Switching to Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide in Adults With HIV and M184V/I Mutation

Ignacio Perez-Valero, Josep M Llibre, Antonella Castagna, Federico Pulido, Jean-Michel Molina, Stefan Esser, Nicolas Margot, Yongwu Shao, Lauren Temme, David Piontkowsky, Ian R McNicholl, Richard Haubrich, Ignacio Perez-Valero, Josep M Llibre, Antonella Castagna, Federico Pulido, Jean-Michel Molina, Stefan Esser, Nicolas Margot, Yongwu Shao, Lauren Temme, David Piontkowsky, Ian R McNicholl, Richard Haubrich

Abstract

Background: The ability of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) to maintain virologic suppression in participants with M184V and/or M184I resistance mutations from historical genotypic reports when switching from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based or abacavir (ABC)-based regimen was investigated.

Setting: Phase IIIb, 48-week, open-label, single-arm, multicenter, clinical trial (NCT02616029).

Methods: Virologically suppressed adults with HIV and documented M184V/I on historical genotypic records switched to E/C/F/TAF from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based or ABC-based regimen. The primary end point was HIV-1 RNA of <50 copies per milliliter at week 12 using pure virologic response (PVR). Secondary end points included HIV-1 RNA of <50 copies per milliliter at weeks 24/48 (PVR) and at weeks 12, 24, and 48 (Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), and change in CD4+ count at weeks 12, 24, and 48.

Results: M184V alone was reported in 82.8% of 64 participants; 9.4% and 7.8% had M184I and M184V/I, respectively, and 43.8% had archived M184V/I (baseline DNA). All (62/62 with available data, 100%, 95% confidence interval 94.2% to 100%) participants maintained PVR at weeks 12, 24, and 48. By Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, one participant had HIV-1 RNA of ≥50 copies per milliliter (week 12); confirmatory HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies per milliliter. No significant changes were observed in CD4+ cell count. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported by 10 (15.6%) participants. Six (9.4%) and 5 (7.8%) participants had grade 3-4 AEs or serious AEs, respectively (none drug related).

Conclusions: The presence of the resistance mutations M184V/I did not jeopardize the efficacy of switching to E/C/F/TAF in virologically suppressed adults. High rates of virologic suppression were maintained throughout 48 weeks of therapy and treatment was well tolerated.

Conflict of interest statement

Data sharing: Gilead Sciences shares anonymized individual patient data upon request or as required by law or regulation with qualified external researchers based on submitted curriculum vitae and reflecting non conflict of interest. The request proposal must also include a statistician. Approval of such requests is at Gilead Science's discretion and is dependent on the nature of the request, the merit of the research proposed, the availability of the data, and the intended use of the data. Data requests should be sent to datarequest@gilead.com.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Virologic outcomes at weeks 12, 24, and 48 (full analysis set). Proportion of participants achieving PVR (A), and proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA

References

    1. Martin-Odoom A, Brown CA, Odoom JK, et al. Emergence of HIV-1 drug resistance mutations in mothers on treatment with a history of prophylaxis in Ghana. Virol J. 2018;15:143.
    1. Kiertiburanakul S, Chaiwarith R, Sirivichayakul S, et al. Comparisons of primary HIV-1 drug resistance between recent and chronic HIV-1 infection within a sub-regional cohort of Asian patients. PLoS One. 2013;8:e62057.
    1. Wang Z, Zhang M, Zhang R, et al. Diversity of HIV-1 genotypes and high prevalence of pretreatment drug resistance in newly diagnosed HIV-infected patients in Shanghai, China. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19:313.
    1. Hamers RL, Sigaloff KCE, Wensing AM, et al. Patterns of HIV-1 drug resistance after first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure in 6 sub-Saharan African countries: implications for second-line ART strategies. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:1660–1669.
    1. Sivamalar S, Dinesha TR, Gomathi S, et al. Accumulation of HIV-1 drug resistance mutations after first-line immunological failure to evaluate the options of recycling NRTI drugs in second-line treatment: a study from South India. AIDS Res Hum Retrov. 2017;33:271–274.
    1. Duani H, Aleixo AW, Tupinambás U. Trends and predictors of HIV-1 acquired drug resistance in Minas Gerais, Brazil: 2002–2012. Braz J Infect Dis. 2017;21:148–154.
    1. Li H, Zhong M, Guo W, et al. Prevalence and mutation patterns of HIV drug resistance from 2010 to 2011 among ART-failure individuals in the Yunnan Province, China. PLoS One. 2013;8:e72630.
    1. Bulteel N, Bansi-Matharu L, Churchill D, et al. The emergence of drug resistant HIV variants at virological failure of HAART combinations containing efavirenz, tenofovir and lamivudine or emtricitabine within the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort. J Infect. 2014;68:77–84.
    1. Miller MD, Margot N, Lu B, et al. Genotypic and phenotypic predictors of the magnitude of response to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate treatment in antiretroviral-experienced patients. J Infect Dis. 2004;189:837–846.
    1. Lopes CAF, Soares MA, Falci DR, et al. The evolving genotypic profile of HIV-1 mutations related to antiretroviral treatment in the north region of Brazil. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:738528.
    1. Melikian GL, Rhee SY, Taylor J, et al. Standardized comparison of the relative impacts of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase (RT) mutations on nucleoside RT inhibitor susceptibility. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:2305–2313.
    1. Olearo F, Nguyen H, Bonnet F, et al. Impact of the M184V/I mutation on the efficacy of abacavir/lamivudine/dolutegravir therapy in HIV treatment-experienced patients. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6:ofz330.
    1. Miller V, Stark T, Loeliger AE, et al. The impact of the M184V substitution in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase on treatment response. HIV Med. 2002;3:135–145.
    1. Wolf K, Walter H, Beerenwinkel N, et al. Tenofovir resistance and resensitization. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:3478.
    1. Ray AS, Fordyce MW, Hitchcock MJM. Tenofovir alafenamide: a novel prodrug of tenofovir for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus. Antivir Res. 2016;125:63–70.
    1. Ruane PJ, DeJesus E, Berger D, et al. Antiviral activity, safety, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of tenofovir alafenamide as 10-day monotherapy in HIV-1-positive adults. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;63:449–455.
    1. Margot NA, Johnson A, Miller MD, et al. Characterization of HIV-1 resistance to tenofovir alafenamide in vitro. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:5917.
    1. Margot N, Ram R, Abram M, et al. Antiviral activity of tenofovir alafenamide against HIV-1 with thymidine analog mutations and M184V. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020;64:e02557-19.
    1. Mills A, Arribas JR, Andrade-Villanueva J, et al. Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in antiretroviral regimens for virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, active-controlled, multicentre, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16:43–52.
    1. Hodder S, Squires K, Kityo C, et al. Brief report: efficacy and safety of switching to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) in virologically suppressed women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2018;78:209–213.
    1. Rizzardini G, Gori A, Miralles C, et al. Randomized study evaluating the efficacy and safety of switching from an an abacavir/lamivudine-based regimen to an elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide single-tablet regimen. AIDS. 2019;33:1583–1593.
    1. Squires K, Kityo C, Hodder S, et al. Integrase inhibitor versus protease inhibitor based regimen for HIV-1 infected women (WAVES): a randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study. Lancet HIV. 2016;3:e410–e420.
    1. NCT02616029: study to evaluate switching to elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) fixed dose combination (FDC) in virologically-suppressed HIV-1 infected adults harboring the archived isolated NRTI resistance mutation M184V/M184I. Available at: . Accessed January 4, 2021.
    1. US Food and Drug Administration. Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Infection: Developing Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment Guidance for Industry. 2015. Available at: . Accessed January 4, 2021.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1993 revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1992;41:1–19.
    1. Margot N, Ram R, McNicholl I, et al. Differential detection of M184V/I between plasma historical HIV genotypes and HIV proviral DNA from PBMCs. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020;75:2249–2252.
    1. Deeks SG, Hoh R, Neilands TB, et al. Interruption of treatment with individual therapeutic drug classes in adults with multidrug‐resistant HIV‐1 infection. J Infect Dis. 2005;192:1537–1544.
    1. Ciaffi L, Koulla-Shiro S, Sawadogo AB, et al. Boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy versus boosted protease inhibitor plus lamivudine dual therapy as second-line maintenance treatment for HIV-1-infected patients in sub-Saharan Africa (ANRS12 286/MOBIDIP): a multicentre, randomised, parallel, open-label, superiority trial. Lancet HIV. 2017;4:e384–e392.
    1. Gagliardini R, Ciccullo A, Borghetti A, et al. Impact of the M184V resistance mutation on virological efficacy and durability of lamivudine-based dual antiretroviral regimens as maintenance therapy in individuals with suppressed HIV-1 RNA: a cohort study. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018;5:ofy113.
    1. Sax PE, Wohl D, Yin MT, et al. Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, coformulated with elvitegravir, cobicistat, and emtricitabine, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: two randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trials. Lancet. 2015;385:2606–2615.
    1. Gupta SK, Post FA, Arribas JR, et al. Renal safety of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a pooled analysis of 26 clinical trials. AIDS. 2019;33:1455–1465.
    1. Miller MD. K65R, TAMs and tenofovir. AIDS Rev. 2004;6:22–33.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa