Safety and efficacy of raltegravir-based versus efavirenz-based combination therapy in treatment-naive patients with HIV-1 infection: a multicentre, double-blind randomised controlled trial

Evolution patterns of raltegravir-resistant mutations after integrase inhibitor interruption

The objective of this study was to address the evolution of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) mutations resistant to the integrase inhibitor raltegravir after drug interruption. Thirteen HIV-1 infected patients undergoing virological failure due to the selection of raltegravir-resistant variants, who had interrupted raltegravir treatment, were enrolled. For all patients, the virological failure was associated with the selection of variants, with mutations conferring resistance to all of the drugs present in their regimens. Patients were prospectively monitored at baseline (raltegravir interruption) and every 4-24 weeks for clinical, virological and immunological parameters, including HIV-1 viraemia, CD4(+) T-cell counts, and sequence analysis of the HIV-1 integrase sequence. Reversion to the wild-type HIV-1 integrase sequence genotype was observed between 4 and 36 weeks after raltegravir withdrawal in eight out of the 13 patients. Reversion was not observed in three patients. In two patients, reversion was partial at week 24 from raltegravir interruption. These results highlight that in eight out of 13 patients under treatment with raltegravir and experiencing a virological failure, HIV-1 variants harbouring mutations associated with raltegravir resistance become undetectable after drug interruption within a few weeks (in some cases, very rapidly). This occurs under different therapy regimens and in patients receiving 3TC mono-therapy. In the other patients, complete reversion of the integrase sequence is not observed, and either primary or secondary resistance mutations are fixed in the replication competent viral population in vivo also for long time, suggesting that other factors may influence this dynamic process.

Premature onset of cardiovascular disease in HIV-infected individuals: the drugs and the virus

Life expectancy in HIV-infected individuals has been greatly enhanced through immunologic restoration and virologic suppression resulting from antiretroviral therapy. Current clinical HIV care in Western countries focuses on treatment of drug toxicities and prevention of comorbidities. These non-AIDS HIV-related comorbidities, such as cardiovascular disease, occur even in individuals with virologic suppression and manifest at an earlier age than when normally presenting in the general population. While traditional risk factors are present in many HIV-infected individuals who develop cardiovascular disease, the additional roles of HIV-related chronic inflammation and immune activation as well as chronic HIV viremia may be significant. This review provides current evidence for the contributions of the virus, in terms of both chronic viremia and its contribution via chronic low-level inflammation, immune activation, premature immune senescence and dyslipidemia, to the pathogenesis of HIV-related cardiovascular disease, and balances this against the propensity of specific antiretroviral therapies to cause cardiovascular disease, in particular through altered cholesterol metabolism.

Severe raltegravir-associated rhabdomyolysis: a case report and review of the literature

Raltegravir (RAL), an HIV integrase inhibitor, may uncommonly induce an increase of serum creatine kinase (CK) both in naïve and antiretroviral (ARV)-experienced HIV-positive patients. We report the case of severe rhabdomyolysis requiring hospitalization in an ARV-experienced HIV/hepatitis C co-infected patient treated with a RAL-containing drug regimen. Factors favouring a severe clinical occurrence of RAL-induced rhabdomyolysis from cases reported in literature are described.

Extended use of raltegravir in the treatment of HIV-1 infection: optimizing therapy

Raltegravir is the first licensed compound in 2007 of the new integrase inhibitor drug class. At the dose of 400 mg twice daily, raltegravir showed a potent antiviral action in antiretroviral-naïve patients when associated with tenofovir and emtricitabine. Raltegravir was also found to be highly active in antiretroviral-experienced patients with virological failure and displaying multiresistant virus, as shown with the BENCHMRK and ANRS 139 TRIO trials. Finally, the use of raltegravir was assessed in the context of a switch strategy in antiretroviral-experienced patients with virological success [human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA below detection limit], highlighting the following mandatory criteria in this strategy: the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors associated with raltegravir have to be fully active. In the different studies, raltegravir had a favorable safety and tolerability profile. In the clinical situation a switch in virologically suppressed patients receiving a protease inhibitor, an improvement of the lipid profile was observed. Overall, when analyzing the Phase II and III trials together, only a few patients on raltegravir discontinued for adverse events. The development of resistance to raltegravir mainly involved three resistance mutations in integrase gene: Q148H/K/R, N155H, and Y143C/H/R. In conclusion, raltegravir improved the clinical management of HIV-1 infection both in antiretroviral-naïve and in antiretroviral-experienced patients.

Efficacy and safety of maraviroc versus efavirenz, both with zidovudine/lamivudine: 96-week results from the MERIT study

BACKGROUND

The MERIT study evaluated maraviroc versus efavirenz, both with zidovudine/lamivudine, in treatment-naïve patients with CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV-1. Post hoc analyses previously assessed week 48 outcomes in patients rescreened with R5 virus by a more sensitive tropism assay.

METHODS

Week 96 efficacy (post hoc, n = 614) and safety (n = 721) were assessed.

RESULTS

Proportions of subjects <50 copies/mL (58.8% maraviroc, 62.7% efavirenz) and time to loss of virologic response (TLOVR) responders (<50 copies/mL: 60.5% vs 60.7%) were similar. Maraviroc recipients had greater CD4 increases (+ 212 vs + 171 cells/mm(3)) and fewer adverse event discontinuations (6.1% vs 15.5%), malignancies, and category C events.

CONCLUSION

Week 96 data confirm week 48 observations in MERIT.

Physical trapping of HIV-1 synaptic complex by different structural classes of integrase strand transfer inhibitors

Raltegravir is an FDA approved inhibitor directed against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) integrase (IN). In this study, we investigated the mechanisms associated with multiple strand transfer inhibitors capable of inhibiting concerted integration by HIV-1 IN. The results show raltegravir, elvitegravir, MK-2048, RDS 1997, and RDS 2197 all appear to encompass a common inhibitory mechanism by modifying IN-viral DNA interactions. These structurally different inhibitors bind to and inactivate the synaptic complex, an intermediate in the concerted integration pathway in vitro. The inhibitors physically trap the synaptic complex, thereby preventing target DNA binding and thus concerted integration. The efficiency of a particular inhibitor to trap the synaptic complex observed on native agarose gels correlated with its potency for inhibiting the concerted integration reaction, defined by IC(50) values for each inhibitor. At low nanomolar concentrations (<50 nM), raltegravir displayed a time-dependent inhibition of concerted integration, a property associated with slow-binding inhibitors. Studies of raltegravir-resistant IN mutants N155H and Q148H without inhibitors demonstrated that their capacity to assemble the synaptic complex and promote concerted integration was similar to their reported virus replication capacities. The concerted integration activity of Q148H showed a higher cross-resistance to raltegravir than observed with N155H, providing evidence as to why the Q148H pathway with secondary mutations is the predominant pathway upon prolonged treatment. Notably, MK-2048 is equally potent against wild-type IN and raltegravir-resistant IN mutant N155H, suggesting this inhibitor may bind similarly within their drug-binding pockets.

Time course of total HIV-1 DNA and 2-long-terminal repeat circles in patients with controlled plasma viremia switching to a raltegravir-containing regimen

BACKGROUND

Early integration of HIV proviral DNA into the host cell genome prevents viral eradication, despite suppressive HAART. In vitro, integrase inhibitors reduce proviral DNA levels and rapidly increase 2-long-terminal repeat (LTR) circle levels. We examined the effect of raltegravir on the time course of HIV-1 DNA forms in patients with controlled viremia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The EASIER-ANRS 138 randomized trial demonstrated that switching from enfuvirtide to raltegravir maintained virological suppression in treatment-experienced patients with viral load below 400 copies/ml. We analyzed total HIV-1 DNA and 2-LTR circle levels measured at weeks (W)0 and 24 in the first 30 patients enrolled in each arm, and at W48 in the raltegravir arm.

RESULTS

At W0 the total DNA level was 3.6 log(10)/10(6) peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) in both groups, and 2-LTR circles were detected in six patients (median 89 copies/10(6) PBMC). At W24 the total DNA level was 3.6 log(10)/10(6) PBMC in both groups, and 2-LTR circles were detected in three new patients. At W48 the total HIV DNA level in the raltegravir group was 3.5 log(10)/10(6) PBMC, and 2-LTR circles were undetectable. No significant change in total HIV DNA occurred between W0 and W24 in either arm (P = 0.71) and no significant change was observed in the raltegravir arm at W48.

DISCUSSION

In most patients on effective HAART, including regimens containing an integrase inhibitor, the viral reservoir, reflected by the HIV-1 DNA load, is stable and nondynamic during the 48 weeks of follow-up.

Lack of a clinically meaningful pharmacokinetic effect of rifabutin on raltegravir: in vitro/in vivo correlation

Raltegravir is an HIV-1 integrase strand transfer inhibitor with potent activity against HIV-1. A prior investigation of raltegravir coadministered with rifampin demonstrated a decrease in plasma concentrations of raltegravir likely secondary to induction of UGT1A1, the enzyme primarily responsible for the metabolism of raltegravir. Little is known regarding the induction of UGT1A1 by rifabutin, an alternate rifamycin. In vitro characterization of the induction potency of rifampin and rifabutin on UGT1A1 was performed. In vitro studies indicate that rifabutin is a less potent inducer of UGT1A1 messenger RNA expression than is rifampin. A fixed-sequence, 2-period, clinical crossover study was conducted to assess the effect of rifabutin on plasma levels of raltegravir: period 1, 400 mg of raltegravir every 12 hours for 4 days; period 2, 400 mg of raltegravir every 12 hours and 300 mg of rifabutin once daily for 14 days. Geometric mean ratio (GMR) (coadministration of rifabutin and raltegravir vs raltegravir alone) of raltegravir area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours post dose (AUC(0-12h)) and the 90% confidence interval (CI) was 1.19 (0.86-1.63); GMR of concentration at 12 hours (C(12h)) and 90% CI was 0.80 (0.68-0.94); and GMR of time to maximal concentration (C(max)) and 90% CI was 1.39 (0.87-2.21). Overall, coadministration of rifabutin did not alter raltegravir pharmacokinetics to a clinically meaningful degree.

Raltegravir versus Efavirenz regimens in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients: 96-week efficacy, durability, subgroup, safety, and metabolic analyses

BACKGROUND

We analyzed the 96-week results in the overall population and in prespecified subgroups from the ongoing STARTMRK study of treatment-naive HIV-infected patients.

METHODS

Eligible patients with HIV-1 RNA (vRNA) levels >5000 copies per milliliter and without baseline resistance to efavirenz, tenofovir, or emtricitabine were randomized in a double-blind noninferiority study to receive raltegravir or efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine.

RESULTS

At week 96 counting noncompleters as failures, 81% versus 79% achieved vRNA levels <50 copies per milliliter in the raltegravir and efavirenz groups, respectively [Delta (95% confidence interval) = 2% (-4 to 9), noninferiority P < 0.001]. Mean change in baseline CD4 count was 240 and 225 cells per cubic millimeter in the raltegravir and efavirenz groups, respectively [Delta (95% confidence interval) = 15 (-13 to 42)]. Treatment effects were consistent across prespecified baseline demographic and prognostic subgroups. Fewer drug-related clinical adverse events (47% versus 78%; P < 0.001) occurred in raltegravir than efavirenz recipients. Both regimens had modest effects on serum lipids and glucose levels and on body fat composition.

CONCLUSIONS

When combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine in treatment-naive patients, raltegravir exhibited durable antiretroviral activity that was noninferior to the efficacy of efavirenz through 96 weeks of therapy. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent with the overall findings. Both regimens were well tolerated.

Clinical use of raltegravir: a review

In the last 5 years there have been important achievements in the field of HIV therapy with the availability of new classes of antiretrovirals together with a new generation of old classes. Among them, the development of raltegravir, the first commercially available component of integrase inhibitors, brought an extraordinary improvement in salvage therapy for HIV-infected patients, allowing for virologic suppression even in multi-experienced subjects, who until recently had limited treatment options. It was subsequently approved for initial treatment combined with a nucleoside/nucleotide backbone, and also became an interesting option for naive HIV-infected populations. Its unique characteristics, the limited potential for significant pharmacokinetic interactions with other drugs and excellent safety profile have increased interest in its use in different settings.

Instantaneous inhibitory potential is similar to inhibitory quotient at predicting HIV-1 response to antiretroviral therapy

BACKGROUND

The instantaneous inhibitory potential (IIP), a measure of antiviral activity that incorporates the slope of the dose-response curve, has been proposed as a better predictor of clinical efficacy than the inhibitory quotient (IQ). However, there are no quantitative analyses supporting this hypothesis.

METHODS

The correlation between differences in log10(IQ) (Deltalog10(IQ)) or differences in IIP (DeltaIIP) and the differences in percentage of subjects with plasma human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA levels <50 copies/mL at week 48 was determined for antiretroviral drugs compared in 17 randomized clinical trials. The Deltalog10(IQmin), Deltalog10(IQmax), DeltaIIPmin, DeltaIIPmax, Deltalog10(IQ12), Deltalog10(IQ24), DeltaIIP12, and DeltaIIP24 for comparative drugs were correlated with differences in percentage of subjects with HIV-1 RNA levels <50 copies/mL in each trial. log10(IQ24), log10(IQ12), IIP24, and IIP12 were calculated using published median effect model slope values and t1/2 values; r2 values from linear regression and Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for each analysis; and correlation coefficients were compared between log10(IQ) and IIP.

RESULTS

r2 values were greatest for the Deltalog10(IQ12) and Deltalog10(IQ24) comparisons using intention-to-treat outcomes from the 17 trials. Differences in r2 values between Deltalog10(IQ24) and DeltaIIP24 and between Deltalog10(IQ12) and DeltaIIP12 were 0.05 and 0.18, respectively. Differences in Spearman rank correlation coefficients between log10(IQ) and IIP at each drug concentration were not significantly different, with the exception of Deltalog10(IQmax) and DeltaIIPmax; the Deltalog10(IQmax) correlation was significantly stronger than the DeltaIIPmax correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

IIP was not substantially better than log10(IQ) in describing the modest relationship between antiviral activity, pharmacokinetics, and virologic outcomes for antiretroviral drugs.

Recent advances in antiretroviral drugs

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Although the combination therapies of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) have significantly contributed to virological suppression, improved immune function and quality of life, issues such as tolerability, drug-drug interactions and cross-resistance amongst members of a particular drug class still pose a significant barrier to long-term successful treatment. There is a constant need for newer anti HIV drugs with increased potency and improved pharmacokinetic properties either in the existing classes or drugs from new classes that target several new steps in HIV replication cycle.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

The authors have discussed newer antiretroviral drugs belonging to second-generation nucleoside analog reverse transcriptase inhibitors (amdoxovir, elvucitabine, apricitabine, racivir), non-nucleoside analog reverse transcriptase inhibitors (etravirine, rilpivirine), protease inhibitors (darunavir, tipranavir) as well as emerging new classes, i.e., fusion inhibitors (enfuvirtide, sifuvirtide), CCR5 inhibitors (maraviroc, vicriviroc, PRO 140, PRO 542), CD4-receptor inhibitors (ibalizumab), integrase inhibitors (raltegravir, elvitegravir, GSK-1349572), maturation inhibitors (bevirimat), cobicistat (pharmacoenhancer), lens epithelium-derived growth factor inhibitors and capsid assembly inhibitors.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

The reader will gain an understanding of the mechanism of action, mechanism of resistance, stages of development and important clinical trials related to the newer antiretroviral drugs and future potential of these drugs.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

The initial clinical trial data of these newer drugs are very encouraging for the long-term successful control of HIV in both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients.

The effect of raltegravir intensification on low-level residual viremia in HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Most HIV-1-infected patients on effective antiretroviral therapy (ART) with plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below the detection limits of commercial assays have residual viremia measurable by more sensitive methods. We assessed whether adding raltegravir lowered the level of residual viremia in such patients.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Patients receiving ART who had plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 50 copies/mL but detectable viremia by single copy assay (SCA) were randomized to add either raltegravir or placebo to their ART regimen for 12 weeks; patients then crossed-over to the other therapy for an additional 12 weeks while continuing pre-study ART. The primary endpoint was the plasma HIV-1 RNA by SCA averaged between weeks 10 and 12 (10/12) compared between treatment groups. Fifty-three patients were enrolled. The median screening HIV-1 RNA was 1.7 copies/mL. The HIV-1 RNA level at weeks 10/12 did not differ significantly between the raltegravir-intensified (n = 25) and the placebo (n = 24) groups (median 1.2 versus 1.7 copies/mL, p = 0.55, Wilcoxon rank sum test), nor did the change in HIV-1 RNA level from baseline to week 10/12 (median -0.2 and -0.1 copies/mL, p = 0.71, Wilcoxon rank sum test). There was also no significant change in HIV-1 RNA level from weeks 10/12 to weeks 22/24 after patients crossed-over. There was a greater CD4 cell count increase from baseline to week 12 in the raltegravir-intensified group compared with the placebo group (+42 versus -44 cells/mm(3), p = 0.082, Wilcoxon rank sum test), which reversed after the cross-over. This CD4 cell count change was not associated with an effect of raltegravir intensification on markers of CD4 or CD8 cell activation in blood.

