Dataset Information

Raltegravir 1200 mg once daily as maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected adults: QDISS open-label trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Raltegravir (RAL) has favorable tolerability and safety profile, with few and manageable drug interactions. The use of RAL 1200 mg once daily (qd) for first-line therapy is well established. We assessed efficacy and safety of RAL 1200 mg qd, as part of triple combined antiretroviral therapy (cART), for maintenance strategy.

Methods

The QDISS trial (NCT03195452) was a 48-week multicenter, single-arm, open-label study designed to evaluate the ability of 2 NRTIs + RAL 1200 mg qd to maintain virological suppression in HIV-1 infected subjects on a stable cART with 2 NRTIs and a third agent for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at week 24, by the FDA snapshot algorithm.

Results

Of 100 participants 91% maintained viral suppression (95% CI: 83.6-95.8) at week 24 and 89% (81.2-94.4) at week 48. At week 24, there was one virological failure, without emergence of resistance-associated mutation and 10 participants had discontinued, 4 because of adverse events (AEs). Over 48 weeks, 7 AEs of grade 3-4 were reported, one possibly study-drug related (spontaneous abortion). BMI remained stable regardless of previous therapy or baseline BMI category. Over 48 weeks, total cholesterol (p = 0.023) and LDL-cholesterol (p = 0.009) decreased, lifestyle and ease subscale significantly improved (p = 0.04). The quality of life and Patients Reported Outcomes (PROs) also improved at W12 (p = 0.007).

Conclusion

RAL 1200 mg qd as part of a maintenance triple therapy showed a high efficacy in virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected subjects, with good safety profile and improved lipid profile and patient reported outcomes.

Trial registration

Clinical trials.gov NCT03195452 and EudraCT 2016-003702-13.

SUBMITTER: Hall N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8760827 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Because studies showed similar viral suppression with lower raltegravir doses and because Asians usually have high antiretroviral concentrations, we explored low-dose raltegravir therapy in Thais. Nineteen adults on raltegravir at 400 mg twice daily (BID) with HIV RNA loads of <50 copies/ml were randomized to receive 400 mg once daily (QD) or 800 mg QD for 2 weeks, followed by the other dosing for 2 weeks. Intensive pharmacokinetic analyses were performed, and HIV RNA was monitored. Two patients were excluded from the 400-mg QD analysis due to inevaluable pharmacokinetic data. The mean patient weight was 58 kg. Mean pharmacokinetic values were as follows: for raltegravir given at 400 mg BID, the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC????) was 15.6 mg/liter-h and the minimum plasma drug concentration (C(trough)) was 0.22 mg/liter; for raltegravir given at 800 mg QD, the AUC???? was 33.6 mg/liter-h and the C(trough) was 0.06 mg/liter; and for raltegravir given at 400 mg QD, the AUC???? was 18.6 mg/liter-h and the C(trough) was 0.08 mg/liter. The HIV RNA load was <50 copies/ml at each dose level. Compared to the adjusted AUC???? for Westerners on raltegravir at 400 mg BID, Thais on the same dose had double the AUC???? and those on raltegravir at 400 mg QD had a similar AUC????. More patients had a C(trough) of <0.021 mg/liter on raltegravir at 400 mg QD (9/17 patients) than on raltegravir at 800 mg QD (1/19 patients) or 400 mg BID (0/19 patients). Seventeen patients used raltegravir at 400 mg QD for a median of 35 weeks; two had confirmed HIV RNA loads between 50 and 200 copies/ml, and both had low C(trough) values. Low-dose raltegravir could be a cost-saving option for maintenance therapy in Asians or persons with low body weight. However, raltegravir at 400 mg QD was associated with a low C(trough) and with a risk for HIV viremia. Raltegravir at 200 or 300 mg BID should be studied, but new raltegravir formulations will be needed.

