A Randomized, Open-Label Trial to Evaluate Switching to Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Plus Darunavir in Treatment-Experienced HIV-1-Infected Adults

Gregory D Huhn, Pablo Tebas, Joel Gallant, Timothy Wilkin, Andrew Cheng, Mingjin Yan, Lijie Zhong, Christian Callebaut, Joseph M Custodio, Marshall W Fordyce, Moupali Das, Scott McCallister, Gregory D Huhn, Pablo Tebas, Joel Gallant, Timothy Wilkin, Andrew Cheng, Mingjin Yan, Lijie Zhong, Christian Callebaut, Joseph M Custodio, Marshall W Fordyce, Moupali Das, Scott McCallister

Abstract

Background: HIV-infected, treatment-experienced adults with a history of prior resistance and regimen failure can be virologically suppressed but may require multitablet regimens associated with lower adherence and potential resistance development.

Methods: We enrolled HIV-infected, virologically suppressed adults with 2-class to 3-class drug resistance and at least 2 prior regimen failures into this phase 3, open-label, randomized study. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter at week 24 [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm].

Results: For 135 participants [elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) plus darunavir (DRV), n = 89; baseline regimen, n = 46], most of whom were taking a median of 5 tablets/d, simplification to E/C/F/TAF plus DRV was noninferior to continuation of baseline regimens at week 24 (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter: 96.6% vs. 91.3%, difference 5.3%, 95.001% CI: -3.4% to 17.4%). E/C/F/TAF plus DRV met prespecified criteria for noninferiority and superiority at week 48 for the same outcome. E/C/F/TAF plus DRV was well tolerated and had an improved renal safety profile compared with baseline regimens, with statistically significant differences between groups in quantitative total proteinuria and markers of proximal tubular proteinuria. Compared with baseline regimens, participants who switched to E/C/F/TAF plus DRV reported higher mean treatment satisfaction scale total scores and fewer days with missed doses.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that regimen simplification from a 5-tablet regimen to the 2-tablet, once-daily combination of E/C/F/TAF plus DRV has durable maintenance of virologic suppression and improvements in specific markers of renal safety. Such a strategy may lead to greater adherence and improved quality of life.

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Consort flow diagram.
FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.
Pharmacokinetic substudy results (N = 15).
FIGURE 3.
FIGURE 3.
Virologic outcome at weeks 24 and 48. At week 48, all virologic failure was due to plasma HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL. One participant in the baseline regimens group had confirmed viral rebound (HIV-1 RNA > 400 copies/mL). The remaining participants had subsequent plasma HIV-1 RNA

FIGURE 4.

Renal safety: urine protein-to-creatinine ratios.…

FIGURE 4.

Renal safety: urine protein-to-creatinine ratios. Differences between treatment groups in changes in quantitative…

FIGURE 4.
Renal safety: urine protein-to-creatinine ratios. Differences between treatment groups in changes in quantitative total proteinuria (UPCR) and in specific markers of proximal tubular proteinuria (RBP:Cr and β-2M:Cr) were statistically significant, favoring E/C/F/TAF + DRV.

FIGURE 5.

Overall HIV treatment satisfaction (HIV-TSQ).…

FIGURE 5.

Overall HIV treatment satisfaction (HIV-TSQ). a ANCOVA HIV-TSQ at baseline 0–6 response range,…

FIGURE 5.
Overall HIV treatment satisfaction (HIV-TSQ). aANCOVA HIV-TSQ at baseline 0–6 response range, n = 10 questions, higher score = better satisfaction in recent weeks; HIV-TSQ (change) post-baseline: −3–3 response range, higher–better satisfaction. bFrom ANCOVA model (treatment as fixed effect; baseline total HIV-TSQ score as covariate).
FIGURE 4.
FIGURE 4.
Renal safety: urine protein-to-creatinine ratios. Differences between treatment groups in changes in quantitative total proteinuria (UPCR) and in specific markers of proximal tubular proteinuria (RBP:Cr and β-2M:Cr) were statistically significant, favoring E/C/F/TAF + DRV.
FIGURE 5.
FIGURE 5.
Overall HIV treatment satisfaction (HIV-TSQ). aANCOVA HIV-TSQ at baseline 0–6 response range, n = 10 questions, higher score = better satisfaction in recent weeks; HIV-TSQ (change) post-baseline: −3–3 response range, higher–better satisfaction. bFrom ANCOVA model (treatment as fixed effect; baseline total HIV-TSQ score as covariate).