CONCLUSION

In this randomized, double-blind cross-over study, 12 weeks of raltegravir intensification did not demonstrably reduce low-level plasma viremia in patients on currently recommended ART. This finding suggests that residual viremia does not arise from ongoing cycles of HIV-1 replication and infection of new cells. New therapeutic strategies to eliminate reservoirs that produce residual viremia will be required to eradicate HIV-1 infection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00515827

Deconstructing most recent antiretroviral recommendations

The selection of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-infected persons initiating treatment is influenced by numerous factors, including efficacy, safety, convenience, drug interactions, and cost, among others. Guidelines have been developed to assist the clinician in choosing regimens that have been found to be effective in clinical studies. Understanding the recommendations of the major US treatment guideline for initial HIV therapy is essential for clinicians caring for such patients.

Substitution of raltegravir for ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors in HIV-infected patients: the SPIRAL study

BACKGROUND

Switching to raltegravir in selected patients treated with ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors may result in similar efficacy and lower plasma lipids.

METHODS

SPIRAL is a 48-week multicentre, open-label trial in which HIV-infected adults with less than 50 copies/ml of plasma HIV RNA for at least the previous 6 months on ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based therapy were randomized (1: 1) to switch from the ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor to raltegravir or to continue on ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based therapy. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients free of treatment failure (noncompleter = failure) at 48 weeks. SPIRAL study was powered to show noninferior efficacy of raltegravir-based therapy with a margin of -12.5%.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-three patients assigned to switch to raltegravir (n = 139) or to continue ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (n = 134) were included in the efficacy analysis. At 48 weeks, 89.2% (raltegravir-based therapy) and 86.6% (ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based therapy) of the patients remained free of treatment failure [difference 2.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.2 to 10.6]. A total of 96.9% (raltegravir-based therapy) and 95.1% (ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based therapy) of the patients remained free of virological failure (difference 1.8%; 95% CI -3.5 to 7.5). Switching to raltegravir was associated with significant decreases in plasma lipids and total-to-HDL cholesterol ratio relative to continuing ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor. Severe adverse events and study drug discontinuations due to any adverse event occurred in 4 and 2% of the patients in each group.

CONCLUSION

In patients with sustained virological suppression on ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based therapy, switching from ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor to raltegravir demonstrated noninferior efficacy and resulted in a better lipid profile at 48 weeks than continuing ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor.

Antiretroviral therapy and management of HIV infection

Antiretroviral therapy of HIV infection has changed a uniformly fatal into a potentially chronic disease. There are now 17 drugs in common use for HIV treatment. Patients who can access and adhere to combination therapy should be able to achieve durable, potentially lifelong suppression of HIV replication. Despite the unquestioned success of antiretroviral therapy, limitations persist. Treatment success needs strict lifelong drug adherence. Although the widely used drugs are generally well tolerated, most have some short-term toxic effects and all have the potential for both known and unknown long-term toxic effects. Drug and administration costs limit treatment in resource-poor regions, and are a growing concern even in resource rich settings. Finally, complete or near complete control of viral replication does not fully restore health. Long-term treated patients who are on an otherwise effective regimen often show persistent immune dysfunction and have higher than expected risk for various non-AIDS-related complications, including heart, bone, liver, kidney, and neurocognitive diseases.

[AIDS Study Group/Spanish AIDS Plan consensus document on antiretroviral therapy in adults with human immunodeficiency virus infection (updated January 2010)]

OBJECTIVE

This consensus document is an update of antiretroviral therapy recommendations for adult patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection.

METHODS

To formulate these recommendations a panel made up of members of the Grupo de Estudio de Sida (Gesida, AIDS Study Group) and the Plan Nacional sobre el Sida (PNS, Spanish AIDS Plan) reviewed the advances in the current understanding of the pathophysiology of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, the efficacy and safety of clinical trials, and cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in biomedical journals or presented at scientific meetings. Three levels of evidence were defined according to the data source: randomized studies (level A), cohort or case-control studies (level B), and expert opinion (level C). The decision to recommend, consider or not to recommend ART was established in each situation.

RESULTS

Currently, the treatment of choice for chronic HIV infection is the combination of three drugs of two different classes, including 2 nucleosides or nucleotide analogs (NRTI) plus 1 non-nucleoside (NNRTI) or 1 boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r), but other combinations are possible. Initiation of ART is recommended in patients with symptomatic HIV infection. In asymptomatic patients, initiation of ART is recommended on the basis of CD4 lymphocyte counts, plasma viral load and patient co-morbidities, as follows: 1) therapy should be started in patients with CD4 counts below 350 cells/microl; 2) When CD4 counts are between 350 and 500 cells/microl, therapy should be started in case of cirrhosis, chronic hepatitis C, high cardiovascular risk, HIV nephropathy, HIV viral load above 100,000 copies/ml, proportion of CD4 cells under 14%, and in people aged over 55; 3) Therapy should be deferred when CD4 are above 500 cells/microl, but could be considered if any of previous considerations concurs. Treatment should be initiated in case of hepatitis B requiring treatment and should be considered for reduce sexual transmission. The objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable viral load. Adherence to therapy plays an essential role in maintaining antiviral response. Therapeutic options are limited after ART failures but undetectable viral loads maybe possible with the new drugs even in highly drug experienced patients. Genotype studies are useful in these situations. Drug toxicity of ART therapy is losing importance as benefits exceed adverse effects. Criteria for antiretroviral treatment in acute infection, pregnancy and post-exposure prophylaxis are mentioned as well as the management of HIV co-infection with hepatitis B or C.

CONCLUSIONS

CD4 cells counts, viral load and patient co-morbidities are the most important reference factors to consider when initiating ART in asymptomatic patients. The large number of available drugs, the increased sensitivity of tests to monitor viral load, and the ability to determine viral resistance is leading to a more individualized therapy approach in order to achieve undetectable viral load under any circumstances.

Recent key advances in human immunodeficiency virus medicine and implications for China

In this article we summarize several recent major developments in human immunodeficiency virus treatment, prevention, outcome, and social policy change. Updated international guidelines endorse more aggressive treatment strategies and safer antiretroviral drugs. New antiretroviral options are being tested. Important lessons were learned in the areas of human immunodeficiency virus vaccines and microbicide gels from clinical studies, and additional trials in prevention, especially pre-exposure prophylaxis, are nearing completion. Insight into the role of the virus in the pathogenesis of diseases traditionally thought to be unrelated to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome has become a driving force for earlier and universal therapy. Lastly, we review important achievements of and future challenges facing China as she steps into her eighth year of the National Free Antiretroviral Treatment Program.

Biochemical and pharmacological analyses of HIV-1 integrase flexible loop mutants resistant to raltegravir

Resistance to raltegravir (RAL), the first HIV-1 integrase (IN) inhibitor approved by the FDA, involves three genetic pathways: IN mutations N155H, Q148H/R/K, and Y143H/R/C. Those mutations are generally associated with secondary point mutations. The resulting mutant viruses show a high degree of resistance against RAL but somehow are affected in their replication capacity. Clinical and virological data indicate the high relevance of the combination G140S + Q148H because of its limited impact on HIV replication and very high resistance to RAL. Here, we report how mutations at the amino acid residues 140, 148, and 155 affect IN enzymatic activity and RAL resistance. We show that single mutations at position 140 have limited impact on 3'-processing (3'-P) but severely inactivate strand transfer (ST). On the other hand, single mutations at position 148 have a more profound effect and inactivate both 3'-P and ST. By examining systematically all of the double mutants at the 140 and 148 positions, we demonstrate that only the combination G140S + Q148H is able to restore the catalytic properties of IN. This rescue only operates in cis when both the 140S and 148H mutations are in the same IN polypeptide flexible loop. Finally, we show that the G140S-Q148H double mutant exhibits the highest resistance to RAL. It also confers cross-resistance to elvitegravir but less to G-quadraduplex inhibitors such as zintevir. Our results demonstrate that IN mutations at positions 140 and 148 in the IN flexible loop can account for the phenotype of RAL-resistant viruses.

Minimal removal of raltegravir by hemodialysis in HIV-infected patients with end-stage renal disease

Little is known about raltegravir removal by hemodialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We therefore measured raltegravir concentrations in plasma in pre- and postdialyzer blood samples from 2 ESRD HIV-infected patients. The hemodialysis extraction ratio and raltegravir hemodialysis clearance were 5.5% and 9.1 ml/min in patient 1 and 9.5% and 19.1 ml/min in patient 2, respectively. Our results suggest minimal raltegravir removal by hemodialysis with no specific raltegravir dosage adjustments required in HIV-infected patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Raltegravir in treatment naive patients

Raltegravir is the first integrase inhibitor approved for the treatment of HIV infection based on the superior efficacy it showed compared to optimized backbone therapy alone in patients harboring multidrug resistant viruses. Studies on naïve patients showed comparable efficacy of raltegravir and efavirenz and just recently the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved raltegravir for the use in naïve patients based on the favorable results of the international double-blind phase III STARTMRK trial. Additional interesting findings were the faster, and not yet explained, decay of HIV-1 RNA and the higher CD4+ cells increase in the raltegravir group as compared to the efavirenz group.

Raltegravir is generally well tolerated and adverse events were generally similar in raltegravir and comparator arms throughout all studies. When compared to efavirenz, patients on raltegravir showed less incidence of central nervous system-related adverse events. In studies on experienced patients higher incidence of cancers was found in the raltegravir arm: a relationship with the drug was, however not confirmed in a recent review considering all raltegravir studies. Raltegravir also showed a safe lipid profile expecially in naïve patients, finding that renders the drug attractive for patients with other cardiovascular risk factors.

All this characteristics in association with its specific mechanism of action, make raltegravir an interesting drug for naïve patients and a large use in this type of patients is predictable. Only time and experience, however, will tell us whether raltegravir will maintain its promises in the long run.

HIV resistance to raltegravir

Similar to all antiretroviral drugs, failure of raltegravirbased treatment regimens to fully supress HIV replication almost invariably results in emergence of HIV resistance to this new drug. HIV resistance to raltegravir is the consequence of mutations located close to the integrase active site, which can be divided into three main evolutionary pathways: the N155H, the Q148R/H/K and the Y143R/C pathways. Each of these primary mutations can be accompanied by a variety of secondary mutations that both increase resistance and compensate for the variable loss of viral replicative capacity that is often associated with primary resistance mutations. One unique property of HIV resistance to raltegravir is that each of these different resistance pathways are mutually exclusive and appear to evolve separately on distinct viral genomes. Resistance is frequently initiated by viruses carrying mutations of the N155H pathway, followed by emergence and further dominance of viral genomes carrying mutations of the Q148R/H/K or of the Y143R/C pathways, which express higher levels of resistance. Even if some natural integrase polymorphisms can be part of this evolution process, these polymorphisms do not affect HIV susceptibility in the absence of primary mutations. Therefore, all HIV-1 subtypes and groups, together with HIV-2, are naturally susceptible to raltegravir. Finally, because interaction of integrase strand transfer inhibitors with the HIV integrase active site is comparable from one compound to another, raltegravir-resistant viruses express significant cross resistance to most other compounds of this new class of antiretroviral drugs.

Raltegravir: molecular basis of its mechanism of action

Integration of the HIV-1 viral DNA generated by reverse transcription of the RNA genome into the host cell chromosomes is a key step of viral replication, catalyzed by the viral integrase. In October 2007, the first integrase inhibitor, raltegravir, was approved for clinical use under the name of Isentress™. The results of the various clinical trials that have evaluated raltegravir have been very encouraging with regard to the immunological and virological efficacy and tolerance. However, as observed for other anti-retrovirals, specific resistance mutations have been identified in patients failing to respond to treatment with raltegravir. Although knowledge of the integrase structural biology remains fragmentary, the structures and modeling data available might provide relevant clues on the origin of the emergence of these resistance mutations. In this review, we describe the mechanism of action of this drug and the main data relating to its use in vivo, together with recent structural data important to our understanding of the origin of viral resistance.

Protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients: the evidence behind the options

The introduction of protease inhibitors (PIs) to HIV treatment combinations in 1996 has significantly reduced morbidity and mortality due to HIV infection. Since the 1990s, multiple PIs have been approved, with several boosted PI regimens recognized as first-line regimens in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive patients. While the current guidelines recommend non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-, PI- and integrase inhibitor-based regimens as equal alternatives in ART-naive patients, there are clearly selected patients for whom PI-based regimens appear to be the best option because of specific toxicity or dosing issues. Due to the multiple options of therapy available for ART-naive patients, providers initiating PI-based ART can individualize therapy based on patient characteristics and needs, including pre-treatment resistance, drug-drug interactions, adverse effect profiles and co-morbid conditions. Here, we discuss the current recommendations and recent guidelines, and the evidence available for various PI-based ART regimens in treatment-naive patients. We also discuss adverse effects and the use of PIs in special circumstances.

Unmet therapeutic needs in the new era of combination antiretroviral therapy for HIV-1

Significant advances in outcomes have been achieved with combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in patients living with HIV. However, several ongoing needs remain with respect to the development of new treatments. The need for new or enhanced cART may become increasingly apparent as patients live longer with HIV and a greater proportion die from non-AIDS-related illnesses. Immunological response to cART is variable and immune failure occurs, despite virological control. Moreover, viral suppression can be incomplete due to insufficient antiviral efficacy, acquired or transmitted drug resistance, suboptimal pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and lack of adherence. Chronic immune activation may continue even when viral replication is relatively restrained. Patients continue to experience cardiovascular and metabolic complications, due to disease, treatment and ageing. In addition, neurocognitive impairment and malignancy are important sources of ongoing morbidity despite cART. HIV also affects immune system senescence and bone turnover. This review discusses potential unmet needs with respect to these issues.

49th ICAAC annual meeting: optimization of anti-infective use in the clinical setting

The meeting of the American Society of Microbiology was recently held in San Francisco, CA, USA - a gathering of experts in the fields of infectious diseases, microbiology and the pharmaceutical industry, among others. Owing to this large attendance and extensive coverage of many infectious disease topics, we focus on the optimization of anti-infective use in the clinical setting. We will cover antimicrobial stewardship, drugs with Gram-positive activity, and antifungal and antiretroviral agents.

Panel of prototypical raltegravir-resistant infectious molecular clones in a novel integrase-deleted cloning vector

We created an HIV-1 cloning vector, pNL4.3DeltaIN, to generate recombinant infectious molecular clones for analysis of patient-derived HIV-1 integrase coding regions. Using this vector, we constructed a panel of clinically derived viruses with the canonical patterns of raltegravir resistance mutations and submitted the panel to the NIH AIDS Research and Reference Reagent Program. Investigational integrase inhibitors with activity against these clones are likely to retain activity against the most clinically relevant raltegravir-resistant variants.

A new drug combination therapy for treatment-naive patients with HIV-1 infection, consisting of raltegravir, emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate

A new drug combination regimen, consisting of raltegravir, emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), is described for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. This new drug combination regimen is applicable to the treatment of drug-naïve HIV-1-infected patients. It extends the use of the drug combinations to a new class of anti-HIV drugs, i.e. raltegravir, targeted at a new site in the HIV-1 replicative cycle, namely the HIV-1 integrase. This opens new perspectives for the design of multiple drug combination regimens targeting different enzymes involved in HIV-1 replication, i.e. integrase and reverse transcriptase. These multiple (triple or quadruple) drug combinations should be aimed at once daily dosing.

Switch to a raltegravir-based regimen versus continuation of a lopinavir-ritonavir-based regimen in stable HIV-infected patients with suppressed viraemia (SWITCHMRK 1 and 2): two multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To reduce lipid abnormalities and other side-effects associated with antiretroviral regimens containing lopinavir-ritonavir, patients might want to switch one or more components of their regimen. We compared substitution of raltegravir for lopinavir-ritonavir with continuation of lopinavir-ritonavir in HIV-infected patients with stable viral suppression on lopinavir-ritonavir-based combination therapy.

METHODS

The SWITCHMRK 1 and 2 studies were multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3, randomised controlled trials. HIV-infected patients aged 18 years or older were eligible if they had documented viral RNA (vRNA) concentration below the limit of assay quantification for at least 3 months while on a lopinavir-ritonavir-based regimen. 707 eligible patients were randomly allocated by interactive voice response system in a 1:1 ratio to switch from lopinavir-ritonavir to raltegravir (400 mg twice daily; n=353) or to remain on lopinavir-ritonavir (two 200 mg/50 mg tablets twice daily; n=354), while continuing background therapy consisting of at least two nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Primary endpoints were the mean percentage change in serum lipid concentrations from baseline to week 12; the proportion of patients with vRNA concentration less than 50 copies per mL at week 24 (with all treated patients who did not complete the study counted as failures) with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12% for each study; and the frequency of adverse events up to 24 weeks. Analyses were done according to protocol. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00443703 and NCT00443729.

FINDINGS

702 patients received at least one dose of study drug and were included in the efficacy and safety analyses for the combined trials (raltegravir, n=350; lopinavir-ritonavir, n=352). Percentage changes in lipid concentrations from baseline to week 12 were significantly greater (p<0.0001) in the raltegravir group than in the lopinavir-ritonavir group in each study, yielding combined results for total cholesterol -12.6%vs 1.0%, non-HDL cholesterol -15.0%vs 2.6%, and triglycerides -42.2%vs 6.2%. At week 24, 293 (84.4%, 95% CI 80.2-88.1) of 347 patients in the raltegravir group had vRNA concentration less than 50 copies per mL compared with 319 (90.6%, 87.1-93.5) of 352 patients in the lopinavir-ritonavir group (treatment difference -6.2%, -11.2 to -1.3). Clinical and laboratory adverse events occurred at similar frequencies in the treatment groups. There were no serious drug-related adverse events or deaths. The only drug-related clinical adverse event of moderate to severe intensity reported in 1% or more of either treatment group was diarrhoea, which occurred in ten patients in the lopinavir-ritonavir group (3%) and no patients in the raltegravir group. The studies were terminated at week 24 because of lower than expected virological efficacy in the raltegravir group compared with the lopinavir-ritonavir group.

INTERPRETATION

Although switching to raltegravir was associated with greater reductions in serum lipid concentrations than was continuation of lopinavir-ritonavir, efficacy results did not establish non-inferiority of raltegravir to lopinavir-ritonavir.

FUNDING

Merck.

Raltegravir-based HAART regimen in a patient with large B-cell lymphoma

OBJECTIVE

To describe the antiretroviral management of a patient diagnosed simultaneously with HIV/AIDS and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, focusing on the drug-drug interactions between highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and concomitant cancer chemotherapy.

CASE SUMMARY

A 55-year-old white man was recently diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and presented 1 month later with complaints of nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, double vision, right eye discomfort/swelling, and a 3.6-kg weight loss. An excisional biopsy of a right inguinal lymph node confirmed a new diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. HAART and a chemotherapeutic regimen, including cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (CHOP) with intrathecal methotrexate, was to be initiated. As the potential for multiple drug-drug interactions existed, raltegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine were chosen for the initial HAART regimen. The patient achieved and maintained an undetectable viral load throughout 6 CHOP cycles.

DISCUSSION

HAART improves the chemotherapeutic response in patients with HIV and lymphoma. Multiple drug-drug interactions are possible in patients who are to receive CHOP and HAART. Cyclophosphamide and vincristine are metabolized via the CYP3A4 isoenzyme. Protease inhibitors (PIs) and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors both inhibit and induce CYP3A4, with the potential for altered chemotherapeutic and cytotoxic effects. When PIs are combined with CHOP, mortality is reduced, but increased adverse effects are demonstrated. Raltegravir, an integrase inhibitor, is eliminated via glucuronidation and results in minimal drug-drug interactions. Raltegravir improves virologic and immunologic responses in HAART-naïve patients and thus would be a suitable alternative for preventing chemotherapeutic-HAART interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited information published regarding the potential for interactions between HAART and cancer chemotherapy. While further research is necessary, it is important for clinicians to consider the potential for drug-drug interactions when designing a HAART regimen concurrently with chemotherapy.

Stage-dependent inhibition of HIV-1 replication by antiretroviral drugs in cell culture

Recent clinical trials have shown that the use of the HIV-1 integrase (IN) inhibitor raltegravir (RAL) results in drops in the viral load that are more rapid than those achieved by use of the reverse transcriptase (RT) inhibitor efavirenz. Previously, mathematical modeling of viral load decay that takes into account the stage of viral replication targeted by a drug has yielded data that closely approximate the clinical trial results. This model predicts greater inhibition of viral replication by drugs that act later in the viral replication cycle. In the present study, we have added drugs that target entry, reverse transcription, integration, or proteolytic processing to acutely infected cells and have shown modest viral inhibition by entry inhibitors, intermediate levels of inhibition by RT and IN inhibitors, and high levels of inhibition by protease inhibitors relative to the levels of growth for the no-drug controls. When dual or triple combinations of these drugs were added to acutely infected cells, we found that the levels of inhibition achieved by any given combination were comparable to those achieved by the latest-acting drug in the combination. In single-round infections in which the kinetics of reverse transcription and integration had been determined by quantitative PCR, addition of IN inhibitors at various times postinfection resulted in levels of inhibition equal to or greater than those achieved by addition of RT inhibitors. Collectively, our data provide in vitro evidence of the stage-dependent inhibition of HIV-1 by clinically relevant drugs. We discuss how stage-dependent inhibition helps to explain the unique viral load decay dynamics observed clinically with RAL.

New therapeutic strategies for raltegravir

Raltegravir (Isentress) is the first approved HIV integrase inhibitor. Agents in this class target a different viral enzyme compared with agents inhibiting reverse transcriptase and protease. A wide number of patients are currently susceptible to integrase inhibitors, including heavily antiretroviral-experienced patients harbouring drug-resistant viruses. The good tolerability and convenience of raltegravir have recently begun to be appreciated, leading to the consideration of other indications for the drug. Data recently released using the drug as first-line therapy or in switch strategies are very promising and the role of raltegravir in intensification therapy is currently under investigation. Altogether, the current information supports a broad use of raltegravir beyond its initial approval for antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected patients.

