Comparative Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of HIV-1 Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors: An Updated Review

Bictegravir, cabotegravir, dolutegravir, elvitegravir, and raltegravir are members of the latest class of antiretrovirals available to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, the integrase strand transfer inhibitors. Integrase strand transfer inhibitors are potent inhibitors of the HIV integrase enzyme with IC_90/95 values in the low nanogram per milliliter range and they retain antiviral activity against strains of HIV with acquired resistance to other classes of antiretrovirals. Each of the integrase strand transfer inhibitors have unique pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties, influencing their role in clinical use in specific subsets of patients. Cabotegravir, approved for use in Canada but not yet by the US Food and Drug Administration, is formulated in both oral and intramuscular formulations; the latter of which has shown efficacy as a long-acting extended-release formulation. Cabotegravir, raltegravir, and dolutegravir have minimal drug-drug interaction profiles, as their metabolism has minimal cytochrome P450 involvement. Conversely, elvitegravir metabolism occurs primarily via cytochrome P450 3A4 and requires pharmacokinetic boosting to achieve systemic exposures amenable to once-daily dosing. Bictegravir metabolism has similar contributions from both cytochrome P450 3A4 and uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferase 1A1. Bictegravir, dolutegravir, and raltegravir are recommended components of initial regimens for most people with HIV in the US adult and adolescent HIV treatment guidelines. This review summarizes and compares the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the integrase strand transfer inhibitor agents, and describes specific pharmacokinetic considerations for persons with hepatic impairment, renal dysfunction, pregnancy, and co-infections.

When special populations intersect with drug-drug interactions: Application of physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling in pregnant populations

Pregnancy results in significant physiological changes that vary across trimesters and into the postpartum period, and may result in altered disposition of endogenous substances and drug pharmacokinetics. Pregnancy represents a unique special population where physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling (PBPK) is well suited to mechanistically explore pharmacokinetics and dosing paradigms without subjecting pregnant women or their fetuses to extensive clinical studies. A critical review of applications of pregnancy PBPK models (pPBPK) was conducted to understand its current status for prediction of drug exposure in pregnant populations and to identify areas of further expansion. Evaluation of existing pPBPK modeling efforts highlighted improved understanding of cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated changes during pregnancy and identified knowledge gaps for non-CYP enzymes and the physiological changes of the postpartum period. Examples of the application of pPBPK beyond simple dose regimen recommendations are limited, particularly for prediction of drug-drug interactions (DDI) or differences between genotypes for polymorphic drug metabolizing enzymes. A raltegravir pPBPK model implementing UGT1A1 induction during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy was developed in the current work and verified against clinical data. Subsequently, the model was used to explore UGT1A1-related DDI risk with atazanavir and rifampicin along with the effect of enzyme genotype on raltegravir apparent clearance. Simulations of pregnancy-related induction of UGT1A1 either exacerbated UGT1A1 induction by rifampicin or negated atazanavir UGT1A1 inhibition. This example illustrated the advantages of pPBPK modeling for mechanistic evaluation of complex interplays of pregnancy- and drug-related effects in support of model-informed approaches in drug development.

HIV-1 Integrase Inhibitors: A Comparative Review of Efficacy and Safety

The newest class of antiretrovirals for all persons living with HIV are the integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs). Since 2007, five INSTIs have been introduced: raltegravir, elvitegravir, dolutegravir, bictegravir, and cabotegravir. The INSTIs have favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, which contribute to both their effectiveness and their ease of use. With the exception of cabotegravir, each INSTI is US Food and Drug Administration approved for treatment-naïve individuals initiating antiretroviral therapy. All of the INSTIs, except raltegravir, are approved for antiretroviral treatment simplification for virologically suppressed patients without INSTI resistance. Data also support the use of dolutegravir and raltegravir in individuals with antiretroviral resistance as part of an optimized antiretroviral regimen. INSTIs are generally well tolerated by people living with HIV compared with older classes of antiretrovirals, but emerging data suggest that some INSTIs contribute to weight gain. Due to their efficacy, safety, and ease of use, HIV treatment guidelines recommend oral INSTIs as preferred components of antiretroviral therapy for individuals initiating therapy. The newest INSTI, cabotegravir, represents an alternative to oral administration of life-long antiretroviral therapy with the availability of a long-acting injectable formulation. This review summarizes the current use of INSTIs in adults living with HIV, highlighting the similarities and differences within the class related to pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, dosing, and administration that contribute to their role in modern antiretroviral therapy.

The Influence of Antiretroviral Therapy on Hepatitis C Virus Viral Load and Liver Fibrosis in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Coinfected Patients: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The role of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for Hepatitis C viral load (HCV-VL) and liver fibrosis is poorly understood. This study aimed at evaluating the influence of ART on HCV-VL and liver fibrosis in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV-coinfected patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of HIV/HCV-coinfected patients followed at a tertiary university hospital.

RESULTS

In total, 143 patients were included. In 61 patients, ART initiation was accompanied by an increase in HCV-VL and a decrease in HIV viral load (HIV-VL), whereas ART suspension led to a decrease in HCV-VL and an increase in HIV-VL. Among the 55 HIV-suppressed patients who switched to a raltegravir (RAL)-containing regimen, median HCV-VL levels decreased significantly, while switching to a rilpivirine-containing regimen did not yield a significant reduction.

DISCUSSION

If the -treatment of chronic hepatitis starts before ART, ART initiation should be delayed as much as possible. If ART has been started, it is advisable to wait 1 year before initiating chronic hepatitis treatment. RAL as the third agent in an ART regimen could be beneficial in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients, in comparison to other antiretroviral drugs.

CONCLUSION

The start and the suspension of ART significantly interferes with HCV-VL in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients.

Determination of raltegravir and raltegravir glucuronide in human plasma and urine by LC-MS/MS with application in a maternal-fetal pharmacokinetic study

Raltegravir (RAL) is a HIV-integrase inhibitor recommended for treatment of HIV type 1 infection during pregnancy. The elimination of RAL to RAL glucuronide (RAL GLU) is mediated primarily by UDP glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1). The present study shows the development and validation of 4 different methods for the analysis of RAL and RAL GLU in plasma and in urine samples. The methods were applied to evaluate the maternal-fetal pharmacokinetics of RAL and RAL GLU in a HIV-infected pregnant woman receiving RAL 400 mg twice daily. The sample preparation for RAL and RAL GLU analysis in 25 μL plasma and 100 μL diluted urine (10-fold with water containing 0.1% formic acid) were carried out by protein precipitation procedure. RAL and RAL GLU generate similar product mass fragments and require separation in the chromatographic system, so a suitable resolution was achieved for unchanged RAL and RAL GLU employing Ascentis Express C18 (75 × 4.6 mm, 2.7 μm) for both plasma and urine samples. The methods showed linearities at the ranges of 0.1-13.5 μg/mL RAL and 0.15-19.5 μg/mL RAL GLU in urine and 10-2000 ng/mL RAL and 2.5-800 RAL GLU in plasma. Precise and accurate evaluation showed coefficients of variation and relative errors ≤ 15%. The methods have been successfully applied in a maternal-fetal pharmacokinetic study.

Comparative Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of HIV-1 Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors

Dolutegravir (DTG), elvitegravir (EVG) and raltegravir (RAL) are members of the latest class of antiretrovirals (ARVs) that have become available to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection: integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs). INSTIs are potent inhibitors of the HIV integrase enzyme, with protein binding-adjusted concentration inhibiting viral replication by 90/95 % [IC90/95] values in the low nanogram per millilitre range, and they retain antiviral activity against strains of HIV with acquired resistance to other classes of ARVs. Each of the INSTIs has unique pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties, influencing its role in clinical use in specific subsets of patients. RAL and DTG have minimal drug-drug interaction profiles, as their metabolism has minimal cytochrome P450 (CYP) involvement. Conversely, EVG metabolism occurs primarily via CYP3A4 and requires pharmacokinetic boosting to achieve systemic exposures amenable to once-daily dosing. EVG and DTG have the added benefit of availability of fixed-dose combination tablets, allowing for convenient and simplified ARV regimens. RAL is the only INSTI to be listed as a preferred agent in the current US perinatal treatment guidelines. All three INSTIs are recommended regimens for treatment-naïve individuals in the US adult and adolescent HIV treatment guidelines. This review summarizes and compares the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the INSTIs, and describes specific pharmacokinetic considerations for special patient conditions: hepatic impairment, renal dysfunction, pregnancy and co-infections.

Dutrebis (lamivudine and raltegravir) for use in combination with other antiretroviral products for the treatment of HIV-1 infection

Raltegravir and lamivudine have been part of highly active therapy regimens throughout the past years of antiretroviral therapy. A fixed-dose, single-tablet regimen comprising a non-poloxamer formulation of the integrase inhibitor raltegravir and the transcriptase inhibitor lamivudine (raltegravir/lamivudine; Dutrebis(®)) has been recently licensed for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. In several Phase I pharmacokinetic studies, one Dutrebis (150 mg lamivudine/300 mg raltegravir) fixed-dose combination tablet showed a higher bioavailability but comparable lamivudine and 400 mg raltegravir poloxamer exposures. Thus, the co-administration of raltegravir together with lamivudine created a potent, effective, well-tolerated antiretroviral combination, which could be more convenient for the patient. However, the disadvantage of twice a day administration, and the existence of other fixed-dose combinations limit its widespread clinical use. This article reviews pharmacokinetics data and appraises their potential use in current and future HIV therapy.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of raltegravir and experience from clinical trials in HIV-positive patients

INTRODUCTION

Raltegravir was the first available integrase inhibitor for treating HIV-positive patients. This review aims to provide an overview of its role in the management of HIV-1 infection, highlighting its key pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers material searched and obtained through Medline and PubMed up to April 2015.

EXPERT OPINION

Raltegravir for its tolerability, efficacy, few drug-to-drug interactions and for the amount of available data in difficult subgroups of patients is a key drug in the antiretroviral armamentarium. For its weak genetic barrier to resistance and erratic pharmacokinetic profile, it should be administered twice daily and with fully active companion antiretrovirals.

Reduced raltegravir clearance in HIV-infected liver transplant recipients: an unexpected interaction with immunosuppressive therapy?

OBJECTIVES

Liver transplantation (LTx) is considered a safe procedure in selected HIV-infected patients. In this clinical setting raltegravir is the antiretroviral of choice due to its optimal tolerability and its negligible interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. We aimed at providing data on the pharmacokinetics of raltegravir in LTx recipients, on which the available information is inconclusive.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicentre study we characterized the pharmacokinetics of raltegravir in a consecutive series of HIV-infected LTx recipients referred to our laboratory for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and compared the obtained profiles with those collected from a control group of HIV-infected patients.

RESULTS

Seventeen HIV-infected LTx patients were considered. LTx recipients had significantly higher raltegravir AUC0-12 compared with the control group of HIV-infected patients [14 314 (11 627-19 998) versus 8795 (5218-12 954) ng·h/mL; P < 0.01]. Two LTx patients experienced moderate increments in serum transaminases, nausea and vomiting that improved after raltegravir dose reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

High raltegravir exposure and acceptable safety profile were observed in HIV-infected LTx recipients. Our results highlight that some patients may obtain an advantage from TDM-guided raltegravir dose adjustments with potential benefits in terms of drug tolerability.

Risk of Liver Enzyme Elevation During Treatment With Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors Among HIV-Monoinfected and HIV/HCV-Coinfected Patients

BACKGROUND

The risk of liver enzyme elevation (LEE) after different ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) has not been fully assessed in real-life settings and in populations with high rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection.

METHODS

Patients introducing a new PI/r between 1998 and 2012 were included, if transaminases and HCV antibody (Ab) were assessed before treatment initiation. Time to grade 3 and 4 LEE were assessed using univariable and multivariable conditional Cox analyses, stratified by HCV serostatus.

