Three-year durable efficacy of dolutegravir plus lamivudine in antiretroviral therapy - naive adults with HIV-1 infection.

OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of dolutegravir (DTG) + lamivudine (3TC) vs. DTG + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) in treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 in the prespecified 144-week secondary analyses of GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2. DESIGN: Identical, multicenter, phase III, randomized, non-inferiority studies (double-blind through 96 weeks). METHODS: Participants with HIV-1 RNA ≤500 000 copies/ml and no major viral resistance mutations to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, or protease inhibitors were randomized 1:1 to once-daily DTG + 3TC or DTG + TDF/FTC. RESULTS: At week 144, DTG + 3TC (N = 716) was noninferior to DTG + TDF/FTC (N = 717) in proportion of participants achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml (Snapshot algorithm) in the pooled analysis (82% vs. 84%, respectively; adjusted treatment difference [95% confidence interval (CI)], -1.8% [-5.8, 2.1]), GEMINI-1 (-3.6% [-9.4, 2.1]), and GEMINI-2 (0.0% [-5.3, 5.3]). Twelve DTG + 3TC participants and nine DTG + TDF/FTC participants met protocol-defined confirmed virologic withdrawal (CVW) criteria; none developed treatment-emergent resistance. One DTG + 3TC participant who did not meet CVW criteria developed M184V at week 132 and R263R/K at week 144, conferring a 1.8-fold change in susceptibility to DTG; non-adherence to therapy was reported. Significantly fewer drug-related adverse events occurred with DTG + 3TC vs. DTG + TDF/FTC (20% vs. 27%; relative risk [95% CI], 0.76 [0.63-0.92]). Renal and bone biomarker changes favored DTG + 3TC. CONCLUSIONS: Three-year durable efficacy, long-term tolerability, and high barrier to resistance support first-line use of DTG + 3TC for HIV-1 treatment (see Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/QAD/C297; video abstract).

Durable Efficacy of Dolutegravir Plus Lamivudine in Antiretroviral Treatment-Naive Adults With HIV-1 Infection: 96-Week Results From the GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: The 2-drug regimen dolutegravir + lamivudine was noninferior to dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine in achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL in treatment-naive adults in the 48-week primary analysis of the GEMINI trials. We present results from the prespecified 96-week secondary analyses. SETTING: One hundred eighty-seven centers in 21 countries. METHODS: GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2 are identical, double-blind phase III studies. Participants with screening HIV-1 RNA ≤500,000 copies/mL were randomized 1:1 to once-daily dolutegravir + lamivudine or dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. RESULTS: At week 96, dolutegravir + lamivudine (N = 716) was noninferior to dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (N = 717) in achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (Snapshot algorithm; -10% noninferiority margin) in the pooled analysis (proportion of responders, 86.0% vs 89.5%, respectively; adjusted treatment difference [95% CI], -3.4% [-6.7 to 0.0007]), GEMINI-1 (-4.9% [-9.8 to 0.03]), and GEMINI-2 (-1.8% [-6.4 to 2.7]). Proportions of participants in the HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL Snapshot category were largely unchanged from week 48 to 96. Eleven participants taking dolutegravir + lamivudine and 7 taking dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine met confirmed virologic withdrawal criteria through week 96; none had treatment-emergent resistance mutations. Dolutegravir + lamivudine had a lower rate of drug-related adverse events than dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (19.6% vs 25.0%; relative risk ratio, 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.95). Renal and bone biomarker changes favored dolutegravir + lamivudine. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with 48-week data, dolutegravir + lamivudine demonstrated long-term, noninferior efficacy vs dolutegravir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine without increased risk of treatment-emergent resistance, supporting its use in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected individuals.

Renal safety of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a pooled analysis of 26 clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has been associated with improvement in markers of renal dysfunction in individual randomized trials; however, the comparative incidence of clinically significant renal events remains unclear. DESIGN: We used a pooled data approach to increase the person-years of drug exposure analysed, maximizing our ability to detect differences in clinically significant outcomes. METHODS: We pooled clinical renal safety data across 26 treatment-naive and antiretroviral switch studies to compare the incidence of proximal renal tubulopathy and discontinuation due to renal adverse events between participants taking TAF-containing regimens vs. those taking TDF-containing regimens. We performed secondary analyses from seven large randomized studies (two treatment-naive and five switch studies) to compare incidence of renal adverse events, treatment-emergent proteinuria, changes in serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, and urinary biomarkers (albumin, beta-2-microglobulin, and retinol binding protein-to-creatinine ratios). RESULTS: Our integrated analysis included 9322 adults and children with HIV (n = 6360 TAF, n = 2962 TDF) with exposure of 12 519 person-years to TAF and 5947 to TDF. There were no cases of proximal renal tubulopathy in participants receiving TAF vs. 10 cases in those receiving TDF (P < 0.001), and fewer individuals on TAF (3/6360) vs. TDF (14/2962) (P < 0.001) discontinued due to a renal adverse event. Participants initiating TAF-based vs. TDF-based regimens had more favourable changes in renal biomarkers through 96 weeks of therapy. CONCLUSION: These pooled data from 26 studies, with over 12 500 person-years of follow-up in children and adults, support the comparative renal safety of TAF over TDF.

