Zidovudine/Lamivudine vs. Abacavir/Lamivudine vs. Tenofovir/Emtricitabine in fixed-dose combinations as initial treatment for HIV patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Initial treatment of the HIV is based on the use of three drugs, two of which are nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitors. There are three combinations of these drugs which have been approved by different guidelines, each with divergent results in terms of efficacy and safety. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of these three combinations. METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing fixed doses of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate / Emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), Abacavir / Lamivudine (ABC/3TC) and Zidovudine / Lamivudine (ZDV/3TC). RESULTS: Seven clinical trials met the eligibility criteria. The results suggested higher efficacy with TDF/FTC vs. ABC/3TC at 96 weeks and vs. ZDV/3TC at 48 weeks. However, there is clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis were performed by third drug and by level of viral load prior to treatment, and found no differences in virological control. Network meta-analysis could only be carried out with TDF/FTC vs. ZDV/3TC, and the proportion of patients with virological response, with no differences at 48 weeks nor at 96 weeks. Direct comparisons showed an increased risk of bone marrow suppression of ZDV/3TC vs. TDF/FTC and of ABC/3TC hypersensitivity reactions vs. ZDV/3TC. CONCLUSIONS: The results did not show differences in effectiveness among the interventions. However, due to the heterogeneity of the third drug and the follow-up time between the included studies, this result is not definitive. The results raise the need for further studies to help improve treatment recommendations in patients infected with HIV.

INTRODUCCIÓN: El tratamiento inicial de la infección por VIH se basa en el uso de tres medicamentos, dos de ellos inhibidores de transcriptasa reversa análogos de nucleósido. Existen tres combinaciones de estos medicamentos aprobadas por diferentes guías, con resultados divergentes en cuanto a eficacia y seguridad. OBJETIVO: Comparar la eficacia y seguridad de las 3 combinaciones. MÉTODOS: Revisión sistemática y metanálisis en red de ensayos clínicos con asignación aleatoria comparando dosis fijas de Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarato/Emtricitabina (TDF/FTC), Abacavir/Lamivudina (ABC/3TC) y Zidovudina/Lamivudina (ZDV/3TC). RESULTADOS: Siete ensayos clínicos cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad. Los resultados sugirieron mayor eficacia con TDF/FTC vs ABC/3TC a 96 semanas y vs. ZDV/3TC a 48 semanas. Sin embargo, existe heterogeneidad clínica y estadística. Se realizó análisis de subgrupos por tercer medicamento y por nivel de carga viral previa al tratamiento, sin encontrar diferencias en control virológico. Se pudo realizar metanálisis en red con TDF/FTC vs ZDV/3TC y proporción de pacientes con respuesta virológica, sin diferencias a las 48 semanas ni 96 semanas. Las comparaciones directas evidenciaron mayor riesgo de supresión de médula ósea de ZDV/3TC vs TDF/FTC y de reacciones de hipersensibilidad de ABC/3TC vs ZDV/3TC. CONCLUSIÓN: Los resultados no demostraron diferencias en efectividad entre las intervenciones; sin embargo, debido a heterogeneidad en cuanto al tercer medicamento y el tiempo de seguimiento entre los estudios incluidos, dicho resultado no es definitivo. Los resultados plantean la necesidad de realizar nuevos estudios que ayuden a mejorar las recomendaciones de tratamiento en los pacientes infectados por el VIH.

Zidovudine/Lamivudine vs. Abacavir/Lamivudine vs. Tenofovir/Emtricitabine in fixed-dose combinations as initial treatment for HIV patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis / Zidovudina/Lamivudina vs Abacavir/Lamivudina vs Tenofovir/Emtricitabina en combinaciones de dosis fija como tratamiento inicial en pacientes con VIH: revisión sistemática y metanálisis en red

