Immunization to rituximab is more frequent in systemic autoimmune diseases than in rheumatoid arthritis: ofatumumab as alternative therapy.

OBJECTIVES: The frequency and consequences of anti-drug antibodies to rituximab (RTX-ADA) are not well known in RA and even less in other systemic auto-immune diseases (sAID). We aimed to evaluate the frequency, consequences and predictive factors of RTX-ADA in RA and sAID. METHODS: All patients presenting with RA or other sAID treated with RTX from 2012 to 2017 in our tertiary reference centre for sAID were retrospectively studied. Patients who were tested for RTX-ADA were identified. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-nine patients were treated with RTX (RA: 124, other sAID: 75). Among 62/199 (31.1%) tested for RTX-ADA, 14 were positive: 3/35 RA (8.6%) and 11/27 (40.7%) other sAID, (P = 0.0047). Among the whole RTX-treated populations, the frequency of RTX-ADA was 2.4% and 14.7% (P = 0.0026) in RA and sAID, respectively. Most of the immunized patients had infusion reactions to second or subsequent RTX cycles (11/14) and loss of efficacy (2/14). Predictive factors of immunization were sAID vs RA (78.6% vs 21.4%, P = 0.026, adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 5.35[1.43-54.75]) and African ethnicity (57.1% vs 4.2%, P < 0.001, adjusted OR = 9.25 [5.08-302.12]). Associated immunosuppressive therapy did not protect against immunization. Three patients with pSS immunized against RTX were treated with ofatumumab with complete remission of their disease. CONCLUSION: Immunization against RTX is more frequent in other sAID than in RA. Testing for RTX-ADA must be performed in patients with infusion reactions or loss of efficacy especially if they are of African origin. Immunized patients might be treated efficiently and safely with ofatumumab. This alternative should be further evaluated for sAID.

Short-term DHEA administration in recreational athletes: impact on food intake, segmental body composition and adipokines.

BACKGROUND: Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) administration is potentially therapeutic because it has been shown to decrease fat mass and adipokines and improve eating and mood disturbances. However, its impact on these parameters has never been investigated in a young healthy population. This study therefore sought to determine whether short-term DHEA administration would alter food intake, segmental body composition, adipokine secretion and mood in young healthy male and female volunteers with regular sport practice. METHODS: Following a double-blind and randomized protocol, 20 young healthy recreational athletes (10 men and 10 women) received treatment with either oral placebo or DHEA (100 mg/day for 4 weeks). Body weight, segmental body composition and adipokines (i.e., leptin, adiponectin and resistin) were determined before and at the end of each treatment. In parallel, spontaneous food intake was assessed at the end of each treatment, and mood was assessed before and at the end of treatment with the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). RESULTS: Body weight and segmental body composition showed no significant change in the men or women. Similarly, no change in adipokine secretion was found after DHEA administration. Total food intake was not affected by DHEA in any subject, despite an increase in fat intake by male subjects under DHEA (P<0.05). Positive and negative affect were not altered. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, in contrast to pathological populations, a young healthy population of men and women was not significantly affected by short-term DHEA administration with regard to total food intake, segmental body composition, adipokines or mood.

Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacogenetic study of nevirapine in HIV-infected Cambodian patients.

