Atazanavir and lopinavir/ritonavir: pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of a promising double-boosted protease inhibitor regimen

Second line antiretroviral therapy for treatment of HIV in Asia

Limited access to virological monitoring has led to a high prevalence of resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) at the time of first line failure in most studies from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Nevertheless, the current standard of care is to include NRTIs in second line regimens. The activity of tenofovir/emtricitabine following failure of stavudine/lamivudine or zidovudine/lamivudine is dependent on the sensitivity of the monitoring strategy used during first line therapy and the threshold for switching, whereas these factors are less important if the opposite sequencing strategy is used. Boosted protease inhibitors (PIs) are the foundation of effective second-line therapy with demonstrated efficacy in early salvage regimens and high barrier to resistance. Lopinavir/ritonavir and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir have recently been described by the World Health Organization as preferred boosted PIs for use in LMIC. Alternative approaches currently under investigation include boosted PI monotherapy, dual boosted PIs, and the combination of raltegravir (an HIV integrase inhibitor) and a boosted PI.

Importance of P-glycoprotein for drug-drug interactions

P-glycoprotein (ABCB1) is one of the most extensively studied transporters regarding drug resistance and drug-drug interactions. P-glycoprotein is expressed in multiple key organs in drug disposition such as small intestine, blood-brain barrier, kidney, and liver. Therefore, P-glycoprotein mediated drug-drug interactions can occur at various organs and tissues. This chapter will mainly focus on drug-drug interactions that are mediated by the intestinal P-glycoprotein.During the last decade, many in vitro and in vivo studies reported that the induction or inhibition of P-glycoprotein can lead to drug-drug interactions. For instance, induction of the intestinal P-glycoprotein activity can cause reduced bioavailability of orally administered drugs and decreased therapeutic efficacy. On the other hand, the inhibition of the intestinal P-glycoprotein activity can lead to increased bioavailability, thus leading to an increased risk of adverse side effects.

Within-Patient Atazanavir Trough Concentration Monitoring in HIV-1-Infected Patients

Objective: Protease inhibitors (PIs) exhibit considerable interpatient pharmacokinetic variability in plasma trough concentrations. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is occasionally used to guide chronic dosing to achieve target trough concentrations, but its clinical success assumes minimal intrasubject variability. Therefore, our primary objective was to evaluate intrapatient variability in atazanavir (ATV) plasma trough concentrations in HIV-1-infected patients. Design/Methods: In a single-site, prospective, cohort study, patients on atazanavir with or without ritonavir (ATV/r or ATV) for 2 clinic visits were enrolled. Adherence and time since last dose (TSLD) were verified at each visit. ATV was assayed with high-performance liquid chromatography. Intra- and interpatient variation was evaluated using the median intraindividual percentage coefficient of variation (ICV). Results: The mean 24-hour ATV trough concentrations for the first and second visit for the ATV/r group (n = 10) was 598 (CV 84%) and 525 ng/mL (CV 66%), respectively ( P = .511), and 300 (CV 81%) and 434 ng/mL (CV 106%) for the ATV group (n = 4), respectively ( P = .369). Median ICV was 43.1% for all patients (range: 0.6%-107.6%), 38.1% (0.6%-107.6%) for the ATV/r group, and 33.1% (2.3%-87.6%) for the ATV group. Conclusions: Potential intrapatient variability in ATV troughs suggests that repeated measurements may be required to ensure that target values are maintained.

Boosting dose ritonavir does not alter peripheral insulin sensitivity in healthy HIV-seronegative volunteers

BACKGROUND

Some HIV protease inhibitors (PIs), including full-dose ritonavir (800 mg) and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir, acutely induce insulin resistance in the absence of HIV infection and changes in body composition. Boosting dose ritonavir (100-200 mg) is the most commonly prescribed PI, yet its effects on glucose metabolism have not been described in the absence of another PI.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, cross-over study, a single dose of ritonavir 200 mg or placebo was given to healthy HIV-seronegative volunteers before assessment of insulin sensitivity by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp.

RESULTS

Boosting dose ritonavir had no effect on insulin-mediated glucose disposal (M/I, placebo: 8.59 ± 0.83 vs. ritonavir: 8.51 ± 0.64 mg/kg per minute per μU/mL insulin, P = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

A single boosting dose of ritonavir does not alter insulin sensitivity, suggesting lopinavir is likely responsible for the induction of insulin resistance demonstrated in prior short-term studies of lopinavir/ritonavir. There is a dose-dependent effect of ritonavir on insulin sensitivity.

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.

Multidrug resistance: a clinical approach

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

New antiretroviral agents have recently become available within existing and new drug classes, increasing treatment options for patients with multidrug-resistant virus. This review discusses the challenges that these new agents pose for the management of treatment-experienced patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies of the efficacy and safety of new antiretroviral drugs illustrate that drug regimens containing new agents are well tolerated and can suppress viremia in even the most drug-resistant patients. The goal of any new regimen should therefore be suppression of plasma HIV RNA levels to less than 50 copies/ml, even in treatment-experienced patients. Patients should be given a regimen with at least two, or preferably three, fully active drugs after careful consideration of their treatment and adherence history, current and prior genotype tests, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. Newer and more tolerable agents also offer the possibility of regimen simplification among patients with multidrug-resistant HIV who are virologically suppressed.

SUMMARY

Clinicians must optimize the pairing and sequencing of recently available antiretroviral agents. Future studies should continue to investigate the optimal use of new agents in order to further improve long-term treatment efficacy in patients with multidrug-resistant HIV infection.

Pure drug and polymer based nanotechnologies for the improved solubility, stability, bioavailability and targeting of anti-HIV drugs

The impact of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been devastating with nearly 7400 new infections every day. Although, the advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has made a tremendous contribution in reducing the morbidity and mortality in developed countries, the situation in developing countries is still grim with millions of people being infected by this disease. The new advancements in the field of nanotechnology based drug delivery systems hold promise to improve the situation. These nanoscale systems have been successfully employed in other diseases such as cancer, and therefore, we now have a better understanding of the practicalities and technicalities associated with their clinical development. Nanotechnology based approaches offer some unique opportunities specifically for the improvement of water solubility, stability, bioavailability and targeting of antiretroviral drugs. This review presents discussion on the contribution of pure drug and polymer based nanotechnologies for the delivery anti-HIV drugs.

Concentration-dependent effects and intracellular accumulation of HIV protease inhibitors in cultured CD4 T cells and primary human lymphocytes

BACKGROUND

The intracellular and plasma concentrations of HIV protease inhibitors (HPIs) vary widely in vivo. It is unclear whether there is a concentration-dependent effect of HPIs such that at increasing concentration they may either block their own efflux (leading to 'autoboosting') or influx (leading to saturability/decreased intracellular accumulation).

METHOD

The effects of various concentrations (0-30 microM) of lopinavir, saquinavir, ritonavir and atazanavir on the accumulation of [(14)C]lopinavir, [(3)H]saquinavir, [(3)H]ritonavir and [(3)H]atazanavir, respectively, were investigated in CEM(parental), CEM(VBL) [P-glycoprotein (ABCB1) overexpressing], CEM(E1000) (MRP1 overexpressing) and in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). We also investigated the effects of inhibitors of ABCB1/ABCG2 (tariquidar), ABCC (MK571) and ABCC1/2 (frusemide), singly and in combination with HPIs, on cellular accumulation.

RESULTS

In all the cell lines, with increasing concentration of lopinavir, saquinavir and ritonavir, there was a significant increase in the cellular accumulation of [(14)C]lopinavir, [(3)H]saquinavir and [(3)H]ritonavir. Tariquidar, MK571 and frusemide (alone and in combination with lopinavir, saquinavir and ritonavir) significantly increased the accumulation of [(14)C]lopinavir, [(3)H]saquinavir and [(3)H]ritonavir. Ritonavir (alone or in combination with tariquidar) decreased the intracellular accumulation of [(3)H]ritonavir in PBMCs. Atazanavir decreased the accumulation of [(3)H]atazanavir in a concentration-dependent manner in all of the cells tested.

