Dataset Information

Switching to Efavirenz Versus Remaining on Ritonavir-boosted Lopinavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-infected Children Exposed to Nevirapine: Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT: Background:We previously demonstrated the noninferiority of switching to efavirenz (EFV) versus remaining on ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) for virologic control in children infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and exposed to nevirapine (NVP) for prevention of mother-to-child transmission. Here we assess outcomes up to 4 years post-randomization. Methods:From 2010-2013, 298 NVP-exposed HIV-infected children ?3 years of age were randomized to switch to EFV or remain on LPV/r in Johannesburg, South Africa (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01146873). After trial completion, participants were invited to enroll into observational follow-up. We compared HIV RNA levels, CD4 counts and percentages, lipids, and growth across groups through four years post-randomization. Results:HIV RNA levels 51-1000 copies/mL were less frequently observed in the EFV group than the LPV/r group (odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-0.88, P = .004), as was HIV RNA >1000 copies/mL (OR 0.52 95% CI: 0.28-0.98, P = .04). The probability of confirmed HIV RNA >1000 copies/mL by 48 months was 0.07 and 0.12 in the EFV and LPV/r groups, respectively (P = .21). Children randomized to EFV had a reduced risk of elevated total cholesterol (OR 0.45 95% CI: 0.27-0.75, P = .002) and a reduced risk of abnormal triglycerides (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.62, P < .001). Conclusions:Our results indicate that the benefits of switching virologically suppressed NVP-exposed HIV-infected children ?3 years of age from LPV/r to EFV are sustained long-term. This approach has several advantages, including improved palatability, reduced metabolic toxicity, simplified cotreatment for tuberculosis, and preservation of second line options. Clinical Trials Registration:NCT01146873.

SUBMITTER: Murnane PM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5849095 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Switching to Efavirenz Versus Remaining on Ritonavir-boosted Lopinavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-infected Children Exposed to Nevirapine: Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial.

Murnane Pamela M PM Strehlau Renate R Shiau Stephanie S Patel Faeezah F Mbete Ndileke N Hunt Gillian G Abrams Elaine J EJ Coovadia Ashraf A Kuhn Louise L

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20170801 3

<h4>Background</h4>We previously demonstrated the noninferiority of switching to efavirenz (EFV) versus remaining on ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) for virologic control in children infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and exposed to nevirapine (NVP) for prevention of mother-to-child transmission. Here we assess outcomes up to 4 years post-randomization.<h4>Methods</h4>From 2010-2013, 298 NVP-exposed HIV-infected children ≥3 years of age were randomized to switch to EFV or remai ...[more]

PMID: 28419200

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy is the predominant (and often the only) regimen available for children in resource-limited settings. Nevirapine resistance after exposure to the drug for prevention of maternal-to-child human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission is common, a problem that has led to the recommendation of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in such settings. Regardless of whether there has been prior exposure to nevirapine, the performance of nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in young children has not been rigorously established.MethodsIn a randomized trial conducted in six African countries and India, we compared the initiation of HIV treatment with zidovudine, lamivudine, and either nevirapine or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in HIV-infected children 2 to 36 months of age who had no prior exposure to nevirapine. The primary end point was virologic failure or discontinuation of treatment by study week 24.ResultsA total of 288 children were enrolled; the median percentage of CD4+ T cells was 15%, and the median plasma HIV type 1 (HIV-1) RNA level was 5.7 log(10) copies per milliliter. The percentage of children who reached the primary end point was significantly higher in the nevirapine group than in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (40.8% vs. 19.3%; P<0.001). Among the nevirapine-treated children with virologic failure for whom data on resistance were available, more than half (19 of 32) had resistance at the time of virologic failure. In addition, the time to a protocol-defined toxicity end point was shorter in the nevirapine group (P=0.04), as was the time to death (P=0.06).ConclusionsOutcomes were superior with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir among young children with no prior exposure to nevirapine. Factors that may have contributed to the suboptimal results with nevirapine include elevated viral load at baseline, selection for nevirapine resistance, background regimen of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, and the standard ramp-up dosing strategy. The results of this trial present policymakers with difficult choices. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; P1060 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00307151.).