References

    1. Palella FJ, Jr, Baker RK, Moorman AC, et al. Mortality in the highly active antiretroviral therapy era: changing causes of death and disease in the HIV outpatient study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:27–34.
    1. Lee LM, Karon JM, Selik R, et al. Survival after AIDS diagnosis in adolescents and adults during the treatment era, United States 1984–1997. JAMA. 2001;285:1308–1315.
    1. Valdez H, Chowdhry TK, Asaad R, et al. Changing spectrum of mortality due to human immunodeficiency virus: analysis of 260 deaths during 1995–1999. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:1487–1493.
    1. Lucas G. Antiretroviral adherence, drug resistance, viral fitness and HIV disease progression: a tangled web is woven. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55:413–416.
    1. Taiwo B, Murphy RL, Katlama C. Novel antiretroviral combinations in treatment-experienced patients with HIV infection. Drugs. 2010;70:1629–1642.
    1. Imaz A, Falcó V, Ribera E. Antiretroviral salvage therapy for multiclass drug-resistant HIV-1-infected patients: from clinical trials to daily clinical practice. AIDS Rev. 2011;13:180–193.
    1. Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected adults and Adolescents: Department of Health and Human Services; Washington, DC: 2016. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS). Guidelines Version 8.0 (English); 2015. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. Ricard F, Wong A, Lebouché B, et al. Low darunavir concentrations in patients receiving Stribild (elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) and darunavir once daily. Poster presented at: 16th International Workshop on Clinical Pharmacology of HIV and Hepatitis Therapy; May 26–28, 2015; Washington, DC.
    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. Wohl D, Oka S, Clumeck N, et al. Brief report: a randomized, double-blind comparison of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, each coformulated with elvitegravir, cobicistat, and emtricitabine for initial HIV-1 treatment: week 96 results. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016;72:58–64.
    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. Rivero A, Pulido F, Caylá J, et al. ; Grupo de Estudio de Sida (GESIDA); Secretaría del Plan Nacional sobre el Sida. The Spanish AIDS Study Group and Spanish National AIDS Plan (GESIDA/Secretaría del Plan Nacional sobre el Sida) recommendations for the treatment of tuberculosis in HIV-infected individuals (Updated January 2013) [in Spanish]. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2013;31:672–684.
    1. Ministry of Health, National Committee on AIDS – Commissione Nazionale per la lotta contro l’AIDS, Linee Guida Italiane sull’utilizzo dei farmaci antiretrovirali e sulla gestione diagnosticoclinica delle persone con infezione da HIV-1, Ministero della Salute, luglio, December 2015 [in Italian]. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. Danish Society of Infectious Diseases. Antiviral behandling af HIV smittede personer, Odense C, DK, August 2015 [in Danish]. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. Snopková S, Rozsypal H, Aster V, et al. Doporučený postup péče o dospělé infikované HIV a postexpoziční profylaxe infekce HIV. 2016.
    1. DAIG Deutsche AIDS-Gesellschaft e.V. Deutsch-Österreichische Leitlinien zur antiretroviralen Therapie der HIV-Infektion, Version 6. Hamburg, DE. Dezember 2015 [in German]. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. Mills A, Crofoot G, Jr, McDonald C, et al. Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in the first protease inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen for initial HIV-1 therapy: a randomized phase 2 study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;69:439–445.
    1. Clotet B, Bellos N, Molina JM, et al. Efficacy and safety of darunavir-ritonavir at week 48 in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection in POWER 1 and 2: a pooled subgroup analysis of data from two randomised trials. Lancet. 2007;369:1169–1178.
    1. Kalichman SC, Amaral CM, Swetzes C, et al. A simple single item rating scale to measure medication adherence: further evidence for convergent validity. J Int Assoc Physicians AIDS Care (Chic). 2009;8:367–374.
    1. Woodcock A, Bradley C. Validation of the HIV treatment satisfaction questionnaire (HIVTSQ). Qual Life Res. 2001;10:517–531.
    1. Amico KR, Fisher WA, Cornman DH, et al. Visual analog scale of ART adherence: association with 3-Day self-report and adherence barriers. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;42:455–459.
    1. Smith F, Hammerstorm T, Soon G, et al. A meta-analysis to assess the FDA DAVP's TLOVR algorithm in HIV submissions. Drug Inf J. 2011;45:291–300.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Guidance for Industry Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Infection: Developing Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment (Revision 1); 2015;1–43. Available at: . Accessed April 15, 2016.
    1. George E, Lucas GM, Nadkarni GN, et al. Kidney function and the risk of cardiovascular events in HIV-1 infected patients. AIDS. 2010;24:387–394.
    1. Currie G, Delles C. Proteinuria and its relation to cardiovascular disease. Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis. 2013;7:13–24.
    1. Agrawal V, Marinescu V, Agarwal M, et al. Cardiovascular implications of proteinuria: an indicator of chronic kidney disease. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2009;6:301–311.
    1. Gallant J, Brunetta J, Crofoot G, et al. Efficacy and safety of switching to a single-tablet regimen of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) in HIV-1/hepatitis B coinfected adults. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016;73:294–298.
    1. Ray AS, Cihlar T, Robinson KL, et al. Mechanism of active renal tubular efflux of tenofovir. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50:3297–3304.
    1. Bam RA, Yant SR, Cihlar T. Tenofovir alafenamide is not a substrate for renal organic anion transporters (OATs) and does not exhibit OAT-dependent cytotoxicity. Antivir Ther. 2014;19:687–692.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere