Similar neurocognitive outcomes after 48 weeks in HIV-1-infected participants randomized to continue tenofovir/emtricitabine + atazanavir/ritonavir or simplify to abacavir/lamivudine + atazanavir.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated neurocognitive disorders can persist in many patients despite achieving viral suppression while on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Neurocognitive function over 48 weeks was evaluated using a Cogstate test battery assessing psychomotor function, attention, learning, and working memory in 293 HIV-1-infected, ART-experienced, and virologically suppressed adults. The ASSURE study randomized participants 1:2 to remain on tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) or simplify to abacavir/lamivudine + atazanavir (ABC/3TC + ATV). Neurocognitive z-scores were computed using demographically adjusted normative data and were classified as "impaired" (defined as either a z-score ≤ - 2 or having 2 or more standardized individual test z-scores ≤ - 1); while higher scores (equaling better performance) were classified as "normal". By z-scores, 54.7% of participants had impaired neurocognition at baseline and 50.2% at week 48. There were no significant differences (p < 0.05) in the baseline-adjusted performance between treatment groups for any individual test or by z-score. Specific demographic and medical risk factors were evaluated by univariate analysis for impact on neurocognitive performance. Factors with p < 0.10 were evaluated by backwards regression analysis to identify neurocognition-correlated factors after accounting for treatment, assessment, and baseline. Four risk factors at baseline for impaired neurocognition were initially identified: lower CD4 nadir lymphocyte counts, higher Framingham risk scores, and interleukin-6 levels, and a history of psychiatric disorder not otherwise specified, however none were found to moderate the effect of treatment on neurocognition. In this aviremic, treatment-experienced population, baseline-adjusted neurocognitive function remained stable and equivalent over 48 weeks with both TDF/FTC + ATV/r-treated and in the ART-simplified ABC/3TC + ATV treatment groups.

HLA-B*57:01 screening and hypersensitivity reaction to abacavir between 1999 and 2016 in the OPERA® observational database: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: HLA-B*57:01 screening was added to clinical care guidelines in 2008 to reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reaction from abacavir. The uptake of HLA-B*57:01 screening and incidence of hypersensitivity reaction were assessed in a prospective clinical cohort in the United States to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS: We included all patients initiating an abacavir-containing regimen for the first time in the pre-HLA-B*57:01 screening period (January 1, 1999 to June 14, 2008) or the post-HLA-B*57:01 screening period (June 15, 2008 to January 1, 2016). Yearly incidence of both HLA-B*57:01 screening and physician panel-adjudicated hypersensitivity reactions were calculated and compared. RESULTS: Of the 9619 patients eligible for the study, 33% initiated abacavir in the pre-screening period and 67% in the post-screening period. Incidence of HLA-B*57:01 screening prior to abacavir initiation increased from 43% in 2009 to 84% in 2015. The incidence of definite or probable hypersensitivity reactions decreased from 1.3% in the pre-screening period to 0.8% in 2009 and further to 0.2% in 2015 in the post-screening period. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of HLA-B*57:01 screening increased steadily since its first inclusion in treatment guidelines in the United States. This increase in screening was accompanied by a decreasing incidence of definite or probable hypersensitivity reactions over the same period. However, a considerable proportion of patients initiating abacavir were not screened, representing a failed opportunity to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Where HLA-B*57:01 screening is standard of care, patients should be confirmed negative for this allele before starting abacavir treatment.

HLA-B*57:01 allele prevalence in HIV-infected North American subjects and the impact of allele testing on the incidence of abacavir-associated hypersensitivity reaction in HLA-B*57:01-negative subjects.

BACKGROUND: The presence of the HLA-B*57:01 allele in HIV-infected subjects is associated with a higher risk of abacavir-associated hypersensitivity reaction (ABC HSR). HLA-B*57:01 allele prevalence varies in different populations, but HLA-B*57:01 testing with immunological confirmation has had a negative predictive value for ABC HSR between 97 and 100%. METHODS: In the ASSURE study (EPZ113734), the HLA-B*57:01 prevalence in virologically suppressed, antiretroviral treatment-experienced, HIV-infected subjects from the United States, including Puerto Rico, was assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-five subjects were screened; 13 were HLA-B*57:01 positive and 372 were negative. Only HLA-B*57:01-negative, abacavir-naive subjects were eligible to enroll into the ASSURE trial. Eleven of the 13 subjects who possessed the HLA-B*57:01 allele were white, the other 2 were African-American. There was no geographic clustering of HLA-B*57:01-positive subjects, and the incidence correlated roughly with those states with the greatest numbers of subjects screened. Similarly, there was no statistically significant correlation between subjects who possessed or lacked the allele and age, gender, ethnicity or CD4+ T-cell numbers. The incidence of ABC HSR following abacavir initiation was also evaluated. Only 1 of 199 HLA-B*57:01-negative subjects (an African-American male) randomized to receive abacavir-containing treatment developed symptoms consistent with suspected ABC HSR; ABC HSR was not immunologically confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the utility of HLA-B*57:01 allele testing to reduce the frequency of ABC HSR. The prevalence of HLA-B*57:01 positivity was higher in white than in African-American subjects. In HLA-B*57:01-negative subjects, suspected ABC HSR is very rare, but should lead to discontinuation of abacavir when ABC HSR cannot be definitively excluded from the differential diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ASSURE (EPZ113734) study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov registration on April 8th 2010 and the registration number is NCT01102972.

ARIES 144 week results: durable virologic suppression in HIV-infected patients simplified to unboosted atazanavir/abacavir/lamivudine.

BACKGROUND: The open-label study ARIES (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00440947) utilized a ritonavir (/r)-boosted protease inhibitor treatment simplification strategy. Antiretroviral-naïve subjects received abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) + atazanavir/ ritonavir (ATV/r) from baseline through randomization at week 36, then maintained or discontinued ritonavir for an additional 108 weeks. Non-inferiority of the unboosted regimen was demonstrated at week 84. In this optional extension phase, virologic suppression and adverse events were assessed through week 144. METHODS: Patients were randomized at week 36 if they had confirmed HIV RNA <50 copies/mL by week 30 and no previous virologic failure (VF; defined as failure to achieve HIV RNA <400 copies/mL or confirmed rebound after achieving HIV RNA ≥400 copies/mL). Three hundred sixty-nine subjects who completed 84 weeks in ARIES participated in the extension phase and maintained their randomized regimen for an additional 60 weeks post randomization. RESULTS: At week 144, 146/189 (77%) versus 132/180 (73%) subjects in the unboosted ATV and ATV/r groups, respectively, maintained HIV RNA <50 copies/mL. Post randomization (weeks 36-144), treatment-related grade 2-4 adverse events were more common in the ATV/r-treated (23%) compared to the ATV-treated (13%) group; the most frequently reported was increased serum bilirubin (6% of ATV-treated subjects vs 14 % of ATV/r-treated subjects). During the extension phase, 3% (11/369) of subjects met protocol-defined VF (5 ATV-treated and 6 ATV/ r-treated subjects); one ATV/r-treated subject had treatment-emergent major viral resistance-associated mutations. The median change in fasting triglycerides from baseline to week 144 was significantly different (P=.001) in the ATV-treated (-8.5 mg/dL) compared to the ATV/r-treated (28.5 mg/dL) groups. CONCLUSIONS: These long-term study results demonstrate that ATV in combination with ABC/3TC is a potent, well-tolerated regimen in patients who have achieved initial suppression on a ritonavir-boosted regimen.

Are We Hitting the Target? HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis from 2012 to 2020 in the OPERA Cohort.

Preventing HIV transmission is a crucial step in ending the HIV epidemic. Safe and effective pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been available in the United States since 2012. We set out to determine if persons at greatest risk for HIV acquisition were receiving HIV PrEP. HIV-negative individuals from the Observational Pharmaco-Epidemiology Research & Analysis (OPERA) cohort who were prescribed daily PrEP were contrasted with newly diagnosed HIV persons without PrEP use between July 16, 2012 and October 31, 2020 to determine if the PrEP prescriptions reached the populations who were seroconverting. Poisson regression was used to estimate incidence rates of seroconversion to HIV among PrEP initiators, as well as new diagnoses of sexually transmitted infections among both the PrEP group and the newly HIV+ group. Out of the 14,598 PrEP users and 3558 persons newly diagnosed with HIV in OPERA, demographics varied widely. Older individuals, those of non-Black race, men, nonintravenous (IV) drug users, and those with commercial insurance were proportionally overrepresented among those prescribed PrEP compared to persons newly diagnosed with HIV during the same time period. Over 82% of new HIV+ individuals received care in the southern United States compared to only 45% of PrEP users. Seroconversion to HIV among PrEP users was generally uncommon, although more frequent among those who identified as Black individuals, especially in the 13-25 years old age range. In conclusion, providers need innovative programs to better identify, educate, and link those at greatest risk of HIV acquisition, especially young people, women, Black individuals, and IV drug users, to PrEP.

To dose-adjust or not to dose-adjust: lamivudine dose in kidney impairment.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of adverse diagnoses and laboratory abnormalities associated with a 300 or 150 mg daily dose of lamivudine (3TC) initiated by people with HIV (PWH) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between at least 30 and 49 ml/min per 1.73 m2 or less. DESIGN: Longitudinal study based on electronic health records of 539 PWH with eGFR between at least 30 and 49 ml/min per 1.73 m2 or less from the Observational Pharmaco-Epidemiology Research and Analysis (OPERA) cohort. METHODS: Common unintended effects of 3TC were evaluated as composite outcomes. We estimated the incidence (univariate Poisson regression) and association between dose and incident composite outcomes (multivariate Poisson regression) among PWH without the relevant diagnoses or laboratory abnormalities at 3TC initiation. RESULTS: PWH initiating 150 mg 3TC had higher HIV RNA, lower eGFR, and more comorbidities than those initiating 300 mg 3TC. The prevalence of relevant diagnoses and laboratory abnormalities was similar in both groups. The most common lab abnormality was low hemoglobin. There was no statistically significant difference in incident adverse diagnoses/severe lab abnormalities with 300 mg versus 150 mg [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59--3.92). However, a statistically significant association was observed when gastrointestinal symptoms/moderate lab abnormalities were included in the outcome (IRR: 3.07, 95% CI 1.12--8.40). CONCLUSION: As 3TC is a well tolerated drug with a wide therapeutic window, dose adjustment may be unnecessary among PWH with eGFR between at least 30 and 49 ml/min per 1.73 m2 or less. Clinical judgement is key when weighing the risks and benefits of 3TC dose adjustment for PWH experiencing gastrointestinal symptoms or moderate lab abnormalities.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Through 1 Year of an HIV-1 Clinical Trial Evaluating Long-Acting Cabotegravir and Rilpivirine Administered Every 4 or 8 Weeks (ATLAS-2M).

BACKGROUND: Advances in HIV-1 therapeutics have led to the development of a range of daily oral treatment regimens, which share similar high efficacy rates. Consequently, more emphasis is being placed upon the individual's experience of treatment and impact on quality of life. The first long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy for HIV-1 (long-acting cabotegravir + rilpivirine [CAB + RPV LA]) may address challenges associated with oral treatment for HIV-1, such as stigma, pill burden/fatigue, drug-food interactions, and adherence. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected in an HIV-1 clinical trial (ATLAS-2M; NCT03299049) comparing participants' experience with two dosing regimens (every 4 weeks [Q4W] vs. every 8 weeks [Q8W]) of CAB + RPV LA are presented herein. METHODS: PRO endpoints evaluated through 48 weeks of therapy included treatment satisfaction (HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire [HIVTSQ]), treatment acceptance ("General Acceptance" domain of the Chronic Treatment Acceptance [ACCEPT®] questionnaire), acceptability of injections (Perception of Injection [PIN] questionnaire), treatment preference (questionnaire), and reasons for switching to/continuing long-acting therapy (exploratory endpoint; questionnaire). Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive CAB + RPV LA Q8W or Q4W. Results were stratified by prior CAB + RPV exposure in either preplanned or post hoc analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 1045 participants were randomized to the Q8W (n = 522) and Q4W (n = 523) regimens; 37% (n = 391/1045) had previously received CAB + RPV in ATLAS. For participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure, large increases from baseline were reported in treatment satisfaction in both long-acting arms (HIVTSQ status version), with Q8W dosing statistically significantly favored at Weeks 24 (p = 0.036) and 48 (p = 0.004). Additionally, improvements from baseline were also observed in the "General Acceptance" domain of the ACCEPT questionnaire in both long-acting arms for participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure; however, no statistically significant difference was observed between arms at either timepoint (Week 24, p = 0.379; Week 48, p = 0.525). Significant improvements (p < 0.001) in the "Acceptance of Injection Site Reactions" domain of the PIN questionnaire were observed from Week 8 to Weeks 24 and 48 in both arms for participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure. Participants with prior CAB + RPV exposure reported high treatment satisfaction (mean [HIVTSQ status version]: Q8W 62.2/66.0; Q4W 62.0/66.0), treatment acceptance (mean: Q8W 89.3/100; Q4W 91.2/100), and acceptance of injection site reactions (mean [5 = not at all acceptable; 1 = totally acceptable]: Q8W 1.72; Q4W 1.59) at baseline/Week 8 that were maintained over time. Participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure who received Q8W dosing preferred this regimen over oral CAB + RPV (98%, n = 300/306). Among those with prior Q4W exposure, 94% (n = 179/191) preferred Q8W dosing versus Q4W dosing (3%, n = 6/191) or oral CAB + RPV (2%, n = 4/191). CONCLUSIONS: Both long-acting regimens provided high treatment satisfaction and acceptance, irrespective of prior CAB + RPV exposure, with most participants preferring Q8W dosing over both the Q4W regimen and their previous daily oral regimen. The PRO data collected at Week 48 support the therapeutic potential of CAB + RPV LA. FUNDING: ViiV Healthcare and Janssen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ATLAS-2M: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03299049, registered October 2, 2017.

Developments in HIV-1 treatment have resulted in effective daily oral medications. However, life-long pill taking can come with several challenges. These include having a daily reminder of living with HIV-1. Treatment satisfaction is important to consider when evaluating a new medicine. This is because it can affect people's quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate people's experiences with the first long-acting injectable medicine for HIV-1. The medicine is called cabotegravir + rilpivirine long-acting (CAB + RPV LA). Over approximately 1 year, this study measured people's satisfaction and experiences while receiving injections of CAB + RPV LA. Injections were given either every 4 weeks or every 8 weeks. The study included people who had never had CAB + RPV LA, as well as people who were already receiving CAB + RPV LA. For people new to CAB + RPV LA, their satisfaction increased compared with their previous medication. They also had improvements in their experiences of injection site reactions throughout the study. For people who were already receiving CAB + RPV LA, their high satisfaction with this treatment and tolerability of injection site reactions were maintained over time. Overall, improvements were similar between people receiving injections every 4 weeks and people receiving injections every 8 weeks. People with experience of both injection schedules tended to prefer to receive injections every 8 weeks. These results show that CAB + RPV LA can provide quality-of-life improvements for people who have HIV-1.

Safety and efficacy of a 36-week induction regimen of abacavir/lamivudine and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in HIV-infected patients.

PURPOSE: The ARIES study assessed safety and efficacy of an induction regimen with atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/RTV) + abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) followed by simplification to ATV + ABC/3TC in antiretroviral-naïve patients. METHODS: This report includes a noncomparative analysis of all patients in the induction phase of the ARIES study through 36 weeks (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00440947). This open-label study included 515 antiretroviral-naïve,HLA-B*5701-negative patients receiving a regimen of ATV 300 mg, RTV 100 mg, and ABC/3TC 600 mg/300 mg once daily for 36 weeks; eligible patients were then randomized to continue the induction regimen or simplify to ATV 400 mg plus ABC/3TC 600 mg/300 mg once daily. RESULTS: Eighty-six percent (442/515) of patients completed 36 weeks on study; 80% (410/515) achieved HIV RNA <50 copies/mL (84% and 76% of patients with baseline HIV RNA of < and >or=100,000 copies/mL achieved this endpoint). Virologic failure (VF) was uncommon (3%); treatment-emergent major protease inhibitor and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mutations were detected in 0/15 and 4/15 patients, respectively. Median CD4+ cell increase was 171 (range, -176 to 718) cells/mm(3). Hyperbilirubinemia (13%), diarrhea (4%), nausea (2%), and rash (2%) were the most frequent drug-related Grade 2-4 adverse events. Few adverse events (3%) led to study discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Induction with ATV/RTV + ABC/3TC once daily provides an efficacious and well-tolerated regimen for the initial treatment of HIV.

A randomized, controlled trial of initial anti-retroviral therapy with abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine twice-daily compared to atazanavir once-daily with lamivudine/zidovudine twice-daily in HIV-infected patients over 48 weeks (ESS100327, the ACTION Study).

BACKGROUND: Traditional first line regimens containing a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor may not be suitable for a subset of antiretroviral-naïve patients such as those with certain co-morbidities, women of child-bearing potential, and intolerability to components of standard first line therapy. This study was conducted to determine if alternate treatment options may meet the needs of both general and special patient populations. The ACTION study was a randomized, open-label, multicenter, 48-week trial that compared the safety and efficacy of a triple nucleoside regimen versus a protease inhibitor plus a dual nucleoside regimen in HIV-1 treatment-naïve subjects. RESULTS: 279 HIV-infected subjects with HIV-1 RNA (VL) >5000 but < 200,000 copies/mL (c/mL) and CD4+ count >/= 100 cells/mm3 were randomized (1:1) to receive abacavir sulfate/lamivudine/zidovudine (ABC/3TC/ZDV) twice-daily or atazanavir (ATV) once-daily plus lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/ZDV) twice-daily. Protocol-defined virologic failure was based on multiple failure criteria.Non-inferiority of ABC/3TC/ZDV to ATV+3TC/ZDV was established with 62% vs. 59% of subjects achieving a VL < 50 c/mL at week 48, [ITT(E), M/S = F, 95% CI: -5.9, 10.4]. Similar results were observed in the 230 (82%) subjects with baseline VL<100,000 c/mL (ABC/3TC/ZDV vs. ATV+3TC/ZDV), 66% vs. 59%; 95% CI: -5.6, 19.5. However, ABC/3TC/ZDV did not meet the non-inferiority criterion compared to ATV+3TC/ZDV in the 48 subjects with baseline VL >/= 100,000 c/mL, 39% vs. 60%; 95% CI: -49.2, 7.4, respectively. Protocol-defined virologic failure was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: ABC/3TC/ZDV demonstrated comparable virologic efficacy to ATV+3TC/ZDV in this population over 48 weeks. In those with a baseline VL >/= 100,000 c/mL, subjects in the ATV+3TC/ZDV showed better virologic efficacy. Both regimens offer benefits in select therapy-naïve subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [Clinical Trials Identifier, NCT00082394].

Abacavir Hypersensitivity Reaction Reporting Rates During a Decade of HLA-B*5701 Screening as a Risk-Mitigation Measure.

INTRODUCTION: Human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B*5701 screening identifies patients at increased risk for abacavir (ABC) hypersensitivity reaction (HSR). Screening was adopted in GlaxoSmithKline and ViiV Healthcare clinical trials in 2007 and human immunodeficiency virus treatment guidelines in 2008. Company meta-analyses of trials pre-HLA-B*5701 screening reported HSR rates of 4-8%. We analyzed the effectiveness of HLA-B*5701 screening on reducing HSR rates using clinical trial, Observational Pharmaco-Epidemiology Research & Analysis (OPERA) cohort, and spontaneous reporting data. METHODS: A meta-analysis examined 12 trials in 3063 HLA-B*5701-negative patients receiving an ABC-containing regimen from April 9, 2007, to September 22, 2015. Potential cases were identified using prespecified Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) preferred terms (drug hypersensitivity, hypersensitivity, anaphylactic reaction, anaphylaxis) and adjudicated against a Company ABC HSR case definition. Investigator-diagnosed cases were identified and rates were calculated. In the OPERA cohort, 9619 patients initiating their first ABC-containing regimen from January 1, 1999, to January 1, 2016, were identified. Patients were observed from regimen start until the earliest-following censoring event: ABC discontinuation, loss to follow-up, death, or study end (July 31, 2016). OPERA physicians evaluated events against OPERA definitions for definite/probable cases of ABC HSR; rates were calculated pre- and post-2008. The Company case definition was used to identify spontaneously reported cases for four marketed ABC-containing products; reporting rates were calculated using estimated exposure from sales data, through December 31, 2016. RESULTS: Suspected ABC HSR rates were 1.3% or less in the meta-analysis. In the OPERA cohort, the rate was 0.4% among patients initiating ABC post-2008 versus 1.3% pre-2008 (p<0.0001). Spontaneous reporting rates were low post-2008 (54 to 22 cases per 100,000 patient-years exposure [PYE]) versus pre-2008 (618 to 55 cases per 100,000 PYE). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically suspected ABC HSR rates were 1.3% or less in HLA-B*5701-negative patients. Recognizing their limitations, data from the OPERA cohort and spontaneous reporting indicate that HLA-B*5701 screening has reduced reporting rates of suspected HSR in clinical practice. Where screening for HLA-B*5701 is standard care, patients should be confirmed negative for this allele before starting ABC treatment.

Changes over time in creatinine clearance and comparison of emergent adverse events for HIV-positive adults receiving standard doses (300 mg/day) of lamivudine-containing antiretroviral therapy with baseline creatinine clearance of 30-49 vs ≥50 mL/min.

A retrospective analysis of the randomized controlled DART (Development of AntiRetroviral Therapy in Africa; ISRCTN13968779) trial in HIV-1-positive adults initiating antiretroviral therapy with co-formulated zidovudine/lamivudine plus either tenofovir, abacavir, or nevirapine was conducted to evaluate the safety of initiating standard lamivudine dosing in patients with impaired creatinine clearance (CLcr). Safety data collected through 96 weeks were analyzed after stratification by baseline CLcr (estimated using Cockcroft-Gault) of 30-49 mL/min (n = 168) versus ≥50 mL/min (n = 3,132) and treatment regimen. The Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (for hematological, hepatic and gastrointestinal events), maximal toxicities for liver enzymes, serum creatinine and bilirubin and maximum treatment-emergent hematology toxicities were comparable for groups with baseline CLcr 30-49 versus CLcr≥50 mL/min. No new risks or trends were identified from this dataset. Substantial and similar increases in the mean creatinine clearance (>25 mL/min) were observed from baseline though Week 96 among participants who entered the trial with CLcr 30-49 mL/min, while no increase or smaller median changes in creatinine clearance (<7 mL/min) were observed for participants who entered the trial with CLcr ≥50 mL/min. Substantial increases (> 150 cells/ mm3) in mean CD4+ cells counts from baseline to Week 96 were also observed for participants who entered the trial with CLcr 30-49 mL/min and those with baseline CLcr ≥50 mL/min. Though these results are descriptive, they suggest that HIV-positive patients with CLcr of 30-49 mL/min would have similar AE risks in comparison to patients with CLcr ≥50 mL/min when initiating antiretroviral therapy delivering doses of 300 mg of lamivudine daily through 96 weeks of treatment. Overall improvements in CLcr were observed for patients with baseline CLcr 30-49 mL/min.

Short-term safety and tolerability of a once-daily fixed-dose abacavir-lamivudine combination versus twice-daily dosing of abacavir and lamivudine as separate components: findings from the ALOHA study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term (12 wks) safety and tolerability of a once-daily, fixed-dose abacavir-lamivudine combination versus twice-daily dosing of the separate components, both with background antiretroviral therapy. DESIGN: Phase IIIB, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study. SETTING: One hundred forty-six human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinics. PATIENTS: Six hundred eighty antiretroviral therapy-naïve patients with HIV type 1 RNA greater than 1000 copies/ml at baseline. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 manner to receive either abacavir 600 mg-lamivudine 300 mg once/day or abacavir 300 mg twice/day and lamivudine 150 mg twice/day. Subjects were stratified based on choice of third or fourth antiretroviral drug (nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor [NRTI], NNRTI, or protease inhibitor), assigned before randomization. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was occurrence of grades 2-4 adverse events and serious adverse events; abacavir hypersensitivity reactions were considered serious adverse events. Baseline characteristics were similar between the once-daily (455 patients) and twice-daily (225 patients) groups. The rates of all grades 2-4 adverse events were similar: once-daily 33% (150 patients), twice-daily 31% (69). A slightly larger proportion of patients in the twice-daily group experienced drug-related grades 2-4 adverse events: once-daily 10% (47), twice-daily 16% (36). Rates of all serious adverse events (once-daily 11% [49], twice-daily 10% [22]) and drug-related serious adverse events (once-daily 5% [21], twice-daily 8% [17]) were similar. The rate of suspected abacavir hypersensitivity reaction was 5.3% (once-daily 4.4% [20], twice-daily 7.1% [16]), with a higher rate for the NNRTI stratum of the twice-daily group (8.6% [10]) than in any other stratum (once-daily, NNRTI 4.3% [10]; twice-daily, protease inhibitor 5.6% [6]; once-daily, protease inhibitor 4.6% [10]). CONCLUSION: In the short-term, the rates of adverse events in the once-daily and twice-daily groups appeared to be similar. The rate of suspected abacavir hypersensitivity reaction in the once-daily group was lower than the rate in the twice-daily group.

Changes from 2000 to 2009 in the Prevalence of HIV-1 Containing Drug Resistance-Associated Mutations from Antiretroviral Therapy-Naive, HIV-1-Infected Patients in the United States.

Pre-existing HIV drug resistance can jeopardize first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) success. Changes in the prevalence of drug resistance-associated mutations (DRMs) were analyzed from HIV-infected, ART-naive, U.S. individuals seeking ART treatment from 2000 to 2009. HIV DRM data from 3,829 ART-naive subjects were analyzed by year of sample collection using International Antiviral Society-United States (IAS-USA) and World Health Organization (WHO) "surveillance" DRM definitions; minor IAS-USA-defined DRMs were excluded. IAS-USA DRM prevalence between 2000 and 2009 was 14%, beginning with 8% in 2000 and 13% in 2009. The greatest incidence was observed in 2007 (17%). Overall, IAS-USA-defined non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) DRMs were 9.5%; nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI): 4%, and major protease inhibitor (PI): 3%. The most frequently detected IAS-USA-defined DRMs by class were NNRTI: K103N/S (4%), NRTI: M41L (1.5%), and PI: L90M (1%). Overall, WHO-defined DRM prevalence was 13% (5% in 2000; 13% in 2009). By class, NNRTI prevalence was 6%, NRTI: 6%, and PI: 3.2%. The most frequent WHO-defined DRMs were NRTI: codon T215 (3.0%), NNRTI: K103N/S (4%), and PI: L90 (1%). WHO-defined NNRTI DRMs declined significantly (p = .0412) from 2007 to 2009. The overall prevalence of HIV-1 containing major IAS-USA or WHO-defined DRMs to ≥2 or ≥3 classes was 2% and <1%, respectively. The prevalence of HIV-1 with WHO-defined dual- or triple-class resistance significantly declined (p = .0461) from 2008 (4%) to 2009 (<1%). In this U.S. cohort, the prevalence of HIV-1 DRMs increased from 2000 onward, peaked between 2005 and 2007, and then declined between 2008 and 2009; the detection of WHO-defined dual- or triple-class DRM similarly decreased from 2008 to 2009.

Response by gender of HIV-1-infected subjects treated with abacavir/lamivudine plus atazanavir, with or without ritonavir, for 144 weeks.

PURPOSE: The 144-week results of the open-label, multicenter Atazanavir/Ritonavir Induction with Epzicom Study (ARIES) were stratified by gender to compare treatment responses. METHODS: A total of 369 HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naïve subjects receiving once-daily abacavir/lamivudine + atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) whose HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies/mL by week 30 were randomized 1:1 at week 36 to maintain or discontinue ritonavir for 108 subsequent weeks. Between- and within-treatment gender-related efficacy and safety differences were analyzed. RESULTS: Subjects were 85% male; 64% white; and had a mean age of 39 years, baseline median HIV-1 RNA of 114,815 copies/mL, and median CD4+ cell count of 198 cells/mm3. Gender (ATV [n=189]: 29 females/160 males; ATV/r [n=180]: 25 females/155 males) and most other demographics were similar between groups; more females than males were black (65% vs 25%) and fewer females had baseline HIV-1 RNA ≥100,000 copies/mL (41% vs 58%). At week 144, no significant differences between genders were observed in proportion maintaining HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (ATV, 79% vs 77%; ATV/r, 60% vs 75%) or <400 copies/mL (ATV, 83% vs 84%; ATV/r, 68% vs 82%) (intent-to-treat-exposed: time to loss of virologic response analysis); median CD4+ change from baseline (ATV, +365 vs +300 cells/mm3; ATV/r, +344 vs +301 cells/mm3); proportion with treatment-related grade 2-4 adverse events (baseline to week 144: ATV, 41% vs 31%; ATV/r, 36% vs 43%; weeks 36 to 144: ATV, 14% vs 13%; ATV/r, 24% vs 23%); or proportion developing fasting lipid changes. Female and male virologic failure rates (ATV, 0 vs 5; ATV/r, 2 vs 4) and proportions completing the study were similar during the extension phase. Primary withdrawal reasons were loss to follow-up and pregnancy for females and loss to follow-up and other for males. CONCLUSION: Over 144 weeks, no significant gender differences were observed in efficacy, safety, or fasting lipid changes with abacavir/lamivudine +ATV or abacavir/lamivudine +ATV/r.

Pilot study of once-daily simplification therapy with abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine and efavirenz for treatment of HIV-1 infection.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to explore the efficacy and safety of the abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine fixed-dose combination tablet administered as two tablets once daily (qd) versus one tablet twice daily (bid) in combination with efavirenz (EFV). METHOD: This was a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study with a 24-week treatment period in 7 outpatient HIV clinics in the United States. Patients currently receiving an initial regimen of abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine bid plus EFV qd for at least 6 months with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL for at least 3 months and a screening CD4+ cell count > or = 200 cells/mm3 were eligible. Thirty-six patients enrolled, and 35 (97%) completed the study. Participants were randomized to switch to 2 tablets of abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine qd plus EFV qd (QD arm) or continue current treatment (BID arm) for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Efficacy, safety, and adherence were evaluated. Median baseline CD4+ cell count was 521 cells/mm3. At week 24, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was achieved for 94% of participants in the QD arm and 89% in the BID arm by intent-to-treat, missing = failure analysis (95% confidence interval for difference: > or = 0.29 to +0.18, p = 1.000). At week 24, median CD4+ cell count change from baseline was +26 cells/mm3 for the QD arm and -39 cells/mm3 for BID arm. One patient randomized to the QD arm met virologic failure criteria (confirmed HIV-1 RNA >120 copies/mL) at week 20 and viral genotype showed M184V. After failure, this patient revealed he never took EFV throughout the entire study after randomization, effectively receiving only abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine qd alone. Median adherence was slightly higher in the QD arm, although both arms had broad variability and overlapping interquartile ranges. Adverse events were infrequent and occurred with similar frequency between arms; treatment-related adverse events were abdominal pain, flatulence, nausea, headache, and abnormal dreams (1 patient [3%] for each adverse event). No patients withdrew due to adverse events, and no abacavir hypersensitivity reactions were reported. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study of patients suppressed on abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine bid plus EFV, 94% of participants switching to abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine qd plus EFV maintained virologic suppression, compared to 89% of participants continuing abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine bid plus EFV.

Pharmacodynamic effects of zidovudine 600 mg once/day versus 300 mg twice/day in therapy-naïve patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the virologic activity of zidovudine monotherapy administered as 600 mg once/day versus 300 mg twice/day. DESIGN: Phase II, randomized (1:1), open-label study. SETTING: Thirteen medical centers in the United States. PATIENTS: Thirty-two antiretroviral-naive patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). INTERVENTION: Patients were administered either zidovudine 600 mg every 24 hours (16 patients) or 300 mg every 12 hours (16 patients) for 13 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration was measured daily. Study end points were between-group differences in change from baseline of log10-transformed HIV-1 RNA and in rates of viral load decline measured by the slope of HIV-1 RNA over time. At baseline, mean HIV-1 RNA was similar in the once/day and twice/day groups (4.33 and 4.40 log10 copies/ml, respectively). At day 14, a trend toward lower mean reduction in HIV-1 RNA from baseline was observed in the once/day group (-0.585, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.728 to -0.442 log10 copies/ml) compared with the twice/day group (-0.849, 95% CI -1.067 to -0.630 log10 copies/ml, p=0.056). Viral load reduction also tended to be slower in the once/day group, as indicated by the smaller slope of viral load decline in the once/day group than in the twice/day group during days 1-14 (-0.045 vs -0.065 logic copies/ml/day, p=0.065). Both zidovudine regimens were similarly well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Zidovudine 600 mg once/day has antiviral activity, although less pronounced and more slowly achieved than that seen with zidovudine 300 mg twice/day. No differences were observed between the two treatment groups with respect to safety profile or tolerability

Twice-daily Trizivir versus Combivir-abacavir in antiretroviral-experienced adults with human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection: a formulation-switch trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To establish the clinical equivalence (noninferiority) of one tablet containing abacavir 300 mg-lamivudine 150 mg-zidovudine 300 mg (Trizivir) versus a tablet containing lamivudine 150 mg-zidovudine 300 mg (Combivir) given with one abacavir (ABC) 300-mg tablet, administered twice/day, in antiretroviral-experienced, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1-infected patients. DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, formulation-switch study. SETTING: Twenty seven outpatient treatment sites. PATIENTS: Adults with HIV-1 RNA levels of 400 copies/ml or less and CD4+ cell counts above 200 cells/mm3 who had been treated for 16 weeks or more with highly active antiretroviral therapy containing Combivir-ABC. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1 to Trizivir (97 patients) or Combivir-ABC (98) for 24 weeks. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary study end point was the proportion of patients who maintained less than a 0.5-log10 increase from baseline in HIV-1 RNA (virologic success) through week 24. Clinical equivalence of the treatments was established if the 95.1% lower confidence limit (LCL) for the difference in proportion of virologic success with Trizivir minus Combivir-ABC was -0.12 or greater. Trizivir was clinically equivalent to Combivir-ABC. The intent-to-treat observed analysis at week 24 with Trizivir and Combivir-ABC showed a similar rate of virologic success (83% [80/97] and 77% [75/98], respectively, 95.1% LCL -0.026), of patients with HIV-1 RNA levels of 400 or fewer copies/ml (99% [82/83] and 93% [77/83], respectively, 95.1% LCL 0.021), and of patients with HIV-1 RNA levels of fewer than 50 copies/ml (89% [74/83] and 77% [64/83], respectively, 95.1% LCL 0.038). The intent-to-treat missing = failure analysis showed comparable results. Changes in CD4+ cell count from baseline, overall mean self-reported adherence (Trizivir 97%, Combivir-ABC 92%), and adverse events did not differ significantly between treatments. No ABC-related hypersensitivity reactions occurred. CONCLUSION: Trizivir was clinically equivalent to Combivir-ABC and may be substituted for the latter to simplify treatment and reduce pill burden.

HIV-1 transmission patterns in antiretroviral therapy-naïve, HIV-infected North Americans based on phylogenetic analysis by population level and ultra-deep DNA sequencing.

Factors that contribute to the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), especially drug-resistant HIV-1 variants remain a significant public health concern. In-depth phylogenetic analyses of viral sequences obtained in the screening phase from antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected patients seeking enrollment in EPZ108859, a large open-label study in the USA, Canada and Puerto Rico (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00440947) were examined for insights into the roles of drug resistance and epidemiological factors that could impact disease dissemination. Viral transmission clusters (VTCs) were initially predicted from a phylogenetic analysis of population level HIV-1 pol sequences obtained from 690 antiretroviral-naïve subjects in 2007. Subsequently, the predicted VTCs were tested for robustness by ultra deep sequencing (UDS) using pyrosequencing technology and further phylogenetic analyses. The demographic characteristics of clustered and non-clustered subjects were then compared. From 690 subjects, 69 were assigned to 1 of 30 VTCs, each containing 2 to 5 subjects. Race composition of VTCs were significantly more likely to be white (72% vs. 60%; p = 0.04). VTCs had fewer reverse transcriptase and major PI resistance mutations (9% vs. 24%; p = 0.002) than non-clustered sequences. Both men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) (68% vs. 48%; p = 0.001) and Canadians (29% vs. 14%; p = 0.03) were significantly more frequent in VTCs than non-clustered sequences. Of the 515 subjects who initiated antiretroviral therapy, 33 experienced confirmed virologic failure through 144 weeks while only 3/33 were from VTCs. Fewer VTCs subjects (as compared to those with non-clustering virus) had HIV-1 with resistance-associated mutations or experienced virologic failure during the course of the study. Our analysis shows specific geographical and drug resistance trends that correlate well with transmission clusters defined by HIV sequences of similarity. Furthermore, our study demonstrates the utility of molecular and epidemiological analysis of VTCs for identifying population-specific risks associated with HIV-1 transmission and developing effective local healthcare strategies.

Simplification to abacavir/lamivudine + atazanavir maintains viral suppression and improves bone and renal biomarkers in ASSURE, a randomized, open label, non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: Simplification of antiretroviral therapy in patients with suppressed viremia may minimize long-term adverse effects. The study's primary objective was to determine whether abacavir/lamivudine + atazanavir (ABC/3TC+ATV) was virologically non-inferior to tenofovir/emtricitabine + atazanavir/ritonavir (TDF/FTC+ATV/r) over 24 weeks in a population of virologically suppressed, HIV-1 infected patients. DESIGN: This open-label, multicenter, non-inferiority study enrolled antiretroviral experienced, HIV-infected adults currently receiving a regimen of TDF/FTC+ATV/r for ≥ 6 months with no history of virologic failure and whose HIV-1 RNA had been ≤ 75 copies/mL on 2 consecutive measurements including screening. Patients were randomized 1 ∶ 2 to continue current treatment or simplify to ABC/3TC+ATV. METHODS: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with HIV-RNA<50 copies/mL at Week 24 by the Time to Loss of Virologic Response (TLOVR) algorithm. Secondary endpoints included alternative measures of efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and fasting lipids. Exploratory endpoints included inflammatory, coagulation, bone, and renal biomarkers. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, ABC/3TC+ATV (n = 199) was non-inferior to TDF/FTC+ATV/r (n = 97) by both the primary analysis (87% in both groups) and all secondary efficacy analyses. Rates of grade 2-4 AEs were similar between the two groups (40% vs 37%, respectively), but an excess of hyperbilirubinemia made the rate of grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities higher in the TDF/FTC+ATV/r group (30%) compared with the ABC/3TC+ATV group (13%). Lipid levels were stable except for HDL cholesterol, which increased significantly in the ABC/3TC+ATV group. Bone and renal biomarkers improved significantly between baseline and Week 24 in patients taking ABC/3TC+ATV, and the difference between groups was significant at Week 24. No significant changes occurred in any inflammatory or coagulation biomarker within or between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: After 24 weeks, simplification to ABC/3TC+ATV from TDF/FTC+ATV/r maintained viral suppression was well-tolerated, and led to improvements in bone and renal biomarkers and HDL cholesterol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01102972 GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Study Register #113734.