Project description:While studies of HIV-infected adults on antiretroviral treatment (ART) report no sex differences in immune recovery and virologic response but more ART-associated complications in women, sex differences in disease progression and response to ART among children have not been well assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate for sex differences in response to ART in South African HIV-infected children who were randomized to continue ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-based ART or switch to nevirapine-based ART.ART outcomes in HIV-infected boys and girls in Johannesburg, South Africa from 2005-2010 were compared. Children initiated ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-based ART before 24 months of age and were randomized to remain on LPV/r or switch to nevirapine-based ART after achieving viral suppression. Children were followed for 76 weeks post-randomization and then long-term follow up continued for a minimum of 99 weeks and maximum of 245 weeks after randomization. Viral load, CD4 count, lipids, anthropometrics, drug concentrations, and adherence were measured at regular intervals. Outcomes were compared between sexes within treatment strata.A total of 323 children (median age 8.8 months, IQR 5.1-13.5), including 168 boys and 155 girls, initiated LPV/r-based ART and 195 children were randomized. No sex differences in risk of virological failure (confirmed viral load >1000 copies/mL) by 156 weeks post-randomization were observed within either treatment group. Girls switched to nevirapine had more robust CD4 count improvement relative to boys in this group through 112 weeks post-randomization. In addition, girls remaining on LPV/r had higher plasma concentrations of ritonavir than boys during post-randomization visits. After a mean of 3.4 years post-randomization, girls remaining on LPV/r also had a higher total cholesterol:HDL ratio and lower mean HDL than boys on LPV/r.Sex differences are noted in treated HIV-infected children even at a young age, and appear to depend on treatment regimen. Future studies are warranted to determine biological mechanisms and clinical significance of these differences.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00117728.

Project description:Background:Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) use in pregnancy has been associated with hormonal dysregulation. We performed a secondary retrospective analysis of longitudinal progesterone and estradiol levels in pregnancy using specimens from the Protease Inhibitors to Reduce Malaria Morbidity in HIV-infected Pregnant Women study, which randomized Ugandan human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected ART-naive women to initiate either lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based or efavirenz (EFV)-based cART. Methods:Three hundred twenty-six women (160 randomized to the EFV arm and 166 women to the LPV/r arm) with at least 1 plasma sample collected during pregnancy were included. Enrollment samples collected prior to cART initiation were used as a cART-naive comparator group. Hormone levels were quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results:Estradiol levels were differentially affected by the 2 cART regimens. Exposure to LPV/r was associated with an increase in estradiol (P < .0001), whereas exposure to EFV was associated with a decrease in estradiol (P < .0001), relative to the cART-naive gestationally matched comparator group. Lower estradiol levels correlated with small for gestational age (SGA) (P = .0019) and low birth weight (P = .019) in the EFV arm, while higher estradiol levels correlated with SGA in the LPV/r arm (P = .027). Although progesterone levels were similar between treatment arms, we observed an association between SGA and lower progesterone in the LPV/r arm (P = .04). No association was observed between hormone levels and preterm birth in either arm. Levels of progesterone and estradiol were lower in cases of stillbirth, and levels of both hormones declined immediately prior to stillbirth in 5 of 8 cases. Conclusions:Combination ART regimens differentially affect estradiol levels in pregnancy, a hormone critical to the maintenance of a healthy pregnancy. Identifying cART regimens that minimize perinatal HIV transmission without contributing to hormonal dysregulation represents an urgent public health priority. Clinical Trials Registration:NCT00993031.

Project description:There is conflicting evidence of the impact of commonly used antiretroviral therapies (ARTs) on the pharmacokinetics of lumefantrine and the safety profile of artemether-lumefantrine. We compared the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 h to 14 days (AUC0-14 days) of lumefantrine and the safety profile of artemether-lumefantrine in malaria-negative human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adults in two steps. In step 1, a half-dose adult course of artemether-lumefantrine was administered as a safety check in four groups (n = 6/group): (i) antiretroviral naive, (ii) nevirapine-based ART, (iii) efavirenz-based ART, and (iv) ritonavir-boosted lopinavir-based ART. In step 2, a standard-dose adult course of artemether-lumefantrine was administered to a different cohort in three groups (n = 10 to 15/group): (i) antiretroviral naive, (ii) efavirenz-based ART, and (iii) ritonavir-boosted lopinavir-based ART. In step 1, lumefantrine's AUC0-14 days was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.82) lower in the efavirenz-based ART group than in the ART-naive group and was 2.4 (95% CI, 1.58 to 3.62) and 2.9(95% CI, 1.75 to 4.72) times higher in the nevirapine- and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir groups, respectively. In step 2, lumefantrine's AUC0-14 days was 1.9 (95% CI, 1.26 to 3.00) times higher in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group and not significantly different between the efavirenz- and ART-naive groups (0.99 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.57]). Frequent cases of hematological abnormalities (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia) were observed in the nevirapine group in step 1, leading to a recommendation from the data and safety monitoring board not to include a nevirapine group in step 2. Artemether-lumefantrine was well tolerated in the other groups. The therapeutic implications of these findings need to be evaluated among HIV-malaria-coinfected adults. (This study has been registered at the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry under numbers PACTR2010030001871293 and PACTR2010030001971409.).

Project description:BACKGROUND:The 2016 World Health Organization guidelines recommend all children <3 years start antiretroviral therapy (ART) on protease inhibitor-based regimens. But lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) syrup has many challenges in low-income countries, including limited availability, requires refrigeration, interactions with anti-tuberculous drugs, twice-daily dosing, poor palatability in young children, and higher cost than non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) drugs. Successfully initiating LPV/r-based ART in HIV-infected children aged <2 years raises operational challenges that could be simplified by switching to a protease inhibitor-sparing therapy based on efavirenz (EFV), although, to date, EFV is not recommended in children <3 years. METHODS:The MONOD ANRS 12026 study is a phase 3 non-inferiority open-label randomised clinical trial conducted in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, and Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (ClinicalTrial.gov registry: NCT01127204). HIV-1-infected children who were tuberculosis-free and treated before the age of 2 years with 12-15 months of suppressive twice-daily LPV/r-based ART (HIV-1 RNA viral load (VL) <500 copies/mL, confirmed) were randomised to two arms: once-daily combination of abacavir (ABC)?+?lamivudine (3TC)?+?EFV (referred to as EFV) versus continuation of the twice-daily combination zidovudine (?ZDV) or? ABC?+?3TC?+?LPV/r (referred to as LPV). The primary endpoint was the difference in the proportion of children with virological suppression by 12 months post-randomisation between arms (14% non-inferiority bound, Chi-squared test). RESULTS:Between May 2011 and January 2013, 156 children (median age 13.7 months) were initiated on ART. After 12-15 months on ART, 106 (68%) were randomised to one of the two treatment arms (54 LPV, 52 EFV); 97 (91%) were aged <3 years. At 12 months post-randomisation, 46 children (85.2%) from LPV versus 43 (82.7%) from EFV showed virological suppression (defined as a VL <500 copies/mL; difference, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -11.5 to 16.5), whereas seven (13%) in LPV and seven (13.5%) in EFV were classed as having virological failure (secondary outcome, defined as a VL ?1000 copies/mL; difference, 0.5%; 95% CI, -13.4 to 12.4). No significant differences in adverse events were observed, with two adverse events in LPV (3.7%) versus four (7.7%) in EFV (p?=?0.43). On genotyping, 13 out of 14 children with virological failure (six out of seven EFV, seven out of seven LPV) had a drug-resistance mutation: nine (five out of six EFV, four out of seven LPV) had one or more major NNRTI-resistance mutations whereas none had an LPV/r-resistance mutation. CONCLUSIONS:At the VL threshold of 500 copies/mL, we could not conclusively demonstrate the non-inferiority of EFV on viral suppression compared to LPV because of low statistical power. However, non-inferiority was confirmed for a VL threshold of <1000 copies/mL. Resistance analyses highlighted a high frequency of NNRTI-resistance mutations. A switch to an EFV-based regimen as a simplification strategy around the age of 3 years needs to be closely monitored. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrial.gov registry n° NCT01127204 , 19 May 2010.

Dataset Information

Switching to Efavirenz Versus Remaining on Ritonavir-boosted Lopinavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-infected Children Exposed to Nevirapine: Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial.

Publications

Switching to Efavirenz Versus Remaining on Ritonavir-boosted Lopinavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-infected Children Exposed to Nevirapine: Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets