Efficacy and safety of raltegravir plus lamivudine maintenance therapy.

BACKGROUND: Decreasing medication burden with raltegravir plus lamivudine in virologically suppressed persons with HIV (PWH) maintained efficacy and was well tolerated at 24 weeks, but more comprehensive data over longer follow-up are required. METHODS: Prospective 48 week extension phase of the raltegravir plus lamivudine arm from a previous 24 week pilot randomized clinical trial in which virologically suppressed PWH were randomized 2:1 to switch to fixed-dose combination 150 mg lamivudine/300 mg raltegravir twice daily or to continue therapy. In this 48 week extension phase, raltegravir was dosed at 1200 mg/day and lamivudine 300 mg/day. Primary outcome was the proportion of PWH with treatment failure at Week 48. Secondary outcomes were changes in ultrasensitive plasma HIV RNA, HIV DNA in CD4 cells, serum IL-6, ultrasensitive C-reactive protein and sCD14, body composition, sleep quality, quality of life and adverse effects. RESULTS: Between May 2018 and June 2019, 33 PWH were enrolled. One participant experienced virological failure without resistance mutations and re-achieved sustained virological suppression without therapy discontinuation, and two others discontinued therapy due to adverse effects. Treatment failure was 9% (95% CI 2%-24%) and 3% (95% CI 0%-17%) in the ITT and on-treatment populations. There were significant changes between baseline and Week 48 in serum cytokines but not in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to raltegravir and lamivudine in PWH with virological suppression maintains efficacy and is well tolerated. This maintenance regimen might be a cost-effective option for PWH at risk of drug-drug interactions or needing to avoid specific toxicities of certain antiretroviral drugs or their negative impact on comorbidities.

Tolerability of bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine versus dolutegravir/lamivudine as maintenance therapy in a real-life setting.

BACKGROUND: While both the burden of therapy and the individual drugs in bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (BIC/TAF/FTC) and dolutegravir/lamivudine differ, it is unclear whether their real-life tolerability may be also different. METHODS: Single-centre, clinical cohort analysis of all virologically suppressed persons with HIV (PWH) who were first prescribed bictegravir as BIC/TAF/FTC or dolutegravir as dolutegravir/lamivudine and had taken ≥1 dose of study medication. Major outcomes were discontinuations either for any reason or due to toxicity. Incidence was calculated as number of episodes per 100 person-years adjusted through propensity score analysis. RESULTS: Relative to persons treated with BIC/TAF/FTC (n = 1231), persons treated with dolutegravir/lamivudine (n = 821) were older and had more AIDS-defining conditions although better HIV control. After a median follow-up of 52 weeks, adjusted incidence rates for discontinuation were 6.68 (95% CI 5.18-8.19) and 8.44 (95% CI 6.29-10.60) episodes per 100 person-years for BIC/TAF/FTC and dolutegravir/lamivudine, respectively; adjusted incidence rate ratio for dolutegravir/lamivudine was 1.26 (95% CI 0.89-1.78) relative to BIC/TAF/FTC (P = 0.1847). Adjusted incidence rates for discontinuation due to toxicity were 3.88 (95% CI 2.70-5.06) and 4.62 (95% CI 3.05-6.19) episodes per 100 person-years for BIC/TAF/FTC and dolutegravir/lamivudine, respectively; adjusted incidence rate ratio for dolutegravir/lamivudine was 1.19 (95% CI 0.75-1.90) relative to BIC/TAF/FTC (P = 0. 4620). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were neuropsychiatric (n = 42; 2%), followed by gastrointestinal (n = 23; 1%), dermatological (n = 15; 1%) and weight increase (n = 15; 1%), without differences between regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to BIC/TAF/FTC or dolutegravir/lamivudine showed no difference in the risks of overall or toxicity-related discontinuations or in the profile of adverse events leading to discontinuation.