Dolutegravir plus lamivudine versus dolutegravir plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection (GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2): week 48 results from two multicentre, double-blind, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Effective two-drug regimens could decrease long-term drug exposure and toxicity with HIV-1 antiretroviral therapy (ART). We therefore aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a two-drug regimen compared with a three-drug regimen for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in ART-naive adults. METHODS: We conducted two identically designed, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trials: GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2. Both studies were done at 192 centres in 21 countries. We included participants (≥18 years) with HIV-1 infection and a screening HIV-1 RNA of 500 000 copies per mL or less, and who were naive to ART. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive a once-daily two-drug regimen of dolutegravir (50 mg) plus lamivudine (300 mg) or a once-daily three-drug regimen of dolutegravir (50 mg) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg) and emtricitabine (200 mg). Both drug regimens were administered orally. We masked participants and investigators to treatment assignment: dolutegravir was administered as single-entity tablets (similar to its commercial formulation, except with a different film colour), and lamivudine tablets and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine tablets were over-encapsulated to visually match each other. Primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 in the intention-to-treat-exposed population, using the Snapshot algorithm and a non-inferiority margin of -10%. Safety analyses were done on the safety population. GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2 are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02831673 and NCT02831764, respectively. FINDINGS: Between July 18, 2016, and March 31, 2017, 1441 participants across both studies were randomly assigned to receive either the two-drug regimen (n=719) or three-drug regimen (n=722). At week 48 in the GEMINI-1 intention-to-treat-exposed population, 320 (90%) of 356 participants receiving the two-drug regimen and 332 (93%) of 358 receiving the three-drug regimen achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted treatment difference -2·6%, 95% CI -6·7 to 1·5); in GEMINI-2, 335 (93%) of 360 in the two-drug regimen and 337 (94%) of 359 in the three-drug regimen achieved HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted treatment difference -0·7%, 95% CI -4·3 to 2·9), showing non-inferiority at a -10% margin in both studies (pooled analysis: 655 [91%] of 716 in the two-drug regimen vs 669 [93%] of 717 in the three-drug regimen; adjusted treatment difference -1·7%, 95% CI -4·4 to 1·1). Numerically, more drug-related adverse events occurred with the three-drug regimen than with the two-drug regimen (169 [24%] of 717 vs 126 [18%] of 716); few participants discontinued because of adverse events (16 [2%] in the three-drug regimen and 15 [2%] in the two-drug regimen). Two deaths were reported in the two-drug regimen group of GEMINI-2, but neither was considered to be related to the study medication. INTERPRETATION: The non-inferior efficacy and similar tolerability profile of dolutegravir plus lamivudine to a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen at 48 weeks in ART-naive adults supports its use as initial therapy for patients with HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: ViiV Healthcare.

Brief Report: Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Tenofovir Alafenamide (TAF) vs Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF), Each Coformulated With Elvitegravir, Cobicistat, and Emtricitabine (E/C/F) for Initial HIV-1 Treatment: Week 144 Results.

In 2 double-blind phase 3 trials, 1733 antiretroviral-naive adults were randomized to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), each coformulated with elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine (E/C/F). At 144 weeks, TAF was superior to TDF in virologic efficacy, with 84.2% vs 80.0% having HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (difference 4.2%; 95% confidence interval: 0.6% to 7.8%). TAF had less impact than TDF on bone mineral density and renal biomarkers. No participants on TAF had renal-related discontinuations vs 12 on TDF (P < 0.001), with no cases of proximal tubulopathy for TAF vs 4 for TDF. There were greater increases in lipids with TAF vs TDF, with no difference in the total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein ratio. For initial HIV therapy, E/C/F/TAF is superior to E/C/F/TDF in efficacy and bone and renal safety.