Outcome effects of antiretroviral drug combinations in HIV-positive patients with chemotherapy for lymphoma: a retrospective analysis

Drug-drug interactions in HIV-infected patients receiving chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Coadministration of antiretrovirals and anti-cancer medications may present many complex clinical scenarios. This is characterized by the potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and the challenges that arise in patient management. In this article, we investigate the potential for DDIs between antiretrovirals, including protease inhibitors (PIs), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs), and anti-cancer medications.

AREAS COVERED

PubMed, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for relevant articles in April 2024. Our review highlights PIs and NNRTIs as particularly prone to DDIs with anticancer agents, with implications for efficacy and toxicity of concomitant cancer therapy. We explain the mechanisms for interactions, emphasizing the significance of pharmacokinetic effects and enzyme induction or inhibition. We discuss clinical challenges encountered in the management of patients receiving combined ART and cancer therapy regimens.

EXPERT OPINION

Data are lacking for potential DDIs between antiretroviral and anti-cancer agents. While some interactions are documented, others are theoretical and based on the pharmacokinetic properties of the medications. Awareness of these interactions, inter-collaborative care between healthcare providers, and standardized treatment guidelines are all crucial for achieving optimal treatment outcomes and ensuring the well-being of patients with HIV/AIDS and cancer comorbidities.

Leveraging interdisciplinary management in people with HIV and lymphoid neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Drug-drug interactions between antiretroviral treatment (ART) and cytostatics may have a negative impact in the prognosis of people with HIV (PWH) and cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the implementation of interdisciplinary management and the type of ART in PWH diagnosed with lymphoid neoplasms.

METHODS

This is a multicentric, retrospective observational cohort study including PWH diagnosed with lymphoid neoplasm who started first-line chemotherapy between 2008 and 2020. Demographic, clinical and therapeutic variables were obtained from the electronic medical records and associated with 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

A total of 118 individuals were included. Boosted ART was being used in 55 (46.6%) cases at the time of neoplasm diagnosis. The Infectious Diseases or the Pharmacy Department was consulted before starting chemotherapy in 79/118 (66.9%) cases. Interdisciplinary management resulted in fewer subjects taking boosted ART (17.7% versus 71.8%, P < 0.001) and more subjects using unboosted integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based ART (74.7% versus 7.7%, P < 0.001). The use of boosted ART with chemotherapy was associated with worse 5-year PFS (P = 0.003) and 5-year OS (P = 0.016). There was a trend towards better 5-year PFS and OS when interdisciplinary management was implemented, with significant differences for individuals receiving boosted ART at neoplasm diagnosis (P = 0.0246 and P = 0.0329, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the significant impact of the type of ART on the prognosis of PWH undergoing chemotherapy. Encouraging collaborative management between oncologists, pharmacists and HIV teams for these patients enhances PFS and OS rates.

Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the HIV Setting

Despite the widespread use of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) and the subsequent decrease in AIDS-defining cancers, HIV-related lymphomas remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in people with HIV (PWH). Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) subtype in PWH. This lymphoma is a heterogeneous disease including morphological variants and molecular subtypes according to the cell of origin or the mutation profile. In the pre-cART era, treatment with standard-dose chemotherapy induced high rates of toxicity and outcomes were very poor. The introduction of cART and the incorporation of infection prophylaxis allowed the use of conventional intensive chemotherapy regimens used in the general population, such as R-CHOP or R-EPOCH. The use of cART during chemotherapy treatment was initially controversial due to the potential risk of adverse drug-drug interactions. However, the availability of current cART regimens with less potential to cause drug interactions and evidence that cART improves survival rates in NHL strongly support the use of cART in PWH with DLBCL. Consequently, interdisciplinary collaboration between HIV specialists and hemato-oncologists for the management of potential interactions and overlapping toxicities between antiretroviral and antineoplastic drugs is crucial for the optimal treatment of PWH with NHL.

Safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapy containing INSTIs and chemotherapy drugs in people living with HIV and concomitant colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous clinical data have shown that raltegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) with fewer drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and adverse events (AEs) is a good regimen in patients with HIV infection who need cancer chemotherapy. There are currently few data on ART regimens that include Integrase inhibitors (INSTIs) other than RAL among this patient subgroup.

METHODS

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of different kinds of INSTI-based regimens among patients with HIV and concomitant colorectal cancer (CRC) who received antineoplastic agents.

RESULTS

From January 2020 to November 2021, 66 patients were enrolled. The patients were divided into three groups: 20 patients treated with dolutegravir (DTG)/lamivudine (3TC)/tenofovir (TDF) (group I), 24 patients treated with DTG/albuvirtide (ABT) (group II), and 22 patients treated with bictegravir (BIC)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF)/emtricitabine (FTC) (group III). The majority of AEs during treatment were of grade 1-2. Treatment-related AEs of grade 3-4 occurred in 6 patients (9.09%), and no grade 5 AEs occurred. The most common AEs were nausea (100%) and neutrophils (84.85%) attributed to anticancer agents, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of these AEs among the three groups (P > 0.05). Viral load rebound was not observed among pretreated patients during chemotherapy. The viral load of untreated patients who started their ART concomitant with chemotherapy almost decreased to the lower limit of detection 6 months after ART initiation (only one patient in group III had a viral load of 102 copies/ml). At the 6th month, the CD4 count in group I decreased significantly from baseline (P < 0.05). However, the change in CD4 count was not significant in group II (P = 0.457) or group III (P = 0.748).

CONCLUSIONS

DTG- or BIC-containing regimens are good options for patients with HIV and concomitant CRC.

Molecular Mechanisms of HIV Protease Inhibitors Against HPV-Associated Cervical Cancer: Restoration of TP53 Tumour Suppressor Activities

Cervical cancer is a Human Papilloma virus-related disease, which is on the rise in a number of countries, globally. Two essential oncogenes, E6 and E7, drive cell transformation and cancer development. These two oncoproteins target two of the most important tumour suppressors, p53 and pRB, for degradation through the ubiquitin ligase pathway, thus, blocking apoptosis activation and deregulation of cell cycle. This pathway can be exploited for anticancer therapeutic interventions, and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Protease Inhibitors (HIV-PIs) have attracted a lot of attention for this anticancer drug development. HIV-PIs have proven effective in treating HPV-positive cervical cancers and shown to restore impaired or deregulated p53 in HPV-associated cervical cancers by inhibiting the 26S proteasome. This review will evaluate the role players, such as HPV oncoproteins involved cervical cancer development and how they are targeted in HIV protease inhibitors-induced p53 restoration in cervical cancer. This review also covers the therapeutic potential of HIV protease inhibitors and molecular mechanisms behind the HIV protease inhibitors-induced p53-dependent anticancer activities against cervical cancer.

Hodgkin Lymphoma in People Living with HIV

Simple Summary

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a non-AIDS defining neoplasm, but people living with HIV (PLWH) have between a 5- and 26-fold higher risk of developing it than the general population. Epstein-Barr virus is present in almost all HIV-related HL cases, and plays an important role in its etiopathogenesis. Despite the aggressive characteristics, the prognosis of HL affecting PLWH is similar to that of the general population if patients are treated following the same recommendations. Administration of cART concomitantly with chemotherapy is highly recommended. However, this combination may be challenging due to drug–drug interactions and overlapping toxicity. Thus, interdisciplinary collaboration between hemato-oncologists and HIV specialists is crucial for the optimal treatment of both lymphoma and HIV infection.

Abstract

Despite widespread use of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) and increased life expectancy in people living with HIV (PLWH), HIV-related lymphomas (HRL) remain a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality for PLWH, even in patients optimally treated with cART. While the incidence of aggressive forms of non-Hodgkin lymphoma decreased after the advent of cART, incidence of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) has increased among PLWH in recent decades. The coinfection of Epstein–Barr virus plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of HL in the HIV setting. Currently, PLWH with HRL, including HL, are treated similarly to HIV-negative patients and, importantly, the prognosis of HL in PLWH is approaching that of the general population. In this regard, effective cART during chemotherapy is strongly recommended since it has been shown to improve survival rates in all lymphoma subtypes, including HL. As a consequence, interdisciplinary collaboration between HIV specialists and hemato-oncologists for the management of potential drug–drug interactions and overlapping toxicities between antiretroviral and antineoplastic drugs is crucial for the optimal treatment of PLWH with HL. In this article the authors review and update the epidemiological, clinical and biological aspects of HL presenting in PLWH with special emphasis on advances in prognosis and the factors that have contributed to it.

HIV-1, HAART and cancer: A complex relationship

HIV infected people are at higher risk of developing cancer, although it is globally diminished in the era of highly active antiretroviral treatment (HAART). Recently, antioncogenic properties of some HAART drugs were discovered. We discuss the role of HAART in the prevention and improvement of treatment outcomes of cancers in HIV-infected people. We describe different trends in HAART-cancer relationships: cancer-predisposing as well as cancer-preventing. We cover the roles of particular drug regimens in cancer prevention. We also describe the causes of cancer treatment with HAART drugs in HIV-negative people, including ongoing clinical studies that may directly point to a possible independent anti-oncogenic activity of HAART drugs. We conclude that despite potent antioncogenic activities of every class of HAART drugs reported in preclinical models, the evidence to date indicates that their independent clinical impact in HIV-infected people is limited. Improved cancer prevention strategies besides HAART are needed to reduce HIV-cancer-related mortality.