Dataset Information

Real-life study of dual therapy based on dolutegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir in HIV-1-infected treatment-experienced patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dual therapy based on dolutegravir and ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DTG/DRV/r) is a combination of well-known drugs with a high genetic barrier to HIV resistance.

Method

A retrospective analysis of all HIV-1 infected treatment-experienced patients who switched to DTG/DRV/r from May 2014 till March 2017 in 4 Polish centres-results of a 48-week treatment.

Results

The study group consisted of 59 men and 17 women. Median baseline parameters were: age- 42.7 years, CD4 cells count- 560.5 cells/?l, CD4 cells nadir- 150 cells/?l, number of prior antiretroviral regimens- 3. The introduction of dual therapy was primarily due to virologic failure (30 patients), adverse events on previous regimens (17 patients) and therapy simplification (27 patients). At week 48 the treatment was continued in 70/76 of patients and the median CD4 cells count increased from 560.5 to 641.0 cells/?l. The therapy was discontinued in six patients (1 -virologic failure, 1 -decrease of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), 1 -myalgia, 3 -lost to follow-up). At week 48 six patients had detectable viremia, but only in one patient viremia was higher than 200 copies/ml. At week 48 the level of serum total cholesterol of the investigated subjects was statistically significantly higher than at the moment of dual therapy introduction (185.8 mg/dl vs. 174.8 mg/dl- p<0.05). However, in patients previously not treated with TDF, there were no changes in lipid parameters during therapy. Proteinuria was observed in 13.2% of patients before the switch to dual therapy and in 7.1% of patients at week 48.

Conclusions

The investigated dual therapy was effective and safe. The observed increase in lipid parameters only concerned the patients who had used a TDF-based regimen prior to analysed dual treatment.

SUBMITTER: Jablonowska E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6336297 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesLong-term use of antiretroviral therapy (ART) to treat HIV infection has been associated with dyslipidemia and metabolic and cardiovascular complications. Available options for patients at risk of cardiovascular disease include antiretroviral drugs with improved lipid profiles. Dolutegravir is one of a new generation of HIV integrase inhibitors recently incorporated into the US Department of Health and Human Services, German, Spanish, and Italian HIV treatment guidelines as a preferred first-line third agent in combination with dual nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone therapies. To understand the lipid profile of dolutegravir in the context of combination ART, we analyzed the lipid outcomes at 48 weeks in ART-naive participants in four phase IIb-IIIb clinical trials.MethodsVariables included in this analysis were total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (HDL-C), TC/HDL ratio, and triglycerides at baseline and week 48.ResultsIn a comparative analysis, dolutegravir demonstrated a broadly neutral effect on lipids versus efavirenz or ritonavir-boosted darunavir; in both comparisons, patients taking dolutegravir exhibited smaller increases in TC, LDL-C, and triglyceride levels. In comparison with raltegravir, dolutegravir exhibited a similar lipid profile, including small increases in TC, LDL-C, and triglyceride levels for both agents. In the pooled dolutegravir analysis, minimal increases in LDL-C and triglycerides were observed but mean values at 48 weeks remained below National Cholesterol Education Program target levels. HDL-C levels increased at 48 weeks, and the mean TC/HDL-C ratio was 0.6 at 48 weeks; these values are associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease.ConclusionsTogether, these data show that dolutegravir has a safer lipid profile in combination ART and provides an important treatment option for older patients who may have other risk factors for metabolic syndrome or cardiovascular disease.

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:ObjectiveVIOLIN (TMC125IFD3002; NCT01422330) evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of etravirine with antiretrovirals other than darunavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected patients.MethodsIn a 48-week, phase IV, single-arm, multicenter study, patients on prior antiretroviral therapy (⩾8 weeks) who needed to change regimen for virologic failure (viral load ⩾ 500 copies/mL) or simplification/adverse events (viral load < 50 copies/mL) received etravirine 200 mg bid with ⩾1 other active antiretroviral, excluding darunavir/ritonavir or only nucleoside/tide reverse transcriptase inhibitors.ResultsOf 211 treated patients, 73% (n = 155) had baseline viral load ⩾ 50 copies/mL and 27% (n = 56) had baseline viral load < 50 copies/mL. Protease inhibitors were the most common background antiretrovirals (83%). Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event (17%). Serious adverse events (no rash) occurred in 5% of patients; none were etravirine related. Overall, median etravirine AUC12h was 5390 ng h/mL and C0h was 353 ng/mL (N = 199). Week 48 virologic response rates (viral load < 50 copies/mL; Food and Drug Administration Snapshot algorithm) were 48% (74/155) (baseline viral load ⩾ 50 copies/mL) and 75% (42/56) (baseline viral load < 50 copies/mL). Virologic failure rates were 42% and 13%, respectively. The most frequently emerging etravirine resistance-associated mutations in virologic failures were Y181C, E138A, and M230L. Virologic response rates for patients with baseline viral load ⩾ 50 copies/mL were 38% (30/79) (non-adherent) versus 64% (44/69) (adherent subset).ConclusionEtravirine 200 mg bid in combination with antiretrovirals other than darunavir/ritonavir was well tolerated in the studied treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected population. The overall etravirine safety and tolerability profile and pharmacokinetics (specifically in those patients who were adherent) were similar to those previously observed for etravirine in HIV-1-infected adults. The relatively high level of non-adherence, also observed in the pharmacokinetic assessments, negatively impacted virologic response, especially in patients with ⩾50 copies/mL at baseline.