Dataset Information

Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the effects of sex and initial antiretroviral regimen on decay of HIV-RNA and virologic outcome.We conducted a viral dynamics substudy of A5142, a trial comparing lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir with efavirenz (LPV/EFV) versus LPV and two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) (LPV) versus EFV and two NRTI (EFV) in antiretroviral (ARV)-naive individuals. HIV-RNA was measured at days 2, 10, and 14 in the substudy and at weeks 1, 4, and 8 in A5142 participants. Two-phase viral decay was estimated in the substudy with biexponential mixed-effects modeling and compared using Wilcoxon tests. Week 1 HIV-RNA change was assessed as a predictor of virologic failure (HIV-RNA above 50 or 200? copies/ml) at weeks 24-96 using logistic regression.Sixty-eight individuals were enrolled in the substudy (median HIV-RNA 4.9 log(10) ?copies/ml). Median rates of phase 1 viral decay by treatment were 0.61(EFV/LPV), 0.53(LPV), and 0.63(EFV) per day. Phase 1 decay was significantly faster for EFV than LPV (P?=?0.023); other comparisons were not significant (P?>?0.11). Viral decay did not differ by sex (P?=?0.10). Week 1 HIV-RNA change, calculated in 571 participants of A5142, was greater for the EFV (median -1.47 log(10) ?copies/ml) than either the LPV/EFV or LPV groups (-1.21 and -1.16 log(10?) copies/ml, respectively; P?

SUBMITTER: Haubrich RH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3572727 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection.

Haubrich Richard H RH Riddler Sharon A SA Ribaudo Heather H Direnzo Gregory G Klingman Karin L KL Garren Kevin W KW Butcher David L DL Rooney James F JF Havlir Diane V DV Mellors John W JW

AIDS (London, England) 20111101 18

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the effects of sex and initial antiretroviral regimen on decay of HIV-RNA and virologic outcome.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a viral dynamics substudy of A5142, a trial comparing lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir with efavirenz (LPV/EFV) versus LPV and two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) (LPV) versus EFV and two NRTI (EFV) in antiretroviral (ARV)-naive individuals. HIV-RNA was measured at days 2, 10, and 14 in the substudy and at weeks 1, 4, and 8 in A514 ...[more]

