Effects of sofosbuvir-based hepatitis C treatment on the pharmacokinetics of tenofovir in HIV/HCV-coinfected individuals receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate

Effect of P-glycoprotein and Cotreatment with Sofosbuvir on the Intestinal Permeation of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate and Tenofovir Alafenamide Fumarate

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare the effects of P-glycoprotein (ABCB1) on the intestinal uptake of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), and metabolites, tenofovir isoproxil monoester (TEM) and tenofovir (TFV), and to study the molecular mechanism of drug-drug interaction (DDI) between sofosbuvir (SOF) and TDF/TAF.

METHODS

Bidirectional transport experiments in Caco-2 cells and accumulation studies in precision-cut intestinal slices prepared from the ileal segment of rodent (rPCIS) and human (hPCIS) intestines were performed.

RESULTS

TDF and TAF were extensively metabolised but TAF exhibited greater stability. ABCB1 significantly reduced the intestinal transepithelial transfer and uptake of the TFV(TDF) and TFV(TAF)-equivalents. However, TDF and TAF were absorbed more efficiently than TFV and TEM. SOF did not inhibit intestinal efflux of TDF and TAF or affect intestinal accumulation of TFV(TDF) and TFV(TAF)-equivalents but did significantly increase the proportion of absorbed TDF.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF and TAF likely produce comparable concentrations of TFV-equivalents in the portal vein and the extent of permeation is reduced by the activity of ABCB1. DDI on ABCB1 can thus potentially affect TDF and TAF absorption. SOF does not inhibit ABCB1-mediated transport of TDF and TAF but does stabilise TDF, albeit without affecting the quantity of TFV(TDF)-equivalents crossing the intestinal barrier. Our data thus suggest that reported increases in the TFV plasma concentrations in patients treated with SOF and TDF result either from a DDI between SOF and TDF that does not involve ABCB1 or from a DDI involving another drug used in combination therapy.

Evidence for Implementation: HIV/HCV Coinfection and Pregnancy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the context of the opioid epidemic, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection prevalence is increasing among women of reproductive age. Pregnant people with HIV/HCV coinfection may be at increased risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, although research in this key population is lacking.

RECENT FINDINGS

Treatment with directly acting antivirals (DAAs) has transformed the clinical care for most patients with HCV. However, pregnant people were excluded from trials of these medications. A recent phase I study has shown promise with excellent safety profile for ledipasvir-sofosbuvir; demonstrating no episodes of perinatal transmission, 100% sustained virologic response, and no safety concerns. Pregnancy represents a time of maximal interaction with the healthcare system and therefore an ideal window of opportunity to cure HCV. Current observational data regarding pregnant people who are co-infected with HCV and HIV suggest poor outcomes such as increased risk of preterm birth; however, there are no prospective and well-controlled studies to fully understand the impact of HIV/HCV coinfection on pregnancy. Phase 1 studies suggest that DAAs are well-tolerated and effective during pregnancy. Only through large, prospective clinical trials will we be able to understand the interaction of HCV and HIV during pregnancy and to evaluate safety and efficacy of DAAs in this key population.

Real-world effectiveness of direct-acting antivirals in people living with human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus genotype 6 infections

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 6 (HCV-6) infection is prevalent predominantly in Southeast Asia, and the data on the virologic response of HCV-6 to direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are sparse in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLWH).

AIM

To assess the virologic response of HCV-6 to DAAs in PLWH.

METHODS

From September 2016 to July 2019, PLWH coinfected with HCV-6 initiating DAAs were included. Laboratory investigations were performed at baseline, the end of treatment, and 12 wk off-therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 349 PLWH included (mean age 48.9 years, 82.5% men), 80.5% comprised people who inject drugs, 18.1% men who have sex with men, and 1.4% heterosexuals. Coexistent hepatitis B virus infection was present in 12.3% of the included PLWH, liver cirrhosis 10.9%, hepatocellular carcinoma 0.9%, and previous HCV treatment experience 10.9%. The mean baseline plasma HCV RNA was 6.2 log₁₀ IU/mL. Treatment with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir was initiated in 51.9%, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir 41.5%, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir 6.3%, and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir 0.3%. At DAA initiation, antiretroviral therapy containing tenofovir alafenamide was given in 26.4%, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 34.4%, non-tenofovir alafenamide/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 39.3%, non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors 30.4%, protease inhibitors 4.0%, and integrase strand transfer inhibitors 66.8%; 94.8% of the included patients had CD4 counts ≥ 200 cells/mm³ and 96.0% had plasma HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL. Overall, 96.8% achieved undetectable plasma HCV RNA (< 30 IU/mL) at end of treatment; and 92.3% achieved sustained virologic response 12 wk off-therapy in the intention-to-treat analysis (93.5% in patients receiving sofosbuvir-based DAAs and 91.2% in those receiving glecaprevir/pibrentasvir).

