Lipid profiles for antiretroviral-naive patients starting PI- and NNRTI-based therapy in the Swiss HIV cohort study

BACKGROUND: Blood lipid abnormalities in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) have been associated with exposure to protease inhibitors (PIs), particularly ritonavir. First therapy with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) leads to relatively favourable lipid profiles. We report on medium-term lipid profiles (up to 5 years) for antiretroviral-naive patients starting NNRTI- and PI-based HAART in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. METHODS: Since April 2000, blood samples taken at visits scheduled every 6 months have been analysed for cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations. For 1065 antiretroviral-naive patients starting HAART after April 2000, we estimated changes in concentration over time using multivariate linear regression with adjustment for baseline covariates, use of lipid-lowering drugs and whether the sample was taken in a fasting state. RESULTS: Non-high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels increase with increasing exposure to either PI- or NNRTI-based therapy, HDL cholesterol levels increase and triglyceride levels decrease with increasing exposure to NNRTI-based therapy, whereas triglyceride levels increase with increasing exposure to PI-based therapy. Between NNRTI-based therapies, there is a slight difference in triglyceride levels, which tend to increase with increasing exposure to efavirenz and to decrease with increasing exposure to nevirapine. Of the three common PI-based therapies, nelfinavir appears to have a relatively favourable lipid profile, with little change with increasing exposure. Of the other two PI therapies, lopinavir with ritonavir has a more favourable profile than indinavir with ritonavir, with smaller increases in both non-HDL cholesterol and triglycerides and an increase in HDL cholesterol. Increasing exposure to abacavir is associated with a decrease in the level of triglycerides. CONCLUSION: In general, NNRTI-based therapy is associated with a more favourable lipid profile than PI-based therapy, but different PI-based therapies are associated with very different lipid profiles. Nelfinavir appears to have a relatively favourable lipid profile. Of the two boosted PI therapies, lopinavir appears to have a more favourable lipid profile than indinavir.

Lipid and lipoprotein profile in HIV-infected patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir as a component of the first combination antiretroviral therapy

We characterized lipid and lipoprotein changes associated with a lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen. We enrolled previously antiretroviral-naive patients participating in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. Fasting blood samples (baseline) were retrieved retrospectively from stored frozen plasma and posttreatment (follow-up) samples were collected prospectively at two separate visits. Lipids and lipoproteins were analyzed at a single reference laboratory. Sixty-five patients had two posttreatment lipid profile measurements and nine had only one. Most of the measured lipids and lipoprotein plasma concentrations increased on lopinavir/ritonavir-based treatment. The percentage of patients with hypertriglyceridemia (TG >150?mg/dl) increased from 28/74 (38%) at baseline to 37/65 (57%) at the second follow-up. We did not find any correlation between lopinavir plasma levels and the concentration of triglycerides. There was weak evidence of an increase in small dense LDL-apoB during the first year of treatment but not beyond 1 year (odds ratio 4.5, 90% CI 0.7 to 29 and 0.9, 90% CI 0.5 to 1.5, respectively). However, 69% of our patients still had undetectable small dense LDL-apoB levels while on treatment. LDL-cholesterol increased by a mean of 17?mg/dl (90% CI -3 to 37) during the first year of treatment, but mean values remained below the cut-off for therapeutic intervention. Despite an increase in the majority of measured lipids and lipoproteins particularly in the first year after initiation, we could not detect an obvious increase of cardiovascular risk resulting from the observed lipid changes.

ADME pharmacogenetics: investigation of the pharmacokinetics of the antiretroviral agent lopinavir coformulated with ritonavir

An ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion)-pharmacogenetics association study may identify functional variants relevant to the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir co-formulated with ritonavir (LPV/r), a first-line anti-HIV agent.

Virological and immunological responses to efavirenz or boosted lopinavir as first-line therapy for patients with HIV

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz and lopinavir boosted with ritonavir are both recommended as first-line therapies for patients with HIV when combined with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. It is uncertain which therapy is more effective for patients starting therapy with an advanced infection. METHODS: We estimated the relative effect of these two therapies on rates of virological and immunological failure within the Swiss HIV Cohort Study and considered whether estimates depended on the CD4(+) T-cell count when starting therapy. We defined virological failure as either an incomplete virological response or viral rebound after viral suppression and immunological failure as failure to achieve an expected CD4(+) T-cell increase calculated from EuroSIDA statistics. RESULTS: Patients starting efavirenz (n=660) and lopinavir (n=541) were followed for a median of 4.5 and 3.1 years, respectively. Virological failure was less likely for patients on efavirenz, with the adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.63 (0.50-0.78) then multiplied by a factor of 1.00 (0.90-1.12) for each 100 cells/mm(3) decrease in CD4(+) T-cell count below the mean when starting therapy. Immunological failure was also less likely for patients on efavirenz, with the adjusted hazard ratio of 0.68 (0.51-0.91) then multiplied by a factor of 1.29 (1.14-1.46) for each 100 cells/mm(3) decrease in CD4(+) T-cell count below the mean when starting therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Virological failure is less likely with efavirenz regardless of the CD4(+) T-cell count when starting therapy. Immunological failure is also less likely with efavirenz; however, this advantage disappears if patients start therapy with a low CD4(+) T-cell count.