Caspofungin use in daily clinical practice for treatment of invasive aspergillosis: results of a prospective observational registry.

BACKGROUND: A prospective observational registry assessed real world experience with caspofungin monotherapy or combination therapy for the initial or salvage treatment of proven or probable invasive aspergillosis (IA). METHODS: Data were collected from April 2006 to September 2007 for patients treated with caspofungin for a single episode of IA. Clinical effectiveness was categorized as favorable (complete or partial) or unfavorable (stable disease or failure) at the end of caspofungin therapy (EOCT). RESULTS: Consecutive patients (n = 103) with proven or probable IA (per EORTC/MSG criteria) were identified from 11 countries. Malignancy (76.7%), neutropenia (64.1%), allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT, 22.3%), solid organ transplantation (8.7%), autologous HSCT (4.9%), and HIV/AIDS (2.9%) were the most common underlying conditions. Most patients (84.5%) had pulmonary IA. Aspergillus fumigatus was the most frequently isolated species. The majority of patients received caspofungin monotherapy (82.5%) primarily as salvage therapy (82.4%). The main reason for switching to salvage therapy was clinical failure of the first-line therapy (69%). A favorable response at EOCT was seen in 56.4% (57/101) of patients overall, including 56.5% (48/85) and 56.3% (9/16) of patients receiving caspofungin monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively. Favorable response rates in clinically relevant subgroups were: malignancy, 51.9% (41/79); allogeneic HSCT, 56.5% (13/23); and neutropenia at time of hospitalization, 53.0% (35/66). There was a 72.3% (73/101) survival at 7 days after EOCT. Serious adverse events related to caspofungin were reported in 4 cases (3.9%); 3 patients (2.9%) discontinued treatment due to an adverse event related to caspofungin. CONCLUSIONS: Caspofungin was both effective and well tolerated among high-risk patient groups such as those with neutropenia and active malignancies.

Boosted versus unboosted indinavir with zidovudine and lamivudine in nucleoside pre-treated patients: a randomized, open-label trial with 112 weeks of follow-up (HIV-NAT 005).

INTRODUCTION: The use of HIV protease inhibitors (PIs) in a ritonavir (RTV)-boosted form is now common. However, randomized data comparing boosted with unboosted PI strategies are scarce. METHODS: This randomized, open-label trial compared indinavir (IDV) 800 mg three times daily with IDV/RTV 800/100 mg twice daily, both given with zidovudine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC) twice daily in individuals with at least 3 months previous AZT experience. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average change in HIV RNA from baseline. Designed as a 48-week study, follow-up continued until week 112. Primary analysis is by intention to treat. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients commenced therapy and are included in the analysis. Patients had a median of 29 months past nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) exposure. Baseline median (interquartile range) log10 HIV RNA was 4.0 (3.3-4.5) and CD4+ T-cell count 166 (40-323) cells/microl. After 112-weeks of study there was no significant difference observed between arms in the mean (SD) change in time-weighted average HIV RNA from baseline (-1.6 [1.1] HIV RNA copies/week/ml three times daily arm; -1.4 [1.1] HIV RNA copies/week/ml twice daily arm; P = 0.3). Both arms were associated with substantial toxicity expressed as serious adverse events and study drug interruptions. The twice daily arm experienced greater dyslipidaemia. Mean (SD) changes in time-weighted CD4+ T-cell count from baseline were similar [88 (84) cells/week/microl three times daily arm; 70 [109] cells/week/microl twice daily arm; P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: RTV-boosted IDV 800/100 mg twice daily demonstrated comparable efficacy to unboosted IDV 800 mg three times daily dosing. Both regimens were associated with substantial toxicity. Use of lower doses of RTV-boosted IDV may result in better tolerability without loss of efficacy and warrant further research.

Relationship between hyperbilirubinaemia and UDP-glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1) polymorphism in adult HIV-infected Thai patients treated with indinavir.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between the UGT1A1*6 (G71R) and UGT1A1*28 (promoter (TA)7-repeat) genotypes and hyperbilirubinaemia in Thai patients treated with indinavir, and characterize the inhibition of human UGTs by indinavir in vitro. METHODS: Ninety-six Thai HIV patients receiving indinavir, 800 mg t.i.d. or 800 mg b.i.d. "boosted" with ritonavir (100 mg b.i.d.), had serum bilirubin levels measured to 24 weeks post-treatment and were genotyped for UGT1A1*6 and UGT1A1*28. The inhibition selectivity and kinetics of indinavir were determined using a panel of recombinant human UGTs. RESULTS: UGT1A1*6 and UGT1A1*28 frequencies in the Thai patients were 10.4% and 15.6%, respectively. Total, conjugated (direct) and unconjugated (indirect) serum bilirubin concentrations increased significantly at 24 weeks of indinavir treatment for all four genotypes, with a trend towards higher levels depending on the number of UGT1A1 mutant alleles; *6/*28 > *6 > *28 > reference. The hazards ratio (HR) for serious hyperbilirubinaemia (total bilirubin > 2.5 mg/dl) at week 24 was statistically significant only in those patients carrying the UGT1A1*6 (HR 2.87) and UGT1A1*6/*28 (HR 11.42) genotypes. The Ki values for indinavir inhibition of UGT1A1 and UGT1A1*6 were 4.1 and 10.7 mumol/l respectively. However, indinavir was also shown to inhibit other human UGTs, notably UGT1A3 and UGT1A7. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to Caucasian HIV-infected patients treated with indinavir, the promoter polymorphism (UGT1A1*28) is of less significance than the coding region (UGT1A1*6) mutation as a risk factor for hyperbilirubinaemia. The Ki values determined for indinavir inhibition of UGT1A1 are consistent with an interaction in vivo, with an additive effect in patients with already impaired bilirubin glucuronidation activity.

Mitochondrial DNA and RNA increase in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from HIV-1-infected patients randomized to receive stavudine-containing or stavudine-sparing combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) has been suggested as a potential marker of mitochondrial toxicity associated with nucleoside analogue reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-containing therapy. METHODS: We quantified mtDNA and mitochondrial RNA (mtRNA) in PBMCs over the course of 48 weeks in 78 patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) who were randomly assigned to receive ritonavir-boosted indinavir and efavirenz with or without stavudine. Furthermore, we analyzed the association of mtDNA and mtRNA with clinical signs and symptoms and/or abnormalities in laboratory markers attributed to mitochondrial toxicity. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in mtDNA and mtRNA content over time between the 2 treatment arms. When arms were combined, both median mtDNA and mtRNA content showed statistically significant increases over the course of 48 weeks, from 206 to 278 copies/cell (P < .001) and from 154 to 288 copies/cell (P = .003), respectively. No statistically significant difference in mtDNA and mtRNA content was found between patients with and those without adverse events attributed to mitochondrial toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The observed increases in mtDNA and mtRNA content during the first year of treatment may represent a restorative trend resulting from suppression of HIV-1 infection, independent of the treatment used. Future studies should focus on well-defined mitochondrial toxicities and changes in these markers within the corresponding affected tissues simultaneously with those in PBMCs. Furthermore, with respect to studies of peripheral blood, mtDNA and mtRNA content in individual cell subtypes rather than in PBMCs may be better markers of toxicity and deserve further investigation.

Pharmacokinetics of indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg twice a day) combined with efavirenz in HIV-infected patients.

A pharmacokinetics study was performed in HIV-infected patients who used indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg twice a day) plus efavirenz in the European and South American Study of Indinavir, Efavirenz and Ritonavir. Indinavir plasma concentrations were similar to values previously obtained in healthy volunteers who used the same combination. Efavirenz concentrations were higher than reported before. The pharmacokinetic data suggest that indinavir/ritonavir plus efavirenz (without dose modifications) should be effective in treatment-naive patients, and this was supported by the treatment response of the participants.

A once-daily HAART regimen containing indinavir + ritonavir plus one or two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (PIPO study).

INTRODUCTION: There is an increased interest in developing once-daily regimens for the treatment of HIV-infected patients. A Phase II study was conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetics, and short-term safety and efficacy of an indinavir/ritonavir combination as part of a once-daily regimen. METHODS: HIV-infected patients with either proven poor compliance to HAART regimens in the past or an anticipated poor compliance to such a regimen in the future were eligible for this study. They received a once-daily regimen consisting of indinavir 1200 mg, ritonavir 400 mg, and one or two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), also administered once daily with food. A 24 h pharmacokinetic profile was constructed in a subset of patients. Short-term safety and efficacy were evaluated at 4, 12 and 24 weeks after initiation of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were included in this study, of whom 27 (42.2%) were treatment-naive. The geometric mean (+95% CI) of indinavir AUC0-24h, Cmax and Cmin as determined in an unselected group of 16 patients were 84.9 (69.7-103.5) mg/l x h, 12.0 (10.2-14.1) mg/l and 0.15 (0.09-0.26) mg/l, respectively. A large interpatient variability was observed, with five out of the 16 subjects having a Cmin value below the minimum effective concentration of 0.10 mg/l. During the 24 weeks of follow-up nine patients (14.1%) discontinued study medication, two due to medication-related toxicity. Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported most frequently (50.0%), followed by skin effects (45.3%), joint pain (9.4%) and urological complaints (7.8%). No patient developed nephrolithiasis. The median (+interquartile range) serum creatinine level in the 64 patients increased slightly from 74 (63-88) micromol/l to 79 (66-92) micromol/l during the 24 weeks of follow-up. One new patient reached a grade 1 elevation in serum creatinine, which normalized during the follow-up; five other patients with elevated serum creatinine at baseline remained stable. During the 24 weeks of follow-up, the proportion of patients with a viral load <500 copies/ml increased from 35.1% at baseline to 71.4% (ITT NC=F analysis) or 83.3% (OT analysis), and from 0% at baseline to 76.2% (ITT NC=F analysis) or 100.0% (OT analysis) in treatment-experienced and -naive patients, respectively. This was accompanied by a mean increase in CD4 cell count of 52 and 220 cells/mm3 in these two sub-groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The 24-week follow-up data of this study indicate favourable pharmacokinetics of an indinavir/ritonavir 1200/400 mg combination as part of a once-daily regimen consisting also of one or two NRTIs. Short-term safety and efficacy were also satisfactory. Long-term follow up is planned to evaluate the durability of these results.

Pharmacokinetics of indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) in combination with efavirenz (600 mg) in HIV-1-infected subjects.

BACKGROUND: Addition of efavirenz (600 mg) to indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) results in significant decreases in indinavir levels in healthy volunteers. This study evaluated the steady-state pharmacokinetics of indinavir/ritonavir at 800/100 mg twice daily (bid) in combination with efavirenz at 600 mg once daily (qd) in HIV-infected Thai subjects who used this nucleoside-sparing combination in The HIV Netherlands Australia Thailand Research Collaboration 009 study. METHODS: At week 4 of the study, 12-hour pharmacokinetic profiles for indinavir/ritonavir were obtained for 20 HIV-infected subjects. For efavirenz, the concentrations at 12 hours and 24 hours (Cmin) after dosing were assessed. RESULTS: All subjects (10 males and 10 females) completed the study. The geometric mean area under the concentration versus time curve, Cmin, and maximum plasma concentration of indinavir were 45.7 mg/(L. h) (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.8-52.5), 0.32 mg/L (95% CI, 0.24-0.44), and 11.1 mg/L (95% CI, 9.4-13.0), respectively. A >10-fold variation in indinavir Cmin was observed. All subjects had an indinavir Cmin that was at least comparable with the reported mean population Cmin of indinavir at 800 mg thrice daily without ritonavir (0.15 mg/L). The geometric mean concentration at 12 hours and Cmin of efavirenz were 3.1 mg/L (95% CI, 2.5-3.7) and 2.1 mg/L (95% CI, 1.6-2.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the known pharmacokinetic interaction between efavirenz and indinavir/ritonavir, the combination of indinavir/ritonavir at 800/100 mg bid and efavirenz at 600 mg qd results in adequate minimum concentrations of both indinavir and efavirenz for treatment-naive patients.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of indinavir with or without low-dose ritonavir in HIV-infected Thai patients.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of indinavir with or without low-dose ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected Thai patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six HIV-1-infected patients who participated in HIV-NAT 005 study gave informed consent to record a pharmacokinetic curve 4 weeks after starting a regimen containing either indinavir 800 mg every 8 h (n = 19) or indinavir 800 mg + ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h (n = 17). Indinavir plasma concentrations were measured by HPLC. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by non-compartmental methods. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range; IQR) body weight of the 36 patients (11 females and 25 males) was 60 (54-72) kg. Median and IQR values for indinavir AUC, Cmax and Cmin were 20.9 (13.1-27.0) mg x h/L, 8.1 (6.6-9.4) mg/L and 0.13 (0.09-0.27) mg/L, respectively, for indinavir 800 mg every 8 h, and 49.2 (42.5-60.4) mg x h/L, 10.6 (8.5-13.2) mg/L and 0.68 (0.43-0.77) mg/L, respectively, for indinavir 800 mg + ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h. These values are not largely different from values found in Caucasian patients, with the exception of relatively high peak levels of indinavir in Thai subjects. Cut-off values for optimal virological efficacy were an indinavir Cmin of 0.10 and 0.25 mg/L for the every 8 h and the every 12 h regimen, respectively; patients with an indinavir AUC greater than 30 (every 8 h regimen) or 60 (every 12 h regimen) mg x h/L were at increased risk of developing nephrotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Indinavir pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in Thai HIV-1-infected patients are similar to those described in Caucasian patients, despite an overall lower body weight in this population

