Continued indinavir versus switching to indinavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected patients with suppressed viral load

Increases in duration of first highly active antiretroviral therapy over time (1996-2009) and associated factors in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens changes occur frequently among HIV-infected persons. Duration and type of initial highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and factors associated with regimen switching were evaluated in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study.

METHODS

Participants were classified according to the calendar period of HAART initiation: T1 (1996-2001), T2 (2002-2005), and T3 (2006-2009). Kaplan-Meier curves depicted time from HAART initiation to first regimen changes within 5.5 years. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to examine factors associated with time to switching.

RESULTS

Of 1009 participants, 796 changed regimen within 5.5 years after HAART initiation. The percentage of participants who switched declined from 85% during T1 to 49% in T3. The likelihood of switching in T3 decreased by 50% (P < 0.01) compared with T1 after adjustment for pre-HAART ART use, age, race, and CD4 count. Incomplete HIV suppression decreased over time (P < 0.01) but predicted switching across all time periods. Lower HAART adherence (≤95% of prescribed doses) was predictive of switching only in T1. In T2, central nervous system symptoms predicted switching [relative hazard (RH) = 1.7; P = 0.012]. Older age at HAART initiation was associated with increased switching in T1 (RH = 1.03 per year increase) and decreased switching in T2 (RH = 0.97 per year increase).

CONCLUSIONS

During the first 15 years of the HAART era, initial HAART regimen duration lengthened and regimen discontinuation rates diminished. Both HIV RNA nonsuppression and poor adherence predicted switching before 2001 while side effects that were possibly ART related were more prominent during T2.

Influence of body weight on achieving indinavir concentrations within its therapeutic window in HIV-infected Thai patients receiving indinavir boosted with ritonavir

Indinavir boosted with ritonavir (IDV/r) dosing with 400/100 mg, twice daily, is preferred in Thai adults, but this dose can lead to concentrations close to the boundaries of its therapeutic window. The objectives of this analysis were to validate a population pharmacokinetic model to describe IDV/r concentrations in HIV-infected Thai patients and to investigate the impact of patient characteristics on achieving adequate IDV concentrations. IDV/r concentration data from 513 plasma samples were available. Population means and variances of pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using a nonlinear mixed effects regression model (NONMEM Version VI). Monte Carlo simulations were performed to estimate the probability of achieving IDV concentrations within its therapeutic window. IDV/r pharmacokinetics were best described by a one-compartment model coupled with a single transit compartment absorption model. Body weight influenced indinavir apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution and allometric scaling significantly reduced the interindividual variability. Final population estimates (interindividual variability in percentage) of indinavir apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution were 21.3 L/h/70 kg (30%) and 90.7 L/70 kg (22%), respectively. Based on model simulations, the probability of achieving an IDV trough concentration greater than 0.1 mg/L was greater than 99% for 600/100 mg and greater than 98% for 400/100 mg, twice daily, in patients weighing 40 to 80 kg. However, the probability of achieving IDV concentrations associated with an increased risk of drug toxicity (greater than 10.0 mg/L) increased from 1% to 10% with 600/100 mg compared with less than 1% with 400/100 mg when body weight decreased from 80 to 40 kg. The validated model developed predicts that 400/100 mg of IDV/r, twice daily, provides indinavir concentrations within the recommended therapeutic window for the majority of patients. The risk of toxic drug concentrations increases rapidly with IDV/r dose of 600/100 mg for patients less than 50 kg and therapeutic drug monitoring of IDV concentrations would help to reduce the risk of IDV-induced nephrotoxicity.

Combination antiretroviral therapy

Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) was one of the greatest achievements in medicine in the twentieth century. It has rapidly evolved during the last 10 years from suboptimal monotherapy to an effective triple therapy that can change the natural history of HIV-1 infection from a deadly disease to a chronic, manageable condition. However, a dreadful toll of long-term toxicity was experienced by HIV-1-infected patients in the cART era. We have recently entered in a new phase of cART, in which efficacy has been increased and toxicity minimized. Currently, the greatest challenge is to make cART available to everybody who needs it with the future prospects of HIV-1 eradication.

Outcomes of patients on dual-boosted PI regimens: experience of the Swiss HIV cohort study

Dual-boosted protease inhibitors (DBPI) are an option for salvage therapy for HIV-1 resistant patients. Patients receiving a DBPI in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study between January1996 and March 2007 were studied. Outcomes of interest were viral suppression at 24 weeks. 295 patients (72.5%) were on DBPI for over 6 months. The median duration was 2.2 years. Of 287 patients who had HIV-RNA >400 copies/ml at the start of the regimen, 184 (64.1%) were ever suppressed while on DBPI and 156 (54.4%) were suppressed within 24 weeks. The median time to suppression was 101 days (95% confidence interval 90-125 days). The median number of past regimens was 6 (IQR, 3-8). The main reasons for discontinuing the regimen were patient's wish (48.3%), treatment failure (22.5%), and toxicity (15.8%). Acquisition of HIV through intravenous drug use and the use of lopinavir in combination with saquinavir or atazanavir were associated with an increased likelihood of suppression within 6 months. Patients on DBPI are heavily treatment experienced. Viral suppression within 6 months was achieved in more than half of the patients. There may be a place for DBPI regimens in settings where more expensive alternates are not available.

Immune reconstitution in severely immunosuppressed antiretroviral-naive HIV type 1-infected patients using a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based or a boosted protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral regimen: three-year results (The Advanz Trial): a randomized, controlled trial

Late diagnosis of HIV-1 infection is quite frequent in Western countries. Very few randomized clinical trials to determine the best antiretroviral treatment in patients with advanced HIV-1 infection have been performed. To compare immune reconstitution in two groups of very immunosuppressed (less than 100 CD4(+) cells/microl), antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected adults, 65 patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zidovudine + lamivudine + efavirenz (group A, 34 patients) or zidovudine + lamivudine + ritonavir-boosted indinavir (group B, 31 patients). The median (interquartile range) CD4(+) cell increase after 12 and 36 months was +199 (101, 258) and +299 (170, 464) cells/microl in the efavirenz arm and +136 (57, 235) and +228 (119, 465) cells/microl in the ritonavir-boosted indinavir arm (p > 0.05 for all time points). The proportion (95% confidence interval) of patients achieving HIV-1 RNA levels under 50 copies/ml was significantly greater in the efavirenz arm at 3 years by the intention-to-treat analysis [59% (41%, 75%) vs. 23% (10%, 41%)], whereas no differences were found in the on-treatment analysis. Immune activation (CD8(+)CD38(+) and CD8(+)CD38DR(+) T cells) was significantly lower for the efavirenz arm from month 6 to month 24. Adverse events were more frequent in the ritonavir-boosted indinavir arm. Almost all cases of disease progression and death were observed in the first year of treatment, with no significant differences between the two arms (p = 0.79 by the log-rank test). At 1 and 3 years, the immune reconstitution induced by an efavirenz-based regimen in very immunosuppressed patients was at least as potent as that induced by a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral regimen.

Methodological issues in the use of composite endpoints in clinical trials: examples from the HIV field

BACKGROUND

In many fields, the choice of a primary endpoint for a trial is not always the ultimate clinical endpoint of interest, but rather some surrogate endpoint believed to be relevant for predicting the effect of the intervention on the clinical endpoint. The classic example of such a field is clinical HIV treatment research, where a variety of primary endpoints are used to evaluate the efficacy of new antiretroviral drugs or new combinations of existing drugs. The choice of endpoint reflects either the goal of therapy as recommended by treatment guidelines (e.g. rapid virological suppression) or the licensing requirements of official drug approval organizations (e.g. time to loss of virological response [TLOVR]).

PURPOSE

To review the diversity of endpoints used in recent clinical trials in HIV infection and highlight the methodological issues.

METHODS

We identified articles relating to antiretroviral therapy by searching PubMed and through hand searches of relevant conference abstracts. We restricted the search to randomized controlled trials conducted in HIV-infected adults published/presented from January 2005 until March 2008.

RESULTS

We identified 28 trials in antiretroviral-naive patients (i.e. patients who were starting antiretroviral therapy for the first time at the time of randomization) and 23 trials in antiretroviral-experienced patients. Most trials were performed for purposes of drug licensing, but others were focused on strategies of using approved drugs. Most trials (40 of 51) used a composite primary endpoint (TLOVR in 13). Of note, 22 of these 40 studies reported that they had used a purely virological efficacy endpoint, but the primary endpoint was actually a composite one due to the way in which missing data and treatment switches were considered as failures.

LIMITATIONS

Examples are restricted to HIV clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst most current HIV clinical trials use composite primary endpoints, there are substantial differences in the components that make up these endpoints. In HIV and other fields where precise definitions are variable, guidelines for standardization of definition and reporting would greatly improve the ability to compare trial results.

Nephrotoxicity associated with antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients

BACKGROUND

With the success of modern antiretroviral therapies in increasing longevity of patients with HIV infection, chronic conditions including renal disease have assumed a greater importance in patient management. Some antiretroviral therapies have themselves been identified to have clinically significant nephrotoxicity.

OBJECTIVE

To review the risk factors and mechanisms for renal toxicity of antiretroviral drugs, and their impact on the clinical management of patients with HIV.

METHODS

Current literature and HIV treatment guidelines are reviewed.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Background rates of renal disease and associated risk factors are significant in the HIV clinic population, and renal function should be assessed in all HIV-infected patients. Modern HIV treatment regimens have a relatively low but clinically significant nephrotoxic potential; therefore, renal function should be evaluated on an ongoing basis in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy.

Ketoconazole is inferior to ritonavir as an alternative booster for saquinavir in a once daily regimen in Thai HIV-1 infected patients

OBJECTIVE

To improve the pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors, boosting with low-dose ritonavir is performed. However, toxicity, storage conditions and high costs of antiretroviral treatment may necessitate interruption of ritonavir. Ketoconazole was investigated as a potential booster of once-daily (o.d.) saquinavir.

METHODS

In a single-group, two-period design, 25 virologically and immunologically stable patients on saquinavir/ritonavir 2000/100 mg o.d. were switched to saquinavir/ketoconazole 2000/400 mg o.d. for 2 weeks. Two steady-state pharmacokinetic curves were recorded at both periods.

RESULTS

Fourteen females and 11 male patients were included. Median age was 34 years [interquartile range (IQR), 32-42 years], body weight 54 kg (IQR, 47-59 kg) and body mass index 21 kg/m (19-23 kg/m). The mean saquinavir area under the curve (AUC) during boosting with ritonavir was 57.93 +/- 27.96 mg/h/l, maximum observed concentration (Cmax) was 7.50 +/- 3.45 mg/l and concentration at 24 h (Cmin) was 0.35 +/- 0.30 mg/l. When ketoconazole was used, the saquinavir AUC, Cmax, and Cmin were 12.00 +/- 6.97 mg/h/l, 2.43 +/- 1.35 mg/l and 0.03 +/- 0.04 mg/l, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Boosting with ketoconazole resulted in 80% lower exposure to saquinavir. Although saquinavir AUC might still be adequate for treatment, concentrations at 24 h reached levels below the recommended trough concentrations of 0.1 mg/l, which may result in selection of resistant HIV-1 viral strains. Therefore, boosting of saquinavir by ketoconazole is not recommended.

Indinavir/ritonavir remains an important component of HAART for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, particularly in resource-limited settings

For over a decade, indinavir has been approved for the treatment of HIV/AIDS; however, following the introduction of new protease inhibitors (PIs) with improved safety and pharmacologic profiles, its use in developed countries has become almost obsolete. In contrast, in resource-limited settings where the majority of people living with HIV/AIDS reside, indinavir is part of the most affordable PI-based highly active antiretroviral treatment regimen. A major drawback of indinavir use is renal toxicity, but low-dose indinavir plus ritonavir (400/100 mg) twice daily is both efficacious and tolerable. Similar low dosing levels in children have also proven successful, but data in pregnant women remains limited. Due to its low cost and proven efficacy indinavir remains a key component of HIV/AIDS treatment in resource-limited settings.

Chronic renal failure among HIV-1-infected patients

BACKGROUND

The role of exposure to antiretrovirals in chronic renal failure (CRF) is not well understood. Glomerular filtration rates (GFR) are estimated using the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) or Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations.

METHODS

Baseline was arbitrarily defined as the first recorded GFR; patients with two consecutive GFR < or = 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) were defined as having CRF. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratio (OR) of CRF at baseline. ART exposure (yes/no or cumulative exposure) prior to baseline was included in multivariate models (adjusted for region of Europe, age, prior AIDS, CD4 cell count nadir, viral load, hypertension and use of nephrotoxic anti-infective therapy).

RESULTS

Using CG, the median GFR at baseline (n = 4474) was 94.4 (interquartile range, 80.5-109.3); 158 patients (3.5%) had CRF. Patients with CRF were older (median, 61.9 versus 43.1 years), had lower CD4 cell count nadirs (median, 80 versus 137 cells/microl), and were more likely to be diagnosed with AIDS (44.3 versus 30.4%), diabetes (16.5 versus 4.3%) or hypertension (53.8 versus 26.4%), all P < 0.001. In a multivariate model any use of indinavir [odds ratio (OR) 2.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.62-3.83] or tenofovir (OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.25-3.81) was associated with increased odds of CRF, as was cumulative exposure to indinavir (OR, 1.15 per year of exposure; 95% CI, 1.06-1.25) or tenofovir (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.20-2.15). Highly consistent results were seen using the MDRD formula.

CONCLUSIONS

Among antiretrovirals, only exposure to indinavir or tenofovir was associated with increased odds of CRF. We used a confirmed low GFR to define CRF to increase the robustness of our analysis, although there are several potential biases associated with this cross-sectional analysis.

Indinavir: the forgotten HIV-protease inhibitor. Does it still have a role?

Indinavir is one of four first-generation HIV-protease inhibitors and was the most popular amongst them in the late 1990s. It was initially licensed for use alone, given three times daily, administered away from meals and together with at least 1.5 litres of fluid per day. In clinical practice, it became common for clinicians to prescribe it with a ritonavir pharmacokinetic 'boost' to remove the food restriction, reduce the pill burden and enable a more convenient twice-daily dosing schedule. However, at a ritonavir-boosted dosing schedule of indinavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg b.i.d., the regimen proved toxic and poorly tolerable, and its use diminished as newer, better tolerated PIs became available. Recent research has suggested that ritonavir-boosted indinavir administered at lower doses, particularly indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg b.i.d., retains potency and is considerably less toxic. As a result, there is interest in its application in resource-constrained settings.

Lack of indinavir-associated nephrological complications in HIV-infected adults (predominantly women) with high indinavir plasma concentration in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire

To report the tolerance of indinavir combined with ritonavir (IDV/r 800/100 mg) twice daily (bid) in sub-Saharan African HIV-infected adults. HAART-naives patients started zidovudine plus lamivudine plus IDV/r 800/100 mg bid. Follow-up included standardized documentation of morbidity, CD4(+) cell count, creatininemia, plasma HIV-1 RNA, and IDV minimal plasma concentration (C(min)) measurements at month 1 (M1), M3, and M6. Seventy HIV-1-infected adults (68 women, median CD4 235/mm(3)) started HAART. At M6, 63% had undetectable viral load, and the median gain in CD4 since baseline was +128/mm(3). During the first 6 months, 21 patients experimented with 23 treatment modifications (reduction in IDV/r 400/100 mg bid, n = 11; switch to efavirenz, n = 11; zidovudine replaced by stavudine, n = 1), including 22 for digestive intolerance and 1 for severe anemia. At M1, M3, and M6, 67, 59, and 48 patients were still receiving IDV/r 800/100 mg bid, of whom 70%, 72%, and 60% had IDV Cmin above 5 ng/ml, respectively. In these patients, at M1, M3, and M6, the mean (+/- SD) IDV C(min) were 3431 +/- 3835 ng/ml, 2288 +/- 2116 ng/ml, and 1543 +/- 2398 ng/ml, respectively. There was no renal insufficiency of any grade, and no symptoms of urinary stones. The IDV/r 800/100 mg bid-containing regimen led to high IDV Cmin and a high rate of digestive intolerance. There was a surprising lack of nephrological side effects during the 6 months of follow-up, supporting the hypothesis that nephrological tolerance of IDV might be higher in sub-Saharan African individuals than in Americans or Europeans.

Methodological standards in non-inferiority AIDS trials: moving from adherence to compliance

Background

The interpretation of the results of active-control trials regarding the efficacy and safety of a new drug is important for drug registration and following clinical use. It has been suggested that non-inferiority and equivalence studies are not reported with the same quantitative rigor as superiority studies.

Methods

Standard methodological criteria for non-inferiority and equivalence trials including design, analysis and interpretation issues were applied to 18 recently conducted large non-inferiority (15) and equivalence (3) randomized trials in the field of AIDS antiretroviral therapy. We used the continuity-corrected non-inferiority chi-square to test 95% confidence interval treatment difference against the predefined non-inferiority margin.

Results

The pre-specified non-inferiority margin ranged from 10% to 15%. Only 4 studies provided justification for their choice. 39% of the studies (7/18) reported only intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis for the primary endpoint. When on-treatment (OT) and ITT statistical analyses were provided, ITT was favoured over OT for results interpretation for all but one study, inappropriately in this statistical context. All but two of the studies concluded there was "similar" efficacy of the experimental group. However, 9/18 had inconclusive results for non-inferiority.

Conclusion

Conclusions about non-inferiority should be drawn on the basis of the confidence interval analysis of an appropriate primary endpoint, using the predefined criteria for non-inferiority, in both OT and ITT, in compliance with the non-inferiority and equivalence CONSORT statement. We suggest that the use of the non-inferiority chi-square test may provide additional useful information.

Boosted versus Unboosted Indinavir with Zidovudine and Lamivudine in Nucleoside Pre-Treated Patients: A Randomized, Open-Label Trial with 112 Weeks of Follow-Up (HIV-Nat 005)

Introduction

The use of HIV protease inhibitors (PIs) in a ritonavir (RTV)-boosted form is now common. However, randomized data comparing boosted with unboosted PI strategies are scarce.

Methods

This randomized, open-label trial compared indinavir (IDV) 800 mg three times daily with IDV/RTV 800/100 mg twice daily, both given with zidovudine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC) twice daily in individuals with at least 3 months previous AZT experience. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average change in HIV RNA from baseline. Designed as a 48-week study, follow-up continued until week 112. Primary analysis is by intention to treat.

Results

One hundred and three patients commenced therapy and are included in the analysis. Patients had a median of 29 months past nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) exposure. Baseline median (interquartile range) log10 HIV RNA was 4.0 (3.3–4.5) and CD4+T-cell count 166 (40–323) cells/μl. After 112-weeks of study there was no significant difference observed between arms in the mean (sd) change in time-weighted average HIV RNA from baseline (-1.6 [1.1] HIV RNA copies/week/ml three times daily arm; -1.4 [1.1] HIV RNA copies/week/ml twice daily arm; P=0.3). Both arms were associated with substantial toxicity expressed as serious adverse events and study drug interruptions. The twice daily arm experienced greater dyslipidaemia. Mean (sd) changes in time-weighted CD4+ T-cell count from baseline were similar [88 (84) cells/week/μl three times daily arm; 70 [109] cells/week/μl twice daily arm; P=0.3).

Conclusions

RTV-boosted IDV 800/100 mg twice daily demonstrated comparable efficacy to unboosted IDV 800mg three times daily dosing. Both regimens were associated with substantial toxicity. Use of lower doses of RTV-boosted IDV may result in better tolerability without loss of efficacy and warrant further research.

Simultaneous determination of 16 anti-HIV drugs in human plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is pivotal to improve the management of HIV infection. Here, a HPLC-UV method has been developed to quantify simultaneously seven HIV protease inhibitors (amprenavir, atazanavir, indinavir, lopinavir, nelfinavir, ritonavir, and saquinavir; PIs), seven nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (abacavir, didanosine, emtricitabine, lamivudine, stavudine, zalcitabine, and zidovudine; NRTIs), and two non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (efavirenz and nevirapine; NNRTIs) in human plasma. The volume of the plasma sample was 600 microL. This method involved automated solid-phase extraction with Oasis HLB Cartridge 1 cc (divinylbenzene and N-vinylpyrrolidone) and evaporation in a water bath under nitrogen stream. The extracted samples were reconstituted with 100 microL methanol. Twenty microliters of these samples were injected into a HPLC-UV system, the analytes were eluted on an analytical C(18) Symmetry column (250 mm x 4.6mm I.D.) with a particle size of 5 microm. The mobile phase (0.01 M KH(2)PO(4) and acetonitrile) was delivered at 1.0 mL/min with linear gradient elution. The total run time for a single analysis was 35 min, the anti-HIV drugs were detected by UV at 240 and 260 nm. The calibration curves were linear up to 10 microg/mL. The absolute recovery ranged between 88 and 120%. The in vitro stability of anti-HIV drugs (0.005-10 microg/mL) in plasma has been studied at 24.0 degrees C. On these bases, a two to four analyte method has been tailored to the individual needs of the HIV-infected patient. The HPLC-UV method here reported has been validated and is currently applied to monitor PIs, NRTIs, and NNRTIs in plasma of HIV-infected patients. It allows to monitor the largest number of anti-HIV drugs simultaneously, appearing useful in a routine laboratory, and represents an essential step to elucidate the utility of a formal therapeutic drug monitoring for the optimal follow-up of HIV-infected patients.

Predictive factors of hyperlipidemia in HIV-infected subjects receiving lopinavir/ritonavir

We studied 382 multiexperienced HIV-infected patients followed up for > or =3 months after starting lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) to identify the factors predicting hypertriglyceridemia and high non-HDL cholesterol levels (triglycerides > or =200 mg/dl and/or non-HDL cholesterol > or =190 mg/dl) after 6 and 12 months of LPV/r exposure. The predictors of hypertriglyceridemia were higher baseline triglyceride levels [OR: 2.28 (95% CI: 1.67-3.12) for each additional 100 mg/dl; p = 0.001], the total duration of antiretroviral treatment [OR: 1.26 (95% CI: 1.12-1.41) for each additional year; p = 0.01], CDC stage C (OR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.24-3.88; p = 0.02), and male gender (OR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.42-4.74; p = 0.02); intravenous drug abusers seem less likely to develop the event (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.37-0.92; p = 0.03). The predictors of high non-HDL cholesterol levels were higher baseline levels [OR: 3.92 (95% CI: 1.92-6.24) for each additional 100 mg/dl; p = 0.001) and the combination of NRTIs and NNRTIs with LPV/r (OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.10-3.69; p = 0.03). The 75 patients stopping LPV/r showed a significant reduction in median triglyceride and non-HDL cholesterol levels after 3 months of 39 mg/dl and 20 mg/dl (p = 0.01 for both), respectively. Patients with high triglyceride and non- HDL cholesterol levels at the start of LPV/r treatment are at higher risk of developing hyperlipidemia.

Efficacy and Safety of Indinavir/Ritonavir 400/100 mg Twice Daily plus Two Nucleoside Analogues in Treatment-Naive HIV-1-Infected Patients with CD4+ T-cell Counts <200 cells/mm3: 96-Week Outcomes

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg plus stavudine and lamivudine twice daily in antiretroviral-therapy-naive Thai HIV-1-infected patients.

Methods

This was an open-label, non-randomized single arm study. Antiretroviral-naive patients ( n=80) with CD4+ cell count <200x106/l were started on stavudine and lamivudine plus indinavir/ritonavir 400/100mg twice daily. CD4+ cell count and HIV RNA were determined at week 0, 12, 24, 48 and 96. HIV RNA was measured to a level of 50 copies/ml by RT-PCR assay. Primary analysis was statistically performed as intent to treat. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with plasma HIV RNA below 50 copies/ml at week 96.

Result

Eighty antiretroviral-therapy-naive patients with median CD4+ cell count 19x106/l (range: 2-197x106/l) and median baseline plasma HIV RNA of 174,000 copies/ml (range 16,800–750,000 copies/ml) were enrolled. In the intent-to-treat analysis at week 96, the proportion of patients with HIV RNA of <50 copies/ml was 68.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 68.3-69.3), whereas it was 88.7% (95% CI: 88.1-89.3) in the on-treatment analysis at week 96. The regimen was well tolerated. Hyperglycaemia, hypercholesterolaemia and hypertriglyceridaemia were found in 8.3, 33.3 and 37.0% of the patients, respectively. Treatment was stopped in 18 patients; two from intolerance, two switched therapy, four as a result of serious adverse event-related death, and ten were lost to follow-up.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg plus stavudine and lamivudine twice daily, the least expensive boosted protease inhibitor, appears to be effective and safe up to 96 weeks despite high baseline viraemia and low CD4+ cell count in antiretroviral-naive patients.

Comparison of two indinavir/ritonavir regimens in the treatment of HIV-infected individuals

BACKGROUND

Pharmacokinetic enhancement of protease inhibitors (PIs) with low-dose ritonavir (RTV) for salvage therapy is increasingly common. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of indinavir (IDV)/RTV at 800/200 mg (arm A) and 400/400 mg (arm B) administered twice daily in HIV-infected subjects failing their first PI-based regimen.

METHODS

A phase I/II, randomized, open-label, 24-week study was conducted. Formal 12-hour pharmacokinetic evaluations were performed, and study visits occurred at baseline; at weeks 1, 2, and 4; and every 4 week thereafter for 24 weeks. Clinical symptoms and laboratory assessments were collected. Subjects were allowed to switch arms because of toxicity.

RESULTS

Forty-four subjects were enrolled (22 per arm). IDV predose concentration, maximum plasma concentration and area under the curve were significantly higher in arm A. Fifty-five percent and 45% of subjects in arms A and B responded (<200 copies/mL at week 24; P = 0.76), respectively. CD4 cell responses were similar. All subjects had IDV-sensitive virus at baseline and at virologic failure. Tolerability was comparable, but all grade 3 or higher triglyceride increases occurred in arm B and more subjects in arm B switched because of toxicity (5 vs. 1 triglyceride increases).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest formal pharmacokinetic evaluation of 2 dosage combinations of IDV/RTV in HIV-infected individuals. Pharmacokinetic parameters were consistent with previous results in patients but lower than in seronegative controls. Both regimens exhibited similar tolerability and response rates. High toxicity with a low response suggests that the optimum IDV/RTV combination would include an RTV dose <400 mg and an IDV dose <800 mg in this population.

Simplifying the treatment of HIV infection with ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors in antiretroviral-experienced patients

PURPOSE

The rationale, advantages, and disadvantages of attempting to enhance the efficacy of a primary protease inhibitor (PI) with ritonavir in the management of HIV infection, especially in patients who have previously undergone highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), are discussed.

SUMMARY

PIs are pivotal components of the HAART regimens used to fight HIV infection. Long-term viral suppression remains a major clinical challenge. Certain pharmacologic features of many PIs, such as their limited oral bioavailability, necessitate burdensome dosage schedules, creating a barrier to patient adherence. Compliance may be further compromised by adverse events. Any factors that undermine adherence may increase the risk that plasma drug concentrations will be suboptimal and that viral resistance and subsequent treatment failure will develop. The pharmacokinetic enhancement, or "boosting," of PI levels with low-dose ritonavir may increase PI potency and efficacy, as well as decrease the emergence of viral resistance, reduce the pill burden, and simplify administration. A number of clinical studies suggest that PI-boosted regimens are safe and effective in HIV-infected patients who have been previously treated with antiretroviral agents, but more research is needed.

CONCLUSION

PI boosting with ritonavir can improve PI pharmacokinetics so that potency and efficacy are increased and regimens are simplified, thereby potentially reducing antiretroviral resistance and promoting patient adherence.

Population pharmacokinetic analysis of indinavir in HIV-infected patient treated with a stable antiretroviral therapy

The objectives of this study were to build a population pharmacokinetic model that describe plasma concentrations of indinavir in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients with sustained virological response under a stable antiretroviral combination, and to characterize the effect of covariates and co-medications on indinavir pharmacokinetics. Data were obtained from 45 patients who received different dosages of indinavir: either indinavir alone t.i.d. (mostly 800 mg), either indinavir b.i.d. (mostly 800 mg) with a booster dose of 100 mg of ritonavir. Patients were required to have a baseline plasma HIV RNA <200 copies/mL and to have unchanged antiretroviral treatment for 6 months. Indinavir concentrations were measured at a first visit (one sample before drug administration and five after) and at a second visit 3 months later (before and 1 or 3 h after drug administration). A one-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination best described indinavir pharmacokinetics. For patients treated with indinavir alone, absorption rate constant was estimated to be 0.43/h, and oral clearance Cl/F was 33 L/h. For patients treated with indinavir plus ritonavir these estimates were 0.25/h and 19 L/h, respectively. Cl/F was found to increase by 1.45-fold in men and by 1.18-fold in patients also receiving zidovudine. Oral volume of distribution (V/F) was 24 L. The inter-individual and intra-individual variability were 117 and 205% for V/F, 42 and 58% for Cl/F, respectively. This population analysis in patients with sustained virological response, quantified the effect of ritonavir on the absorption rate constant and on the clearance of indinavir, showed an increase of Cl/F in men and can be used to draw reference curve for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Antiretroviral recommendations may influence the rate of transmission of drug-resistant HIV type 1

BACKGROUND

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment guidelines have evolved, shifting from more-aggressive to more-conservative approaches. The potential impact of these shifts on the transmission of drug-resistant virus is unknown.

METHODS

Drug-resistance genotypes were examined in all consecutive patients with recent HIV type 1 (HIV-1) seroconversion (hereafter, "HIV-1 seroconverters") seen at 10 Spanish hospitals since 1997. During the same period, the proportion of patients with chronic HIV-1 infection having undetectable viremia was examined, to estimate the extent and effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 141 recent HIV-1 seroconverters were identified, 67.4% of whom were men who have sex with men. The rate of primary drug-resistance mutations, by year of infection, was 33.3% for 1997, 29.4% for 1998, 20% for 1999, 14.3% for 2000, 3.4% for 2001, 15.4% for 2002, and 10.9% for 2003. On the other hand, the proportion of 8388 persons with chronic HIV-1 carriage who had an undetectable virus load was 33.4% for 1997, 34.6% for 1998, 39.7% for 1999, 47.5% for 2000, 52.9% for 2001, 39.7% for 2002, and 58.1% for 2003. A significant inverse correlation between transmission of drug-resistant HIV-1 and undetectable virus load was found (r=-0.955, by Spearman's test; P=.001). The lowest rate of transmission of drug-resistant HIV-1 was seen in 2001, when relatively "aggressive" treatment guidelines were used. Transmission of drug-resistant HIV-1 increased in 2002, in parallel with a reduction in the number of patients with chronic HIV-1 carriage and undetectable virus load, reflecting the popularity of drug holidays or treatment interruptions.

CONCLUSION

The rate of drug resistance in recent HIV-1 seroconverters inversely correlates with the proportion of chronically HIV-1-infected individuals who have undetectable virus loads in the same region, which indirectly reflects antiretroviral treatment rules at any given time.

[Therapeutic strategies for HIV infection: tolerance to boost antiproteases]

As tolerance not only depends on protease inhibitors (PI) dosing but also on their trough concentrations, the enhanced exposure associated with PI boosting goes together with a reduced tolerance, especially at the biological level. Moreover, the toxicity associated with the low doses ritonavir used in boosting seems to compromise, at least partly, the favourable metabolic profile of certain PI. Eventually, boosted lopinavir tolerance is similar to that of other PI. Even if the advantage/risk ratio of lopinavir or other boosted PI globally seems favourable, the final choice belongs to the physician in charge of evaluating the individual risk of a lesser, especially metabolic tolerance, for his or her patient.

Indinavir/ritonavir-based therapy in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral therapy-naive patients: comparison of 800/100 mg and 400/100 mg twice daily

Objectives To compare the efficacy and tolerability of indinavir (IDV)/ritonavir (RTV) at 800/100 and 400/100 mg twice daily (bid) in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive patients. Methods An open comparison of two groups of ART-naive patients treated with IDV/RTV 800/100 or 400/100 mg bid plus two nucleoside analogues was carried out. Viral load, CD4 cell count and tolerability were measured at baseline and at weeks 4, 12, 24 and 48. IDV plasma concentrations were measured retrospectively. Results A total of 107 patients were included in the study. Of these, 57 were treated with 800/100 and 50 with 400/100 mg IDV/RTV bid. At week 48, a viral load of <50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL was achieved by 77 and 64% of the patients, respectively, and the median CD4 cell count increases were +171 and +164 cells/muL (intent-to-treat; P not significant), respectively. Side effects leading to protease inhibitor discontinuation occurred in 61% of subjects in the 800/100 mg group vs. 20% in the 400/100 mg group (P<0.0001). Switching from 800/100 to 400/100 mg dosage improved adverse events in 16 of 20 patients. IDV concentrations were above 0.15 mg/L in 89% of the 28 patients tested in the 400/100 mg group. Conclusions Indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg bid provided the same efficacy as 800/100 mg bid at 48 weeks in an ART-naive population, but safety and tolerance were significantly better for 400/100 mg, while convenience was also improved and cost was reduced.

Discordant Conclusions from HIV Clinical Trials — An Evaluation of Efficacy Endpoints

The three main components of long-term efficacy for a combination of antiretrovirals are: (i) the strength of the antiviral effect, (ii) toxicity profile and (iii) patient acceptability of the regimen. Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis, where discontinuations and switches are considered failures [ITT, switch equals failure (ITT/S=F)], is a regulatory standard for analysing the efficacy of anti-retrovirals. A review of all clinical trials published in FDA product labels was conducted, including all clinical trials of boosted protease inhibitor- or nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naive patients, and all clinical trials of antiretrovirals in treatment-experienced patients. Clinical trials where the results are presented in the standard ITT/S=F method were included. For randomized clinical trials in treatment-naive patients, the majority of treatment discontinuations have been either for toxicity (32%) or patient refusal of treatment (41%), with only 27% of failure endpoints for virological reasons among recent clinical trials in naive patients. Therefore, there is the potential for the results from ITT/S=F analysis to be driven by non-virological endpoints – a new treatment can be classified as ‘more efficacious’ than control owing to fewer discontinuations due to adverse events or patient preference.

In order to understand the intrinsic potency of the anti-retroviral regimen under study, ITT analysis needs to be supplemented by standardized as-treated analyses, excluding withdrawals for toxicity or other reasons. To evaluate the efficacy of a treatment strategy or sequential treatment regimens, the ‘ITT, switch included’ (ITT/SI) method: where changes from the initial randomized treatment are not classified as treatment failure – can be used. However, interpretation of clinical trials using ITT/SI analysis is difficult and depends on the frequency of treatment switching in the different arms of a trial.

Conclusions on efficacy from clinical trials can depend on the primary analysis used; most commonly, treatments could be significantly different by ITT/S=F analysis, but then interpreted as equivalent using the ITT/SI or as-treated methods.

Pharmacokinetics of Reduced-Dose Indinavir/Ritonavir 400/100 Mg Twice Daily in HIV-1-Infected Thai Patients

Objective

To study the pharmacokinetics of indinavir/ ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily in antiretroviral-naive patients at Srinagarind Hospital in Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Methods

This was a steady-state, open-label pharmacokinetic study of 19 patients. A 12 h pharmacokinetic curve was recorded after an overnight fast. Plasma levels of indinavir and ritonavir were determined by a validated HPLC method. Virological failure was defined according to the most recent US Department of Health and Human Services guidelines as a viral load above 400 copies/ml at week 24.

Results

Median baseline values for CD4 and viral load were 13 cells/mm3 and 167000 copies/ml, respectively. The median (interquartile ranges) for indinavir AUC, Cmax and Cmin were 18.1 (15.3–23.8) mg/l•h, 4.1 (3.6–4.8) mg/l and 0.17 (0.12–0.30) mg/l, respectively. These values represent 37%, 39% and 24% of the AUC, Cmax and Cmin values found, respectively, for the indinavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg dose in HIV-1-infected Thai patients. Short-term virological response was satisfactory. There were three subjects with an indinavir Cmin below the target value of 0.10 mg/l, of whom one had virological failure (33%). Among the other 16 subjects with an indinavir Cmin above 0.10 mg/l, there was also one virological failure (6%) ( P=0.30).

Conclusions

Indinavir exposure in this reduced-dose regimen of 400 mg with 100 mg ritonavir twice daily was more than dose-proportionally lower than previously observed with the indinavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg twice daily regimen. Therapeutic Cmin levels of indinavir were achieved in >80% of the subjects and short-term virological response was satisfactory in this cohort of patients starting highly active antiretroviral therapy at an advanced disease stage with high baseline viral loads.

Pharmacokinetics of indinavir and ritonavir administered at 667 and 100 milligrams, respectively, every 12 hours compared with indinavir administered at 800 milligrams every 8 hours in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients on nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors with HIV RNA at <1,000 copies/ml were randomized in an open-label study to administration of combined indinavir/ritonavir (IDV/RTV) at 667/100 mg every 12 h (q12h) or IDV alone at 800 mg q8h to determine the regimens' pharmacokinetics. On day 14, plasma IDV and RTV levels were determined over 24 h. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetics (minimum concentration of drug in serum [C(min)], area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h [AUC(0-24)], and maximum concentration of drug in serum [C(max)]) were expressed as geometric mean values with 90% confidence intervals (CI). The primary hypothesis was that the lower bound of the protocol-specified 90% CI for the geometric mean C(min) ratio of the combination compared to IDV alone regimen would be >/=2. Twenty-seven patients were enrolled, and 24 (15 male; average age, 42 years) completed the study. The C(min), AUC(0-24), and C(max) for IDV/RTV compared to IDV alone were 1,511 versus 250 nM, 119,557 versus 77,034 nM . h, and 10,428 versus 10,407 nM, respectively. Corresponding relationships for IDV/RTV compared to IDV alone were a 6.0-fold increase in C(min) (90% CI, 4.0, 9.3), an increase in AUC(0-24) (1.5-fold, 90% CI, 1.2, 2.0), and no increase in C(max). Adverse events were similar and generally mild, with no cases of nephrolithiasis. The geometric mean ratio of IDV C(min) for IDV/RTV compared to IDV was at least 2 by a lower bound of the 90% CI, satisfying the primary hypothesis. The C(max) was not increased, suggesting an IDV/RTV 667/100-mg toxicity profile may be similar to that of unboosted IDV.

Pharmacokinetics of indinavir at 800, 600, and 400 milligrams administered with ritonavir at 100 milligrams and efavirenz in ethnic chinese patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus

We assessed the pharmacokinetics of three different doses of indinavir in five patients. All doses achieved trough concentrations above efficacy thresholds. Toxic trough concentrations were observed in all patients receiving 800 mg, in two patients receiving 600 mg, and in none receiving 400 mg. Indinavir at 400 mg may be efficacious and less toxic in patients taking ritonavir and efavirenz.

Health-Related Quality of Life in HIV Patients Switching to Twice-Daily Indinavir/Ritonavir Regimen or Continuing with Three-Times-Daily Indinavir-Based Therapy

Objective

To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes in patients treated with indinavir three-times daily after switching to a twice-daily indinavir/ritonavir regimen or continuing with the same regimen.

Methods

Patients on HAART including indinavir three-times-daily with undetectable viral load were randomly assigned to continue with this therapy or to change to a twice-daily indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) regimen. The Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey (MOS-HIV) questionnaire was used as the HRQoL measure.

Results

A total of 118 patients participated in the study, of which 59 (50%) were randomly assigned to continue with the three-times-daily regimen. Patients had a mean age of 39 years and 80% of them were male. At baseline, subjects included in the three-times-daily group presented a significantly greater number of symptoms than subjects in the twice-daily group, but no statistically significant differences were observed in MOS-HIV scores between the groups. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, a reduction in HRQoL scores was observed in both groups, which was greater in the twice-daily group. In the per protocol analysis, reduction of HRQoL was minimal.

Conclusions

A HRQoL deterioration, greater in the twice-daily group, was observed in this study in the ITT analysis, while HRQoL remained stable in both groups in patients who continued with and tolerated the allocated regimen.

The Problems Faced When Assessing the Prevalence and Incidence of Antiretroviral-Related Toxicities

Although the dramatic effect of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in reducing morbidity and mortality must not be underestimated, it is also important to consider the incidence and prevalence of HAART-related toxicities. Although several studies have investigated HAART-related toxicities, there has been great variety between them in the reported incidence and prevalence rates of these toxicities. Various factors, including whether the study type was a clinical trial or an observational study, the definition of the toxicity endpoints, the demographic characteristics of the study populations and the effect of calendar year on analyses, may all influence the rates observed. We investigated the possible explanations for the differences in the incidence and prevalence rates of HAART-related toxicities between studies, focussing on metabolic and hepatotoxic disorders.