RESULTS

A total of 6193 HIV-infected patients (3242 HCV-Ab negative and 2951 HCV-Ab positive) were included. Incidence of grade 3 LEE was 1.05, 7.66, and 8.08 per 100 patient-years of follow-up among HCV-Ab negative, HCV-Ab-positive and HCV-RNA-positive patients, respectively. Among HCV-Ab-negative patients, no differences were detected between different PI/r. Use of darunavir/ritonavir was not associated with LEE among HCV-coinfected patients. Atazanavir/ritonavir use was associated with grade 3 LEE but only among HCV-Ab-positive patients (versus LPV/r, hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.1 to 1.75). This risk was not confirmed in a subanalysis restricted to HCV-RNA-positive patients (versus LPV/r, hazard ratio: 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.87 to 1.55). Other independent predictors of grade 3 LEE among HCV-Ab-positive patients were older age, male gender, being treatment naive, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor coadministration, increased aspartate aminotransferase at baseline, overweight, positive HCV-RNA, and advanced estimated liver fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Occurrence of hepatotoxicity was a rare finding among HCV-Ab-negative patients and was not influenced by the type of PI/r. In particular, the use of darunavir/ritonavir, previously linked with severe cases of hepatotoxicity, was not associated with a greater risk of LEE, irrespective from HCV serostatus.

Darunavir and ritonavir total and unbound plasmatic concentrations in HIV-HCV-coinfected patients with hepatic cirrhosis compared to those in HIV-monoinfected patients

Our objective was to describe the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of total and unbound darunavir and ritonavir concentrations in HIV-hepatitis C virus (HCV)-coinfected patients with cirrhosis, as ritonavir-boosted darunavir is mainly metabolized in the liver, and hepatic cirrhosis might modify darunavir-ritonavir concentrations. This was a prospective, case-control, and unicenter study. HIV-HCV-coinfected patients with compensated cirrhosis (cases) and HIV-monoinfected patients with normal liver function (controls) were included. Darunavir-ritonavir was given at 800/100 mg once daily. Patients were followed for 24 weeks to assess safety and efficacy. A steady-state 12-h PK study was performed. Total and unbound concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The unbound fraction was obtained by ultrafiltration. The plasma area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and oral clearance (CL/F) were assessed by noncompartmental models. Thirty patients (20 cases and 10 controls) were included. Among cirrhotic patients, the Child-Pugh score was C in 4 cases, B in 1 case, and A in 15 cases; the median (interquartile range) transient elastography values were 20 kPa (14 to 26 kPa), and 5 patients had prior clinical decompensations. There were no significant differences in the darunavir PK parameters between cases and controls except for longer time to maximum plasma concentrations (Tmax) and half-lives in the cirrhotic patients. There were no significant differences in ritonavir total concentrations, but the unbound concentrations were higher in cirrhotic patients. There were significant correlations between the darunavir total and unbound concentrations in both cirrhotic patients and controls. There were no differences in PK parameters based on Child-Pugh score, liver elasticity, gender, or use of concomitant medications. In conclusion, in HIV-HCV-coinfected patients with clinically compensated cirrhosis receiving darunavir-ritonavir at 800/100 mg once daily, the darunavir total and unbound concentrations are similar to those observed in noncirrhotic patients, and dose adjustments are not necessary.

Strategies to prevent and reverse liver fibrosis in humans and laboratory animals

Liver fibrosis results from chronic damage to the liver in conjunction with various pathways and is mediated by a complex microenvironment. Based on clinical observations, it is now evident that fibrosis is a dynamic, bidirectional process with an inherent capacity for recovery and remodeling. The major mechanisms involved in liver fibrosis include the repetitive injury of hepatocytes, the activation of the inflammatory response after injury stimulation, and the activation and proliferation of hepatic stellate cells (HSCs), which represents the major extracellular matrix (ECM)-producing cells, stimulated by hepatocyte injury and inflammation. The microenvironment in the liver is synergistically regulated abnormal ECM deposition, scar formation, angiogenesis, and fibrogenesis. Moreover, recent studies have clarified novel mechanism in fibrosis such as epigenetic regulation of HSCs, the leptin and PPARγ pathways, the coagulation system, and even autophagy. Uncovering the mechanisms of liver fibrogenesis provides a basis to develop potential therapies to reverse and treat the fibrotic response, thereby improving the outcomes of patients with chronic liver disease. Although both scientific and clinical challenges remain, emerging studies attempt to reveal the ideal anti-fibrotic drug that could be easily delivered to the liver with high specificity and low toxicity. This review highlights the mechanisms, including novel pathways underlying fibrogenesis that may be translated into preventive and treatment strategies, reviews both current and novel agents that target specific pathways or multiple targets, and discusses novel drug delivery systems such as nanotechnology that can be applied in the treatment of liver fibrosis. In addition, we also discuss some current treatment strategies that are being applied in animal models and in clinical trials.