PMID: 21941167

Similar Datasets

Project description:Nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy is not suitable for all treatment-naive HIV-infected persons.To evaluate 3 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing initial antiretroviral regimens to show equivalence for virologic efficacy and tolerability.A phase 3, open-label study randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio with follow-up for at least 96 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00811954).57 sites in the United States and Puerto Rico.Treatment-naive persons aged 18 years or older with HIV-1 RNA levels greater than 1000 copies/mL without resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors or protease inhibitors.Atazanavir, 300 mg/d, with ritonavir, 100 mg/d; raltegravir, 400 mg twice daily; or darunavir, 800 mg/d, with ritonavir, 100 mg/d, plus combination emtricitabine, 200 mg/d, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, 300 mg/d.Virologic failure, defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA level greater than 1000 copies/mL at or after 16 weeks and before 24 weeks or greater than 200 copies/mL at or after 24 weeks, and tolerability failure, defined as discontinuation of atazanavir, raltegravir, or darunavir for toxicity. A secondary end point was a combination of virologic efficacy and tolerability.Among 1809 participants, all pairwise comparisons of incidence of virologic failure over 96 weeks showed equivalence within a margin of equivalence defined as -10% to 10%. Raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir were equivalent for tolerability, whereas ritonavir-boosted atazanavir resulted in a 12.7% and 9.2% higher incidence of tolerability discontinuation than raltegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir, respectively, primarily because of hyperbilirubinemia. For combined virologic efficacy and tolerability, ritonavir-boosted darunavir was superior to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir, and raltegravir was superior to both protease inhibitors. Antiretroviral resistance at the time of virologic failure was rare but more frequent with raltegravir.The trial was open-label, and ritonavir was not provided.Over 2 years, all 3 regimens attained high and equivalent rates of virologic control. Tolerability of regimens containing raltegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir was superior to that of the ritonavir-boosted atazanavir regimen.National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Project description:Recent reports have described the effect of mutations in the connection and RNase H domains of reverse transcriptase (RT) on nucleoside and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI and NNRTI, respectively) resistance in the presence of thymidine analog resistance mutations (TAMs) and NNRTI mutations (J. H. Brehm, D. Koontz, J. D. Meteer, V. Pathak, N. Sluis-Cremer, and J. W. Mellors, J. Virol. 81:7852-7859, 2007; K. A. Delviks-Frankenberry, G. N. Nikolenko, R. Barr, and V. K. Pathak, J. Virol. 81:6837-6845, 2007; G. N. Nikolenko, K. A. Delviks-Frankenberry, S. Palmer, F. Maldarelli, M. J. Fivash, Jr., J. M. Coffin, and V. K. Pathak, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104:317-322, 2007; G. N. Nikolenko, S. Palmer, F. Maldarelli, J. W. Mellors, J. M. Coffin, and V. K. Pathak, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 102:2093-2098, 2005; and S. H. Yap, C. W. Sheen, J. Fahey, M. Zanin, D. Tyssen, V. D. Lima, B. Wynhoven, M. Kuiper, N. Sluis-Cremer, P. R. Harrigan, and G. Tachedjian, PLoS Med. 4:e335, 2007). In the present study, novel mutations in the connection domain of RT (T369I/V), first identified in patient-derived viruses, were characterized, and their effects on NNRTI and NNRTI susceptibility were determined. Furthermore, the effect of N348I on NRTI and NNRTI resistance was confirmed. HIV-1 with either N348I or T369I/V demonstrated reduced susceptibility to nevirapine (NVP), efavirenz (EFV), delaviridine (DLV), and zidovudine (ZDV) compared to wild-type HIV-1. However, HIV-1 with T369I and N348I demonstrated 10- to 60-fold resistance to these same drugs. In clinical samples, these two connection domain RT mutations were predominantly observed in viruses containing TAMs and NNRTI mutations and did not alter the susceptible-resistant classifications of these samples. Introduction of T369I, N348I, or T369I/N348I also reduced replication capacity (RC). These observations suggest that it may be of scientific interest to test these mutations against new NNRTI candidates.

Project description:In the SAILING study, dolutegravir demonstrated superior virologic efficacy compared with raltegravir in treatment-experienced, integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-naive patients with HIV-1 who harbored resistance to ≥2 antiretroviral drug classes. Significantly fewer dolutegravir-treated patients demonstrated virologic failure with treatment-emergent resistance than raltegravir-treated patients through 48 weeks. Investigator-selected background therapy (ISBT) included at least one fully active agent, selected on the basis of resistance analysis. Genotypic and phenotypic resistance testing were performed on baseline and time-of-failure samples from patients with protocol-defined virologic failure (PDVF). A post hoc analysis of SAILING (N = 715; 354 dolutegravir, 361 raltegravir) assessed efficacy in subpopulations defined by ISBT activity, resistance profiles, and treatment history. When ISBT contained only nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), PDVF occurred in 0% (0/32) of dolutegravir-treated patients and 21.9% (7/32) of raltegravir-treated patients (p = .005). In patients harboring M184 V whose ISBT contained lamivudine or emtricitabine plus a second NRTI, 0% (0/13) of dolutegravir- and 33.3% (4/12) of raltegravir-treated patients (p = .026) experienced PDVF. Among patients receiving protease inhibitor (PI)-containing ISBT, 6.0% (18/300) of dolutegravir-treated patients versus 11.8% (36/305) of raltegravir-treated patients (p = .012) experienced PDVF. Darunavir/ritonavir was part of ISBT in 130 dolutegravir-treated patients and 145 raltegravir-treated patients; 6 (4.6%) and 12 (8.3%), respectively, experienced PDVF (difference -3.7%; 95% confidence interval: -10.1% to 2.5%; p = .256). There was no or less virologic failure in treatment-experienced, INSTI-naive subjects receiving dolutegravir versus raltegravir, even when the ISBT was suboptimal or NRTI resistance was present at baseline. These findings are not explained by the use of PI/ritonavir-containing ISBT.

Dataset Information

Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection.

Publications

Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets