Article

Darunavir: pharmacokinetics and drug interactions.

Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Antiviral therapy (Impact Factor: 3.07). 02/2008; 13(1):1-13.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Darunavir (TMC114) is a new HIV protease inhibitor that has demonstrated substantial antiretroviral activity against wild-type HIV-1 virus and multidrug-resistant strains. Darunavir inhibits and is primarily metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) isoenzymes and is coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (darunavir/r); ritonavir is an inhibitor of CYP3A isoenzymes and pharmacologically enhances darunavir, resulting in increased plasma concentrations and allowing for a lower daily dose. The t1/2 (terminal elimination half-life) of darunavir is 15 h in the presence of ritonavir. An extensive darunavir/r drug-drug interaction programme has been undertaken, covering a wide range of therapeutic areas. Studies conducted in HIV-negative healthy volunteers and in HIV-infected patients show that the potential for interactions is well characterized and the interactions are manageable. For most drugs investigated, no dose adjustments of darunavir/r or the co-administered drug are required. This article reviews all the pharmacokinetic and drug-drug interaction studies conducted to date for darunavir/r, providing guidance on how to co-administer darunavir/r with many other antiretroviral or non-antiretroviral medications commonly used in HIV-infected individuals.

1 Bookmark
 · 
92 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Human Immunodeficiency Virus type-1 (HIV-1) spreads by cell-free diffusion and by direct cell-to-cell transfer, the latter being a significantly more efficient mode of transmission. Recently it has been suggested that cell-to-cell spread may permit ongoing virus replication in the presence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) based on studies performed using Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (RTIs). Protease Inhibitors (PIs) constitute an important component of ART; however whether this class of inhibitors can suppress cell-to-cell transfer of HIV-1 is unexplored. Here we have evaluated the inhibitory effect of PIs during cell-to-cell spread of HIV-1 between T lymphocytes. Using quantitative assays in cell line and primary cell systems that directly measure the early steps of HIV-1 infection we find that the PIs Lopinavir and Darunavir are equally potent against both cell-free and cell-to-cell spread of HIV-1. We further show that a protease resistant mutant maintains its resistant phenotype during cell-to-cell spread is transmitted more efficiently than wild-type virus in the presence of drug. By contrast we find that T cell-T cell spread of HIV-1 is 4-20 fold more resistant to inhibition by the RTIs Nevirapine, Zidovudine and Tenofovir. Notably, varying the ratio of infected and uninfected cells in co-culture impacted on the degree of inhibition, indicating that the relative efficacy of ART is dependent on the multiplicity of infection. We conclude that if the variable effects of antiviral drugs on cell-to-cell virus dissemination of HIV-1 do indeed impact on viral replication and maintenance of viral reservoirs this is likely to be influenced by the antiviral drug class, since PIs appear particularly effective against both modes of HIV-1 spread.
    Retrovirology 12/2013; 10(1):161. · 5.66 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases 02/2014; · 9.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine whether baseline clinical genotypes are equivalent to diagnostic serum genotypes for surveillance of HIV transmitted drug resistance (TDR). Current HIV TDR surveillance in Canada is conducted through genotyping remnant diagnostic sera from new HIV diagnoses. As part of routine care, baseline genotyping is now conducted on all newly diagnosed HIV infections, with TDR data being generated a second time on the same patients. Surveillance genotyping, on HIV diagnostic serum, was performed on newly diagnosed HIV cases from 2007 to 2010 in Alberta, Canada. All subjects with a baseline clinical genotype result on file, and no evidence of antiretroviral therapy, were studied further. The HIV sequences from diagnosis and from the first clinical genotype were compared according to elapsed time between testing and by evaluating timing of infection based on BED capture enzyme immunoassay (BED-CEIA, abbreviated as BED in this article). Eighty-seven genotype pairs were available for analysis, most of which were subtype B. The time between genotypes ranged from 0 to 755 days, with a median of 36 days and an interquartile range of 155.25 days. Genetic distance between genotypes varied between 0 and 0.03389 substitutions per site and did not correlate with sampling times. There was a tendency for the genotypes of infections classified as recent by BED to be more similar to their clinical genotypes but this effect was lost when adjusted for elapsed time between tests. There was no difference in the identified drug resistance. Baseline clinical genotypes from treatment-naive patients may be used for HIV TDR surveillance.
    JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 12/2013; 64(5):443-447. · 4.65 Impact Factor