[GESIDA/National AIDS Plan: Consensus document on antiretroviral therapy in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (Updated January 2015)]

OBJECTIVE

This consensus document is an update of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) guidelines and recommendations for HIV-1 infected adult patients.

METHODS

To formulate these recommendations, a panel composed of members of the AIDS Study Group and the AIDS National Plan (GeSIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida) reviewed the efficacy and safety advances in clinical trials, and cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in medical journals (PubMed and Embase) or presented in medical scientific meetings. The strength of the recommendations, and the evidence that supports them, are based on modified criteria of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

RESULTS

In this update, cART is recommended for all patients infected by type 1 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1). The strength and level of the recommendation depends on the CD4+T-lymphocyte count, the presence of opportunistic diseases or comorbid conditions, age, and prevention of transmission of HIV. The objective of cART is to achieve an undetectable plasma viral load. Initial cART should always comprise a combination of 3 drugs, including 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and a third drug from a different family. Three out of the ten recommended regimes are regarded as preferential (all of them with an integrase inhibitor as the third drug), and the other seven (based on a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor, or an integrase inhibitor) as alternatives. This update presents the causes and criteria for switching cART in patients with undetectable plasma viral load, and in cases of virological failure where rescue cART should comprise 3 (or at least 2) drugs that are fully active against the virus. An update is also provided for the specific criteria for cART in special situations (acute infection, HIV-2 infection, and pregnancy) and with comorbid conditions (tuberculosis or other opportunistic infections, kidney disease, liver disease, and cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

These new guidelines update previous recommendations related to cART (when to begin and what drugs should be used), how to monitor and what to do in case of viral failure or drug adverse reactions. cART specific criteria in comorbid patients and special situations are equally updated.

Plasma concentrations of efavirenz, darunavir/ritonavir and raltegravir in HIV-HCV-coinfected patients without liver cirrhosis in comparison with HIV-monoinfected patients

BACKGROUND

The objective of the study was to assess plasma concentrations of efavirenz, darunavir/ritonavir and raltegravir in patients with human immunodeficiency virus-hepatitis C virus (HIV-HCV)-coinfection without liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

In this observational, open-label study, adult HIV-infected outpatients treated with tenofovir/emtricitabine plus efavirenz (600 mg daily), darunavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg daily) or raltegravir (400 mg twice daily) for at least 4 weeks were asked to participate. Subjects with liver cirrhosis were excluded. The trough concentration (C trough) of darunavir/ritonavir and raltegravir and the mid-dose concentration (C12h) of efavirenz were assessed at steady state by a validated high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-tandem mass spectrometry method.

RESULTS

A total of 96 HIV-positive patients were enrolled into the study. Thirty-four patients were treated with efavirenz, 33 with darunavir/ritonavir and 29 with raltegravir. The geometric mean plasma C trough [coefficient of variation (%)] of darunavir was comparable between HIV+/HCV+ and HIV+/HCV- subjects: 2644 ng/ml (155%) and 2491 ng/ml (139%), respectively (geometric mean ratio (GMR) = 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.79-1.56; p = 0.69). These values were comparable for raltegravir: 108 ng/ml (149%) in the HIV+/HCV+ group and 96 ng/ml (161%) in the HIV+/HCV- group (GMR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.61-1.44; p = 0.72). On the contrary, the geometric mean plasma C12h of efavirenz was significantly higher among the 15 HIV+/HCV+ patients (1915 ng/ml, 159%) than among the 19 HIV+/HCV- patients (1505 ng/ml, 167%; GMR = 1.41; 95% CI = 1.19-1.71; p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

The mean plasma concentration of efavirenz was significantly higher in HCV-positive than in HCV-negative patients without liver cirrhosis, while the mean plasma levels of darunavir/ritonavir and raltegravir were comparable in both groups.