CONCLUSIONS

There are complex and variable drug-specific rather than class-specific effects of the HPIs on their own accumulation.

Atazanavir: a review of its use in the management of HIV-1 infection

Atazanavir (Reyataz), a protease inhibitor (PI), is approved in many countries for use as a component of antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens for the treatment of adult, and in some countries in paediatric, patients with HIV-1 infection. ART regimens containing ritonavir-boosted atazanavir improved virological and immunological markers in adult patients with HIV-1 infection, and had similar efficacy to regimens containing lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients. In addition, unboosted atazanavir was noninferior to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in treatment-naive patients. Atazanavir is administered once daily and has a low capsule burden. Atazanavir, whether unboosted or boosted, was generally well tolerated and appeared to be associated with less marked metabolic effects, including less alteration of lipid levels, than other PIs. These properties mean that boosted atazanavir, and unboosted atazanavir in patients unable to tolerate ritonavir, continues to have a role as a component of ART regimens in patients with HIV-1 infection.

HAART for children with treatment failure

Even as pediatric rollout programs are struggling to meet global need, increasing numbers of children are failing first-line antiretroviral therapy in low- and middle-income countries. Without better access to viral load monitoring, second-line antiretrovirals and research to guide optimal regimen selection, it will be difficult to ensure that HIV-infected children will survive into adulthood. Data available on pediatric drug resistance demonstrate that failure occurs early in childhood. Studies of salvage drug options have been promising, but are primarily conducted in adults. Evidence-based approaches to regimen selection, pediatric antiretroviral formulations and expanded access to novel drugs are now required to prepare for the future.

Atazanavir: its role in HIV treatment

Azatanavir is a protease inhibitor (PI) approved for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. Atazanavir is a substrate and inhibitor of cytochrome P450 isozyme 3A and an inhibitor and inducer of P-glycoprotein. It has similar virologic efficacy as efavirenz and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in antiretroviral-naive individuals. Its impact on lipids is less than other PIs and it is suitable for those in whom hyperlipidemia is undesirable. Ritonavir boosting of atazanavir enhances the bioavailability of atazanavir but may result in some elevation of lipids and is recommended for treatment-experienced patients and those receiving efavirenz or tenofovir. Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir has similar antiviral activity as ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in both antiretroviral therapy-naive and -experienced patients. Atazanavir causes unconjugated bilirubinemia in over 40% of patients but results in less than 2% discontinuations. Atazanavir is licensed for once-daily use and atazanavir/ritonavir competes with lopinavir/ritonavir as the most commonly prescribed PI.

[Clinical utility of atazanavir]

Atazanavir (ATV) is a protease inhibitor (PI) in which its main qualities, compared to other PI are dosing convenience, good tolerability and excellent metabolic profile. These characteristics makes it more like a nonnucleoside than a PI, but with the increased genetic barrier common to PI. It is indicated in initial treatment, simplification treatment or a change due to toxicity and in first line rescue treatment. The administering of ATV boosted with ritonavir (300/100 mg/d) has been approved in Europe in all clinical situations. In naïve patients it has been combined with practically all the nucleoside analogue pairs and has shown to be as effective as lopinavir/ritonavir and even efavirenz. In the USA, this indication has been approved for almost 5 years and ATV has become the most prescribed PI, while the EMEA has approved it this year. ATV is an optimal drug to replace other antiretrovirals in simplification strategies or changes due to toxicity. In several studies it has been shown that, in patients with good virological control, it can LPV/r or another PI, the therapeutic efficacy being maintained, with excellent tolerance and an improved lipid profile, and decreasing the cardiovascular risk. This strategy is widely used in Spain. In this scenario some patients could benefit from non-boosted ATV treatment (400 mg/d). ATV is an effective and very attractive option in first line rescue treatments in which the virus shows little or no resistance to PI, as its simplicity and tolerability can improve problems with compliance, the main cause of therapeutic failure. In patients with moderate resistance to PI, ATV is as effective as LPV/r. The survival of patients with HIV infection is increasingly longer and factors such as tolerability, cardiovascular risk and the adaptability of the treatment to the lifestyle of the patient, become more important, therefore ATV must play an important role in the treatment of HIV-infection.

