Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection (GS-US-380-1489): a double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

A Review of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in HIV-Infected Patients: The Next Big Thing?

The burden of liver-related morbidity remains high among HIV-infected patients, despite advances in the treatment of HIV and viral hepatitis. Especially, the impact of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is significant with a prevalence of up to 50%. The pathogenesis of NAFLD and the reasons for progression to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are still not fully elucidated, but insulin resistance, mitochondrial dysfunction and dyslipidemia seem to be the main drivers. Both HIV-infection itself and combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) can contribute to the development of NAFLD/NASH in various ways. As ongoing HIV-related immune activation is associated with insulin resistance, early initiation of cART is needed to limit its duration. In addition, the use of early-generation nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors is also associated with the development of NAFLD/NASH. Patients at risk should therefore receive antiretroviral drugs with a more favorable metabolic profile. Only weight reduction is considered to be an effective therapy for all patients with NAFLD/NASH, although certain drugs are available for specific subgroups. Since patients with NASH are at risk of developing liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, several non-antifibrotic and antifibrotic drugs are under investigation in clinical trials to broaden the therapeutic options. The epidemiology and etiology of NAFLD/NASH in HIV-positive patients is likely to change in the near future. Current guidelines recommend early initiation of cART that is less likely to induce insulin resistance, mitochondrial dysfunction and dyslipidemia. In contrast, as a result of increasing life expectancy in good health, this population will adopt the more traditional risk factors for NAFLD/NASH. HIV-treating physicians should be aware of the etiology, pathogenesis and treatment of NAFLD/NASH in order to identify and treat the patients at risk.

Risks of cardiovascular or central nervous system adverse events and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome, for dolutegravir versus other antiretrovirals: meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Results from nonrandomized cohort studies suggest higher risks of CNS adverse events for dolutegravir, versus other ARVs. There have been two case reports of myocarditis on dolutegravir. Integrase inhibitors have been associated with IRIS in two cohort studies. Meta-analysis of randomized trials can be used to cross-check potential safety signals. This systematic review of drug safety used an EMBASE and MEDLINE search combined with serious adverse event (SAE) reports on the website www.clinicaltrials.gov. Cardiovascular, CNS or IRIS-associated adverse events were analysed for dolutegravir versus other ARVs. Relative risks for the comparison between dolutegravir and other antiretrovirals were calculated for each adverse event. Meta-analyses applied Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models.

RECENT FINDINGS

There was a higher risk of Grade 1-4 insomnia adverse events for DTG (6.1%) versus other ARVs (4.5%; P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between DTG and other ARVs in the risk of cardiovascular serious adverse events. In the SINGLE and SPRING-1 trials comparing DTG with efavirenz, there were 5/465 patients with reported suicidality SAEs on DTG (1.1%) versus 6/469 (1.3%) on EFV. In other studies, serious adverse events of suicidality were reported for 15/2250 patients on DTG (0.7%) versus 9/2257 patients on other ARVs (0.4%). Risks of IRIS were low, but event rates were low and the main trials excluded CDC stage C disease.

SUMMARY

In this meta-analysis, there was no significant effect of dolutegravir on the risk of cardiac, IRIS or suicide-related serious adverse events. There was a higher risk of insomnia for DTG. Other completed randomized trials should be included in new evaluations of DTG safety. Continued pharmacovigilance, with regular meta-analyses, should be used to monitor safety.

Bictegravir: First Global Approval

Gilead Sciences has developed a single tablet anti-HIV-1 medication (Biktarvy^®) combining the novel integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) bictegravir with the nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide. This fixed dose combination has demonstrated efficacy as treatment for both anti-retroviral naïve and virologically suppressed HIV-1 infection in patients switching therapy, and was recently approved in the USA. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of bictegravir leading to this first approval of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide as treatment for HIV-1 infection.

Bictegravir in a fixed-dose tablet with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide for the treatment of HIV infection: pharmacology and clinical implications

INTRODUCTION

Current antiretroviral therapy is more effective and simpler than in previous times due to the development of new drugs with improved pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles and the advent of single pill regimens with low toxicity that facilitate long-term adherence. The recent approval of the novel potent integrase strand-transfer inhibitor bictegravir (BIC) co-formulated with emtricitabine (FTC) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in a fixed daily dose pill, B/F/TAF, adds to the list of single-tablet regimens available to treat HIV infection. Areas covered: This review provides an overview of the pharmacological and clinical information obtained from MEDLINE/PubMed publications and the latest international conferences. Expert opinion: BIC is a potent antiretroviral with an improved resistance profile over previous integrase inhibitors. Its combination with the new tenofovir prodrug TAF and FTC creates an effective regimen B/F/TAF for treatment-naïve patients and for those switching from another successful combination. B/F/TAF's favorable pharmacokinetic profile, simple dose, low pill burden, and few drug-drug interactions or treatment-related adverse events, will make it one of the preferred regimens in the future.

Discontinuation of dolutegravir, elvitegravir/cobicistat and raltegravir because of toxicity in a prospective cohort

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to assess the rates of discontinuation of integrase inhibitor regimens because of any neuropsychiatric adverse event (NPAE) and the factors associated with discontinuation.