CONCLUSION

Similar to the observation made in HIV-negative patients, sustained virologic response 12 wk off-therapy with DAAs is high in PLWH coinfected with HCV-6.

Pharmacokinetics and renal safety of tenofovir alafenamide with boosted protease inhibitors and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir

BACKGROUND

Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir increases tenofovir plasma exposures by up to 98% with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and exposures are highest with boosted PIs. There are currently no data on the combined use of the newer tenofovir prodrug, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), boosted PIs and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the plasma and intracellular pharmacokinetics and renal safety of TAF with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir when co-administered with boosted PIs.

METHODS

Persons with HIV between 18 and 70 years and on a boosted PI with TDF were eligible. The study was comprised of four phases: (1) TDF 300 mg with boosted PI; (2) TAF 25 mg with boosted PI; (3) TAF 25 mg with boosted PI and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir; and (4) TAF 25 mg with boosted PI. Pharmacokinetic sampling, urine biomarker collection [urine protein (UPCR), retinol binding protein (RBP) and β2 microglobulin (β2M) normalized to creatinine] and safety assessments occurred at the end of each phase. Plasma, PBMCs and dried blood spots were collected at each visit.

RESULTS

Ten participants were enrolled. Plasma tenofovir exposures were 76% lower and tenofovir-diphosphate (TFV-DP) concentrations in PBMCs increased 9.9-fold following the switch to TAF. Neither of these measures significantly increased with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir co-administration, nor did TAF plasma concentrations. No significant changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate or UPCR occurred, but RBP:creatinine and β2M:creatinine improved following the switch to TAF.

CONCLUSIONS

Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir did not significantly increase plasma tenofovir or intracellular TFV-DP in PBMCs with TAF. These findings provide reassurance that the combination of TAF, boosted PIs and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir is safe in HIV/HCV-coinfected populations.

Randomized Pilot Study of an Advanced Smart-Pill Bottle as an Adherence Intervention in Patients With HIV on Antiretroviral Treatment

BACKGROUND

Adherence is critical to achieve the benefits of antiretroviral therapy. A smart-pill bottle service that transmits real-time adherence data via cellular networks to a central service and prompts nonadherent patients with phone or text messages may improve adherence.

METHODS

Adults with HIV taking a tenofovir-containing regimen with suboptimal adherence were randomized to adherence counseling ± a smart-pill bottle service for 12 weeks. Tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) levels by dried blood spot, HIV RNA levels, CD4 cell counts, and self-reported adherence were collected.

RESULTS

Sixty-three participants (22% women; 48% black, 25% Latino) were randomized: 30 to the smart-pill bottle (2 of whom were lost to follow-up before the baseline visit), and 33 to control arms. At baseline, 49% of participants had HIV RNA ≤20 copies/mL and 61% reported 100% adherence with ART over 4 days. From baseline to week 12, median TFV-DP levels were +252 and -41 fmol/punch in the bottle and control arms, respectively (P = 0.10). Exploratory exclusion of 3 participants with known or suspected drug-drug interactions found median TFV-DP levels of +278 and -38 fmol/punch, respectively (P = 0.04). There were no differences in study discontinuations, HIV RNA suppression, CD4 cell counts, or self-reported adherence at week 12.

CONCLUSIONS

In a diverse group of participants with suboptimal adherence to ART, the smart-pill bottle service was associated with higher TFV-DP levels.

Increased tenofovir monoester concentrations in patients receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir

BACKGROUND

Intracellular tenofovir diphosphate concentrations are markedly increased in HIV/HCV coinfected individuals receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with sofosbuvir-containing treatment. Sofosbuvir may inhibit the hydrolysis of TDF to tenofovir, resulting in increased concentrations of the disoproxil or monoester forms, which may augment cell loading. We sought to quantify tenofovir disoproxil and monoester concentrations in individuals receiving TDF with and without ledipasvir/sofosbuvir.

METHODS

HIV/HCV coinfected participants receiving TDF-based therapy were sampled pre-dose and 1 and 4 h post-dose prior to and 4 weeks after initiating ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. Tenofovir disoproxil was not detectable. Tenofovir monoester in plasma and tenofovir diphosphate in PBMC and dried blood spots (DBS) were quantified using LC-MS/MS. Geometric mean ratios (week 4 versus baseline) and 95% CIs were generated for the pharmacokinetic parameters. P values reflect paired t-tests.

