Article

Atazanavir Plus Ritonavir or Efavirenz as Part of a 3-Drug Regimen for Initial Treatment of HIV-1

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
Annals of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 16.1). 02/2011; 154(7):445-56. DOI: 10.1059/0003-4819-154-7-201104050-00316
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Limited data compare once-daily options for initial therapy for HIV-1.
To compare time to virologic failure; first grade-3 or -4 sign, symptom, or laboratory abnormality (safety); and change or discontinuation of regimen (tolerability) for atazanavir plus ritonavir with efavirenz-containing initial therapy for HIV-1.
A randomized equivalence trial accrued from September 2005 to November 2007, with median follow-up of 138 weeks. Regimens were assigned by using a central computer, stratified by screening HIV-1 RNA level less than 100 000 copies/mL or 100 000 copies/mL or greater; blinding was known only to the site pharmacist. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00118898)
59 AIDS Clinical Trials Group sites in the United States and Puerto Rico.
Antiretroviral-naive patients.
Open-label atazanavir plus ritonavir or efavirenz, each given with with placebo-controlled abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)-emtricitabine.
Primary outcomes were time to virologic failure, safety, and tolerability events. Secondary end points included proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA level less than 50 copies/mL, emergence of drug resistance, changes in CD4 cell counts, calculated creatinine clearance, and lipid levels.
463 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive atazanavir plus ritonavir and 465 were assigned to receive efavirenz, both with abacavir-lamivudine; 322 (70%) and 324 (70%), respectively, completed follow-up. The respective numbers of participants in each group who received tenofovir DF-emtricitabine were 465 and 464; 342 (74%) and 343 (74%) completed follow-up. Primary efficacy was similar in the group that received atazanavir plus ritonavir and and the group that received efavirenz and did not differ according to whether abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir DF-emtricitabine was also given. Hazard ratios for time to virologic failure were 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.56) and 1.01 (CI, 0.70 to 1.46), respectively, although CIs did not meet prespecified criteria for equivalence. The time to safety (P = 0.048) and tolerability (P < 0.001) events was longer in persons given atazanavir plus ritonavir than in those given efavirenz with abacavir-lamivudine but not with tenofovir DF-emtricitabine.
Neither HLA-B*5701 nor resistance testing was the standard of care when A5202 enrolled patients. The third drugs, atazanavir plus ritonavir and efavirenz, were open-label; the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors were prematurely unblinded in the high viral load stratum; and 32% of patients modified or discontinued treatment with their third drug.
Atazanavir plus ritonavir and efavirenz have similar antiviral activity when used with abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir DF-emtricitabine.
National Institutes of Health.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Katie Mollan, Aug 02, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
157 Views
  • Source
    • "There are four nonnucleoside analogues recommended in Europe and North America for the treatment of HIV: efavirenz , etravirine, nevirapine, and rilpivirine [1] [2] [3]. Of these, efavirenz is the most widely recommended for first-line treatment , owing to the high rates of efficacy seen in large randomized trials [4] [5] [6]. Nevirapine has shown levels of efficacy close to, but not equivalent with, efavirenz as a first-line treatment [7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Unlike other nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, etravirine is only approved for use in treatment-experienced patients. In the DUET 1 and 2 trials, 1203 highly treatment-experienced patients were randomized to etravirine or placebo, in combination with darunavir/ritonavir and optimized background treatment. In these trials, etravirine showed significantly higher rates of HIV RNA suppression when compared with placebo (61% versus 40% at Week 48). There was no significant rise of lipids or neuropsychiatric adverse events, but there was an increase in the risk of rash with etravirine treatment. In the SENSE trial, which evaluated etravirine and efavirenz in 157 treatment-naïve patients in combination with 2 nucleoside analogues, there was a lower risk of lipid elevations and neuropsychiatric adverse events with etravirine when compared to efavirenz. Etravirine has been evaluated in three randomized switching studies. In the SSAT029 switch trial, 38 patients who had neuropsychiatric adverse events possibly related to efavirenz showed an improvement in these after switching to etravirine. The Swiss Switch-EE recruited 58 individuals without neuropsychiatric adverse events who were receiving efavirenz, and no benefit was shown when switching to etravirine. In the Spanish ETRA-SWITCH trial (), there were improvements in lipids when individuals switched from a protease inhibitor to etravirine. These switching trials were conducted in patients with full HIV RNA suppression: <50 copies/mL and with no history of virological failure or resistance to therapy. The results from these three randomized switching studies suggest a possible new role for etravirine, in combination with two nucleoside analogues, as a switching option for those with HIV RNA suppression but who are reporting adverse events possibly related to antiretroviral therapy. However a large well-powered trial would need to be conducted to strengthen the evidence from the pilot studies conducted so far.
    AIDS research and treatment 02/2014; 2014:636584. DOI:10.1155/2014/636584
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite having demonstrated noninferior efficacy against atazanavir/ritonavir plus coformulated tenofovir/emtricitabine (cTDF/FTC), the combination of nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC is not included among preferred regimens in some international guidelines. This combination is frequently used in Spain. We analyzed its effectiveness and safety as first-line therapy in a routine clinical practice. A retrospective, multicenter study was performed in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected subjects who started nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC as first-line therapy according to the nevirapine CD4(+) cell count threshold. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml at week 48. We included 123 subjects starting the regimen from 2005 to 2008. The median age was 41.0 years, the median baseline CD4(+) cell count was 215 cells/μl, the median plasma viral load (VL) was 4.83 log(10) copies/ml, and 22% had hepatitis C coinfection. At week 48, 96 subjects (78%; 95% CI: 69.9-84.4) had a VL <50 copies/ml in an ITT analysis, and the median rise in the CD4(+) cell count was 118 cells/μl. Virological failure was observed in 6.5% (8/123) of subjects, all them before week 24 and related to poor adherence. There was no relationship between virological failure and baseline CD4(+) cell count or VL. Ten percent (13/123) of the subjects discontinued the treatment due to adverse events. There was a significant decrease in total/HDL-cholesterol ratio (p=0.03) with an increase in HDL-cholesterol (p=0.01) over 48 weeks. The combination of nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC showed a high virological efficacy without unexpected toxicities as a first-line treatment in a routine clinical practice.
    AIDS research and human retroviruses 07/2011; 28(2):165-70. DOI:10.1089/aid.2011.0092 · 2.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We report a 46-year-old man who has sex with men (MSM) patient, of Scottish descent, who had no history of arterial hypertension, diabetes, or illicit drug use, was hepatitis C virus (HCV) negative but underwent right nephrectomy for urothelial tumor in 2006. Before starting antiretroviral therapy, he had a CD4 cell count of 316/mm(3) and plasma HIV RNA level was 1,020,537 copies per milliliter. He developed acute renal failure only 2 weeks after introduction of tenofovir-based antiretroviral therapy and then required 3 months of hemodialysis. After the end of hemodialysis, antiviral therapy was resumed with abacavir (300 mg×2/day), lamivudine (300 mg every day), and lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg twice daily). Renal biopsy revealed severe and diffuse toxic acute tubular necrosis Two years after tenofovir discontinuation, the patient's renal function remained subnormal. Although severe renal toxicity due to tenofovir is rare, patients receiving tenofovir must be monitored closely for renal dysfunction especially during the first weeks of tenofovir therapy.
    AIDS patient care and STDs 08/2011; 25(8):457-60. DOI:10.1089/apc.2011.0056 · 3.58 Impact Factor
Show more