METHODS

A population-based, prospective, multicentre cohort study was carried out. Treatment-naïve subjects starting therapy with a regimen containing integrase inhibitors, or those switching to such a regimen, with plasma HIV-1 RNA < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL in 14 hospitals in Catalonia or the Balearic Islands (Spain) were included in the study. Every discontinuation because of adverse events (AEs) was double-checked directly with treating physicians. Multivariable Cox models identified factors correlated with discontinuation.

RESULTS

A total of 4165 subjects (37% treatment-naïve) started regimens containing dolutegravir (n = 1650; 91% with abacavir), raltegravir (n = 930) or elvitegravir/cobicistat (n = 1585). There were no significant differences among regimens in the rate of discontinuation because of any AE. Rates of discontinuation because of NPAEs were low but higher for dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine [2.1%; 2.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0, 4.2) discontinuations/100 patients/year] versus elvitegravir/cobicistat (0.5%; 0.8 (95% CI 0.3, 1.5) discontinuations/100 patients/year], with significant differences among centres for dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine and NPAEs (P = 0.003). We identified an association of female gender and lower CD4 count with increased risk of discontinuation because of any AE [Incidence ratio (IR) 2.3 (95% CI 1.4, 4.0) and 1.8 (95% CI 1.1, 2.8), respectively]. Female gender, age > 60 years and abacavir use were not associated with NPAE discontinuations. NPAEs were commonly grade 1-2, and had been present before and improved after drug withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large prospective cohort study, patients receiving dolutegravir, raltegravir or elvitegravir/cobicistat did not show significant differences in the rate of discontinuation because of any toxicity. The rate of discontinuations because of NPAEs was low, but was significantly higher for dolutegravir than for elvitegravir/cobicistat, with significant differences among centres, suggesting that greater predisposition to believe that a given adverse event is caused by a given drug of some treating physicians might play a role in the discordance seen between cohorts.

Safety of elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in HIV-1-infected adults with end-stage renal disease on chronic haemodialysis: an open-label, single-arm, multicentre, phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND

Current treatment for HIV-infected individuals with renal failure on haemodialysis frequently requires complex regimens with multiple pills. A daily single-tablet regimen of coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is approved in Europe, the USA, and in other regions for use in HIV-1-infected individuals with mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease (creatinine clearance 30-69 mL/min). We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of this regimen in HIV-infected adults with end-stage renal disease on chronic haemodialysis.

METHODS

We did an open-label, single-arm, multicentre, phase 3b trial at 26 outpatient clinics in Austria, France, Germany, and the USA. Participants were HIV-1-infected adults with end-stage renal disease (creatinine clearance <15 mL/min), on chronic haemodialysis for at least 6 months before screening. Virological suppression (ie, plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) on a stable antiretroviral regimen was required for at least 6 months before screening with a CD4 count of at least 200 cells per μL. We switched all participants to coformulated elvitegravir 150 mg, cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg once daily, taken after haemodialysis for up to 96 weeks. We did assessments at study visits at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, and 48, and every 12 weeks thereafter up to 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher up to week 48. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the primary analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02600819) and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 1, and Nov 3, 2016, 55 participants were enrolled and received at least one dose of study drug. Through week 48, 18 of 55 participants (33%, 95% CI 20-45) had an adverse event of grade 3 or higher on study treatment. Treatment-emergent grade 3 or higher adverse events that occurred in more than one participant included anaemia, osteomyelitis, prolonged electrocardiogram QT, fluid overload, hyperkalaemia, hypertension, and hypotension (all n=2). No adverse event of grade 3 or higher was considered by the site investigators to be treatment related. Three participants (5%, 95% CI 0-11) discontinued treatment because of adverse events; one of these (grade 1 allergic pruritus) was considered treatment related. Treatment-related adverse events were reported for six individuals (11%, 95% CI 3-19), the most common of which was nausea (in four individuals [7%]); all treatment-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2 in severity.

INTERPRETATION

At 48 weeks, switching to the single-tablet regimen of elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was well tolerated. This regimen might provide a tolerable and convenient option for ongoing treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults with end-stage renal disease on chronic haemodialysis.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

New antiretroviral agent use affects prevalence of HIV drug resistance in clinical care populations

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of HIV drug resistance over time and identify risk factors for multiclass resistance.

DESIGN

Prospective clinical cohort of HIV-infected patients at the University of North Carolina.

METHODS

Among antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced patients in care 2000-2016, we estimated annual prevalences of cumulative resistance, defined as at least one major mutation by drug class. Clinical data and multiple imputation were used when genotypic data were missing, and mutations were carried forward in time. We estimated resistance odds ratios comparing characteristics of patients in care in 2016.

