Abacavir Hypersensitivity Reaction Reporting Rates During a Decade of HLA-B*5701 Screening as a Risk-Mitigation Measure.

INTRODUCTION: Human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B*5701 screening identifies patients at increased risk for abacavir (ABC) hypersensitivity reaction (HSR). Screening was adopted in GlaxoSmithKline and ViiV Healthcare clinical trials in 2007 and human immunodeficiency virus treatment guidelines in 2008. Company meta-analyses of trials pre-HLA-B*5701 screening reported HSR rates of 4-8%. We analyzed the effectiveness of HLA-B*5701 screening on reducing HSR rates using clinical trial, Observational Pharmaco-Epidemiology Research & Analysis (OPERA) cohort, and spontaneous reporting data. METHODS: A meta-analysis examined 12 trials in 3063 HLA-B*5701-negative patients receiving an ABC-containing regimen from April 9, 2007, to September 22, 2015. Potential cases were identified using prespecified Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) preferred terms (drug hypersensitivity, hypersensitivity, anaphylactic reaction, anaphylaxis) and adjudicated against a Company ABC HSR case definition. Investigator-diagnosed cases were identified and rates were calculated. In the OPERA cohort, 9619 patients initiating their first ABC-containing regimen from January 1, 1999, to January 1, 2016, were identified. Patients were observed from regimen start until the earliest-following censoring event: ABC discontinuation, loss to follow-up, death, or study end (July 31, 2016). OPERA physicians evaluated events against OPERA definitions for definite/probable cases of ABC HSR; rates were calculated pre- and post-2008. The Company case definition was used to identify spontaneously reported cases for four marketed ABC-containing products; reporting rates were calculated using estimated exposure from sales data, through December 31, 2016. RESULTS: Suspected ABC HSR rates were 1.3% or less in the meta-analysis. In the OPERA cohort, the rate was 0.4% among patients initiating ABC post-2008 versus 1.3% pre-2008 (p<0.0001). Spontaneous reporting rates were low post-2008 (54 to 22 cases per 100,000 patient-years exposure [PYE]) versus pre-2008 (618 to 55 cases per 100,000 PYE). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically suspected ABC HSR rates were 1.3% or less in HLA-B*5701-negative patients. Recognizing their limitations, data from the OPERA cohort and spontaneous reporting indicate that HLA-B*5701 screening has reduced reporting rates of suspected HSR in clinical practice. Where screening for HLA-B*5701 is standard care, patients should be confirmed negative for this allele before starting ABC treatment.

Effect of pregnancy and the postpartum period on adherence to antiretroviral therapy among HIV-infected women established on treatment.

: Among women who become pregnant after initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), few data describe the effect of pregnancy and postpartum on adherence. We conducted a retrospective clinical cohort study among therapy-naive women (age, 18-45 years) initiating HAART in Johannesburg, South Africa. Among 7510 women in our analysis, 896 experienced a pregnancy after starting HAART. Compared with nonpregnant periods of follow-up, there was an increased risk of nonadherence during the postpartum period (weighted risk ratio: 1.46, 95% confidence interval: 1.17 to 1.82) but not during pregnancy itself (weighted risk ratio: 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.78 to 1.17).

Comparison of pharmacy-based measures of adherence to antiretroviral therapy as predictors of virological failure.

We compared multiple pharmacy refill-based adherence indicators for antiretroviral therapy, as well as thresholds for defining non-adherent behavior, based on ability to predict virological failure. A total of 29,937 pharmacy visits with corresponding viral load assessments were contributed by 8,695 patients attending a large clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa. Indicators based on pill coverage and timing of refill pickup performed comparably using the strictest thresholds for adherence [100 % pill coverage: odds ratio (OR) (95 % confidence interval (CI)) : 1.26 (1.15, 1.39); prescription picked up on or before scheduled refill date: 1.27 (1.16,1.38)]. For both types of indicators, the association between non-adherence and virological failure increased as the threshold defining adherent behavior was lowered. All measures demonstrated high specificity (range 84-98 %), but low sensitivity (5-19 %). In this setting, patients identified as non-adherent using pharmacy-based indicators are likely correctly classified and in need of interventions to improve compliance. Pharmacy based measures alone, however, are inadequate for identifying most cases of nonadherence.