RESULTS

Ten participants had complete data. At baseline, geometric mean (95% CI) tenofovir monoester plasma concentrations at 1 and 4 h post-dose were 97.4 ng/mL (33.0-287.5) and 0.74 ng/mL (0.27-2.06), respectively. With ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, tenofovir monoester concentrations at 4 h post-dose were 5.02-fold higher (95% CI 1.40-18.05; P = 0.019), but did not significantly differ at 1 h post-dose (1.72-fold higher, 95% CI 0.25-11.78; P = 0.54), possibly due to absorption variability. Tenofovir diphosphate in PBMC and DBS were increased 2.80-fold (95% CI 1.71-4.57; P = 0.001) and 7.31-fold (95% CI 4.47-11.95; P < 0.0001), respectively, after 4 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir.

CONCLUSIONS

Tenofovir monoester concentrations were increased in individuals receiving TDF with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, consistent with inhibition of TDF hydrolysis. Additional studies are needed to determine the clinical relevance of this interaction.

Pharmacokinetics of tenofovir monoester and association with intracellular tenofovir diphosphate following single-dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir monoester is a relatively lipophilic intermediate formed during the hydrolysis of tenofovir disoproxil to tenofovir. Its clinical pharmacokinetic profile and influence on the cellular pharmacology of tenofovir diphosphate have not been reported.

METHODS

Plasma, PBMC and dried blood spots (DBS) were obtained from HIV-uninfected adults participating in a randomized, cross-over bioequivalence study of single-dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine unencapsulated or encapsulated with a Proteus® ingestible sensor. Plasma pharmacokinetics of tenofovir monoester and tenofovir were characterized using non-compartmental methods. Relationships with tenofovir diphosphate in DBS and PBMC were examined using mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Samples were available from 24 participants (13 female; 19 white, 3 black, 2 Hispanic). Tenofovir monoester appeared rapidly with a median (range) Tmax of 0.5 h (0.25-2) followed by a rapid monophasic decline with a geometric mean (coefficient of variation) t½ of 26 min (31.0%). Tenofovir monoester Cmax was 131.6 ng/mL (69.8%) and AUC0-4 was 93.3 ng·h/mL (47.9%). The corresponding values for plasma tenofovir were 222.2 ng/mL (37.1%) and 448.1 ng·h/mL (30.0%). Tenofovir monoester AUC0-∞ (but not tenofovir AUC0-∞) was a significant predictor of tenofovir diphosphate in both PBMC (P = 0.015) and DBS (P = 0.005), increasing by 3.8% (95% CI 0.8%-6.8%) and 4.3% (95% CI 1.5%-7.2%), respectively, for every 10 ng·h/mL increase in tenofovir monoester.

CONCLUSIONS

Tenofovir monoester Cmax and AUC0-4 were 59.2% and 20.6% of corresponding plasma tenofovir concentrations. Tenofovir monoester was significantly associated with intracellular tenofovir diphosphate concentrations in PBMC and DBS, whereas tenofovir concentrations were not. Tenofovir monoester likely facilitates cell loading, thereby increasing tenofovir diphosphate exposures in vivo.

Antenatal Intracellular Concentrations of Tenofovir Diphosphate and Emtricitabine Triphosphate and Associations Between Tenofovir Diphosphate and Severe Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: IMPAACT-PROMISE (1077BF) Trial

BACKGROUND

In the Promoting Maternal and Infant Survival Everywhere (PROMISE) trial, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) use was associated with moderate or severe adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcomes. This study characterized tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) and emtricitabine triphosphate (FTC-TP) concentrations in dried blood spots (DBS) and assessed association between severe adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcomes and TFV-DP concentration.

METHODS

Retrospective case-control study of PROMISE trial arm-C women randomized to receive TDF, FTC, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r), who took at least 1 dose of TDF + FTC and had week-4 postrandomization DBS drawn before delivery. Cases, defined as severe adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcomes (very preterm delivery before 34 weeks of gestation, stillbirth ≥20 weeks of gestation, or infant death before 14 days-of-age), were matched to controls (1:2 ratio) by site and gestational age at entry. Week 4 and week 8 DBS samples were assayed for TFV-DP and FTC-TP by liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. Associations were tested using Wilcoxon rank test and conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 447 PROMISE arm-C women, 33 met case definitions, and overall, 22 cases and 44 controls were analyzed. Median (interquartile range) concentrations of TFV-DP at weeks 4 and 8 were 706 (375-1023) fmol/punch and 806 (414-1265) fmol/punch, respectively. Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for severe adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcome with natural log of TFV-DP concentrations as the predictor were 1.27 (0.74 to 2.18) and 1.74 (0.66 to 4.60) at weeks 4 and 8, respectively. Median (interquartile range) concentrations of FTC-TP at weeks 4 and 8 were 0.27 (0.05-0.36) pmol/punch and 0.29 (0.05-0.40) pmol/punch, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TFV-DP concentrations in DBS appeared not to be associated with severe adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcomes, although sample size was limited.

Engagement in Mental Health Care is Associated with Higher Cumulative Drug Exposure and Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy

Mental health (MH) disorders are more prevalent among persons living with HIV compared to the general population, and may contribute to suboptimal adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Tenofovir-diphosphate (TFV-DP), the phosphorylated anabolite of tenofovir (TFV), is a biomarker with a 17-day half-life in red blood cells. TFV-DP can be measured in dried blood spots (DBS) using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) to assess adherence and cumulative drug exposure to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based ART. From a larger clinical cohort (N = 807), TFV-DP concentrations and a paired HIV viral load were available from 521 participants at their enrollment visit. We used multivariable linear regression to evaluate the association between TFV-DP in DBS and engagement in MH care. After adjusting for clinical covariates, participants with MH disorders who were engaged in MH care had 40% higher TFV-DP compared to participants with MH disorders who were not engaged in MH care (p < 0.001), and similar TFV-DP to participants without MH disorders (p = 0.219). Further research is needed to identify the mechanism(s) for these findings, with the goal of optimizing engagement and retention in MH care strategies to improve ART adherence and clinical outcomes in PLWH with MH disorders.

Evaluation of Safety and Effectiveness of Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Switch Followed by Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir HCV Therapy in HIV-HCV Coinfection

Background

We conducted a pilot study assessing the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a simplified combination HIV antiretroviral and hepatitis C virus (HCV) antiviral regimen in HIV–HCV coinfection.

Methods

Participants on suppressive antiretrovirals and HCV genotype 1 infection were switched to single-tablet daily-dosed elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) and 1 month later initiated single-tablet-regimen daily-dosed ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. E/C/F/TAF was continued during HCV treatment and for 12 weeks after.

Results

Twenty-six individuals were screened, 25 enrolled, and 23 completed all HIV and HCV treatment. Participants were predominantly male, with a mean age (SD) of 55 (7.5) years. The median transient elastography score (interquartile range [IQR]) was 5.9 (5.3 to 7.6) kPa, and the mean CD4 count (SD) was 579 (223) cells/µL. The median adherence to HCV medications, assessed by pill count, was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 100%–100%), and HIV ranged from 99% to 100% (100%; 95% CI, 90%–100%) over the 7-month study duration. HIV undetectability was maintained in all but 1 participant enrolled with unsuspected multiclass resistance. Treatment was well tolerated, with no study medication modification due to adverse events and no serious adverse event related to the study drug. All participants achieved sustained virological response. The mean CD4 count (SD) increased to 673 (361) cells/µL, and the fibrosis score (IQR) declined to 5.2 (4.4 to 7.4) kPa by week 12 after HCV treatment. There was no treatment effect on glucose metabolism. Cholesterol increased during and after treatment.

Conclusions

Provision of this 2-tablet daily HIV–HCV regimen is feasible, well tolerated, and safe, avoids drug–drug interactions between HIV and HCV medications, maintains HIV suppression in the absence of drug resistance, and is highly curative of HCV.

Evolution of Pretreatment Assessment and Direct Acting Antiviral Regimens in Accordance with Upgrading Guidelines: A Retrospective Study in HIV/HCV Coinfected Patients

Since the advent of new direct acting antivirals (DAA), substantial changes in hepatitis C (HCV) treatment guidelines have occurred. However, little is known about how these recommendations have been adopted into clinical practice. We conducted a retrospective review of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV coinfected patients treated with DAAs at the Ryan White Clinic of the Jackson Health System in Miami, FL, USA. Our aim was to determine changes in HCV evaluation and treatment patterns in the use of DAAs over a four-year period from January 2014 to December 2017. Data were divided into two periods: period 1 (2014⁻2015) and period 2 (2016⁻2017). In comparison with the rest of the cohort, patients in period 2 had a lower frequency of advanced liver disease (24.4% vs. 48.6%, p = 0.026) and underwent more elastography (34.1% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.001) and less ultrasound (78.0% vs. 97.3%, p = 0.011). They were more often treated with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (85.4% vs. 56.8%, p = 0.005) and less often with simeprevir/sofosbuvir (0% vs. 32.4%, p < 0.001). Gastrointestinal side effects were reported less frequently (2.4% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.017) in this period. In accordance with the updated guidelines, our study demonstrated a growing preference for non-invasive methods to assess fibrosis in recent years. Regarding treatment, there was a clear preference for second generation DAAs in 2016⁻2017, along with initiation of treatment in the early stages of liver disease.