RESULTS

A total of 3682 patients contributed 23 169 person-years. Prevalence of at least one major resistance mutation, irrespective of viral suppression, peaked in 2005 with 49% (95% confidence interval 46, 52) and decreased to 38% (35, 40) in 2016. Resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, protease inhibitors, and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors also peaked in 2005-2007 and decreased to 28 (26, 31), 14 (12, 16), and 27% (24, 29) in 2016, respectively. In 2016, prevalence of integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) resistance was 2% (1, 3) and triple-class resistance 10% (9, 12). Over the study period, cumulative resistance was frequent among patients with detectable viremia, but uncommon among patients initiating ART post-2007. Among 1553 patients in care in 2016, ART initiation at an older age, with an INSTI, and with higher CD4 cell counts were associated with resistance to fewer or no classes.

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of resistance to older ART classes has decreased in the last 10 years in this clinical cohort, whereas INSTI resistance has increased but remained very low. Patients with viremia continue to have a high burden of resistance even if they initiated ART recently.

Canary in the Coal Mine? Transmitted Mutations Conferring Resistance to All Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors in a Treatment-Naive Patient

Transmitted drug resistance to the integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) class of antiretrovirals is very rare. We present a case of a treatment-naive female patient with human immunodeficiency virus harboring resistance to all INSTIs, including bictegravir and dolutegravir.

Profile of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide fixed dose combination and its potential in the treatment of HIV-1 infection: evidence to date

Modern pharmacologic management of people living with HIV involves the use of fixed dose combinations of antiretrovirals that are simple to take, well tolerated, and highly effective. Specific recent pharmacologic advancements include 1) the second-generation integrase strand transfer inhibitors (dolutegravir and bictegravir) that consistently show less side effects, high tolerability, minimal drug interactions, and rapid rates of HIV viral load decline and 2) tenofovir alafenamide, a prodrug of tenofovir that concentrates in lymphoid tissue and minimizes off target effects. Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide or B/F/TAF is a recently approved fixed dose combination that incorporates these new advancements in the management of HIV. This review focuses on the data supporting the use of B/F/TAF, reviews clinically relevant findings, and highlights the unanswered questions that may limit its clinical utility.

Development and validation of LC-MS/MS method for quantification of bictegravir in human plasma and its application to an intracellular uptake study

A sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method was developed and validated for quantification of bictegravir in human plasma. A small volume of only 50 μL aliquot of plasma was precipitated with acetonitrile containing an internal standard (IS). Chromatographic separation was performed on a Kinetex EVO C₁₈ column, 50 × 3.0 mm, 5 μm using an isocratic mobile phase containing 80:20 acetonitrile-water with 0.1% formic acid. A mass spectrometer was operated in ESI positive multiple reaction monitoring mode using the m/z 450.1/289.1 for bictegravir and 420.1/277.1 for IS. The dynamic range of the method was 1-10,000 ng/mL with a correlation coefficient of ≥0.9991. The precision results of calibration standards were in the range of 0.05-4.57% and accuracies were 95.07-104.70%. The mean extraction recovery was 98.64% with a precision of 2.91%. The method was validated as per US Food and Drug Administration guidelines and was found to be accurate and precise. The method was successfully applied to in vitro cellular uptake study.

Patient-Reported Symptoms Over 48 Weeks Among Participants in Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Non-inferiority Trials of Adults with HIV on Co-formulated Bictegravir, Emtricitabine, and Tenofovir Alafenamide versus Co-formulated Abacavir, Dolutegravir, and Lamivudine

BACKGROUND

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are recommended for first-line antiretroviral therapy in combination with two nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Co-formulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), a novel, INSTI-based regimen, is currently approved in the US and EU for the treatment of HIV-1 infection and recommended as first-line treatment in current guidelines. In our current analysis, we aimed to determine changes in patient-reported symptoms over time among HIV-1-infected adults who initiated or switched to B/F/TAF versus another INSTI-based regimen, co-formulated abacavir, dolutegravir, and lamivudine (ABC/DTG/3TC).

METHODS

A planned secondary analysis of patient-reported outcomes was conducted for two double-blind, randomized, phase III studies in HIV-1-infected adults comparing B/F/TAF with ABC/DTG/3TC: one in treatment-naïve individuals (GS-US-380-1489, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02607930) and the other in virologically suppressed participants (GS-US-380-1844, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02603120). In both studies, the HIV symptoms distress module (HIV-SI) was administered at baseline (BL) and weeks 4, 12, and 48. Responses to each of the 20 items were dichotomized as bothersome or not bothersome. Treatment differences were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models (adjusted for BL HIV-SI count, age, sex, BL Veterans Aging Cohort Study [VACS] Index, medical history of serious mental illness, BL Short Form [SF]-36 Physical Component Summary [PCS], BL SF-36 Mental Component Summary [MCS], and, for virologically suppressed participants only, years since HIV diagnosis). We conducted longitudinal modeling of bothersome symptoms using a generalized mixed model including treatment, time, time-by-treatment, and additional covariates from the adjusted logistic regression model as described above. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was administered at the same frequency as the HIV-SI, and the total score was dichotomized as good or poor sleep quality. Similar models to those used for HIV-SI were applied, using BL sleep quality and BL SF-36 MCS as covariates. Statistical significance was assessed using p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Across both studies, bothersome symptoms were reported by fewer participants on B/F/TAF than those on ABC/DTG/3TC. In treatment-naïve adults, fatigue/loss of energy, nausea/vomiting, dizzy/lightheadedness, and difficulty sleeping were reported significantly less with B/F/TAF at two or more time points. Fatigue and nausea were also significantly less common for those receiving B/F/TAF in longitudinal models. In virologically suppressed participants, nausea/vomiting, sad/down/depressed, nervous/anxious, and poor sleep quality (from the PSQI) were reported significantly less with B/F/TAF at two or more time points, as well as in longitudinal models.

CONCLUSIONS

B/F/TAF was associated with lower prevalence of bothersome symptoms than ABC/DTG/3TC in both treatment-naïve and virologically suppressed adults.

Selective resistance profiles emerging in patient-derived clinical isolates with cabotegravir, bictegravir, dolutegravir, and elvitegravir

Background

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are recommended for first-line HIV therapy based on their relatively high genetic barrier to resistance. Although raltegravir (RAL) and elvitegravir (EVG) resistance profiles are well-characterized, resistance patterns for dolutegravir (DTG), bictegravir (BIC), and cabotegravir (CAB) remain largely unknown. Here, in vitro drug selections compared the development of resistance to DTG, BIC, CAB, EVG and RAL using clinical isolates from treatment-naïve primary HIV infection (PHI) cohort participants (n = 12), and pNL4.3 recombinant strains encoding patient-derived Integrase with (n = 5) and without (n = 5) the E157Q substitution.

Results

Patient-derived viral isolates were serially passaged in PHA-stimulated cord blood mononuclear cells in the presence of escalating concentrations of INSTIs over the course of 36–46 weeks. Drug resistance arose more rapidly in primary clinical isolates with EVG (12/12), followed by CAB (8/12), DTG (8/12) and BIC (6/12). For pNL4.3 recombinant strains encoding patient-derived integrase, the comparative genetic barrier to resistance was RAL > EVG > CAB > DTG and BIC. The E157Q substitution in integrase delayed the advent of resistance to INSTIs. With EVG, T66I/A, E92G/V/Q, T97A or R263K (n = 16, 3, 2 and 1, respectively) arose by weeks 8–16, followed by 1–4 accessory mutations, conferring high-level resistance (> 100-fold) by week 36. With DTG and BIC, solitary R263K (n = 27), S153F/Y (n = 7) H51Y (n = 2), Q146 R (n = 3) or S147G (n = 1) mutations conferred low-level (< 3-fold) resistance at weeks 36–46. Similarly, most CAB selections (n = 18) resulted in R263K, S153Y, S147G, H51Y, or Q146L solitary mutations. However, three CAB selections resulted in Q148R/K followed by secondary mutations conferring high-level cross-resistance to all INSTIs. EVG-resistant viruses (T66I/R263K, T66I/E157Q/R263K, and S153A/R263K) retained residual susceptibility when switched to DTG, BIC or CAB, losing T66I by week 27. Two EVG-resistant variants developed resistance to DTG, BIC and CAB through the additional acquisition of E138A/Q148R and S230N, respectively. One EVG-resistant variant (T66I) acquired L74M/G140S/S147G, L74M/E138K/S147G and H51Y with DTG CAB and BIC, respectively.

Conclusions

Second generation INSTIs show a higher genetic barrier to resistance than EVG and RAL. The potency of CAB was lower than BIC and DTG. The development of Q148R/K with CAB can result in high-level cross-resistance to all INSTIs.

HIV Clinical Updates: New Single-Tablet Regimens

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacokinetics, safety, common drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and advantages and disadvantages of new single-tablet regimens (STRs) approved since September 2016 for HIV-1 infection.

DATA SOURCES

A search using PubMed was conducted (2004 through May 2018) using the following keywords: single tablet regimen AND HIV. Additionally, a PubMed search was conducted for each individual STR using the generic names of the agents. For specific STRs, additional search terms were added to narrow results. Articles were evaluated for content, and additional references were identified from a review of literature citations. Conference abstracts from national and international HIV conferences were also searched.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Studies included were published randomized controlled trials and observational studies that evaluated STR approved since September 2016. Relevant conference abstracts were included if the study design was a randomized controlled trial or observational study pertaining to the STRs included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Four new STRs are available, including the first dual antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen for virologically suppressed patients. Of the STRs, only 1 is a new molecular entity, and others include new combinations of existing agents that result in distinct advantages and disadvantages. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: The treatment of HIV-1 continues to improve with new agents developed rapidly. These agents should be analyzed in regard to efficacy, safety, DDIs, and appropriateness for specific patients on an individual basis.

CONCLUSIONS

STRs and agents in the pipeline continue to simplify ART regimens, increase medication adherence, and minimize toxicities.

Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, tenofovir alafenamide after initial treatment with bictegravir or dolutegravir and emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide

A phase 2, randomized, active-controlled study of initial antiretroviral therapy with bictegravir or dolutegravir in combination with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide showed excellent efficacy. After 60 weeks of blinded treatment, participants switched to a single-tablet regimen of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Switching maintained viral suppression in all participants who remained on the study through 12 weeks in the open-label phase, and was safe and well tolerated.