The aims of this ANRS12154 open-label, single-center, multiple-dose pharmacokinetic study were to characterize nevirapine pharmacokinetics in a Cambodian population of HIV-infected patients and to identify environmental and genetic factors of variability, focusing on the CYP2B6, CYP3A5, and ABCB1 (MDR1) genes. A total of 170 Cambodian HIV-infected patients were included. Nevirapine trough concentrations were measured after 18 and 36 months of starting antiretroviral treatment and in samples drawn during a dosing interval in a subset of 10 patients. All data were analyzed by nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The effect of covariates was investigated using the population pharmacokinetic model. Patients carrying homozygous loss-of-function alleles CYP3A5 6986A>G, CYP2B6 516G>T, CYP2B6 1459C>T, and ABCB1 3435C>T represent 42.4%, 9.2%, 0%, and 18% of the population, respectively. The median nevirapine trough concentrations did not differ after 18 and 36 months of treatment (5,705 ng/ml [range, ≤50 to 13,871] and 5,709 ng/ml [range, ≤50 to 15,422], respectively). Interpatient and intrapatient variabilities of nevirapine apparent clearance were 28% and 17%, respectively. CYP2B6 516G>T and creatinine clearance were found to significantly affect nevirapine apparent clearance. The estimated nevirapine apparent clearances were 2.95 liters/h, 2.62 liters/h, and 1.86 liters/h for CYP2B6 516GG, CYP2B6 516GT, and CYP2B6 516TT genotypes, respectively. The impact of creatinine clearance was small. This study demonstrates that 95% of the patients had sustained nevirapine exposure well above the 3,000-ng/ml threshold. Nevirapine clearance was shown to be affected by CYP2B6 516G>T genetic polymorphism and creatinine clearance, although this explained only part of the interpatient variability, which remains low compared to that for other antiretroviral drugs.

Simplified Assessment of Antiretroviral Adherence and Prediction of Virological Efficacy in HIV-Infected Patients in Cambodia.

Background. Adherence to antiviral therapy is important for HIV-infected people living in low- and middle-income countries, because of poor access to alternative regimens. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adherence in Cambodian patients enrolled in the ESTHER program and treated with WHO first-line regimen for at least 6 months. The survey was based on a self-report questionnaire, drug assay, MCV measurement, visual analog scale, and viral load HIV RNA. Results. Two hundred fifty-nine patients treated for a median of 16 months participated in the survey. At inclusion in the program, 158 patients (61%) were ARV-naïve. The virological success rate was 71% overall and 81% in previously ARV-naive patients. Considered individually, the measures suggested perfect adherence in 71% to 93% of patients. In multivariate analysis adjusted for sex and therapeutic status before HAART initiation, only the biological markers were associated with virological efficacy. Self-funded treatment before entry to the program was highly predictive of virological failure. Conclusion. Adherence was excellent in these Cambodian patients. Biological markers were predictive of virological efficacy. MCV might thus serve as a simple alternative for assessing adherence and predicting virological efficacy among patients receiving AZT- or d4T-based regimens.

Intracellular Pharmacokinetics of Antiretroviral Drugs in HIV-Infected Patients, and their Correlation with Drug Action.

In patients infected by HIV, the efficacy of highly active antiretroviral (ARV) therapy through the blockade of different steps of the retrovirus life cycle is now well established. As HIV is a retrovirus that replicates within the cells of the immune system, intracellular drug concentrations are important to determine ARV drug efficacy and toxicity. Indeed, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-NRTIs (NNRTIs), newly available integrase inhibitors and protease inhibitors (PIs) act on intracellular targets. NRTIs are prodrugs that require intracellular anabolic phosphorylation to be converted into their active form of triphosphorylated NRTI metabolites, most of which have longer plasma half-lives than their parent compounds. The activity of intracellular kinases and the expression of uptake transporters, which may depend on cell functionality or their activation state, may greatly influence intracellular concentrations of triphosphorylated NRTI metabolites. In contrast, NNRTIs and PIs are not prodrugs, and they exert their activity by inhibiting enzyme targets directly. All PIs are substrates of cytochrome P450 3A, which explains why most of them display poor pharmacokinetic properties with intensive presystemic first-pass metabolism and short elimination half-lives. There is evidence that intracellular concentrations of PIs depend on P-glycoprotein and/or the activity of other efflux transporters, which is modulated by genetic polymorphism and coadministration of drugs with inhibiting or inducing properties. Adequate assay of the intracellular concentrations of ARVs is still a major technical challenge, together with the isolation and counting of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Furthermore, intracellular drug could be bound to cell membranes or proteins; the amount of intracellular ARV available for ARV effectiveness is never measured, which is a limitation of all published studies. In this review, we summarize the findings of 31 studies that provided results of intracellular concentrations of ARVs in HIV-infected patients. Most studies also measured plasma concentrations, but few of them studied the relationship between plasma and intracellular concentrations. For NRTIs, most studies could not establish a significant relationship between plasma and triphosphate concentrations. Only eight published studies reported an analysis of the relationships between intracellular concentrations and the virological or immunological efficacy of ARVs in HIV patients. In prospective studies that were well designed and had a reasonable number of patients, virological efficacy was found to correlate significantly with intracellular concentrations of NRTIs but not with plasma concentrations. For PIs, the only prospectively designed trial of lopinavir found that virological efficacy was influenced by both trough plasma concentrations and intracellular concentrations. ARVs are known to cause important adverse effects through interference with cellular endogenous processes. The relationship between intracellular concentrations of ARVs and their related toxicity was investigated in only four studies. For zidovudine, the relative strength of the association between a decrease in haemoglobin levels and plasma zidovudine concentrations, as compared with intracellular zidovudine triphosphate concentrations, is still unknown. Similarly, for efavirenz and neuropsychological disorders, methodological differences confound the comparison between studies. In conclusion, intracellular concentrations of ARVs play a major role in their efficacy and toxicity, and are influenced by numerous factors. However, the number of published clinical studies in this area is limited; most studies have been small and not always adequately designed. In addition, standardization of assays and PBMC counts are warranted. Larger and prospectively designed clinical studies are needed to further investigate the links between intracellular concentrations of ARVs and clinical endpoints.

Risk factors for virological failure and subtherapeutic antiretroviral drug concentrations in HIV-positive adults treated in rural northwestern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about immunovirological treatment outcomes and adherence in HIV/AIDS patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) treated using a simplified management approach in rural areas of developing countries, or about the main factors influencing those outcomes in clinical practice. METHODS: Cross-sectional immunovirological, pharmacological, and adherence outcomes were evaluated in all patients alive and on fixed-dose ART combinations for 24 months, and in a random sample of those treated for 12 months. Risk factors for virological failure (>1,000 copies/ml) and subtherapeutic antiretroviral (ARV) concentrations were investigated with multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: At 12 and 24 months of ART, 72% (n = 701) and 70% (n = 369) of patients, respectively, were alive and in care. About 8% and 38% of patients, respectively, were diagnosed with immunological failure; and 75% and 72% of patients, respectively, had undetectable HIV RNA (<400 copies/ml). Risk factors for virological failure (>1,000 copies/ml) were poor adherence, tuberculosis diagnosed after ART initiation, subtherapeutic NNRTI concentrations, general clinical symptoms, and lower weight than at baseline. About 14% of patients had low ARV plasma concentrations. Digestive symptoms and poor adherence to ART were risk factors for low ARV plasma concentrations. CONCLUSION: Efforts to improve both access to care and patient management to achieve better immunological and virological outcomes on ART are necessary to maximize the duration of first-line therapy.

Predictive values of the human immunodeficiency virus phenotype and genotype and of amprenavir and lopinavir inhibitory quotients in heavily pretreated patients on a ritonavir-boosted dual-protease-inhibitor regimen.

The inhibitory quotient (IQ) of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitors (PIs), which is the ratio of drug concentration to viral susceptibility, is considered to be predictive of the virological response. We used several approaches to calculate the IQs of amprenavir and lopinavir in a subset of heavily pretreated patients participating in the French National Agency for AIDS Research (ANRS) 104 trial and then compared their potentials for predicting changes in the plasma HIV RNA level. Thirty-seven patients were randomly assigned to receive either amprenavir (600 mg twice a day [BID]) or lopinavir (400 mg BID) plus ritonavir (100 or 200 mg BID) for 2 weeks before combining the two PIs. The 90% inhibitory concentration (IC(90)) was measured using a recombinant assay without or with additional human serum (IC(90+serum)). Total and unbound PI concentrations in plasma were measured. Univariate linear regression was used to estimate the relation between the change in viral load and the IC(90) or IQ values. The amprenavir phenotypic IQ values were very similar when measured with the standard and protein binding-adjusted IC(90)s. No relationship was found between the viral load decline and the lopinavir IQ. During combination therapy, the amprenavir and lopinavir genotypic IQ values were predictive of the viral response at week 6 (P = 0.03). The number of protease mutations (< 5 or > or = 5) was related to the virological response throughout the study. These findings suggest that the combined genotypic IQ and the number of protease mutations are the best predictors of virological response. High amprenavir and lopinavir concentrations in these patients might explain why plasma concentrations and the phenotypic IQ have poor predictive value.