Pharmacokinetics of indinavir combined with low-dose ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected children

So far, no pediatric doses for indinavir combined with ritonavir have been defined. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of 400 mg of indinavir/m(2) combined with 125 mg of ritonavir/m(2) every 12 h (q12h) in 14 human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected children. The area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h and the minimum concentration of drug in serum for indinavir were similar to those for 800 mg of indinavir-100 mg of ritonavir q12h in adults, while the maximum concentration of drug in serum was slightly decreased, with geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals in parentheses) of 1.1 (0.87 to 1.3), 0.96 (0.60 to 1.5), and 0.80 (0.68 to 0.94), respectively.

Risk of Metabolic Abnormalities in Patients Infected with HIV Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy that Contains Lopinavir‐Ritonavir

The evolution of fasting glucose, triglyceride, and total and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level and the factors associated with development of clinically significant abnormalities in these metabolic parameters at 6 months were assessed in 353 consecutive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients who were receiving antiretroviral therapy containing lopinavir-ritonavir. Although glucose and HDL cholesterol levels did not change, triglyceride and total cholesterol levels significantly increased (P<.0001 for each), as did the proportion of patients with a triglyceride level of >400 mg/dL and a total cholesterol level of >240 mg/dL (P=.002). A baseline triglyceride level of >400 mg/dL and a baseline total cholesterol level of >240 mg/dL were identified as independent factors predicting clinically significant hypertriglyceridemia and hypercholesterolemia, respectively, at 6 months. These findings may have clinical implications when the therapeutic option of lopinavir-ritonavir is considered.

Lopinavir/ritonavir vs. indinavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral naive HIV-infected patients: immunovirological outcome and side effects

We compared immunovirological outcomes and toxicities of HAART regimens including LPV/r and IDV/r in antiretroviral naïve HIV-1 patients. We retrospectively selected 55 patients starting LPV/r and 52 starting IDV/r as first-line HAART. Immunovirological and metabolic parameters were recorded at baseline and every 3 months as were side effects, AIDS-defining events and deaths. Demographic characteristics and NRTIs included in the regimens were comparable. Both groups reached undetectable HIV-RNA plasma viremia from third month and maintained during follow-up. However, patients receiving IDV/r had a lower probability to obtain virological success (RH: 0.46). Patients receiving IDV/r patients showed a greater increase of total cholesterol (P = 0.01). Three patients on LPV/r and 21 on IDV/r discontinued the drug for toxicity, leading to a 8.40 higher risk of discontinuation in the latter group. In our clinical setting IDV/r showed to be less effective and more toxic than LPV/RTV as first-line HAART.

Ritonavir exhibits anti-atherogenic properties on vascular smooth muscle cells

OBJECTIVES

HIV protease inhibitors (PI) such as ritonavir have dramatically decreased HIV-related morbidity and mortality. However they exhibit significant side-effects such as hyperlipidemia, hyperglycemia with or without lipodystrophy, which may increase patients' risk for atherosclerosis. Direct effects of PI on the vascular wall have not been investigated. Platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) is a major contributor to atherogenesis.

DESIGN

In the present study the effects of ritonavir on PDGF-BB-induced responses of vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) were evaluated.

METHODS

PDGF-induced proliferation of VSMCs was measured by BrdU-incorporation, and chemotaxis was assessed by utilizing modified Boyden chambers. Cytotoxicity and apoptosis were quantified using LDH-release- and apoptosis-kits. Immunoprecipitation and Western blot analyses were performed to evaluate betaPDGF receptor (betaPDGFR) expression and phosphorylation, and to monitor intracellular signaling.

RESULTS

Pretreatment of VSMCs with ritonavir resulted in a significant concentration-dependent inhibition of PDGF-BB-induced cellular responses. At a therapeutic concentration (10 microg/ml), ritonavir significantly reduced PDGF-induced DNA synthesis and chemotaxis by 46.8 +/- 5.5% and 37.2 +/- 3.3%, respectively (P < 0.05 each). In addition it significantly inhibited PDGF-dependent downstream signaling, such as Erk activation. These inhibitory effects were not due to cytotoxicity or apoptosis. Instead, ritonavir inhibited the ligand-induced tyrosine phosphorylation of the betaPDGFR, whereas it did not alter betaPDGFR expression.

CONCLUSIONS

Ritonavir has direct effects on VSMCs at clinically relevant concentrations in vitro, as it inhibits betaPDGFR activation and PDGF-dependent proliferation and migration of VSMCs. Although ritonavir may increase the risk of vascular disease by its metabolic side effects, it may exhibit anti-atherogenic properties on the cellular level.

Comparison of Two Reduced-Dose Regimens of Indinavir (600 Mg Vs 400 Mg Twice Daily) and Ritonavir (100 Mg Twice Daily) in Healthy Volunteers (Coredir)

Objective

To assess the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of reduced dosages of twice daily indinavir (IDV) boosted by low-dose ritonavir (RTV) in healthy volunteers.

Methods

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of IDV/RTV twice daily (600/100 mg and 400/100 mg) were assessed in a randomized crossover design in 16 healthy volunteers. Each dosage was taken twice daily for 2 weeks before 12 h pharmacokinetics were obtained.

Results

Sixteen subjects were included, with a mean age ±SD of 30 ±4 years; seven female, nine male. Fifteen subjects completed the study. After dose reduction of IDV AUC, Cmax and Cmin decreased significantly. In the 400 mg group three out of 15 subjects had IDV levels below 0.10 mg/l vs none in the 600 mg group. All subjects reported mild to moderate side effects throughout the study period, which were more severe in the 600 mg group (mostly renal, dry skin/lips, paresthesias/oral discomfort). In the 600 mg group four subjects reported dysuria and one subject discontinued because of flank pain, whereas two subjects reported dysuria and no subject discontinued in the 400 mg group, respectively. Eight subjects developed crystalluria without a significant difference between both groups. No significant change in serum creatinine was observed.

Conclusions

IDV/RTV 400/100 mg twice daily resulted in significant lower IDV exposure, with three out of 15 subjects revealing Cmin values below the recommended threshold for wild-type virus of 0.10 mg/l. Tolerability, however, was lower in the 600 mg IDV group. Therapeutic drug monitoring in the individual patient appears to be necessary to guarantee appropriate drug levels and simultaneously minimize toxicity. Presented in part at the 6th International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection. Glasgow, Scotland, UK, November 2002. Abstract P182.

Clinical trial methodology and clinical cohorts: the importance of complete follow-up in trials evaluating the virological efficacy of anti-HIV medicines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It has been common practice in randomized trials of HIV medicines to classify switches away from the original therapy as failures in analyses of virological effect, in line with an HIV-RNA measurement above a given level of quantification. This approach precludes the ability to identify the possible effects of a given therapy on those of a subsequent therapy. This review explores whether there have been changes in the reporting of randomized trials since the importance of continuous follow-up throughout the study period was initially raised 2 years ago.

