Comparative biological and clinical outcomes after a switch from a virologically unsuccessful first protease inhibitor-containing antiretroviral combination to a 3-drug regimen containing efavirenz, nevirapine, or abacavir

Abacavir-based triple nucleoside regimens for maintenance therapy in patients with HIV

BACKGROUND

Regimen simplification can be defined as a change in established effective therapy to reduce pill burden and dosing frequency, to enhance tolerability, or to decrease specific food and fluid requirements. Many patients on suppressive antiretroviral therapy may be considered candidates for a simplification strategy and, among them, those who have achieved virologic suppression. Several clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of triple nucleoside combination as a simplification therapy in patients who achieved virologic suppression

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to combine randomised, controlled trials to examine whether in patients with undetectable viraemia on a Protease inhibitor (PI) based regimen simplification treatment with abacavir (ABC)-based triple-nucleoside combinations has similar rates of efficacy and tolerability compared with a PI regimen or simplification with a NNRTIs (efavirenz-EFV- or nevirapine-NVP) containing regimen. Studies were included if they had at least two of the three interventions, including one 3NRTI arm.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic databases and conference proceedings were searched (1996-2012) with relevant search terms without limits to language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only are included in this review. Patients population is represented by HIV-infected adult patients treated with a PI-containing regimen (PI or boosted PI),  with undetectable viral load. Patients on a PI-containing regimen had three possibilities: continue the PI regimen or switch to a simplification maintenance regimen, including switch to a NNRTI (EFV or NVP) containing regimen, or switch to a triple-NRTI regimen (ABC-zidovudine-lamivudine)

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were: proportion of patients discontinuing or switching antiretroviral therapy due to virologic failure or to adverse events; death (all cause) and AIDS defining illness; occurrence of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular disease. Secondary outcomes  were: proportion of patients maintaining an undetectable viral load (e.g. HIV-RNA <50 or <400 copies/mm(3)); change in mean CD4+ cell count; occurrence of lipodystrophy. We applied Cochrane Collaboration tools to assess each individual study for risk for bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCT, for a total of 1,610 patients. All the studies included HIV-1 infected patients virologically suppressed after a successful treatment with PI containing ART. Articles included in the analysis were published between 2001 and 2010, and could be classified as low risk of bias trials in most of the domains considered. Overall, there was no significant difference between the participants on triple nucleoside combination and controls, either PI-based or NNRTI based in terms of overall failures, death and AIDS related events, and rates of patients with viral load below the detectability cut-off. For the outcomes discontinuation for adverse events and virologic failures, the RRs were not significant , albeit  being not far from the alpha level of 0.05, thus suggesting a weak evidence of lower incidence of side effects  and an higher incidence of virologic failure in the 3NRTI group compared to controls . Change in lipids and in CD4 cells from baselines were reported in 7 studies, but inconsistency in reporting these data did not allow quantitative analysis. However, all agreed that simplification with ABC had a favourable and significant impact on lipid metabolism compared to control group. An increase in CD4 cells count from baseline was evident in all analysed studies, without significant differences between ABC and controls in individual studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The strategy of switching to triple nucleoside regimens shows weak evidence of lower incidence of side effects and a higher incidence of virologic failure in the 3NRTI group compared to controls. Simplification with 3NRTI holds the advantages of preserving other classes of antiretroviral drugs, to lower blood lipids, and to be cost effective and simple to administer.Thus, simplification with triple nucleoside regimens AZT + 3TC + ABC should be still considered for individuals who are unable to tolerate or have contraindications to NNRTI or PI based regimens. Additional data are needed on longer-term efficacy of triple NRTI regimens, particularly on the development of antiretroviral resistance. Though studies in the current review were conducted between 2001 and 2010, the large majority of patients from studies analysed received old PI regimens (e.g., indinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir, saquinavir) not longer recommended by International Guidelines. Since current guidelines recommend new "lipid -friendly" PI, future studies should compare regimens containing these news PIs to triple NRTI regimens. More realistically, however, there are opportunities to examine these issues in existing cohorts.

Efavirenz: a decade of clinical experience in the treatment of HIV

Efavirenz, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has been an important component of the treatment of HIV infection for 10 years and has contributed significantly to the evolution of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). The efficacy of efavirenz has been established in numerous randomized trials and observational studies in HAART-naive patients, including those with advanced infection. In the ACTG A5142 study, efavirenz showed greater virological efficacy than the boosted protease inhibitor (PI), lopinavir. Efavirenz is more effective as a third agent than unboosted PIs or the nucleoside analogue abacavir. Some, but not all, studies have suggested that efavirenz (added to two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors) is more effective than nevirapine. Virological and immunological responses achieved with efavirenz-based HAART have been maintained for 7 years. Dosing convenience predicts adherence, and studies have demonstrated that patients can be switched from PI-based therapy to simplified, once-daily efavirenz-based regimens without losing virological control. The one-pill, once-daily formulation of efavirenz plus tenofovir and emtricitabine offers a particular advantage in this regard. Efavirenz also retains a role after failure of a first PI-based regimen. Efavirenz is generally well tolerated: rash and neuropsychiatric disturbances are the most notable adverse events. Neuropsychiatric disturbances generally develop early in treatment and they tend to resolve with continued administration, but they are persistent and troubling in a minority of patients. Efavirenz has less effect on plasma lipid profiles than some boosted PIs. Lipodystrophy can occur under treatment with efavirenz but it may be reduced if the concurrent use of thymidine analogues is avoided. Efavirenz resistance mutations (especially K103N) can be selected during long-term treatment, underscoring the importance of good adherence. Recent data have confirmed that efavirenz is a cost-effective option for first-line HAART. In light of these features, efavirenz retains a key role in HIV treatment strategies and is the first-line agent recommended in some guidelines.