High rate of early virological failure with the once-daily tenofovir/lamivudine/nevirapine combination in naive HIV-1-infected patients

Risk Factors Associated with Unsuppressed Viral Load in People Living with HIV Receiving Antiretroviral Treatment in Jawa Barat, Indonesia

Introduction

The success rate of antiretroviral therapy (ART) was sufficiently high globally that by 2030, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection would no longer become a significant health issue. The evaluation of the success rate of ART in Indonesia is still fairly low, with estimates that 6.1% of the total population living with HIV. This is affected by treatment failure and limitations of viral load (VL) testing. We investigated the risk factors for failure of VL suppression in HIV patients on ART.

Methods

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 1203 subjects, medical records of adult HIV patients in Jawa Barat, who followed the Viral Load Months Program from the government in 2020. Data were taken using total sampling technique and analyzed with multivariate logistic regression model using SPSS version 21 software.

Results

Of the 1203 subjects, 5.2% had unsuppressed VL and 94.8% had suppressed VL. The results showed that a nevirapine-based regimen was the main factor increasing unsuppressed risk (Prevalence Odds Ratio (POR) 3.75 (95% CI: 1.41-9.99, p-value 0.008)). The other factors are ART duration <5 years (POR 2.46; 95% CI: 1.22-4.97, p-value 0.012), WHO clinical stage III-IV (POR 2.30; 95% CI: 1.30-4.08, p-value 0.004), and loss to follow-up history (POR 2.28, 95% CI: 1.03-5.07). Meanwhile, the zidovudine-based regimen reduced the risk of failure (POR 0.34 (95% CI: 0.12-0.96)).

Conclusion

Several factors could contribute to unsuppressed VL in HIV patients receiving ART, which warrants further investigations.

Community Based Antiretroviral Treatment in Rural Zimbabwe

Treatment of HIV has reduced HIV/AIDS-related mortality. Sustaining >90% virologic suppression in sub-Saharan Africa requires decentralized care and prevention services to rural communities. In Zimbabwe, the number of people receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART) has increased rapidly. However, access to treatment monitoring tools such as viral load and drug resistance testing is limited. We assessed virologic treatment outcomes among ART recipients in Nyamutora, a rural community receiving bimonthly ART and prevention services. We enrolled all ART recipients (143) at 6-monthly visits in the Nyamutora community in 2014 and 2015. Whole blood samples were collected in K-EDTA tubes, transported to Harare for CD4 counts and viral load testing, and genotype was obtained in participants with viral loads >1,000 copies/ml. Ages ranged from 2 to 75 years (median 43 years) with a median 42 months on ART at follow-up. Eight of 143 (6%) had viral loads >1,000 copies/ml at one of the 3 visits, 7 on first-line nevirapine (NVP)-based ART and 1 on second-line LPV/r-based ART. Seven participants had sequence data available, and five had drug resistance mutations, K65R, T69N, K101E, K103N, Y181C/I, M184V, and G190A. Virologic failure (p = .001) and drug resistance mutations (p = .01) on first-line NVP-based ART were associated with younger age by univariate exact logistic regression. The participants had high viral suppression (94%) despite less than optimal (NVP based) ART regimens without laboratory monitoring. Virologic failure and drug resistance were higher among children and adolescents. Effective ART delivery to the community achieved high rates of virologic suppression and minimal drug resistance.

Antiretroviral therapy for pregnant women living with HIV or hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of various antiretroviral/antiviral regimens in pregnant women living with HIV or hepatitis B virus (HBV).

DESIGN

We performed random effects meta-analysis for HIV-related outcomes and network meta-analysis for HBV outcomes, and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess quality separately for each outcome.

DATA SOURCES

Embase and Medline to February 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

For maternal outcomes, we considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tenofovir-based regimens with those with alternative nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). For child outcomes, we included RCTs and comparative observational studies of tenofovir-based regimens versus alternative NRTIs regimens or, for HBV, placebo.

RESULTS

Ten studies (seven RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for maternal and child outcomes, and an additional 33 studies (12 RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for HBV-specific outcomes. The most common comparison was tenofovir and emtricitabine versus zidovudine and lamivudine. There was no apparent difference between tenofovir-based regimens and alternatives in maternal outcomes, including serious laboratory adverse events (low certainty) and serious clinical adverse events (moderate certainty). There was no difference between NRTIs in vertical transmission of HIV: 1 more per 1000, 8 fewer to 10 more, low certainty; or vertical transmission of HBV: 7 fewer per 1000, 10 fewer to 38 more, moderate certainty. We found moderate certainty evidence that tenofovir/emtricitabine increases the risk of stillbirths and early neonatal mortality (51 more per 1000, 11 more to 150 more) and the risk of early premature delivery at <34 weeks (42 more per 1000, 2 more to 127 more).

CONCLUSIONS

Tenofovir/emtricitabine is likely to increase stillbirth/early neonatal death and early premature delivery compared with zidovudine/lamivudine, but certainty is low when they are not coprescribed with lopinavir/ritonavir. Other outcomes are likely similar between antiretrovirals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42017054392.

Zidovudine- versus Tenofovir-Based Antiretroviral Therapy for the Initial Treatment of HIV Infection in the Ethnic Minority Region of Liangshan Prefecture, Sichuan Province, China

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir (TDF)-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), as recommended by the World Health Organization guidelines for HIV-naive patients, has been limited in resource-constrained settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of zidovudine-(ZDV) versus TDF-based HAART in the Yi minority region of Sichuan Province, China at a single HIV treatment center.

METHODS

The primary end point was the attainment of an HIV viral load <50 copies/mL. Secondary end points included change in CD4 level, adverse reactions, mortality, and sustained virologic suppression.

RESULTS

Of the 361 total participants, recipients of TDF-based HAART were more likely to achieve viral load <50 copies/mL (60% versus 46%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.7, P = .016) as well as sustained virologic suppression (61% versus 28%, OR = 3.4, P = .001). Tenofovir (adjusted odds ratio [OR_adj] = 1.71, P = .025) and female sex (OR_adj = 1.93, P = .003) were identified as independent predictors of achieving HIV viral load <50 copies/mL in the multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Among Chinese Yi minority HIV-infected participants, TDF-based HAART was superior to ZDV-based HAART for initial treatment of HIV infection, suggesting TDF-based HAART should be the regimen of choice in China.

Modeling Outcomes of First-Line Antiretroviral Therapy and Rate of CD4 Counts Change among a Cohort of HIV/AIDS Patients in Ethiopia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Antiretroviral therapy has shown to be effective in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients infected with HIV for the past couples of decades. However, there remains a need to better understand the characteristics of long-term treatment outcomes in resource poor settings. The main aim of this study was to determine and compare the long-term response of patients on nevirapine and efavirenz based first line antiretroviral therapy regimen in Ethiopia.

Methods

Hospital based retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2009 to December 2013 at University hospital located in Northwest Ethiopia. Human subject research approval for this study was received from University of Gondar Research Ethics Committee and the medical director of the hospital. Cox-proportional hazards model was used to assess the effect of baseline covariates on composite outcome and a semi-parametric mixed effect model was used to investigate CD4 counts response to treatments.

Results

A total of 2386 HIV/AIDS naive patients were included in this study. Nearly one-in-four patients experienced the events, of which death, lost to follow up, treatment substitution and discontinuation of Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors(NNRTI) accounted: 99 (26.8%), 122 (33.0%), 137 (37.0%) and 12 (3.2%), respectively. The hazard of composite outcome on nevirapine compared with efavirenz was 1.02(95%CI: 0.52-1.99) with p-value = 0.96. Similarly, the hazard of composite outcome on tenofovir and stavudine compared with zidovudine were 1.87 (95%CI: 1.52-2.32), p-value < 0.0001 and 1.72(95% CI: 1.22-2.32), p-value = 0.002, respectively. The rate of CD4 increase in response to treatment was high during the first 10 months and stabilized later.

Conclusions

This study revealed that treatment responses were comparable whether nevirapine or efavirenz was chosen to initiate antiretroviral therapy for HIV/AIDS patients in Ethiopia. There was significant difference on risk of composite outcome between patients who were initiated with Tenofovir containing ART regimen compared with zidovudine after controlling for NNRTI drug combinations.

Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line antiretroviral therapy for the treatment of HIV infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

New antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens for HIV could improve clinical outcomes for patients. To inform global guidelines, we aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of recommended ART regimens for HIV in ART-naive patients.

METHODS

For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched for randomised clinical trials published up to July 5, 2015, comparing recommended antiretroviral regimens in treatment-naive adults and adolescents (aged 12 years or older) with HIV. We extracted data on trial and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: viral suppression, mortality, AIDS defining illnesses, discontinuations, discontinuations due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. We synthesised data using network meta-analyses in a Bayesian framework and included older treatments, such as indinavir, to serve as connecting nodes. We defined network nodes in terms of specific antivirals rather than specific ART regimens. We categorised backbone regimens and adjusted for them through group-specific meta-regression. We used the GRADE framework to interpret the strength of inference.

FINDINGS

We identified 5865 citations through database searches and other sources, of which, 126 articles related to 71 unique trials were included in the network analysis, including 34 032 patients randomly assigned to 161 treatment groups. For viral suppression at 48 weeks, compared with efavirenz, the odds ratio (OR) for viral suppression was 1·87 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·34-2·64) with dolutegravir and 1·40 (1·02-1·96) with raltegravir; with respect to viral suppression, low-dose efavirenz was similar to all other treatments. Both low-dose efavirenz and integrase strand transfer inhibitors tended to be protective of discontinuations due to adverse events relative to normal-dose efavirenz. The most protective effect relative to efavirenz in network meta-analyses was that of dolutegravir (OR 0·26, 95% CrI 0·14-0·47), followed by low-dose efavirenz (0·39, 0·16-0·92). Owing to insufficient data, we could make no conclusions about serious adverse events. Low event rates also limited the quality of evidence with regard to mortality and AIDS defining illnesses.

INTERPRETATION

The efficacy and safety of ART has substantially improved with the introduction of newer drug classes of antiretrovirals that are now available to patients and HIV care providers. Their improved tolerance could be part of a larger solution to improve retention, which is a challenge, particularly in low-income and middle-income country settings.

FUNDING

The World Health Organization.

Virological responses to lamivudine or emtricitabine when combined with tenofovir and a protease inhibitor in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients in the Dutch AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands (ATHENA) cohort

OBJECTIVES

Lamivudine (3TC) and emtricitabine (FTC) are considered interchangeable in recommended tenofovir disoproxil-fumarate (TDF)-containing combination antiretroviral therapies (cARTs). This statement of equivalence has not been systematically studied. We compared the treatment responses to 3TC and FTC combined with TDF in boosted protease inhibitor (PI)-based cART for HIV-1-infected patients.

METHODS

An observational study in the AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands (ATHENA) cohort was carried out between 2002 and 2013. Virological failure rates, time to HIV RNA suppression < 400 copies/mL, and time to treatment failure were analysed using multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models. Sensitivity analyses included propensity score-adjusted models.

RESULTS

A total of 1582 ART-naïve HIV-1-infected patients initiated 3TC or FTC with TDF and ritonavir-boosted darunavir (29.6%), atazanavir (41.5%), lopinavir (27.1%) or another PI (1.8%). Week 48 virological failure rates on 3TC and FTC were comparable (8.9% and 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.208). The multivariable adjusted odds ratio of virological failure when using 3TC instead of FTC with TDF in PI-based cART was 0.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-1.79; P = 0.51]. Propensity score-adjusted models showed comparable results. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for treatment failure of 3TC compared with FTC was 1.15 (95% CI 0.58-2.27) within 240 weeks after cART initiation. The time to two consecutive HIV RNA measurements < 400 copies/mL within 48 weeks (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.78-1.16) and the time to treatment failure after suppression < 400 copies/mL (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.36-2.50) were not significantly influenced by the use of 3TC in TDF/PI-containing cART.

CONCLUSIONS

The virological responses were not significantly different in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients starting either 3TC/TDF or FTC/TDF and a ritonavir-boosted PI.

The Global Health Impact Index: Promoting Global Health

Millions of people cannot access essential medicines they need for deadly diseases like malaria, tuberculosis (TB) and HIV/AIDS. There is good information on the need for drugs for these diseases but until now, no global estimate of the impact drugs are having on this burden. This paper presents a model measuring companies' key malaria, TB and HIV/AIDS drugs' consequences for global health (global-health-impact.org). It aggregates drugs' impacts in several ways-by disease, country and originator-company. The methodology can be extended across diseases as well as drugs to provide a more extensive picture of the impact companies' drugs are having on the global burden of disease. The study suggests that key malaria, TB and HIV/AIDS drugs are, together, ameliorating about 37% of the global burden of these diseases and Sanofi, Novartis, and Pfizer's drugs are having the largest effect on this burden. Moreover, drug impacts vary widely across countries. This index provides important information for policy makers, pharmaceutical companies, countries, and other stake-holders that can help increase access to essential medicines.

Superior Effectiveness of Zidovudine Compared With Tenofovir When Combined With Nevirapine-based Antiretroviral Therapy in a Large Nigerian Cohort

BACKGROUND

Despite sparse efficacy data, tenofovir-emtricitabine or tenofovir-lamivudine plus nevirapine is used in many resource-constrained settings.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients initiating nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) with either tenofovir-emtricitabine or lamivudine (tenofovir group) or zidovudine-lamivudine (zidovudine group). Clinical, virologic, and immunologic evaluations were performed at baseline and every 6 months. Virologic failure was defined as 2 consecutive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-RNA values >1000 copies/mL. Patients were included from ART initiation until time of failure, regimen switch, discontinuation, or last HIV-RNA measurement. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model factors influencing time to failure. Bias due to dependent censoring was investigated via inverse probability weighted pooled logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 5547 patients were evaluated; 1484 (26.8%) were in the tenofovir group and 4063 (73.2%) were in the zidovudine group. In the adjusted model, tenofovir regimen (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.79) and higher baseline log10 HIV-RNA (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.28) were associated with virologic failure. Higher baseline log10 CD4+ cell count (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, .40-.63) and increasing age (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, .97-.99) decreased the risk of virologic failure. Inverse probability weighting results were consistent with the primary analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with zidovudine-lamivudine, the use of tenofovir-lamivudine or emtricitabine in combination with nevirapine was a strong predictor of virologic failure in our cohort, which was not explained by other risk factors or criteria for regimen selection.

Renal and metabolic toxicities following initiation of HIV-1 treatment regimen in a diverse, multinational setting: a focused safety analysis of ACTG PEARLS (A5175)

BACKGROUND

Convenient dosing, potency, and low toxicity support use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) as preferred nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) for HIV-1 treatment. However, renal and metabolic safety of TDF compared to other NRTIs has not been well described in resource-limited settings.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis examining the occurrence of renal abnormalities (RAs) and renal and metabolic serious non-AIDS-defining events (SNADEs) through study follow-up between participants randomized to zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine/ efavirenz and TDF/emtricitabine/efavirenz treatment arms within A5175/PEARLS trial. Exact logistic regression explored associations between baseline covariates and RAs. Response profile longitudinal analysis compared creatinine clearance (CrCl) over time between NRTI groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 1,045 participants developed RAs through 192 weeks follow-up; there were 15 out of 21 in the TDF arm (P = .08). Age 41 years or older (odds ratio [OR], 3.35; 95% CI, 1.1-13.1), his- tory of diabetes (OR, 10.7; 95% CI, 2.1-55), and lower baseline CrCl (OR, 3.1 per 25 mL/min decline; 95% CI, 1.7-5.8) were associated with development of RAs. Renal SNADEs occurred in 42 participants; 33 were urinary tract infections and 4 were renal failure/insufficiency; one event was attributed to TDF. Significantly lower CrCl values were maintained among patients receiving TDF compared to ZDV (repeated measures analysis, P = .05), however worsening CrCl from baseline was not observed with TDF exposure over time. Metabolic SNADEs were rare, but were higher in the ZDV arm (20 vs 3; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

TDF is associated with lower serious metabolic toxicities but not higher risk of RAs, serious renal events, or worsening CrCl over time compared to ZDV in this randomized multinational study.

Increased virological failure in naive HIV-1-infected patients taking lamivudine compared with emtricitabine in combination with tenofovir and efavirenz or nevirapine in the Dutch nationwide ATHENA cohort

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection consider lamivudine and emtricitabine to be interchangeable components in first-line combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). The evidence for their clinical equivalence in cART is inconsistent. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the virological responses to lamivudine and emtricitabine in recommended cART.

METHODS

This was an observational study using data from the AIDS Therapy Evaluation in the Netherlands (ATHENA) nationwide HIV cohort. The virological responses to lamivudine and emtricitabine were compared by multivariable adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models. Sensitivity analyses included propensity score-adjusted models.

RESULTS

Therapy-naive HIV-1-infected patients without baseline resistance (N = 4740) initiated lamivudine or emtricitabine with efavirenz/tenofovir or nevirapine/tenofovir. The use of lamivudine was associated with more virological failure at week 48 compared to emtricitabine with efavirenz/tenofovir (10.8% vs 3.6%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-2.84) and nevirapine/tenofovir (27% vs 11%; AOR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.25-3.52) in on-treatment analysis. Propensity score-adjusted models and intent-to-treat sensitivity analyses gave comparable results. The adjusted hazard ratio of virological failure at week 240 using lamivudine instead of emtricitabine was 2.35 (95% CI, 1.61-3.42) with efavirenz and 2.01 (95% CI, 1.36-2.98) with nevirapine. The inclusion of lamivudine or emtricitabine in cART did not influence the time to virological suppression within 48 weeks or the probability of virological rebound after successful virological suppression.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of emtricitabine instead of lamivudine as part of cART was associated with better virological responses. These findings are relevant for settings with extensive use of lamivudine and for settings where generic lamivudine will be available.

The impact of choice of NNRTI on short-term treatment outcomes among HIV-infected patients prescribed tenofovir and lamivudine in Johannesburg, South Africa

Introduction

Recent WHO guidelines for resource-limited settings recommend tenofovir in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) yet there are suggestions that patients receiving nevirapine with tenofovir have worse outcomes than those receiving efavirenz. We sought to compare outcomes among those taking nevirapine vs. efavirenz with tenofovir and lamivudine.

Methods

We analyzed data on ART naïve, non-pregnant patients, ≥18 years old without tuberculosis co-infection, initiating tenofovir with lamivudine and either nevirapine or efavirenz between April 1, 2010 and July 31, 2011 (when South Africa’s public-sector use of tenofovir began) at Themba Lethu Clinic in South Africa. We measured virologic suppression (viral load <400 copies/ml), virologic failure (2 consecutive viral loads >1000 copies/ml), and attrition (death/loss to follow-up) all at 12 months after ART initiation. Modified Poisson regression with robust error estimation was used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for predictors of each outcome.

Results

2,254 patients were prescribed efavirenz, 131 nevirapine. Patients were followed a median (range) of 12.0 (0.1–12.0) person-months. 62.2% were female and median (IQR) age was 37.7 years (31.5–44.1). Patients prescribed efavirenz had similar initiating CD4 counts (median 132 for both regimens) but were somewhat more likely to be WHO Stage III or IV (39.6% vs. 33.6%) than those prescribed nevirapine. No difference in attrition was found (aRR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.49–1.41). Among patients with ≥1 viral load within 1 year on ART, those prescribed nevirapine were as likely to reach virologic suppression (aRR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.88–1.07) but more likely to experience virologic failure (aRR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.02–3.31) than those prescribed efavirenz.

Conclusions

Our results support the notion that, among patients prescribed tenofovir and lamivudine, virologic failure is more common among those taking nevirapine than among those taking efavirenz. Longer-term follow up and larger studies will be needed to confirm this finding.

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens

Objectives

South Africa’s national antiretroviral (ARV) treatment program expanded in 2010 to include the nucleoside reverse transcriptase (RT) inhibitors (NRTI) tenofovir (TDF) for adults and abacavir (ABC) for children. We investigated the associated changes in genotypic drug resistance patterns in patients with first-line ARV treatment failure since the introduction of these drugs, and protease inhibitor (PI) resistance patterns in patients who received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-containing therapy.

Methods

We analysed ARV treatment histories and HIV-1 RT and protease mutations in plasma samples submitted to the Tygerberg Academic Hospital National Health Service Laboratory.

Results

Between 2006 and 2012, 1,667 plasma samples from 1,416 ARV-treated patients, including 588 children and infants, were submitted for genotypic resistance testing. Compared with 720 recipients of a d4T or AZT-containing first-line regimen, the 153 recipients of a TDF-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have the RT mutations K65R (46% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (10% vs. 0.6%; p<0.001), L74VI (8.5% vs. 1.8%; p<0.001), and K70EGQ (7.8% vs. 0.4%) and recipients of an ABC-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have K65R (17% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (30% vs 0.6%; p<0.001), and L74VI (56% vs 1.8%; p<0.001). Among the 490 LPV/r recipients, 55 (11%) had ≥1 LPV-resistance mutations including 45 (9.6%) with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance. Low (20 patients) and intermediate (3 patients) darunavir (DRV) cross resistance was present in 23 (4.6%) patients.

Conclusions

Among patients experiencing virological failure on a first-line regimen containing two NRTI plus one NNRTI, the use of TDF in adults and ABC in children was associated with an increase in four major non- thymidine analogue mutations. In a minority of patients, LPV/r-use was associated with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance with predominantly low-level DRV cross-resistance.

Deficient reporting and interpretation of non-inferiority randomized clinical trials in HIV patients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Non-inferiority (NI) randomized clinical trials (RCTs) commonly evaluate efficacy of new antiretroviral (ARV) drugs in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients. Their reporting and interpretation have not been systematically evaluated. We evaluated the reporting of NI RCTs in HIV patients according to the CONSORT statement and assessed the degree of misinterpretation of RCTs when NI was inconclusive or not established.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were reviewed until December 2011. Selection and extraction was performed independently by three reviewers.

RESULTS

Of the 42 RCTs (n = 21,919; range 41-3,316) selected, 23 were in ARV-naïve and 19 in ARV-experienced patients. Twenty-seven (64%) RCTs provided information about prior RCTs of the active comparator, and 37 (88%) used 2-sided CIs. Two thirds of trials used a NI margin between 10 and 12%, although only 12 explained the method to determine it. Blinding was used in 9 studies only. The main conclusion was based on both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses in 5 trials, on PP analysis only in 4 studies, and on ITT only in 31 studies. Eleven of 16 studies with NI inconclusive or not established highlighted NI or equivalence, and distracted readers with positive secondary results.

CONCLUSIONS

There is poor reporting and interpretation of NI RCTs performed in HIV patients. Maximizing the reporting of the method of NI margin determination, use of blinding and both ITT and PP analyses, and interpreting negative NI according to actual primary findings will improve the understanding of results and their translation into clinical practice.

A 72-week randomized study of the safety and efficacy of a stavudine to zidovudine switch at 24 weeks compared to zidovudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate when given with lamivudine and nevirapine

BACKGROUND

Due to superior long-term toxicity profiles, zidovudine (AZT) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are preferred over stavudine (d4T) for first-line antiretroviral regimens. However, short-term d4T use could be beneficial in avoiding AZT-induced anaemia.

METHODS

We randomized (1:1:1) 150 treatment-naive Thai HIV-infected adults with CD4(+) T-cell count <350 cells/mm(3) to arm 1 (24-week GPO-VIR S30(®) [d4T plus lamivudine (3TC) plus nevirapine (NVP)] followed by 48-week GPO-VIR Z250(®) [AZT plus 3TC plus NVP]), arm 2 (72-week GPO-VIR Z250(®)) or arm 3 (72-week TDF plus emtricitabine [FTC] plus NVP). Haemoglobin (Hb), dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, neuropathic signs, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), CD4(+) T-cell count, plasma HIV RNA and adherence were assessed.

RESULTS

In an intention-to-treat analysis, mean Hb decreased from baseline to week 24 in arm 2 compared with arm 1 (-0.19 versus 0.68 g/dl; P=0.001) and arm 3 (0.48 g/dl; P=0.010). Neuropathic signs were more common in arm 2 compared with arm 3 (20.4 versus 4.2%; P=0.028) at week 24. There were no differences in changes in peripheral fat and eGFR from baseline to weeks 24 and 72 among arms. CD4(+) T-cell count increased more in arm 1 than arms 2 and 3 from baseline to week 24 (168 versus 117 and 118 cells/mm(3); P=0.01 and 0.02, respectively) but the increase from baseline to week 72 was similar among arms.

CONCLUSIONS

A 24-week d4T lead-in therapy caused less anaemia and greater initial CD4(+) T-cell count increase than initiating treatment with AZT. This strategy could be considered in patients with baseline anaemia or low CD4(+) T-cell count. If confirmed in a larger study, this may guide global recommendations on antiretroviral initiation where AZT is more commonly used than TDF.

A review of the virological efficacy of the 4 World Health Organization-recommended tenofovir-containing regimens for initial HIV therapy

We systematically reviewed studies of the virological efficacy of the 4 new tenofovir (TDF)-containing regimens recommended for initial antiretroviral (ARV) therapy in the 2010 World Health Organization ARV Treatment Guidelines. Thirty-three studies assessed the efficacy of 1 or more TDF-containing regimens: TDF/lamivudine (3TC)/nevirapine (NVP) (n = 3), TDF/ emtricitabine (FTC)/NVP (n = 9), TDF/3TC/efavirenz (EFV) (n = 6), and TDF/FTC/EFV (n = 19). TDF/3TC/NVP was the least well-studied and appeared the least efficacious of the 4 regimens. In 2 comparative studies, TDF/3TC/NVP was associated with significantly more virological failure than AZT/3TC/NVP; a third study was terminated prematurely because of early virological failure. TDF/FTC/NVP was either equivalent or inferior to its comparator arms. TDF/3TC/EFV was equivalent to its comparator arms. TDF/FTC/EFV was equivalent or superior to its comparator arms. Possible explanations for these findings include the greater antiviral activity of EFV versus NVP and longer intracellular half-life of FTC-triphosphate versus 3TC-triphosphate. Further study of TDF/3TC/NVP is required before it is widely deployed for initial ARV therapy.

Evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of nevirapine plus coformulated tenofovir/emtricitabine as first-line therapy in routine clinical practice

Despite having demonstrated noninferior efficacy against atazanavir/ritonavir plus coformulated tenofovir/emtricitabine (cTDF/FTC), the combination of nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC is not included among preferred regimens in some international guidelines. This combination is frequently used in Spain. We analyzed its effectiveness and safety as first-line therapy in a routine clinical practice. A retrospective, multicenter study was performed in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected subjects who started nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC as first-line therapy according to the nevirapine CD4(+) cell count threshold. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml at week 48. We included 123 subjects starting the regimen from 2005 to 2008. The median age was 41.0 years, the median baseline CD4(+) cell count was 215 cells/μl, the median plasma viral load (VL) was 4.83 log(10) copies/ml, and 22% had hepatitis C coinfection. At week 48, 96 subjects (78%; 95% CI: 69.9-84.4) had a VL <50 copies/ml in an ITT analysis, and the median rise in the CD4(+) cell count was 118 cells/μl. Virological failure was observed in 6.5% (8/123) of subjects, all them before week 24 and related to poor adherence. There was no relationship between virological failure and baseline CD4(+) cell count or VL. Ten percent (13/123) of the subjects discontinued the treatment due to adverse events. There was a significant decrease in total/HDL-cholesterol ratio (p=0.03) with an increase in HDL-cholesterol (p=0.01) over 48 weeks. The combination of nevirapine plus cTDF/FTC showed a high virological efficacy without unexpected toxicities as a first-line treatment in a routine clinical practice.

Comparative outcomes of tenofovir-based and zidovudine-based antiretroviral therapy regimens in Lusaka, Zambia

BACKGROUND

Although tenofovir (TDF) is a common component of antiretroviral therapy (ART), recent evidence suggests inferior outcomes when it is combined with nevirapine (NVP).

METHODS

We compared outcomes among patients initiating TDF + emtricitabine or lamivudine (XTC) + NVP, TDF + XTC + efavirenz (EFV), zidovudine (ZDV) + lamuvidine (3TC) + NVP, and ZDV + 3TC + EFV. We categorized drug exposure by initial ART dispensation by a time-varying analysis that accounted for drug substitutions and by predominant exposure (>75% of drug dispensations) during an initial window period. Risks for death and program failure were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. All regimens were compared with ZDV + 3TC + NVP.

RESULTS

Between July 2007 and November 2010, 18,866 treatment-naive adults initiated ART: 18.2% on ZDV + 3TC + NVP, 1.8% on ZDV + 3TC + EFV, 36.2% on TDF + XTC + NVP, and 43.8% on TDF + XTC + EFV. When exposure was categorized by initial prescription, patients on TDF + XTC + NVP [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03 to 2.06] had a higher post-90-day mortality. TDF + XTC + NVP was also associated with an elevated risk for mortality when exposure was categorized as time-varying (AHR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.95) or by predominant exposure over the first 90 days (AHR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.34). However, these findings were not consistently observed across sensitivity analyses or when program failure was used as a secondary outcome.

CONCLUSION

TDF + XTC + NVP was associated with higher mortality when compared with ZDV + 3TC + NVP but not consistently across sensitivity analyses. These findings may be explained in part by inherent limitations to our retrospective approach, including residual confounding. Further research is urgently needed to compare the effectiveness of ART regimens in use in resource-constrained settings.

Nevirapine- versus lopinavir/ritonavir-based initial therapy for HIV-1 infection among women in Africa: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Nevirapine (NVP) is widely used in antiretroviral treatment (ART) of HIV-1 globally. The primary objective of the AA5208/OCTANE trial was to compare the efficacy of NVP-based versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based initial ART.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In seven African countries (Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), 500 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected women with CD4<200 cells/mm(3) were enrolled into a two-arm randomized trial to initiate open-label ART with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) once/day plus either NVP (n = 249) or LPV/r (n = 251) twice/day, and followed for ≥48 weeks. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to death or confirmed virologic failure ([VF]) (plasma HIV RNA<1 log(10) below baseline 12 weeks after treatment initiation, or ≥400 copies/ml at or after 24 weeks), with comparison between treatments based on hazard ratios (HRs) in intention-to-treat analysis. Equivalence of randomized treatments was defined as finding the 95% CI for HR for virological failure or death in the range 0.5 to 2.0. Baseline characteristics were (median): age = 34 years, CD4 = 121 cells/mm(3), HIV RNA = 5.2 log(10)copies/ml. Median follow-up = 118 weeks; 29 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. 42 women (37 VFs, five deaths; 17%) in the NVP and 50 (43 VFs, seven deaths; 20%) in the LPV/r arm reached the primary endpoint (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.29). During initial assigned treatment, 14% and 16% of women receiving NVP and LPV/r experienced grade 3/4 signs/symptoms and 26% and 22% experienced grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities. However, 35 (14%) women discontinued NVP because of adverse events, most in the first 8 weeks, versus none for LPV/r (p<0.001). VF, death, or permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 80 (32%) of NVP and 54 (22%) of LPV/r arms (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4), with the difference primarily due to more treatment discontinuation in the NVP arm. 13 (45%) of 29 women tested in the NVP versus six (15%) of 40 in the LPV/r arm had any drug resistance mutation at time of VF.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial ART with NVP+TDF/FTC demonstrated equivalent virologic efficacy but higher rates of treatment discontinuation and new drug resistance compared with LPV/r+TDF/FTC in antiretroviral-naïve women with CD4<200 cells/mm(3).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00089505.

A randomised comparison of safety and efficacy of nevirapine vs. atazanavir/ritonavir combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine in treatment-naïve patients

BACKGROUND

We report data from NEWART, a randomised phase 4 clinical trial comparing virologic efficacy and safety of nevirapine (NVP) vs. ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) on a background of tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) in HIV-1-infected treatment-naïve patients. This study enrolled patients according to CD4-based initiation criteria for NVP (<250 cells/mm(3) for women and <400 cells/mm(3) for men), to reduce the likelihood of symptomatic hepatic events. NEWART was designed to support and confirm results from ARTEN, an international trial with similar design and study endpoints.

METHODS

A total of 152 patients were randomised 1 : 1 to open-label NVP 200 mg twice daily or ATV/r (300/100 mg) once daily, plus once daily TDF/FTC (300/200 mg). All participants met CD4(+) guidelines at entry. The primary endpoint for non-inferiority was virologic response prior to and at week 48 (confirmed HIV plasma viral load <50 copies/ml, without rebound or change in ARVs). Safety data, including plasma lipids, were recorded throughout the study.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was achieved in 46/75 (61.3%) and 50/77 (64.9%) of patients taking NVP and ATV/r, respectively. Frequency of adverse events (AEs) was similar between arms, with 88.0% of NVP-treated patients and 94.8% of ATV/r-treated patients experiencing at least one AE. Nine patients (12%) in each arm experienced an AE that led to discontinuation. At week 48, a significantly greater increase was seen in mean plasma HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) in the NVP arm (9.6 mg/dl) vs. the ATV/r arm (3.5 mg/dl); p = 0.016. Also, total cholesterol (TC):HDL-C ratio on-treatment was -0.38 and -0.02 for the NVP and ATV/r arms, respectively (p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy results were consistent with the ARTEN study demonstrating that NVP was non-inferior to ATV/r when taken in combination with TDF/FTC. Rates of AEs were similar between the two arms, whereas HDL-C increased and TC:HDL-C decreased significantly more in patients taking NVP than ATV/r.

Guidelines for the use of extended-release nevirapine in HIV-infected patients

INTRODUCTION

Nevirapine (NVP) was the first non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) approved for the treatment of HIV infection and quickly became one of the most extensively used antiretrovirals (ARVs) worldwide. A new extended-formulation of the drug has now been FDA approved for once-daily use.

AREAS COVERED

Two recent, randomized and controlled clinical trials have established the clinical noninferiority of a new, extended-release formulation of NVP (NVP XR), in both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients. VERxVE demonstrated the noninferiority of NVP XR in treatment-naive patients. Treatment-experienced patients already stable on the NVP immediate-release formulation (NVP IR) were safely transitioned directly to NVP XR in the TRANxITION study.

EXPERT OPINION

The advantage of the extended release formulation of NVP is that it permits once-daily dosing, while demonstrating safety and efficacy results that are noninferior to that of the twice-daily formulation. It is expected that patients who are on NVP IR at present will consider switching to NVP XR to achieve regimen simplification by reducing their daily dosing and pill burden. In addition, treatment-naive patients who are considering starting on an NVP-based ARV regimen will probably transition to the extended-release formulation once they have successfully initiated NVP therapy according to current guidelines.

Optimizing antiretroviral product selection: a sample approach to improving patient outcomes, saving money, and scaling-up health services in developing countries

Over the last decade, increased funding to support HIV treatment programs has enabled millions of new patients in developing countries to access the medications they need. Today, although demand for antiretrovirals continues to grow, the financial crisis has severely constrained funding leaving countries with difficult choices on program prioritization. Product optimization is one solution countries can pursue to continue to improve patient care while also uncovering savings that can be used for further scale up or other health system needs. Program managers can make procurement decisions that actually reduce program costs by considering additional factors beyond World Health Organization guidelines when making procurement decisions. These include in-country product availability, convenience, price, and logistics such as supply chain implications and laboratory testing requirements. Three immediate product selection opportunities in the HIV space include using boosted atazanavir in place of lopinovir for second-line therapy, lamivudine instead of emtricitabine in both first-line and second-line therapy, and tenofovir + lamivudine over abacavir + didanosine in second-line therapy. If these 3 opportunities were broadly implemented in sub-Saharan Africa and India today, approximately $300 million of savings would be realized over the next 5 years, enabling hundreds of thousands of additional patients to be treated. Although the discussion herein is specific to antriretrovirals, the principles of product selection are generalizable to diseases with multiple treatment options and fungible commodity procurement. Identifying and implementing approaches to overcome health system inefficiencies will help sustain and may expand quality care in resource-limited settings.

Clinical experience with nevirapine combined with tenofovir plus emtricitabine or lamivudine-containing regimens in HIV-infected subjects

We retrospectively evaluated the durability and reasons for discontinuation of nevirapine (NVP) in combination with a tenofovir (TDF) and emtricitabine (FTC) or lamivudine (3TC)-containing antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen in an Australian outpatient setting. Between January 2003 and June 2009, 64 patients (29 naïve and 35 treatment-experienced) received NVP/TDF-based regimens. The median exposure was 13.0 months (interquartile range [IQR] 6.0-20.0 months). The two- and three-year probability of continuing a NVP/TDF with FTC or 3TC regimen was 76% and 70%, respectively. Thirteen (20.3%) patients discontinued their regimen during the observation period. Reasons for discontinuation included virological failure in four (6.3%), rash in three (4.7%), lost to follow-up in three (4.7%), liver toxicity in two (3.1%) and HIV-1-related encephalopathy in one (1.6%). Long-term follow-up with a NVP/TDF-based regimen showed a low rate of discontinuation and enabled physicians to extend the use of ART over a long period, often with simplified (once-daily) regimens.

Antiretroviral therapies in women after single-dose nevirapine exposure

BACKGROUND

Peripartum administration of single-dose nevirapine reduces mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) but selects for nevirapine-resistant virus.

METHODS

In seven African countries, women infected with HIV-1 whose CD4+ T-cell counts were below 200 per cubic millimeter and who either had or had not taken single-dose nevirapine at least 6 months before enrollment were randomly assigned to receive antiretroviral therapy with tenofovir–emtricitabine plus nevirapine or tenofovir-emtricitabine plus lopinavir boosted by a low dose of ritonavir. The primary end point was the time to confirmed virologic failure or death.

RESULTS

A total of 241 women who had been exposed to single-dose nevirapine began the study treatments (121 received nevirapine and 120 received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir). Significantly more women in the nevirapine group reached the primary end point than in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (26% vs. 8%) (adjusted P=0.001). Virologic failure occurred in 37 (28 in the nevirapine group and 9 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group), and 5 died without prior virologic failure (4 in the nevirapine group and 1 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group). The group differences appeared to decrease as the interval between single-dose nevirapine exposure and the start of antiretroviral therapy increased. Retrospective bulk sequencing of baseline plasma samples showed nevirapine resistance in 33 of 239 women tested (14%). Among 500 women without prior exposure to single-dose nevirapine, 34 of 249 in the nevirapine group (14%) and 36 of 251 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (14%) had virologic failure or died.

CONCLUSIONS

In women with prior exposure to peripartum single-dose nevirapine (but not in those without prior exposure), ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus tenofovir–emtricitabine was superior to nevirapine plus tenofovir–emtricitabine for initial antiretroviral therapy. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Research Center; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00089505.).

Tenofovir or zidovudine in three-drug combination therapy with one nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and one non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor for initial treatment of HIV infection in antiretroviral-naïve individuals

BACKGROUND

The introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) as treatment for HIV infection has greatly improved mortality and morbidity for adults and children living with HIV around the world. Two of the most common medications given in first-line ART are the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) zidovudine (AZT) and the nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NtRTI) tenofovir (TDF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of TDF compared with AZT in combination with one NRTI and one non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) as part of first-line ART for HIV-infected people in resource-limited settings

SEARCH STRATEGY

Standard Cochrane methods were used to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of HIV-infected patients aged 5 years and older were included. Primary outcomes of interest included mortality, serious adverse events, virologic response to ART, and adherence/tolerance/retention. Secondary outcomes included immunologic response to ART, development of ART drug resistance, and prevention of sexual transmission of HIV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed each reference for inclusion and exclusion criteria established a priori. Data were abstracted independently using a standardised abstraction form.

MAIN RESULTS

Two randomised controlled trials contributed to this literature, enrolling 586 participants, and found no critical difference between TDF and AZT in regards to serious adverse events or virologic response. The trials did find higher rates of adherence and immunologic response in TDF-containing regimens compared with those containing AZT. The quality of the literature to support this conclusion is moderate to high. Drug resistance was more common for TDF than AZT, but the quality of this literature is low, with only one study reporting this outcome. It should be noted that the two studies compared two different drugs in addition to TDF and AZT; one had lamivudine (3TC) and nevirapine (NVP) and the other had emtricitabine (FTC) and efavirenz (EFV).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that for the critical outcomes of virologic response and serious adverse events, initial ART regimens containing TDF are equivalent to those containing AZT. However, TDF is superior to AZT in terms of immunologic response and adherence and less frequent emergence of resistance. How much the other drugs in the regimens contributed to these findings is unclear, and true head-to-head trials are still warranted. The role of each drug in initial ART likely will be driven by their specific toxicities.

Economic evaluation of ART in resource-limited countries

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the face of increasing economic constraints, it is critically important to evaluate how best to utilize available resources. In this article, we review the growing number of cost-effectiveness analyses of HIV treatment with antiretroviral therapy (ART) in resource-limited settings. We focus on studies that evaluate when to start therapy, what therapy to start with and what to switch to based on what criteria.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings show that earlier ART initiation based on CD4 cell count criteria (CD4 cell counts <350 cells/microl) can be cost effective in most resource-limited settings. They also suggest that initiating ART with tenofovir as a component of the first-line regimen is an efficient use of resources compared with initiating ART with stavudine. Finally, they show that HIV RNA monitoring combined with CD4 monitoring is more effective than CD4 monitoring alone, although this strategy was not yet found to be cost effective in all studies. Nearly all studies demonstrate, however, that the cost-effectiveness ratio of HIV RNA monitoring will become more attractive as the cost of HIV RNA tests and second-line ART regimens decrease.

SUMMARY

Substantial research shows that ART for HIV disease in resource-limited settings is cost effective. Improved initial regimens and increased laboratory monitoring may provide both clinical benefit and good value for money. Further price reductions of laboratory tests and recent antiretroviral drugs are needed to guarantee the cost-effectiveness of these required improvements.

Intensification of a failing regimen with zidovudine may cause sustained virologic suppression in the presence of resensitising mutations including K65R

OBJECTIVES

The reverse transcriptase (RT)-mutation K65R limits further therapeutic options and has been selected by unfavorable RT-combinations, e.g. tenofovir in combination with abacavir and/or didanosine.

METHODS

We identified HIV-1 infected patients from a large treatment cohort who experienced virological failure (HIV-1 RNA >1000 copies/mL) with evidence of resistance mutations including the K65R, but without thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) in genotypic resistance assay. Phenotype was performed from previously collected frozen plasma. The patients were followed for clinical and resistance outcome after treatment intensification with only zidovudine.

RESULTS

Five patients had experienced antiretroviral treatment failure on various nucleoside analogue combinations, containing abacavir, didanosine, lamivudine, nevirapine, reverset and/or tenofovir. RT-sequence revealed mutations at position K65R in combination with other non-TAMs. The patients' median viral load prior to zidovudine intensification was 3.551 Log10 (range 3.053-4.681) and despite evidence for resistance to the failing drug regimen, all responded within 4 weeks to undetectable levels (<1.699 Log10 or <50 copies/mL) and remained virologically suppressed during follow-up (20 months through 6.5 years).

CONCLUSIONS

In virologically failing patients due to K65R- and other non-thymidine-mutations, simple regimen intensification with zidovudine resulted in sustained HIV-1 suppression. The finding of re-sensitized HIV-1 in patients may be clinically relevant.

Safety and efficacy of tenofovir/emtricitabine plus nevirapine in HIV-infected patients

All 178 HIV-infected individuals who had initiated tenofovir-emtricitabine-nevirapine (TDF/FTC/NVP) at our institution and were adherent to their medication were retrospectively examined. Only 22% were antiretroviral naive. After a median follow-up of 16 months, only five (2.8%) individuals (all with prior exposure to other antiretroviral regimens) experienced virological failure. In all instances, viral rebound occurred after 12 weeks of therapy. These results do not support an increased risk of early virological failure using TDF/FTC/NVP.

The K65R mutation in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase: genetic barriers, resistance profile and clinical implications

Resistance to antiviral therapy is the limiting factor in the successful management of HIV. In general, the K65R mutation is rarely selected (1.7-4%) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), abacavir (ABC), didanosine (ddI), and stavudine (d4T), as compared with the high incidence (>40%) of thymidine analog mutations associated with zidovudine and d4T. The high barrier to the development of K65R may reflect a combination of factors, including the high potency of K65R-selecting drugs, including recommended TDF/emtricitabine and ABC/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) combinations; the partial (low-intermediate level) profile of cross-resistance conferred by K65R to TDF, ABC and 3TC; the favorable viral fitness constraint imposed by K65R and the 3TC/emtricitabine-associated M184V mutations; the bidirectional antagonism between the K65R and thymidine analog mutation pathways; and unique RNA structural considerations in the region surrounding codon 65. Nevertheless, surprisingly high levels of treatment failures and K65R resistance may be associated with triple nucleoside analog regimens. The use of TDF + ABC, TDF + ddI and ABC + d4T in combination with 3TC or emtricitabine should be avoided. This selection of K65R may be reduced by the inclusion of zidovudine in two-four nucleoside reverse-transcriptase regimens. Clinical studies have demonstrated an increased frequency of K65R in association with suboptimal d4T and ddI regimens, as well as nevirapine and its resistance mutations Y181C and G190A. The potential for the development of the K65R mutation in subtype C is particularly problematic wherein a signature KKK nucleotide motif, at codons 64, 65 and 66 in reverse transcriptase, appear to lead to template pausing, facilitating the selection of K65R. Optimizing regimens may attenuate the emergence of K65R, leading to better long-term treatment management in different geographic settings. TDF-based regimens are the leading candidates for first- and second-line therapy, microbicides and chemoprophylaxis strategies.

Recent Publications on Medications and Pharmacy

Hospital Pharmacy presents this feature to keep pharmacists abreast of new publications in the medical/pharmacy literature. Articles of interest regarding a broad scope of topics are abstracted monthly.

Simplification Strategies to Reduce Antiretroviral drug Exposure: Progress and Prospects

Current US guidelines for initial therapy of HIV type-1 (HIV-1) infection recommend daily, lifelong treatment with a combination of three antiretroviral drugs consisting of two nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors and a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or a protease inhibitor. Although this approach has been successful in reducing morbidity and mortality from HIV-1 infection, concerns remain about adverse events from chronic drug exposure, the requirement for daily medication adherence, the risk of HIV-1 drug resistance and high treatment costs. The availability of antiretrovirals that are coformulated and dosed once daily have reduced pill burden and have simplified dosing schedules, but have not lowered drug exposure or cost. These limitations have stimulated research into drug-sparing strategies including intermittent therapy and simplified maintenance regimens. Randomized clinical trials have shown greater mortality with intermittent therapy compared with continuous therapy leading to rejection of this strategy. Pilot studies of simplified maintenance therapy with a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor alone have shown more promise, although concerns remain. This article reviews progress in the simplification of antiretroviral therapy, recent clinical trial results and prospects for the future.