Continued indinavir versus switching to indinavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected patients with suppressed viral load.

OBJECTIVE: To compare continued indinavir (IDV) 8-hourly (q8h) with switching to indinavir/ritonavir (IDV/RTV) 12-hourly (q12h) in HIV-positive patients having suppressed viral load with IDV q8h plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI). DESIGN: Multicentre, international, randomized, open-label study enrolling HIV-1 infected patients on IDV 800 mg q8h plus two NRTI with CD4 cell counts > or = 100 x 106/l and plasma HIV RNA < 500 copies/ml for > or = 3 months. METHODS: Patients were randomized to continue on the same regimen or to switch to IDV plus liquid RTV (IDV/RTV 800 mg/100 mg q12h). Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients remaining < 500 copies/ml at 48 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 323 patients (IDV/RTV, 162; IDV, 161) were evaluable. At 48 weeks, the proportions of patients with plasma HIV RNA < 500 copies/ml were 93%, 88% and 58% in the IDV/RTV arm versus 92% (P = 1), 86% (P = 0.87) and 74% (P = 0.003) in the IDV arm using on-treatment (OT) and intent-to-treat (ITT) [switches included (ITT, S = I) and switches = failure (ITT, S = F)] analyses respectively. Mean increase in CD4 cell count was 88 x 106/cells/l (IDV/RTV arm) and 60 x 106 cells/l (IDV arm) (P = 0.08). More patients discontinued study medication due to adverse events in the IDV/RTV arm than in the IDV arm (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Equivalence of continuing IDV q8h versus switching to IDV/RTV (liquid) q12h in suppressed stable patients was demonstrated by OT and ITT S = I analyses. However, the IDV q8h arm performed better when discontinuations were classified as failures. IDV/RTV q12h can be convenient and equally effective for patients able to tolerate it.

The influence of efavirenz on the pharmacokinetics of a twice-daily combination of indinavir and low-dose ritonavir in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of multiple-dose efavirenz on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of the combination of indinavir (800 mg) and low-dose ritonavir (100 mg) twice a day, in which ritonavir is used to increase indinavir plasma concentrations. METHODS: Eighteen healthy male volunteers participated in this multiple-dose, 1-arm, 2-period interaction study. They took a combination of 800 mg indinavir and 100 mg ritonavir with food for 15 days. From days 15 to 29, a once-daily administration of 600 mg efavirenz was added to the combination. Pharmacokinetics of indinavir and ritonavir on days 15 and 29 were compared. RESULTS: Fourteen volunteers completed the study. The addition of efavirenz resulted in significant reductions (P <.01) in indinavir area under the curve (AUC, -25%), trough concentration (C(min), -50%), and maximum concentration (C(max), -17%). All indinavir C(min) levels on day 29 remained equivalent to or above the mean C(min) value described for the regimen of 800 mg indinavir three times a day, without ritonavir (0.15 mg/L). Changes in ritonavir AUC, C(min), and C(max) were -36%, -39%, and -34%, respectively. Pharmacokinetics of efavirenz on day 29 were comparable with published data. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of efavirenz to a combination of 800 mg indinavir and 100 mg ritonavir twice daily results in significant decreases in AUC, C(max), and especially C(min) of indinavir. The dose of indinavir or ritonavir should be increased to maintain similar indinavir drug levels after addition of efavirenz to the indinavir-ritonavir combination. Dose modifications may not be needed in antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients if the reference C(min) of the regimen of 800 mg indinavir 3 times a day is considered to be adequate.