Project description:Administering raltegravir once daily would make adherence to antiretroviral treatment easier, especially if the concomitant drugs are also administered once daily. We report our experience on the use of raltegravir, both once- and twice-daily.Retrospective review of HIV-infected patients on treatment with raltegravir 800?mg once or 400?mg twice a day plus 2 analogs. Patients were classified as group A (subjects switched to raltegravir due to adverse events on a previous regimen or drug-drug interactions) and group B (subjects who restarted antiretroviral treatment after a previous drop-out). The primary clinical endpoint was the percentage of subjects with virological suppression after 96 weeks. Treatment's effectiveness (noncomplete/missing equals failure) was also evaluated. Pharmacokinetic study was performed in unselected patients. Plasma raltegravir concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry.A total of 133 patients were included in the study (74 and 59 on raltegravir once- and twice-daily). There were only 4 virological failures in the entire cohort during the follow-up. Thus, the Kaplan-Meier estimation of efficacy by on-treatment analysis was 96.3% (CI95, 92.8-99.8) at week 96, independently of the dosing regimen and of the raltegravir concentrations. Similar exposures to raltegravir based on AUC0-?, but higher Cmax and significantly lower Ctrough were observed when raltegravir was given once daily compared with 400?mg twice daily. In fact, 14 out of 56 Ctrough concentrations (25%) from patients taking raltegravir once daily were below the IC95 of wild-type HIV-1 clinical isolates while only 2 samples from patients receiving 400?mg twice a day were below this value, although no relationship between Ctrough and efficacy was found. The main limitations of the study are that the raltegravir dosing regimen was not randomized and more than 50% of the patients were virologically suppressed at baseline.Regimens comprising raltegravir 800?mg once daily plus 2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors can be an efficacious and safe option, particularly in virologically suppressed patients and those with a viral load <100,000?copies/mL.

Project description:BackgroundWhether the non-inferior efficacy and safety results of switching virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected patients from nevirapine immediate-release (NVP-IR) to NVP extended-release (NVP-XR) demonstrated in the TRANxITION study conducted in Europe and North America are also applicable to virologically suppressed HIV-infected Taiwanese patients remains unknown. We evaluated the comparative safety and efficacy of continuing NVP-IR versus switching to NVP-XR in virologically suppressed HIV-infected Taiwanese adults receiving combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) regimens.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study at Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital from April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2015. Eighty-four virologically suppressed HIV-infected adults receiving NVP-IR cART were split into two groups: those continuing with NVP-IR (n = 49) and those being switched to NVP-XR (n = 35). Demographic characteristics, clinical variables, and laboratory findings were compared. Therapeutic drug monitoring of steady-state plasma NVP concentrations and genotype analysis of CYP2B6 516 were also performed in 22 participants. The primary endpoint was continued virological suppression at the end of the study. Secondary endpoints were time to loss of virological response and adverse events.ResultsDuring a mean follow-up of 18.4 months, the NVP-XR group demonstrated similar success at maintaining virological response compared with the NVP-IR group (82.9% vs. 85.7%; P = 0.72). Cox regression analysis indicated that there were no significant differences between NVP regimens for time to loss of virological response (hazard ratio: 0.940; P = 0.754). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in adverse events between these two groups. In the 22 participants, there was a non-significantly lower level of steady-state plasma NVP concentrations in the NVP-XR group than in NVP-IR recipients (5145.0 ng/mL vs. 6775.0 ng/mL; P = 0.267). The prevalence of CYP2B6 516 GT was 86.6%, and there was no significant difference in the distribution of CYP2B6 516 between these two groups.ConclusionsWe found that switching from NVP-IR to NVP-XR appeared to have similar safety and efficacy compared with continuing NVP-IR among virologically suppressed, HIV-infected Taiwanese patients. Our finding of higher Ctrough levels in both groups compared with other studies conducted in Caucasian populations and the high prevalence of CYP2B6 516 GT requires further investigation in a larger Taiwanese cohort.