High concentration of raltegravir in semen of HIV-infected men: results from a substudy of the EASIER-ANRS 138 trial

Raltegravir concentrations and human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA levels in semen samples from 10 treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients were measured after 24 weeks of raltegravir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Semen and plasma HIV-1 RNA levels were below 100 copies/ml and 50 copies/ml, respectively, in all samples. The median raltegravir concentrations in semen samples (n=10) and in plasma samples (n=9) drawn simultaneously were 345 (range, 83 to 707) ng/ml and 206 (range, 106 to 986) ng/ml, respectively. The median semen-to-plasma ratio of raltegravir concentration was 1.42 (range, 0.52 to 6.66), indicating good although variable levels of drug penetration of raltegravir in the seminal compartment.

Strand transfer inhibitors of HIV-1 integrase: bringing IN a new era of antiretroviral therapy

HIV-1 integrase (IN) is one of three essential enzymes (along with reverse transcriptase and protease) encoded by the viral pol gene. IN mediates two critical reactions during viral replication; firstly 3'-end processing (3'EP) of the double-stranded viral DNA ends and then strand transfer (STF) which joins the viral DNA to the host chromosomal DNA forming a functional integrated proviral DNA. IN is a 288 amino acid protein containing three functional domains, the N-terminal domain (NTD), catalytic core domain (CCD) and the C-terminal domain (CTD). The CCD contains three conserved catalytic residues, Asp64, Asp116 and Glu152, which coordinate divalent metal ions essential for the STF reaction. Intensive research over the last two decades has led to the discovery and development of small molecule inhibitors of the IN STF reaction (INSTIs). INSTIs are catalytic inhibitors of IN, and act to chelate the divalent metal ions in the CCD. One INSTI, raltegravir (RAL, Merck Inc.) was approved in late 2007 for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with prior antiretroviral (ARV) treatment experience and was recently approved also for first line therapy. A second INSTI, elvitegravir (EVG, Gilead Sciences, Inc.) is currently undergoing phase 3 studies in ARV treatment-experienced patients and phase 2 studies in ARV naïve patients as part of a novel fixed dose combination. Several additional INSTIs are in early stage clinical development. This review will discuss the discovery and development of this novel class of antiretrovirals. This article forms part of a special issue of Antiviral Research marking the 25th anniversary of antiretroviral drug discovery and development, Vol 85, issue 1, 2010.

The evolution of HIV treatment guidelines: current state-of-the-art of ART

Expert panels have provided guidelines for the treatment of HIV infection for more than a decade. The guidelines have evolved rapidly reflecting the remarkable improvements in HIV therapeutics over this time. From guidelines based mostly on expert opinion - the current guidelines are now primarily evidence-based recommendations - which the vast majority of treating clinicians accept and follow. We will highlight the major guideline recommendations for initiation of antiretroviral therapy - focusing on new data for the asymptomatic patient and those presenting with acute AIDS-related opportunistic infections. Given the number of new drugs available, we are currently able to offer virtually all patients in practice - a fully suppressive regimen, even in patients with substantial multi-drug resistant HIV. A remarkable achievement since AZT was first introduced for the treatment of HIV. This article forms part of a special issue of Antiviral Research marking the 25th anniversary of antiretroviral drug discovery and development, vol. 85, issue 1, 2010.

Understanding and managing the adverse effects of antiretroviral therapy

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has changed the landscape of HIV disease in a way that seemed unthinkable a decade ago; from an almost uniformly fatal disease to a chronic manageable one. The first HAART regimens worked in suppressing virus, but were encumbered by a variety of short term and long term side effects. More recent regimens became simpler, easier to take, and with fewer adverse events. As we look to people living perhaps a normal life span with HIV, the increasing number of antiretroviral agents available means that individualizing treatment has become more feasible and the longer downstream adverse events related to HAART, such as its effect on cardiovascular disease and diabetes, renal and hepatic disease, have begun to dominate our choice of drugs. A knowledge of both the short and long term adverse events associated with HAART is essential for providers and for patients. For new drugs to be acceptable in the current field, they will have to pass a litmus test of tolerability. Since adverse events are often remarkably idiosyncratic, pharmacogenomics may offer a way of predicting side effects and their severity from a particular drug or drug class in individual patients. This article forms part of a special issue of Antiviral Research marking the 25th anniversary of antiretroviral drug discovery and development, Vol. 85, issue 1, 2010.

Switch from enfuvirtide to raltegravir in virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected patients: effects on level of residual viremia and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Raltegravir is a potential treatment option for virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected patients on enfuvirtide with injection site reactions.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize safety and efficacy of an enfuvirtide to raltegravir switch including changes in T-cells, quality of life, and residual viremia.

STUDY DESIGN

In patients with viral load <50 copies/mL and injection site reactions, enfuvirtide was switched to raltegravir without additional changes to the antiretroviral regimen. Virologic failure was defined as a viral load >1000 copies/mL or two consecutive viral load measurements between 50 and 1000 copies/mL (low-level viremia). Over the 24 week study, we compared changes in T-cells, injection site reactions, quality of life, and residual viremia, as measured through the single-copy assay which can detect plasma virus down to a single copy, using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients with a median CD4+ T-cell count of 420 cells/microL were enrolled. After the switch, two patients experienced virologic failure due to confirmed low-level viremia. However, both patients subsequently were re-suppressed, one without any changes to his regimen. There was no change in CD4+ T-cell count. Injection site reactions resolved. However, there was little reported change in quality of life. The baseline median level of residual viremia was 6 copies/mL and did not change after the switch to raltegravir.

CONCLUSIONS

A switch to raltegravir in virologically suppressed patients on enfuvirtide is effective in maintaining immunologic and virologic control at 24 weeks but did not result in a change in residual viremia.