Salvage therapy with amprenavir, lopinavir and ritonavir is durably potent in HIV-infected patients in virological failure: 1-year results.

We report the results of the extended follow-up at one year of a randomized trial evaluating the virological efficacy of a salvage therapy combining lopinavir and amprenavir with either 200 or 400 mg/day ritonavir, along with optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, in patients carrying multidrug-resistant isolates. The combination of amprenavir, lopinavir and ritonavir (400 mg/day) is durably potent, yielding a sustained virological response (HIV RNA < 50 copies) in 39% of cases.

Determination of amprenavir total and unbound concentrations in plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography and ultrafiltration.

Amprenavir is an HIV-1 protease inhibitor with high protein binding (90%) in human plasma. This study was designed to develop an assay to measure the concentration of unbound amprenavir, to study variation with time in patients, and to investigate whether ritonavir and lopinavir, other protease inhibitors that could be combined, interact with amprenavir protein binding in vitro. A reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography assay to UV detection was developed and validated to measure total amprenavir in plasma, and this method was adapted to quantitate low concentrations of unbound amprenavir in ultrafiltrate aqueous fluid. Equilibrium dialysis and ultrafiltration were used and compared with separate unbound fraction. The latter method was easier to use and was, therefore, subsequently adopted. In 10 patients who received amprenavir 600 mg bid combined with ritonavir, mean amprenavir free-fraction in plasma was 8.6% (range, 4.4-20%). When added to pooled human plasmas at concentrations close to those found in treated patients, the unbound amprenavir fraction was increased in the presence of lopinavir, but remained unaffected by ritonavir. It remains to be seen whether measurement of unbound concentrations, rather than total concentrations, could improve therapeutic drug monitoring.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and summary of efficacy and tolerability of atazanavir.

The efficacy of HIV-1 protease inhibitors (PIs) as part of highly active antiretroviral therapy is now well established and has provided benefits to many patients with HIV infection. Atazanavir is a new azapeptide PI compound that was recently approved in the US and Europe. Atazanavir is recommended in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. Atazanavir is rapidly absorbed and administration of a single dose of atazanavir with a light meal resulted in a 70% increase in area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC); therefore atazanavir should be taken with food. Atazanavir is 86% bound to human serum protein independently of concentration. Concentration in body fluids appeared to be lower than plasma concentration. Like other PIs, atazanavir is extensively metabolised by hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A isoenzymes. The mean terminal elimination half-life in healthy volunteers was approximately 7 hours at steady state following administration of atazanavir 400 mg daily with a light meal. When atazanavir 300 mg was coadministered with ritonavir 100 mg on a once-daily dosage regimen, atazanavir AUC from 0 to 24 hours and minimum plasma concentration were increased by 3- to 4-fold and approximately 10-fold, respectively, compared with atazanavir 300 mg alone. Therefore, ritonavir boosted atazanavir regimen (ritonavir 100 mg and atazanavir 300 mg once daily) is increasingly favoured in some patients. Efavirenz, a potent CYP3A inducer, decreased atazanavir concentrations by 75% and, unexpectedly, tenofovir, a nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor, decreased atazanavir concentrations by 25%. Average predose concentrations in HIV-infected patients who received atazanavir 400mg once daily were 273 ng/mL, which was believed to be several-fold higher than protein-binding corrected 50% inhibitory concentration of wild-type viruses. In HIV-infected patients who received once-daily ritonavir (100mg) boosted atazanavir (300 mg), mean (+/-SD) trough concentration was 862 (+/-838) ng/mL. Several clinical trials showed the efficacy of atazanavir 400 mg once daily with a nucleoside analogue backbone in antiretroviral-naive patients. The atazanavir 300/ritonavir 100 mg once-daily combination coadministered with other antiretrovirals showed the efficacy of this strategy in patients receiving efavirenz or in moderately antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected patients. Recommended once-daily doses of atazanavir taken with food are either 400 mg or 300 mg in combination with low dose ritonavir (100 mg) in moderately antiretroviral-experienced patients. Major advantages of atazanavir to date are its simplicity of administration (once-daily administration) and its less undesirable effect on the lipid profiles in patients.