The transition to dolutegravir and other new antiretrovirals in low-income and middle-income countries: what are the issues?

: There are currently approximately 16 million people taking NNRTI-based first-line treatment in low-income and middle-income countries. Most of these patients are using the combination of tenofovir (TDF), lamivudine (3TC) and efavirenz (EFV). The integrase inhibitor dolutegravir (DTG) has shown an improved safety profile compared with EFV in randomized studies. DTG also has a high barrier to development of drug resistance. New co-formulated tablets with TDF/3TC/DTG are being introduced into LMICs, for a median price of $75 per person-year. The prodrug of TDF, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is cheaper to manufacture than TDF. A combined pill with TAF/3TC/DTG is also being launched in LMICs, at a similar low price. However, the clinical development programmes for DTG and TAF did not include extensive analysis of several key populations: pregnant women, people with HIV-tuberculosis (TB) coinfection taking rifampicin-based treatment, and treatment-naive or pretreated patients with NRTI drug resistance. An observational study in Botswana has shown an increased risk of neural tube defects when dolutegravir is used in early pregnancy. In LMICs, only 50% of patients have access to regular viral load testing, and genotypic resistance testing is rarely performed. There is currently no clinical data to support switching patients from TDF/3TC/EFV directly to TDF/3TC/DTG if their viral load is either detectable or unknown. New clinical trials and observational studies will be needed to better understand the consequences of this switch of treatment in LMICs. Clinical trials of new antiretrovirals in key populations should be conducted earlier in their development. This will ensure that new treatments can be introduced into LMICs soon after their launch in high-income countries.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2018 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel

Importance

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is the cornerstone of prevention and management of HIV infection.

Objective

To evaluate new data and treatments and incorporate this information into updated recommendations for initiating therapy, monitoring individuals starting therapy, changing regimens, and preventing HIV infection for individuals at risk.

Evidence Review

New evidence collected since the International Antiviral Society-USA 2016 recommendations via monthly PubMed and EMBASE literature searches up to April 2018; data presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences. A volunteer panel of experts in HIV research and patient care considered these data and updated previous recommendations.

Findings

ART is recommended for virtually all HIV-infected individuals, as soon as possible after HIV diagnosis. Immediate initiation (eg, rapid start), if clinically appropriate, requires adequate staffing, specialized services, and careful selection of medical therapy. An integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI) plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) is generally recommended for initial therapy, with unique patient circumstances (eg, concomitant diseases and conditions, potential for pregnancy, cost) guiding the treatment choice. CD4 cell count, HIV RNA level, genotype, and other laboratory tests for general health and co-infections are recommended at specified points before and during ART. If a regimen switch is indicated, treatment history, tolerability, adherence, and drug resistance history should first be assessed; 2 or 3 active drugs are recommended for a new regimen. HIV testing is recommended at least once for anyone who has ever been sexually active and more often for individuals at ongoing risk for infection. Preexposure prophylaxis with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and appropriate monitoring is recommended for individuals at risk for HIV.

Conclusions and Relevance

Advances in HIV prevention and treatment with antiretroviral drugs continue to improve clinical management and outcomes for individuals at risk for and living with HIV.

A week-48 randomized phase-3 trial of darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide in treatment-naive HIV-1 patients

Objectives:

To investigate efficacy and safety of a single-tablet regimen of darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg vs. darunavir/cobicistat plus emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxyl fumarate (TDF) (control) in antiretroviral-treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected adults.

Design:

Phase-3, randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, international, multicenter, noninferiority study (NCT02431247).

Methods:

Seven hundred and twenty-five participants were randomized (1 : 1) to D/C/F/TAF (362) or control (363). The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of D/C/F/TAF vs. control for percentage viral load less than 50 copies/ml (FDA-snapshot analysis) at 48 weeks (10% margin).

Results:

At week 48, D/C/F/TAF was noninferior to control (91.4 vs. 88.4% achieved viral load <50 copies/ml, respectively; difference 2.7%; 95% CI −1.6 to 7.1; P < 0.0001), with 4.4 vs. 3.3% of patients, respectively, having viral load greater or equal to 50 copies/ml. No treatment-emergent mutations associated with darunavir or TAF/TDF resistance were observed in either group. One patient (D/C/F/TAF) was identified with M184I/V conferring resistance to emtricitabine. Incidences of grades 3 and 4 adverse events (5 vs. 6%), serious adverse events (5 vs. 6%) and adverse event-related discontinuations (2 vs. 4%) were low and similar between groups. Mean decrease in urine protein/creatinine ratio was greater with D/C/F/TAF than control (−22.42 vs. −10.34 mg/g, P = 0.033). Mean percentage change in bone mineral density with D/C/F/TAF vs. control was 0.21 vs. −2.73%, P < 0.0001 (hip), −0.68 vs. −2.38%, P = 0.004 (lumbar spine), and −0.26 vs. −2.97%, P < 0.0001 (femoral neck). Median change from baseline in total cholesterol/HDL-cholesterol ratio was 0.20 vs. 0.08, P = 0.036.

