Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic of once-daily boosted saquinavir (1500/100 mg) together with 2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in real life: a multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND. Ritonavir-boosted saquinavir (SQVr) is nowadays regarded as an alternative antiretroviral drug probably due to several drawbacks, such as its high pill burden, twice daily dosing and the requirement of 200 mg ritonavir when given at the current standard 1000/100 mg bid dosing. Several once-daily SQVr dosing schemes have been studied with the 200 mg SQV old formulations, trying to overcome some of these disadvantages. SQV 500 mg strength tablets became available at the end of 2005, thus facilitating a once-daily regimen with fewer pills, although there is very limited experience with this formulation yet. METHODS. Prospective, multicentre study in which efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of a regimen of once-daily SQVr 1500/100 mg plus 2 NRTIs were evaluated under routine clinical care conditions in either antiretroviral-naïve patients or in those with no previous history of antiretroviral treatments and/or genotypic resistance tests suggesting SQV resistance. Plasma SQV trough levels were measured by HPLV-UV. RESULTS. Five hundred and fourteen caucasian patients were included (47.2% coinfected with hepatitis C and/or B virus; 7.8% with cirrhosis). Efficacy at 52 weeks (plasma RNA-HIV <50 copies/ml) was 67.7% (CI95: 63.6 - 71.7%) by intention-to-treat, and 92.2% (CI95: 89.8 - 94.6%) by on-treatment analysis. The reasons for failure were: dropout or loss to follow-up (18.4%), virological failure (7.8%), adverse events (3.1%), and other reasons (4.6%). The high rate of dropout may be explained by an enrollment and follow-up under routine clinical care condition, and a population with a significant number of drug users. The median SQV Cmin (n = 49) was 295 ng/ml (range, 53-2172). The only variable associated with virological failure in the multivariate analysis was adherence (OR: 3.36; CI95, 1.51-7.46, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS. Our results suggests that SQVr (1500/100 mg) once-daily plus 2 NRTIs is an effective regimen, without severe clinical adverse events or hepatotoxicity, scarce lipid changes, and no interactions with methadone. All these factors and its once-daily administration suggest this regimen as an appropriate option in patients with no SQV resistance-associated mutations.

Nevirapine vs efavirenz in virologically supressed patients: Differences in lipoprotein subclasses and inflammatory biomarkers.

Background: The interaction between lipid disturbances and inflammatory markers is not well known in patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART). As nevirapine (NVP) is associated with a better lipid profile than efavirenz (EFV), we investigated the relationships between lipid profiles, lipoprotein subclasses and inflammatory biomarkers in patients with prolonged viral suppression with either NVP or EFV and no obvious clinical inflammation. Methods: 122 clinically stable HIV-infected patients with HIV-1 RNA <20 copies longer than 6 months on NNRTI therapy were studied. 72 (59%) were on EFV and 50 (41%) on NVP. Any potentially inflammatory co-morbid diseases (concurrent viral hepatitis, diabetes, hypertension, chronic liver or renal diseases), or statin treatment, were exclusion criteria. Inflammatory biomarkers included hsCRP, LpPLA2, sCD40L, IL-6, IL-8, t-PA, MCP-1, p-selectin and VCAM-1. Lipoprotein subclass measures (VLDL, LDL, IDL and HDL particle number and size) were obtained by the use of proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Results: 82% were male; median age 45 years. Median CD4 count 550/μL (IQR 324). Median time since HIV diagnosis 96 months (IQR 102) and accumulated time on ART 50 months (IQR 101). Patients on NVP had higher time since HIV diagnosis (126.9 [66.7] vs 91.3 [6.6] months, p=0.008) a prolonged time on ART (89.6 [54.6] vs 62.3 [52.2] months, p=0.01) and were older (47.7 vs 40.7 years, p=0.001) than those on EFV. NVP-treated patients presented increased HDL-c (55.8 [16] vs 48.8 [10.7] mg/dL, p=0.007) and apoA1 levels (153.4 [31.9] vs 141.5 [20.5] mg/dL, p=0.02), and reduced apoB/apoA1 ratio (0.68 [0.1] vs 0.61 [0.1], p=0.003) than EFV-treated patients. No differences in inflammatory markers or lipoprotein subclasses were found between NVP and EFV. In patients with extreme lipid values (less favorable: 75th percentiles of LDL, small/dense LDLp and small HDLp, or more favorable: HDL p75 and apoB/apoA1 ratio p25), no consistent differences in inflammatory biomarkers were found. Conclusions: Patients with prolonged viral suppression on NVP present significantly higher HDL and apoA1 levels and reduced apoB/apoA1 ratios than those on EFV, but no differences were found in lipoprotein particles nor inflammatory biomarkers. Relationships between lipid parameters and inflammatory biomarkers in NNRTItreated patients are complex and do not show a linear relationship in this study.

Clinical and Virological Efficacy of Etravirine Plus Two Active Nucleos(t)ide Analogs in an Heterogeneous HIV-Infected Population.

Etravirine (ETV) is recommended in combination with a boosted protease inhibitor plus an optimized background regimen for salvage therapy, but there is limited experience with its use in combination with two nucleos(t)ide reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). This multicenter study aimed to assess the efficacy of this combination in two scenarios: group A) subjects without virologic failure on or no experience with non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) switched due to adverse events and group B) subjects switched after a virologic failure on an efavirenz- or nevirapine-based regimen. The primary endpoint was efficacy at 52 weeks analysed by intention-to-treat. Virologic failure was defined as the inability to suppress plasma HIV-RNA to <50 copies/mL after 24 weeks on treatment, or a confirmed viral load >200 copies/mL in patients who had previously achieved a viral suppression or had an undetectable viral load at inclusion. Two hundred eighty seven patients were included. Treatment efficacy rates in group A and B were 88.0% (CI95, 83.9-92.1%) and 77.4% (CI95, 65.0-89.7%), respectively; the rates reached 97.2% (CI95, 95.1-99.3%) and 90.5% (CI95, 81.7-99.3), by on-treatment analysis. The once-a-day ETV treatment was as effective as the twice daily dosing regimen. Grade 1-2 adverse events were observed motivating a treatment switch in 4.2% of the subjects. In conclusion, ETV (once- or twice daily) plus two analogs is a suitable, well-tolerated combination both as a switching strategy and after failure with first generation NNRTIs, ensuring full drug activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01437241.

Lipid changes in HIV-patients switching to the coformulated single tablet FTC/RPV/TDF (Eviplera®). Efficacy and safety analysis. GeSida Study 8114.

INTRODUCTION Rilpivirine (RPV) has a better lipid profile than efavirenz (EFV) in naïve patients (1). Switching to RPV may be convenient for many patients, while maintaining a good immunovirological control (2). The aim of this study was to analyze lipid changes in HIV-patients at 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera® (emtricitabine/RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate [FTC/RPV/TDF]). MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective, multicentre study of a cohort of asymptomatic HIV-patients who switched from a regimen based on 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI)+protease inhibitor (PI)/non nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or ritonavir boosted PI monotherapy to Eviplera® during February-December, 2013; all had undetectable HIV viral load for ≥3 months prior to switching. Patients with previous failures on antiretroviral therapy (ART) including TDF and/or FTC/3TC, with genotype tests showing resistance to components of Eviplera®, or who had changed the third drug of the ART during the study period were excluded. Changes in lipid profile and cardiovascular risk (CVR), and efficacy and safety at 24 weeks were analyzed. RESULTS Among 305 patients included in the study, 298 were analyzed (7 cases were excluded due to lack of data). Men 81.2%, mean age 44.5 years, 75.8% of HIV sexually transmitted. 233 (78.2%) patients switched from a regimen based on 2 NRTI+NNRTI (90.5% EFV/FTC/TDF). The most frequent reasons for switching were central nervous system (CNS) adverse events (31.0%), convenience (27.6%) and metabolic disorders (23.2%). At this time, 293 patients have reached 24 weeks: 281 (95.9%) have continued Eviplera®, 6 stopped it (3 adverse events, 2 virologic failures, 1 discontinuation) and 6 have been lost to follow up. Lipid profiles of 283 cases were available at 24 weeks and mean (mg/dL) baseline vs 24 weeks are: total cholesterol (193 vs 169; p=0.0001), HDL-c (49 vs 45; p=0.0001), LDL-c (114 vs 103; p=0.001), tryglycerides (158 vs 115; p=0.0001), total cholesterol to HDL-c ratio (4.2 vs 4.1; p=0.3). CVR decreased (8.7 vs 7.5%; p= 0.0001). CD4 counts were similar to baseline (653 vs 674 cells/µL; p=0.08), and 274 (96.8%) patients maintained viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS At 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera®, lipid profile and CVR improved while maintaining a good immunovirological control. Most subjects switched to Eviplera® from a regimen based on NNRTI, mainly EFV/FTC/TDF. CNS adverse events, convenience and metabolic disorders were the most frequent reasons for switching.