[Pharmacology, pharmacokinetic features and interactions of atazanavir]

Atazanavir (ATV) is an HIV protease inhibitor (IP) with a high in vitro activity against HIV-1, that demonstrates a high additive activity in the presence of other antiretrovirals and a synergic activity with other PI. Oral absorption is greater than 68%, maximum concentration (C(max)) being reached approximately 2 to 3 h after its administration. Its absorption is dependent on gastric pH, its administration being recommended after meals. The pharmacokinetics (PK) of ATV are non-linear; that is to say, its plasma concentrations (C(p)) do not increase in proportion to the dose. ATV is approximately 86% bound to plasma proteins. Its entry into the cerebrospinal fluid, semen or genital secretions varies but is generally less than 10-20%. Its passage across the placenta, measured as the mean of the ratios between the C(p) in umbilical cord and maternal blood, is 0.13. ATV is metabolised by oxidation by cytochrome P450 enzymes, subsequently being eliminated by the bile duct in the free or glucuronide form (80%) and by the urine. ATV is a weak competitive inhibitor of CYP3A4 and a strong inhibitor of uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase 1A1, which is the cause of the frequent high plasma bilirubin after its administration and of its pharmacological interactions.

Effects of acid-reducing agents on the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir

A total of 71 HIV-negative healthy adults were randomized to 1 of 6 regimens to receive lopinavir/ritonavir tablets 400/100 mg twice daily (bid) or 800/200 mg once daily (qd) or atazanavir 300 mg + ritonavir 100 mg qd from study days 1 to 15 with a moderate-fat meal. One hour before breakfast, either omeprazole 40 mg qd was administered on study days 11 through 15, or a single dose of ranitidine 150 mg was administered on study day 11. Lopinavir, atazanavir, and ritonavir pharmacokinetics were determined on study days 10, 11, and 15 and compared using point estimates and 90% confidence intervals (CIs). The point estimates for lopinavir Cmax and AUCtau were in the range of 0.92 to 1.08, with 90% CI contained within the range of 0.80 to 1.25 after coadministration of omeprazole or ranitidine. The point estimates for atazanavir Cmax and AUCtau were decreased by 48% to 62% with the upper bound of the 90% CI <or=0.55 after coadministration of omeprazole or ranitidine. The results indicated that lopinavir bioavailability was not affected by the coadministration of omeprazole or ranitidine. In contrast, atazanavir bioavailability was decreased by 48% to 62% when coadministered with ritonavir and either omeprazole or ranitidine.

Two cases of multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus infection treated with atazanavir and lopinavir/ritonavir combination therapy

The combination of atazanavir (ATV) and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) has been used as a salvage regimen for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients. In this paper, we discuss two cases of HIV-positive patients who had long histories of virological failure following a heavy treatment of antiretroviral drugs, but then achieved virological suppression with double-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) regimens. In patients with multiple genotypic resistance to PIs and NRTIs, virological suppression can be achieved with a combination of ATV plus LPV/RTV with an NRTI backbone. The two cases in this report suggest that a combination of ATV plus LPV/RTV could be a useful salvage regimen for the subset of HIV-positive patients with limited treatment options.

Long-term pharmacokinetic efficacy and safety of low-dose ritonavir as a booster and atazanavir pharmaceutical formulation based on solid dispersion system in rats

