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.

0 Followers
 · 
147 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Despite antiretroviral (ARV) therapy reducing renal disease in human immunodeficiency virus overall, there is concern that certain ARVs, particularly tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with or without a boosted protease inhibitor (PI), may reduce renal function over time. It is not known whether effects seen with PI-based regimens are independent, result from interactions with TDF coadministration, or are artefactual owing to inhibition of renal tubular creatinine transport by ritonavir or cobicistat pharmacoenhancement. The aim of this review was to conduct a systematic review of studies, weighted toward high-quality evidence, examining changes in renal function over time with PI-based regimens. Methods PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases and conference abstracts were searched using pre-defined terms for English language articles, published up to and including August 12, 2013, describing changes in renal function over time with PI-based regimens. All available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected; however, to reduce bias, only observational studies recruiting from more than one center and analyzing data from more than 1,000 patients were included. Evidence was qualitatively evaluated according to levels established by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM). Results A total of 2,322 articles were retrieved by the initial search. Of these, 37 were selected for full review, comprising 24 RCTs (OCEBM Level 1 evidence: 4 reports of fully double-blinded or blinded with respect to the PI component). The remaining 20 RCTs and 13 observational studies qualified as OCEBM Level 2 evidence. Level 1 evidence showed initial but non-progressive increases in serum creatinine and corresponding decreases in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), suggesting an effect on renal tubular transport of creatinine. Level 2 evidence suggested that atazanavir and lopinavir especially in combination with TDF were associated with non-progressive reductions in eGFR over time, with a decreased risk for the development of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on cessation and without the development of advanced CKD or end-stage renal disease (ESRD); whether these reductions were independent or associated with interactions with coadministered TDF could not be established with certainty. Data on darunavir were insufficient to draw any conclusions. The principal limitation of the reviewed studies was the lack of standardization of creatinine measurements in virtually all studies and the lack of corroborative data on changes in proteinuria or other indices of renal function. Discussion In this review, there was little evidence for progressive changes in eGFR, or the development of advanced CKD, or ESRD with lopinavir or atazanavir. Further long-term studies, employing a wide range of validated renal function assessments, are required to fully evaluate potential association of PIs with CKD.
    01/2015; 4(1). DOI:10.1007/s40121-014-0056-4
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess factors at the start of antiretroviral therapy (ART) associated with long-term virological response in children.
    AIDS 10/2014; 28(16-16):2395-2405. DOI:10.1097/QAD.0000000000000438 · 6.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effects of antiretrovirals on cystatin C-based renal function estimates are unknown. We analyzed changes in renal function using creatinine and cystatin C-based estimating equations in 269 patients in A5224s, a substudy of study A5202, in which treatment-naive patients were randomized to abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir/emtricitabine with open-label atazanavir/ritonavir or efavirenz. Changes in renal function significantly improved (or declined less) with abacavir/lamivudine treatment compared with tenofovir/emtricitabine using the Cockcroft-Gault formula (P = .016) and 2009 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI; P = .030) and 2012 CKD-EPI cystatin C-creatinine (P = .025). Renal function changes significantly improved (or declined less) with efavirenz compared with atazanavir/ritonavir (P < .001 for all equations). Mean (95% confidence interval) renal function changes specifically for tenofovir/emtricitabine combined with atazanavir/ritonavir were -8.3 (-14.0, -2.6) mL/min with Cockcroft-Gault; -14.9 (-19.7, -10.1) mL/min per 1.73(2) with Modification of Diet in Renal Disease; -12.8 (-16.5, -9.0) mL/min per 1.73(2) with 2009 CKD-EPI; +8.9 (4.2, 13.7) mL/min per 1.73(2) with 2012 CKD-EPI cystatin C; and -1.2 (-5.1, 2.6) mL/min per 1.73(2) with 2012 CKD-EPI cystatin C-creatinine. Renal function changes for the other treatment arms were more favorable but similarly varied by estimating equation. Antiretroviral-associated changes in renal function vary in magnitude and direction based on the estimating equation used.
    03/2014; 1(1):ofu003. DOI:10.1093/ofid/ofu003

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
56 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014