Abstract Introduction: Initial treatment of the HIV is based on the use of three drugs, two of which are nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitors. There are three combinations of these drugs which have been approved by different guidelines, each with divergent results in terms of efficacy and safety. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of these three combinations. Methods: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing fixed doses of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate / Emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), Abacavir / Lamivudine (ABC/3TC) and Zidovudine / Lamivudine (ZDV/3TC). Results: Seven clinical trials met the eligibility criteria. The results suggested higher efficacy with TDF/FTC vs. ABC/3TC at 96 weeks and vs. ZDV/3TC at 48 weeks. However, there is clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis were performed by third drug and by level of viral load prior to treatment, and found no differences in virological control. Network meta-analysis could only be carried out with TDF/FTC vs. ZDV/3TC, and the proportion of patients with virological response, with no differences at 48 weeks nor at 96 weeks. Direct comparisons showed an increased risk of bone marrow suppression of ZDV/3TC vs. TDF/FTC and of ABC/3TC hypersensitivity reactions vs. ZDV/3TC Conclusions: The results did not show differences in effectiveness among the interventions. However, due to the heterogeneity of the third drug and the follow-up time between the included studies, this result is not definitive. The results raise the need for further studies to help improve treatment recommendations in patients infected with HIV.

Resumen Introducción: El tratamiento inicial de la infección por VIH se basa en el uso de tres medicamentos, dos de ellos inhibidores de transcriptasa reversa análogos de nucleósido. Existen tres combinaciones de estos medicamentos aprobadas por diferentes guías, con resultados divergentes en cuanto a eficacia y seguridad. Objetivo: Comparar la eficacia y seguridad de las 3 combinaciones Métodos: Revisión sistemática y metanálisis en red de ensayos clínicos con asignación aleatoria comparando dosis fijas de Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarato/Emtricitabina (TDF/FTC), Abacavir/Lamivudina (ABC/3TC) y Zidovudina/Lamivudina (ZDV/3TC). Resultados: Siete ensayos clínicos cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad. Los resultados sugirieron mayor eficacia con TDF/FTC vs ABC/3TC a 96 semanas y vs. ZDV/3TC a 48 semanas. Sin embargo, existe heterogeneidad clínica y estadística. Se realizó análisis de subgrupos por tercer medicamento y por nivel de carga viral previa al tratamiento, sin encontrar diferencias en control virológico. Se pudo realizar metanálisis en red con TDF/FTC vs ZDV/3TC y proporción de pacientes con respuesta virológica, sin diferencias a las 48 semanas ni 96 semanas. Las comparaciones directas evidenciaron mayor riesgo de supresión de médula ósea de ZDV/3TC vs TDF/FTC y de reacciones de hipersensibilidad de ABC/3TC vs ZDV/3TC. Conclusión: Los resultados no demostraron diferencias en efectividad entre las intervenciones; sin embargo, debido a heterogeneidad en cuanto al tercer medicamento y el tiempo de seguimiento entre los estudios incluidos, dicho resultado no es definitivo. Los resultados plantean la necesidad de realizar nuevos estudios que ayuden a mejorar las recomendaciones de tratamiento en los pacientes infectados por el VIH.

Prevalence of HLA-B*57:01 allele in Argentinean HIV-1 infected patients.

Hypersensitivity reaction to abacavir (ABC hypersensitivity syndrome, AHS) is strongly associated with the presence of the HLA-B*57:01 allele. This study was designed to estimate the prevalence of HLA-B*57:01 allele in Argentinean HIV-1 infected patients. We analyzed the presence of HLA-B*57:01 allele in 1646 HIV-1 infected patients from different regions of Argentina. This allele was detected in 81 patients; most of them corresponded to patients living in the central region of the country. The prevalence of HLA-B*57:01 was 4.9%, similar to other Caucasian populations and higher than other data reported for South American populations. This strongly supports screening for the presence of HLA-B*57:01 in abacavir treatment of HIV-1 in our country.

Bioequivalence of a dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine fixed-dose combination tablet and the effect of food.

BACKGROUND: The integrase inhibitor dolutegravir and nucleoside analogues abacavir and lamivudine are once-daily treatment options for HIV. This study (NCT01622790) evaluated, first, the bioequivalence (BE) of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet containing dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg (dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC) vs coadministered dolutegravir 50 mg and abacavir/lamivudine combination tablets (Epzicom) and, second, the effect of food on the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC tablet. METHODS: Study part A (66 healthy subjects) was a single-dose, open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover study to evaluate the BE of the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC tablet and dolutegravir + abacavir/lamivudine tablets in the fasted state. In study part B, 12 subjects from part A received the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC tablet with a high-fat meal. BE and food effect were assessed by analysis of variance to determine the ratio of geometric least squares means and associated 90% confidence intervals for key pharmacokinetic parameters for each of dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine. RESULTS: Sixty-two subjects completed part A. The dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine tablet was bioequivalent to the dolutegravir + abacavir/lamivudine tablets; 90% confidence intervals for the geometric least squares mean ratios fell within the 0.8-1.25 BE criteria. The effect of food on the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC tablet was similar to previous food effects observed with the separate formulations. The safety profile was comparable between treatments, with no observed serious or grade 3/4 adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The BE of the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine FDC tablet was demonstrated; it may be administered without regard to meals.

Abacavir and lamivudine fixed-dose combination tablet once daily compared with abacavir and lamivudine twice daily in HIV-infected patients over 48 weeks (ESS30008, SEAL).

BACKGROUND: Abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC) administered twice daily were compared with an ABC + 3TC fixed-dose combination (Epzicom, Kivexa; EPZ) administered once daily, both in combination with a protease inhibitor (PI) or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). METHODS: Two hundred sixty HIV-infected subjects with more than 6 months of ABC and 3TC administered twice daily plus a PI or NNRTI with an HIV-1 RNA level less than 400 copies/mL for more than 3 months and a CD4 count greater than 50 cells/mm were randomized 1:1 to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily or EPZ administered once daily. RESULTS: At baseline, median time on ABC and 3TC administered twice daily was 22 months, and median CD4 count and HIV-1 RNA level were 554 cells/mm and <50 copies/mL, respectively. EPZ administered once daily was established as not inferior to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily based on the proportion of nonvirologic failures (confirmed HIV-1 RNA level > or =1265 copies/mL; 90% confidence interval: -3.4 to 6.4; (intent to treat [ITT]: missing [M] = failure [F]). Proportions with an HIV-1 RNA level <50 copies/mL were 81% of those taking EPZ once daily and 82% of those taking ABC + 3TC twice daily at week 48 (ITT: M = F). Virologic failure was rare (2 patients taking the once-daily regimen, 4 patients taking the twice-daily regimen). There was a low incidence of grade 2 through 4 adverse events (AEs) and no drug-related serious AEs or hypersensitivity reactions. CONCLUSIONS: EPZ administered once daily was established as not inferior to ABC + 3TC administered twice daily in a regimen containing an NNRTI or a PI over 48 weeks. A dual-nucleoside backbone of ABC and 3TC administered once or twice daily is effective, durable, and well tolerated.

Predictors of adherence and virologic outcome in HIV-infected patients treated with abacavir- or indinavir-based triple combination HAART also containing lamivudine/zidovudine.

OBJECTIVES: To compare dosing convenience and adherence with abacavir (ABC) 300 mg plus a fixed-dose lamivudine 150 mg/zidovudine 300 mg combination tablet (COM) twice daily versus indinavir (IDV) plus COM twice daily in treatment-naïve, HIV-1-infected adults; and to evaluate the association among difficulty taking antiretroviral regimens, adherence, and virologic efficacy. METHODS: An open-label, randomized, multicenter, international study compared the COM/ABC and IDV/COM regimens with respect to self-reported adherence and regimen convenience over 48 weeks. Logistic regression analysis (LRA) was done on a patient sub-sample from both groups to evaluate predictors of adherence and virologic response at last time-point on randomized therapy (LTORT). RESULTS: The study population was diverse with respect to ethnicity (38% Asian, 27% Hispanic, 28% white, 3% black, 4% other) and gender (39% women, 61% men). Baseline median HIV-1 RNA was 4.80 log(10) copies/mL and CD4+ cell count was 315 cells/mm(3). Of 329 patients who were randomized and received treatment, 315 (96%) provided adherence data. Significantly more patients in the ABC/COM group than in the IDV/COM group reported > or = 95% adherence to therapy (76 vs 58%, p < 0.001) and no difficulty in taking their regimen (91 vs 61%, p < 0.001). In both groups, the highest probability of HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL occurred when median adherence was > or = 95%. The probability of HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL declined more rapidly in the IDV/COM group as adherence rates decreased. LRA showed that no difficulty taking any of the drugs in the regimen, ABC/COM treatment group, and male gender were independent significant predictors of > or = 95% adherence (p < 0.05). Median adherence and baseline HIV-1 RNA were significant predictors of HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported greater ease of use and superior adherence to ABC/COM than IDV/COM. Patient-reported difficulty taking drugs in a regimen was predictive of reduced adherence, and both of the latter factors were predictive of poorer virologic outcome. Adherence levels of > or = 95% in both treatment groups maximized the probability of patients achieving an HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL.

The NEAT study: a 48-week open-label study to compare the antiviral efficacy and safety of GW433908 versus nelfinavir in antiretroviral therapy-naive HIV-1-infected patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, durability, and tolerability of GW433908 (908), 1400 mg twice-daily (BID), with nelfinavir (NFV), 1250 mg BID. METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label study (NEAT) in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive HIV-infected adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA (vRNA) at screening > or =5000 copies/mL (c/mL). Patients were randomly assigned to 908 or NFV (2:1) for a minimum of 48 weeks, with a background of abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC). RESULTS: A total of 166 patients received randomized treatment with 908 BID and 83 received NFV BID. The population was diverse with regard to race and gender (76% Hispanics and blacks, 31% female) and had advanced HIV disease at screening (45% had vRNA >100,000 c/mL, 48% had CD4 cell counts <200 cells/mm3, 20% had a history of Centers for Disease Control class C events). After 48 weeks of study by an intention-to-treat rebound or discontinuation = failure analysis, a greater proportion of patients in the 908 BID group (66%) than the NFV BID group (51%) achieved vRNA <400 c/mL. Furthermore, more patients with screening vRNA >100,000 c/mL (67 vs. 35%) or CD4 <50 cells/mm3 (48 vs. 24%) achieved undetectable viral loads taking 908 BID compared with NFV BID, respectively. Favorable immunologic responses were observed for both groups. Diarrhea, which was more common in the NFV BID group (18 vs. 5%), was the only drug-related grade 2-4 adverse event with a significant difference (P = 0.002) in incidence between groups. CONCLUSION: Administration of 908 BID resulted in a potent and sustained antiretroviral response, notably in ART-naive patients with advanced HIV disease. GW433908 was generally well tolerated and provides a convenient dosing option without food or fluid restrictions.

A randomized, double-blind study of triple nucleoside therapy of abacavir, lamivudine, and zidovudine versus lamivudine and zidovudine in previously treated human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected children. The CNAA3006 Study Team.

OBJECTIVES: Abacavir (ABC) is a potent inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase. We compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of combination therapy with ABC, lamivudine (3TC), and zidovudine (ZDV) versus 3TC and ZDV in antiretroviral experienced HIV-1-infected children over 48 weeks. METHODS: Two hundred five HIV-1-infected children who had received previous antiretroviral therapy and had CD4(+) cell counts >/=100 cells/mm(3) were stratified by age and by previous treatment. Participants were randomly assigned to receive ABC (8 mg/kg twice daily [BID]) plus 3TC (4 mg/kg BID) and ZDV (180 mg/m(2) BID; ABC/3TC/ZDV group) or ABC placebo plus 3TC (4 mg/kg BID) and ZDV (180 mg/m(2); 3TC/ZDV group). Participants who met a protocol-defined switch criteria (plasma HIV-1 RNA >0.5 log(10) copies/mL above baseline at week 8 or >10 000 copies/mL after week 16) had the option to switch to open-label ABC plus any antiretroviral combination or continue randomized therapy or withdraw from the study. RESULTS: The Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence interval) of the proportion of participants who maintained HIV-1 RNA levels 10 000 copies/mL, a significantly higher proportion of participants in the ABC/3TC/ZDV group had HIV-1 RNA