Article

Comment on: High rate of early virological failure with the once-daily tenofovir/lamivudine/nevirapine combination in naive HIV-1-infected patients

COREVIH, Hôpitaux Universitaires, Strasbourg, France.
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (Impact Factor: 5.44). 12/2008; 63(2):380-8. DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkn471
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The combination of one non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors is a validated first-line antiretroviral (ARV) therapy. The once-daily combination of lamivudine, tenofovirDF and nevirapine has not been evaluated in a clinical trial.
Randomized, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority trial comparing lamivudine, tenofovirDF and nevirapine once daily (Group 2) with zidovudine/lamivudine and nevirapine twice daily (Group 1), in naive HIV-1-infected patients with a CD4 count <350/mm(3). We planned to enroll 250 patients.
As of May 2006, 71 patients had been enrolled (35 in Group 1 and 36 in Group 2) and an unplanned interim analysis was done. The groups were comparable at baseline: median CD4 count was 195 and 191/mm(3) and median plasma viral load was 4.9 log(10) and 5.01 log(10), respectively, in Groups 1 and 2. Eight early non-responses (22.2%) were observed, all in Group 2, while two later viral rebounds occurred. Resistance genotypes for the nine Group 2 failing patients showed the mutations M184V/I (n = 3), K65R (n = 6), one or more NNRTI resistance mutations in all cases. At baseline, the nine Group 2 patients who failed had higher median plasma viral load (5.4 log(10)) and lower median CD4 count (110/mm(3)) than the other Group 2 patients (4.7 log(10), P = 0.002 and 223/mm(3), P = 0.004). Nevirapine trough concentrations were not different between the two groups, nor between patients with full viral suppression or those who failed in Group 2. Due to slow recruitment, and those results, the steering committee decided to stop the trial at 12 months.
In ARV-naive HIV-1-infected patients, the once-daily lamivudine, tenofovirDF and nevirapine regimen resulted in a high rate of early virological failures. The reasons for the failures remain unclear.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: David Rey, Apr 09, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
137 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: agents administered during hospi- talization at a tertiary care acade- mic medical center. The retrospec- tive analysis was conducted over 1 year. A total of 416 allergies were reported among 300 patients; more than 1 allergy was reported by more than one-fourth of study patients (82/300 (27.3%)). Only 36.3% (151/416) of allergies reported were accompanied by a reaction description (95% confi- dence interval (CI), 31.7% to
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: MEDICATION SAFETY Overlooked Renal Dosage Adjustments A retrospective analysis of 647 patients at hospital discharge com-pared required renal dosage adjust-ments to dosage actually prescribed. This study was conducted at VieCuri Medical Centre in Venlo, Netherlands. Patient demographics and renal function data were col-lected, and dosage adjustment needs were assessed via the pharmacy-supported discharge counseling ser-vice. The incidence of inappropriate dosing based on renal function was measured at hospital discharge. Thirty-seven percent of patients evaluated during the study period (237/647) had a creatinine clear-ance less than 51 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ; dosage adjustment was warranted in 23.9% (411/1,718) of prescrip-tions. When dosage adjustment should have been performed, more than 40% of prescriptions (169/411; 41.1%) were inappropri-ate for renal function (9.8% of pre-scriptions overall; 169/1,718). Fur-thermore, 60.4% (102/169) of inappropriate prescriptions pos-sessed the potential for moderate or severe clinical consequences, as evaluated by a panel of two clinical pharmacologists and one nephrolo-gist. Study authors also noted a lack of standardized dosing guidelines for agents requiring renal dosage adjustment. The authors also sug-gested that augmenting medication systems by adding dynamic renal dosing alerts would improve moni-toring. Summary: A comparison of suggested renal dosing and actual dosing at hospital discharge revealed that appropriate prescribing may be overlooked. van Dijk EA, Drabbe NRG, Kruijtbosch M, De Smet PAGM. Drug dosage adjust-ments according to renal function at hos-pital discharge. Ann Pharmacother. 2006;40:1254-1260.
    Hospital pharmacy 12/1122; 41(7). DOI:10.1310/hpj4311-937
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nevirapine (NVP) is often prescribed once daily in clinical practice in combination with a once daily nucleoside backbone. We investigated the relationship of NVP dosing with safety and efficacy. Patients from the Dutch AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands (ATHENA) cohort study, Canadian HAART Observational Medical Evaluation and Research (HOMER) cohort and Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) using NVP-based combination therapy either once daily or twice daily were included. Risk factors for discontinuing NVP because of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) were investigated using multivariate logistic regression. Risk factors for virological failure 96 weeks after NVP initiation were identified using logistic regression and Cox models. Of 5,636 patients (774 once daily and 4,862 twice daily), 268 (4.8%) discontinued NVP because of HSR between 2 and 18 weeks. Logistic regression showed that, compared with patients with detectable HIV type-1 (HIV-1) RNA starting twice-daily NVP, there was a significantly higher risk of discontinuation of once-daily NVP because of HSR in patients with detectable HIV-1 RNA at the start of NVP (odds ratio [OR] 1.52; P=0.04), whereas the risk was actually significantly lower in patients starting once-daily NVP with undetectable HIV-1 RNA (OR 0.44; P=0.04). Cox models showed that risk of virological failure was not different for twice- versus once-daily NVP in treatment-naive patients (twice-daily versus once-daily hazard ratio [HR] 1.01; P=0.95), treatment-experienced patients experiencing treatment failure (twice-daily versus once-daily HR 1.22; P=0.30) or patients with undetectable HIV-1 RNA simplifying treatment with NVP (twice-daily versus once-daily HR 1.29; P=0.30). Initiation of a once-daily NVP-based regimen in patients with suppressed viraemia carries a low risk of treatment-limiting HSR. Once- or twice-daily NVP-based regimens appear to have similar antiretroviral efficacy.
    Antiviral therapy 01/2009; 14(7):931-8. DOI:10.3851/IMP1418 · 3.14 Impact Factor
Show more