Dose-dependent influence of didanosine on immune recovery in HIV-infected patients treated with tenofovir

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and didanosine (ddI) has been associated with poor immune recovery despite virologic success. This effect might be related to ddI toxicity since ddI exposure is substantially increased by TDF. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether immune recovery during ART with TDF and ddI is ddI-dose dependent. DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal analysis of immune recovery measured by the CD4 T-cell slope in 614 patients treated with ART containing TDF with or without ddI. Patients were stratified according to the tertiles of their weight-adjusted ddI dose: low dose (< 3.3 mg/kg), intermediate dose (3.3-4.1 mg/kg) and high dose (> 4.1 mg/kg). Cofactors modifying the degree of immune recovery after starting TDF-containing ART were identified by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. RESULTS: CD4 T-cell slopes were comparable between patients treated with TDF and a weight-adjusted ddI-dose of < 4.1 mg/kg per day (n = 143) versus TDF-without-ddI (n = 393). In the multivariable model the slopes differed by -13 CD4 T cells/mul per year [95% confidence interval (CI), -42 to 17; P = 0.40]. In contrast, patients treated with TDF and a higher ddI dose (> 4.1 mg/kg per day, n = 78) experienced a significantly impaired immune recovery (-47 CD4 T cells/microl per year; 95% CI, -82 to -12; P = 0.009). The virologic response was comparable between the different treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Immune recovery is impaired, when high doses of ddI (> 4.1 mg/kg) are given in combination with TDF. If the dose of ddI is adjusted to less than 4.1 mg/kg per day, immune recovery is similar to other TDF-containing ART regimen.

Tenofovir-containing nucleoside/nucleotide-only antiretroviral maintenance therapy: decision making and virological outcome

OBJECTIVE: To assess the virological outcome of patients with undetectable human immunodeficiency (HI) viremia switched to tenofovir (TDF)-containing nucleosideonly (NUKE-only) treatments and to investigate the factors influencing the physicians' decision for application of a nonestablished therapy. METHOD: Patients' characteristics and history were taken from the cohort database. To study the decision-making process, questionnaires were sent to all treating physicians. RESULTS: 49 patients were changed to TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment and 46 had a follow-up measurement of HI viremia. Virological failure occurred in 16 (35%) patients. Virological failure was associated with previous mono or dual therapy and with a regimen including didanosine or abacavir. No failure occurred in 15 patients without these predisposing factors. The main reasons for change to TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment were side effects and presumed favorable toxicity profile. The rationale behind this decision was mainly analogy to the zidovudine/lamivudine/abacavir maintenance therapy. CONCLUSION: TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment is associated with high early failure rates in patients with previous nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mono or dual therapy and in drug combinations containing didanosine or abacavir but not in patients without these predisposing factors. In HIV medicine, treatment strategies that are not evidence-based are followed by a minority of experienced physicians and are driven by patients' needs, mainly to minimize treatment side effects.

Rates of disease progression according to initial highly active antiretroviral therapy regimen: a collaborative analysis of 12 prospective cohort studies

BACKGROUND: No large clinical end-point trials have been conducted comparing regimens among human immunodeficiency virus type 1-positive persons starting antiretroviral therapy. We examined clinical progression according to initial regimen in the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration, which is based on 12 European and North American cohort studies. METHODS: We analyzed progression to death from any cause and to AIDS or death (AIDS/death), comparing efavirenz (EFV), nevirapine (NVP), nelfinavir, idinavir, ritonavir (RTV), RTV-boosted protease inhibitors (PIs), saquinavir, and abacavir. We also compared nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor pairs: zidovudine/lamivudine (AZT/3TC), stavudine (D4T)/3TC, D4T/didanosine (DDI), and others. RESULTS: A total of 17,666 treatment-naive patients, 55,622 person-years at risk, 1,617 new AIDS events, and 895 deaths were analyzed. Compared with EFV, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for AIDS/death was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.60) for NVP, 1.31 (95% CI, 1.01-1.71) for RTV, and 1.45 (95% CI, 1.15-1.81) for RTV-boosted PIs. For death, the adjusted HR for NVP was 1.65 (95% CI, 1.16-2.36). The adjusted HR for death for D4T/3TC was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.14-1.59), compared with AZT/3TC. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes may vary across initial regimens. Results are observational and may have been affected by bias due to unmeasured or residual confounding. There is a need for large, randomized, clinical end-point trials.

Factors associated with the emergence of K65R in patients with HIV-1 infection treated with combination antiretroviral therapy containing tenofovir

BACKGROUND: The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse-transcriptase mutation K65R is a single-point mutation that has become more frequent after increased use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). We aimed to identify predictors for the emergence of K65R, using clinical data and genotypic resistance tests from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. METHODS: A total of 222 patients with genotypic resistance tests performed while receiving treatment with TDF-containing regimens were stratified by detectability of K65R (K65R group, 42 patients; undetected K65R group, 180 patients). Patient characteristics at start of that treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: In an adjusted logistic regression, TDF treatment with nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors and/or didanosine was associated with the emergence of K65R, whereas the presence of any of the thymidine analogue mutations D67N, K70R, T215F, or K219E/Q was protective. The previously undescribed mutational pattern K65R/G190S/Y181C was observed in 6 of 21 patients treated with efavirenz and TDF. Salvage therapy after TDF treatment was started for 36 patients with K65R and for 118 patients from the wild-type group. Proportions of patients attaining human immunodeficiency virus type 1 loads <50 copies/mL after 24 weeks of continuous treatment were similar for the K65R group (44.1%; 95% confidence interval, 27.2%-62.1%) and the wild-type group (51.9%; 95% confidence interval, 42.0%-61.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In settings where thymidine analogue mutations are less likely to be present, such as at start of first-line therapy or after extended treatment interruptions, combinations of TDF with other K65R-inducing components or with efavirenz or nevirapine may carry an enhanced risk of the emergence of K65R. The finding of a distinct mutational pattern selected by treatment with TDF and efavirenz suggests a potential fitness interaction between K65R and nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-induced mutations.

Lipodystrophy and weight changes: data from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, 2000-2006

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is changing, and this may affect the type and occurrence of side effects. We examined the frequency of lipodystrophy (LD) and weight changes in relation to the use of specific drugs in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS). METHODS: In the SHCS, patients are followed twice a year and scored by the treating physician as having 'fat accumulation', 'fat loss', or neither. Treatments, and reasons for change thereof, are recorded. Our study sample included all patients treated with cART between 2003 and 2006 and, in addition, all patients who started cART between 2000 and 2003. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2006, the percentage of patients taking stavudine, didanosine and nelfinavir decreased, the percentage taking lopinavir, nevirapine and efavirenz remained stable, and the percentage taking atazanavir and tenofovir increased by 18.7 and 22.2%, respectively. In life-table Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients starting cART in 2003-2006 were less likely to develop LD than those starting cART from 2000 to 2002 (P<0.02). LD was quoted as the reason for treatment change or discontinuation for 4% of patients on cART in 2003, and for 1% of patients treated in 2006 (P for trend <0.001). In univariate and multivariate regression analysis, patients with a weight gain of >or=5 kg were more likely to take lopinavir or atazanavir than patients without such a weight gain [odds ratio (OR) 2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-2.9, and OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: LD has become less frequent in the SHCS from 2000 to 2006. A weight gain of more than 5 kg was associated with the use of atazanavir and lopinavir.

Impact of recommendation updates in well-controlled patients on nonrecommended antiretroviral therapies: the Swiss HIV cohort study

BACKGROUND HIV treatment recommendations are updated as clinical trials are published. Whether recommendations drive clinicians to change antiretroviral therapy in well-controlled patients is unexplored. METHODS We selected patients with undetectable viral loads (VLs) on nonrecommended regimens containing double-boosted protease inhibitors (DBPIs), triple-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), or didanosine (ddI) plus stavudine (d4T) at publication of the 2006 International AIDS Society recommendations. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics with those of control patients with undetectable VL not on these regimens and examined clinical outcome and reasons for treatment modification. RESULTS At inclusion, 104 patients were in the DBPI group, 436 in the triple-NRTI group, and 19 in the ddI/d4T group. By 2010, 28 (29%), 204 (52%), and 1 (5%) patient were still on DBPIs, triple-NRTIs, and ddI plus d4T, respectively. 'Physician decision,' excluding toxicity/virological failure, drove 30% of treatment changes. Predictors of recommendation nonobservance included female sex [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1 to 7.26; P = 0.01] for DPBIs, and undetectable VL (aOR 3.53, 95% CI 1.6 to 7.8; P = 0.002) and lack of cardiovascular events (aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.23 to 6.97; P = 0.02) for triple-NRTIs. All patients on DBPIs with documented diabetes or a cardiovascular event changed treatment. Recommendation observance resulted in lower cholesterol values in the DBPI group (P = 0.06), and more patients having undetectable VL (P = 0.02) in the triple-NRTI group. CONCLUSION The physician's decision is the main factor driving change from nonrecommended to recommended regimens, whereas virological suppression is associated with not switching. Positive clinical outcomes observed postswitch underline the importance of observing recommendations, even in well-controlled patients.