Conclusion:

D/C/F/TAF achieved a high virologic suppression rate (91.4%) and was noninferior to darunavir/cobicistat with F/TDF. D/C/F/TAF also demonstrated the bone and renal safety advantages of TAF in combination with darunavir/cobicistat.

Efficacy and safety of switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Switching from therapy based on a boosted protease inhibitor to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide could avoid drug interactions and unwanted side-effects in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection, while maintaining a high barrier to resistance and providing a simplified once-daily, single-tablet regimen. Here, we report 48 week results of a phase 3 study investigating this switch.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were enrolled at 121 outpatient centres in ten countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or higher, had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or more before screening, and were on a regimen consisting of boosted atazanavir or darunavir plus either emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated once-daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg), herein known as the bictegravir group, or to remain on their baseline boosted protease inhibitor regimen, herein known as the boosted protease inhibitor group, for 48 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir at screening. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting patients and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603107.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 2, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 578 participants were randomly assigned and 577 were treated (290 in the bictegravir group and 287 in the boosted protease inhibitor group). At week 48, five participants (2%) in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher (difference 0·0%, 95·002% CI -2·5 to 2·5), thus switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy. The overall incidence and severity of adverse events was similar between groups, although headache occurred more frequently in the bictegravir group than in the boosted protease inhibitor group. 233 (80%) participants in the bictegravir group and 226 (79%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had an adverse event. Only two (1%) participants in the bictegravir group and one (<1%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. 54 participants (19%) in the bictegravir group had drug-related adverse events compared with six (2%) in the protease inhibitor group.

INTERPRETATION

Fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might be a safe and efficacious alternative to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

Switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir plus abacavir and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Bictegravir, co-formulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, has shown good efficacy and tolerability, and similar bone, renal, and lipid profiles to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, in treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection, without development of treatment-emergent resistance. Here, we report 48-week results of a phase 3 study investigating switching to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, HIV-1-infected adults were enrolled at 96 outpatient centres in nine countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and on a regimen of 50 mg dolutegravir, 600 mg abacavir, and 300 mg lamivudine (fixed-dose combination or multi-tablet regimen); had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL/min or higher; and had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 3 months or more before screening. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg; herein known as the bictegravir group), or to remain on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (herein known as the dolutegravir group), once daily for 48 weeks. The investigators, participants, study staff, and individuals assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (according to the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm); the prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4%. The primary efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting participants and is in the open-label extension phase, wherein participants are given the option to receive bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for an additional 96 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603120.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 11, 2015, and July 6, 2016, 567 participants were randomly assigned and 563 were treated (282 received bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide, and 281 received dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine). Switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to remaining on dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for the primary outcome: three (1%) of 282 in the bictegravir group had HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 versus one (<1%) of 281 participants in the dolutegravir group (difference 0·7%, 95·002% CI -1·0 to 2·8; p=0·62). Treatment-related adverse events were recorded in 23 (8%) participants in the bictegravir group and 44 (16%) in the dolutegravir group. Treatment was discontinued because of adverse events in six (2%) participants in the bictegravir group and in two (1%) participants in the dolutegravir group.

INTERPRETATION

The fixed-dose combination of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might provide a safe and efficacious option for ongoing treatment of HIV-1 infection.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

7-Step Flow Synthesis of the HIV Integrase Inhibitor Dolutegravir

Dolutegravir (DTG), an important active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) used in combination therapy for the treatment of HIV, has been synthesized in continuous flow. By adapting the reported GlaxoSmithKline process chemistry batch route for Cabotegravir, DTG was produced in 4.5 h in sequential flow operations from commercially available materials. Key features of the synthesis include rapid manufacturing time for pyridone formation, one-step direct amidation of a functionalized pyridone, and telescoping of multiple steps to avoid isolation of intermediates and enable for greater throughput.

Analysis of the costs and cost-effectiveness of the guidelines recommended by the 2018 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults

BACKGROUND

The GESIDA/National AIDS Plan expert panel recommended preferred regimens (PR), alternative regimens (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2018. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR.

METHODS

Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-effectiveness) based on decision tree analyses. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug-resistance studies) over the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2018. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6788 euros for TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,649 euros for TAF/FTC+RAL (PR). The effectiveness varies from 0.82 for TAF/FTC+DRV/r (AR) to 0.91 for TAF/FTC+DTG (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-effectiveness, ranges from 7814 to 12,412 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TAF/FTC+RAL (PR), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TAF/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR).

Efficacy of single-tablet darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in the treatment of HIV-1

INTRODUCTION

HIV eradication is not feasible and lifelong treatment is warranted to manage HIV infection. In this scenario, the advent of single-tablet, once-daily, fixed-dose co-formulations is important for reducing pill burden and maximize long-term drug adherence. Cobicistat-boosted darunavir along with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide co-formulation (DRV/c/FTC/TAF or the trade name Symtuza®) is the first marketed protease inhibitor-based fixed-dose combination regimen for the treatment of HIV infection. It was approved in late 2017 by the European Medical Agency both for naïve patients and treatment-experienced patients with viral suppression. Areas covered: PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and presentations at scientific meetings were searched with the terms 'darunavir/cobicistat' and 'tenofovir alafenamide and emtricitabine' for clinical trials either conducted to date or ongoing as well as a review of abstracts from major HIV/AIDS and infectious diseases conferences from 2015 to up to date. Expert opinion: DRV/c/FTC/TAF is a novel unique antiretroviral drug co-formulation that exhibits a convenient dosing, satisfactory safety profile, and high antiviral efficacy, even in patients harboring viruses with resistance to antivirals other than darunavir in the short-midterm. It represents the first fixed-dose combination therapy including a protease inhibitor given as one single pill once daily for drug-naïve patients and as second-line antiretroviral therapy.

Next generation fixed dose combination pharmacotherapies for treating HIV

INTRODUCTION

Treatment options for patients with HIV-1 infection have grown over the past two decades to include multiple fixed-dose combination pharmacotherapies that have greatly simplified administration of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for both patients and providers. Effective virologic control can often be achieved with once-daily use of a single-tablet regimen. Over the past three years, ART drug development has focused on the next generation of fixed-dose combinations for initial and maintenance therapy with improved efficacy, safety and tolerability.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers pre-clinical and clinical data searched through PubMed and presented at major conferences through November 2017.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently available single-tablet regimens have clinical limitations related to adverse event profiles, drug-drug and drug-food interactions and variable barriers to resistance. Anticipated advances in ART fixed-dose combinations promise combinations of current multiple tablet regimens into single tablets, as well as combinations with novel drugs with improved safety and tolerability. The traditional dogma of effective ART containing at least three active antiretroviral drugs is being challenged by promising data to support efficacy of certain regimens containing two drugs. Implementation of next generation ART will bring to light issues of clinical preference and cost-effectiveness as patents of existing drugs expire and more generic formulations become available.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dolutegravir-rilpivirine for the maintenance of virological suppression in adults with HIV-1: phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority SWORD-1 and SWORD-2 studies

BACKGROUND

Lifelong HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) has prompted an interest in two-drug regimens to minimise cumulative drug exposure and toxicities. The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of dolutegravir and rilpivirine suggest potential compatibility and effectiveness as a two-drug regimen. We aimed to investigate this two-drug regimen in a phase 3 study.

METHODS

We identically designed SWORD-1 and SWORD-2, which were open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority studies in 12 countries evaluating efficacy and safety of once-daily dolutegravir 50 mg plus rilpivirine 25 mg versus current ART regimen (CAR). We included participants aged 18 years or older who were on first or second ART with stable plasma HIV-1 RNA (viral load <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or longer at screening. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) with stratification by third-agent class, age, and planned participation in a bone mineral density substudy. The primary endpoint was proportion of participants with viral load lower than 50 copies per mL at week 48 among those individuals who received one or more doses of study medication. Investigators monitored adverse events to assess safety. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02429791 (SWORD-1) and NCT02422797 (SWORD-2).

FINDINGS

We screened for participants from April 14, 2015, to Oct 15, 2015, for SWORD-1 and from April 21, 2015, to Sept 25, 2015, for SWORD-2. We randomly assigned 516 participants to dolutegravir-rilpivirine and 512 to continue with CAR. At week 48 (last patient visit was Nov 22, 2016), in the pooled analysis of the intention-to-treat population, 95% of participants had viral loads lower than 50 copies per mL in each group (486 of 513 in the dolutegravir-rilpivirine group vs 485 of 511 in the CAR group), with an adjusted treatment difference of -0·2% (95% CI -3·0 to 2·5) and showed non-inferiority with a predefined margin of -8%. 395 (77%) of 513 participants in the dolutegravir-rilpivirine group and 364 (71%) of 511 participants in the CAR group reported adverse events. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis (49 [10%] for dolutegravir-rilpivirine vs 50 [10%] for CAR) and headache (41 [8%] vs 23 [5%]). More participants taking dolutegravir-rilpivirine (17 [3%]) reported adverse events leading to withdrawal than did participants taking CAR (three [<1%]).

INTERPRETATION

Dolutegravir-rilpivirine was non-inferior to CAR over 48 weeks in participants with HIV suppression and showed a safety profile consistent with its components. Results support the use of this two-drug regimen to maintain HIV suppression.

FUNDING

ViiV Healthcare and Janssen Pharmaceutica NV.

Benign and malignant gastroduodenal diseases associated with Helicobacter pylori: a narrative review and personal remarks in 2018

The subject of Helicobacter pylori continues to elicit worldwide interest in many research fields. Epidemiological data suggest that the prevalence of the infection is decreasing in Western/developed countries and even in some developing regions, but this is masked by the high prevalence in the most populous regions. Chronic gastritis, caused invariably by the bacterium, was again classified in Kyoto and Helicobacter pylori-associated gastritis was included as a distinct entity. The prevalence of peptic ulcers is decreasing, but bleeding ulcers are a challenging problem, with stable mortality levels even in the endoscopic era. With the extended use of endoscopy, gastric polyps (GP) have become more prevalent: some are associated with the infection, some are not. Autoimmune and Helicobacter-induced gastritis can share common pathogenetic mechanisms. Gastric cancer (GC) is ranked highly on mortality lists worldwide. Its surgical treatment has registered some progress though. Little, if any improvement has been achieved in the medical treatment of advanced GC. With proper organization, GC seems a preventable disease. In spite of many guidelines, the Pan-European registry of Helicobacter pylori management shows that eradication rates obtained in many places are suboptimal. A new therapeutic regimen was compiled with promising pilot results. The results obtained with vonaprazan are limited to Asia. New avenues of both antibiotic and non-antibiotic treatments are expected to accelerate the eradication of this ulcerogenic and carcinogenic bacterium.