Antiretroviral blood levels in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with cirrhosis after liver transplant: a report of three cases

Since the introduction of combined antiretroviral therapy, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is no longer a contraindication for solid organ transplantation. In HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV)-coinfected patients undergoing liver transplantation, HCV-related cirrhosis, drug-drug interactions, and calcineurin inhibitors-related toxicity affect clinical outcomes. Therapeutic drug monitoring can be useful to assess antiretroviral over- or underexposure in this cohort. We report the clinical characteristics along with antiretroviral trough levels of maraviroc, darunavir, and etravirine in 3 HIV/HCV-coinfected liver transplant recipients who developed post-transplant liver cirrhosis.

Effect of faldaprevir on raltegravir pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers

Faldaprevir is a potent hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor and an inhibitor of UDP-glucuronosyltransferase-1A1 (UGT1A1), which is involved in raltegravir clearance. Raltegravir, an HIV integrase inhibitor, may be used in combination with HCV treatment in HCV/HIV co-infected patients. In this open-label, 2-period, fixed-sequence study, 24 healthy volunteers (12 males) received faldaprevir 240 mg and raltegravir 400 mg in 2 treatment schedules (A and B) separated by a washout phase of ≥7 days: (A) twice-daily raltegravir (Days 1-3), once-daily raltegravir (Day 4); (B) twice-daily raltegravir and twice-daily faldaprevir (loading dose, Day 1), twice-daily raltegravir and once-daily faldaprevir (Days 2-5), once-daily raltegravir and once-daily faldaprevir (Day 6). Pharmacokinetics and safety were assessed over 132 hours post-dosing. Compared with raltegravir alone, co-administration with faldaprevir led to 2.7-fold and 2.5-fold increases in raltegravir geometric mean AUC(τ,ss) and C(max,ss), respectively, and a similar increase in raltegravir glucuronide metabolite exposure. No serious adverse events (AEs) were reported and no subject discontinued due to AEs. Faldaprevir and raltegravir co-administration was well tolerated and resulted in a moderate increase in raltegravir exposure.

[GeSIDA/National AIDS Plan: Consensus document on antiretroviral therapy in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (Updated January 2014)]

OBJECTIVE

This consensus document is an update of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) guidelines for HIV-1 infected adult patients.

METHODS

To formulate these recommendations a panel composed of members of the Grupo de Estudio de Sida and the Plan Nacional sobre el Sida reviewed the efficacy and safety advances in clinical trials, cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in medical journals (PubMed and Embase) or presented in medical scientific meetings. Recommendations strength and the evidence in which they are supported are based on modified criteria of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

RESULTS

In this update, antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for all patients infected by type 1 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1). The strength and grade of the recommendation varies with the clinical circumstances: CDC stage B or C disease (A-I), asymptomatic patients (depending on the CD4+ T-lymphocyte count: <350cells/μL, A-I; 350-500 cells/μL, A-II, and >500 cells/μL, B-III), comorbid conditions (HIV nephropathy, chronic hepatitis caused by HBV or HCV, age >55years, high cardiovascular risk, neurocognitive disorders, and cancer, A-II), and prevention of transmission of HIV (mother-to-child or heterosexual, A-I; men who have sex with men, A-III). The objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable plasma viral load. Initial ART should always comprise a combination of 3 drugs, including 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and a third drug from a different family (non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, protease inhibitor, or integrase inhibitor). Some of the possible initial regimens have been considered alternatives. This update presents the causes and criteria for switching ART in patients with undetectable plasma viral load and in cases of virological failure where rescue ART should comprise 2 or 3 drugs that are fully active against the virus. An update is also provided for the specific criteria for ART in special situations (acute infection, HIV-2 infection, and pregnancy) and with comorbid conditions (tuberculosis or other opportunistic infections, kidney disease, liver disease, and cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

These new guidelines updates previous recommendations related to cART (when to begin and what drugs should be used), how to monitor and what to do in case of viral failure or drug adverse reactions. cART specific criteria in comorbid patients and special situations are equally updated.