RECENT FINDINGS

Follow-up is still likely to be discontinued at a premature switch from study medication in a large number of the randomized trials published in 2002-2003. However, some studies, all initiated by investigators, did follow patients throughout the study period. In three of the studies, the proportions of patients with virological failure assessed with and without data after the premature discontinuation of randomized therapy could be elicited. Substantial differences were seen in the comparisons of two highly active antiretroviral therapy regimens according to the choice of analytical approach. In all three studies significant differences were observed between the regimens according to one approach, but not to the other.

SUMMARY

The notation of treatment switch equals failure leads to an imprecise measurement of virological effect, and complete follow-up throughout the study period should be strongly encouraged, thus enabling several supplementary analyses of the virological effect of the treatment strategies being compared.

Pharmacokinetics of Indinavir/Ritonavir (800/100 mg) in Combination With Efavirenz (600 mg) in HIV-1???Infected Subjects

BACKGROUND

Addition of efavirenz (600 mg) to indinavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) results in significant decreases in indinavir levels in healthy volunteers. This study evaluated the steady-state pharmacokinetics of indinavir/ritonavir at 800/100 mg twice daily (bid) in combination with efavirenz at 600 mg once daily (qd) in HIV-infected Thai subjects who used this nucleoside-sparing combination in The HIV Netherlands Australia Thailand Research Collaboration 009 study.

METHODS

At week 4 of the study, 12-hour pharmacokinetic profiles for indinavir/ritonavir were obtained for 20 HIV-infected subjects. For efavirenz, the concentrations at 12 hours and 24 hours (Cmin) after dosing were assessed.

RESULTS

All subjects (10 males and 10 females) completed the study. The geometric mean area under the concentration versus time curve, Cmin, and maximum plasma concentration of indinavir were 45.7 mg/(L. h) (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.8-52.5), 0.32 mg/L (95% CI, 0.24-0.44), and 11.1 mg/L (95% CI, 9.4-13.0), respectively. A >10-fold variation in indinavir Cmin was observed. All subjects had an indinavir Cmin that was at least comparable with the reported mean population Cmin of indinavir at 800 mg thrice daily without ritonavir (0.15 mg/L). The geometric mean concentration at 12 hours and Cmin of efavirenz were 3.1 mg/L (95% CI, 2.5-3.7) and 2.1 mg/L (95% CI, 1.6-2.6), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the known pharmacokinetic interaction between efavirenz and indinavir/ritonavir, the combination of indinavir/ritonavir at 800/100 mg bid and efavirenz at 600 mg qd results in adequate minimum concentrations of both indinavir and efavirenz for treatment-naive patients.

A Once-Daily Haart Regimen Containing Indinavir + Ritonavir plus One Or Two Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (Pipo Study)

Introduction

There is an increased interest in developing once-daily regimens for the treatment of HIV-infected patients. A Phase II study was conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetics, and short-term safety and efficacy of an indinavir/ritonavir combination as part of a once-daily regimen.

Methods

HIV-infected patients with either proven poor compliance to HAART regimens in the past or an anticipated poor compliance to such a regimen in the future were eligible for this study. They received a once-daily regimen consisting of indinavir 1200 mg, ritonavir 400 mg, and one or two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), also administered once daily with food. A 24 h pharmacokinetic profile was constructed in a subset of patients. Short-term safety and efficacy were evaluated at 4, 12 and 24 weeks after initiation of treatment.

Results

A total of 64 patients were included in this study, of whom 27 (42.2%) were treatment-naive. The geometric mean (+95% CI) of indinavir AUC0–24h, Cmax and Cmin as determined in an unselected group of 16 patients were 84.9 (69.7–103.5) mg/l.h, 12.0 (10.2–14.1) mg/l and 0.15 (0.09–0.26) mg/l, respectively. A large interpatient variability was observed, with five out of the 16 subjects having a Cmin value below the minimum effective concentration of 0.10 mg/l. During the 24 weeks of follow-up nine patients (14.1%) discontinued study medication, two due to medication-related toxicity. Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported most frequently (50.0%), followed by skin effects (45.3%), joint pain (9.4%) and urological complaints (7.8%). No patient developed nephrolithiasis. The median (+interquartile range) serum creatinine level in the 64 patients increased slightly from 74 (63–88) μmol/l to 79 (66–92) μmol/l during the 24 weeks of follow-up. One new patient reached a grade 1 elevation in serum creatinine, which normalized during the follow-up; five other patients with elevated serum creatinine at baseline remained stable. During the 24 weeks of follow-up, the proportion of patients with a viral load <500 copies/ml increased from 35.1% at baseline to 71.4% (ITT NC=F analysis) or 83.3% (OT analysis), and from 0% at baseline to 76.2% (ITT NC=F analysis) or 100.0% (OT analysis) in treatment-experienced and -naive patients, respectively. This was accompanied by a mean increase in CD4 cell count of 52 and 220 cells/mm3 in these two sub-groups, respectively.

Conclusion

The 24-week follow-up data of this study indicate favourable pharmacokinetics of an indinavir/ritonavir 1200/400 mg combination as part of a once-daily regimen consisting also of one or two NRTIs. Short-term safety and efficacy were also satisfactory. Long-term follow up is planned to evaluate the durability of these results.

Efficacy and Safety of Ritonavir/Indinavir 100/400 Mg Twice Daily in Combination with Two Nucleoside Analogues in Antiretroviral Treatment-Naive HIV-Infected Individuals

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of indinavir/ritonavir (IDV/RTV) 400/100 mg twice daily in combination with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in antiretroviral-naive patients.

Design and methods

Antiviral therapy-naive patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA >5000 copies/ml were enrolled in this pilot, single-arm study. CD4 cell count and viral load were evaluated at weeks (W) 4, 12, 24 and every 3 months until W48. The primary end-point was the percentage (%) of patients with viral load <400 copies/ml at W48. Intent-to-treat (ITT) (missing values or change in treatment equalled failure) and on-treatment (OT) analyses were performed.

Results

Forty patients were enrolled. Baseline median viral load was 5.36 log10 copies/ml, median CD4 count was 84 cells/mm3. At W48 by ITT analysis, the % patients with viral load <400 copies/ml was 65% (95% CI: 48–79) and 50% (95% CI: 35–65) with viral load <50 copies/ml, and 96% (26/27) (95% CI: 89–100) and 74% (95% CI: 57–91], respectively, by OT analysis. The median decrease in viral load at W48 was –3.83 log10 copies/ml (–0.1; –5.19) and the median increase in CD4 was +167 cells/mm3 (6–474 cell/mm3). At W4 (34/40), the median IDV Cmin was 500 ng/ml (range 5–8100) with 91% of patients with an adequate IDV Cmin >150 ng/ml. Ten patients discontinued the study treatment before W48: adverse events (eight), patient's will (one) and simplification of therapy (one). Three patients were lost to follow-up. Only one virological failure occurred and was associated with poor compliance and sub-optimal concentrations of IDV/RTV.

Conclusions

IDV/RTV 400/100 mg twice daily is an effective and safe first-line antiretroviral therapy. The simplicity and the low cost of IDV/RTV is of major interest particularly in countries with limited resources.