Role of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in the treatment and prophylaxis of HIV and HBV infections

Tenofovir (TFV) is the cornerstone of the treatment and prophylaxis of HIV infections. It has been routinely used in its prodrug form TDF (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) combined with emtricitabine ((-)FTC) and other antiretroviral agents. TDF has now been replaced by TAF (tenofovir alafenamide) which allows better uptake by the lymphoid tissue. In combination with elvitegravir (E), cobicistat (C), emtricitabine (F), TAF can be advocated as an STR (single tablet regimen, Genvoya®) for the treatment of HIV infections. In this combination, E and C may in the future be replaced by bictegravir. The prophylaxis of HIV infection is momentarily based upon Truvada®, the combination of F with TDF, which in the future may also be replaced by TAF. TAF (Vemlidy®) has also replaced TDF (Viread®) for the treatment of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections. Both TDF and TAF offer little or no risk for virus-drug resistance. As compared to TDF, TAF limits the risk for nephrotoxicity and loss of bone mineral density. What remains to be settled, however, before the universal use of TAF could be recommended, is its safety during pregnancy and its applicability in the treatment of tuberculosis, in combination with rifampicin.

Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection (GS-US-380-1490): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) coadministered with two nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) are recommended as first-line treatment for HIV, and coformulated fixed-dose combinations are preferred to facilitate adherence. We report 48-week results from a study comparing initial HIV-1 treatment with bictegravir-a novel INSTI with a high in-vitro barrier to resistance and low potential as a perpetrator or victim of clinically relevant drug interactions-coformulated with the NRTI combination emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination to dolutegravir administered with coformulated emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial, HIV-infected adults were screened and enrolled at 126 outpatient centres in 10 countries in Australia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. Participants were previously untreated adults (HIV-1 RNA ≥500 copies per mL) with estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 mL/min. Chronic hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C co-infection was allowed. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive oral fixed-dose combination bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg or dolutegravir 50 mg with coformulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg, with matching placebo, once a day for 144 weeks. Investigators, participants, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 (US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607956.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 11, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 742 participants were screened for eligibility, of whom 657 were randomly assigned to treatment (327 with bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fixed-dose combination [bictegravir group] and 330 with dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide [dolutegravir group]). 320 participants who received the bictegravir regimen and 325 participants who received the dolutegravir regimen were included in the primary efficacy analyses. At week 48, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL was achieved in 286 (89%) of 320 participants in the bictegravir group and 302 (93%) of 325 in the dolutegravir group (difference -3·5%, 95·002% CI -7·9 to 1·0, p=0·12), showing non-inferiority of the bictegravir regimen to the dolutegravir regimen. No treatment-emergent resistance to any study drug was observed. Incidence and severity of adverse events were similar between groups, and few participants discontinued treatment due to adverse events (5 [2%] of 320 in the bictegravir group and 1 [<1%] 325 in the dolutegravir group). Study drug-related adverse events were less common in the bictegravir group than in the dolutegravir group (57 [18%] of 320 vs 83 [26%] of 325, p=0·022).

INTERPRETATION

At 48 weeks, virological suppression with the bictegravir regimen was achieved and was non-inferior to the dolutegravir regimen in previously untreated adults. There was no emergent resistance to either regimen. The fixed-dose combination of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was safe and well tolerated compared with the dolutegravir regimen.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences Inc.

Investigational HIV integrase inhibitors in phase I and phase II clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

To date, three HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs), i.e. raltegravir, elvitegravir and dolutegravir, have been approved for clinical use. Recent research has focused on new integrase inhibitors including those targeting non-catalytic sites of HIV integrase. Areas covered: This paper reviews two investigational INSTIs in phase I and II clinical trials, bictegravir (BIC) and cabotegravir (CAB), as well as an investigational noncatalytic integrase inhibitor (NCINI) termed BI 224436. Expert opinion: Data from phase I and II clinical trials demonstrate that CAB has good efficacy and is well-tolerated. CAB is promising because it can be formulated both orally and as a long-acting (LA) injectable for treatment and prevention of HIV infection. Since LA-CAB formulation offers the possibility of favourable dosing, it may help individuals who struggle with adherence issues. BIC also represents a promising safe, effective and well-tolerated drug that can be administered as a single once-daily regimen in coformulation with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (FTC/TAF). Ongoing phase III trials should clarify optimal doses and reveal the potential clinical advantages of these new drugs and formulations over other current regimens. Exploration of novel HIV integrase inhibitors acting through mechanisms different from those of INSTIs is still needed.