Salvage therapy with amprenavir, lopinavir and ritonavir 200 mg/d or 400 mg/d in HIV-infected patients in virological failure.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the antiviral efficacy of a salvage therapy combining lopinavir and amprenavir with 200 mg/d or 400 mg/d ritonavir, together with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, over a 26-week period in HIV-infected patients in whom multiple antiretroviral regimens had failed. DESIGN: Phase IIb, randomized, open-label, multicentre trial. Patients were eligible if they had <500 CD4+ cells/mm3 and >4 log10 copies/ml HIV-RNA after treatment with at least two protease inhibitors (PIs) and one non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. RESULTS: At baseline (n=37), the median CD4+ cell count was 207/mm3 and the median plasma HIV-1 RNA level was 4.7 log10 copies/ml; the median number of PI mutations was seven and the median decrease in phenotypic susceptibility to lopinavir and amprenavir was 9.7 and 2.6, respectively. The mean number of antiretrovirals received prior to randomization was 7.7. The fall in the median HIV-1 RNA level at week 26 was -1.4 log10 copies/ml in the 200 mg/d ritonavir group and -2.5 log10 copies/ml in the 400 mg/d group (P=0.02). Viral load fell below 50 copies/ml in 32% and 61% of patients, respectively (P=0.07). After adjustment for the ritonavir dose, a smaller number of PI mutations was the only baseline characteristic associated with a better virological response at week 26. Amprenavir concentrations were significantly lower in presence of lopinavir. The lopinavir inhibitory quotient at week 6 correlated weakly with the change in the HIV-RNA level at week 26. CONCLUSION: Combination of amprenavir, lopinavir and 400 mg/d ritonavir shows significant virological efficacy without increased toxicity in HIV-infected patients in whom multiple antiretroviral regimens have failed.

Interactions between amprenavir and the lopinavir-ritonavir combination in heavily pretreated patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

OBJECTIVE: This pharmacokinetic study was designed to characterize interactions between amprenavir and the lopinavir-ritonavir combination in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus in whom previous antiretroviral therapy had failed. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients included in a randomized clinical trial (ANRS [National Agency for AIDS Research] Protocol 104) participated in this study. They were randomized to receive ritonavir at a dose of either 100 mg twice daily or 200 mg twice daily. For the first 2 weeks of therapy, they were randomly assigned to receive lopinavir (400 mg twice daily) and ritonavir (100 mg twice daily), amprenavir (600 mg twice daily) plus ritonavir (100 mg twice daily), lopinavir (400 mg twice daily) and ritonavir (100 mg twice daily) plus additional ritonavir (100 mg twice daily), or amprenavir (600 mg twice daily) plus ritonavir (200 mg twice daily). From week 3 onward, all patients received amprenavir plus lopinavir-ritonavir with or without an additional ritonavir dose (100 mg twice daily). The pharmacokinetics of the 3 drugs was studied in weeks 2 and 6 of therapy. RESULTS: Median amprenavir concentrations decreased by 54% (P =.004) when lopinavir was added to the amprenavir-ritonavir regimen. Lopinavir weakly displaced amprenavir from plasma proteins: The average unbound fraction of amprenavir was 0.089 in week 2 and 0.114 in week 6 (P =.03), but this did not fully account for the observed interaction. Increasing the ritonavir dose did not affect the amprenavir concentration. The relationship between lopinavir and ritonavir concentrations fitted a maximum effect (E(max)) model;the average concentration of ritonavir that yielded a lopinavir concentration of 8119 ng/mL (50% of E(max)) was 602 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 22%). There was a significant relationship between the lopinavir inhibitory quotient and the virologic response in week 2 (P =.005). CONCLUSION: Lopinavir markedly decreases the amprenavir concentration during amprenavir and lopinavir-ritonavir combination therapy. The inhibitory quotients were more predictive of the short-term virologic response than was the level of drug exposure.