Atazanavir (ATV) is clinically coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (RTV), which boosts the oral bioavailability (BA) of ATV by inhibiting cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, and P-glycoprotein (Pgp) via the same metabolic pathway; however, it is well known that in the chronic phase, the inhibition effect of RTV on Pgp and CYP3A becomes an induction effect. In this study, we investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of RTV-boosted ATV in rats with a clinical relevant dosage of ATV and RTV, 7 mg/kg and 2 mg/kg, respectively, and drew a direct comparison with RTV-boosted ATV and the previously reported ATV pharmaceutical formulation based on a solid dispersion system (ATV-SLS SD+G). Rats received RTV-boosted ATV or ATV-SLS SD+G for 14 d in the pharmacokinetic study. In addition, after 14-d repeated administration of each formulation, cyclosporine A (CyA) was administered to rats and Western blot analysis of Pgp and CYP3A was performed to investigate the impact on pharmacokinetic interaction of each ATV formulation. After repeated administration of both formulations, there was no significant difference between ATV pharmacokinetic parameters on day 1 and 14; therefore, it was considered that the long-term efficacy of both ATV formulations was maintained. However, after treatment with RTV-boosted ATV, the Cmax and AUC0-infinity of the following CyA significantly decreased to 49% and 47% in comparison to the control, respectively, and the Pgp expression in the small intestine by Western blot analysis was approximately 2-fold higher than the control, whereas after treatment with ATV pharmaceutical formulation, neither significant alteration of CyA nor notable change in the expression of intestinal Pgp and hepatic CYP3A was observed. Therefore, it was considered that the BA of CyA after treatment with RTV-boosted ATV would decrease by the induction effect of RTV in chronic phase as described above. The results of this study revealed that the chronic use of low-dose RTV as a booster has great potential to compromise drug-drug interactions; therefore, it is recommended that the BA of protease inhibitors be improved by a pharmaceutical approach without pharmacokinetic interaction by RTV.

Pharmacokinetics of an indinavir-ritonavir-fosamprenavir regimen in patients with human immunodeficiency virus

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the pharmacokinetic compatibility of a ritonavir-boosted indinavir-fosamprenavir combination among patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

DESIGN

Single-center, nonrandomized, prospective, multiple-dose, two-phase pharmacokinetic study.

SETTING

University research center.

PATIENTS

Eight adult patients with HIV infection who had been receiving and tolerating indinavir 800 mg-ritonavir 100 mg twice/day for at least 2 weeks. Intervention. After 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on all patients (period A), fosamprenavir (a prodrug of amprenavir) 700 mg twice/day was coadministered for 5 days, with a repeat 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling performed on the fifth day (period B).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for indinavir, ritonavir, and amprenavir: area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to 12 hours after dosing (AUC(0-12)), maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), and 12-hour plasma concentration (C(12)). For each parameter, the geometric mean, as well as the geometric mean ratio (GMR) comparing period B with period A, were calculated. Indinavir C(max) was lowered by 20% (GMR 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.96), AUC(0-12) was lowered by 6% (GMR 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.21), and C(12) was increased by 28% (GMR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78-2.10). Ritonavir AUC(0-12) was 20% lower (GMR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54-1.19), C(max) was 15% lower (GMR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55-1.32), and C(12) was 7% lower (GMR 0.93, 95% CI 0.49-1.76). With the exception of indinavir C(max), the changes in indinavir and ritonavir pharmacokinetic parameters observed after fosamprenavir coadministration were not statistically significant. The geometric means of amprenavir AUC(0-12), C(max), and C(12) were 41,517 ng*hour/ml (95% CI 30,317-56,854 ng*hr/ml), 5572 ng/ml (95% CI 4330-7170 ng/ml), and 2421 ng/ml (95% CI 1578-3712 ng/ml), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The combination of indinavir 800 mg-ritonavir 100 mg-fosamprenavir 700 mg twice/day appears to be devoid of a clinically significant drug-drug interaction and should be evaluated as an alternative regimen in salvage HIV treatment. This combination may be suitable as part of a background regimen to optimize the therapeutic benefit of newer classes of antiretroviral agents such as the integrase and coreceptor inhibitors in the treatment of multidrug-resistant viruses.

Decrease of atazanavir and lopinavir plasma concentrations in a boosted double human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitor salvage regimen

The human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitor combination of atazanavir (ATV)-lopinavir-ritonavir was reported to exhibit a mutual pharmacoenhancement of plasma lopinavir and ATV concentrations which may be beneficial for salvage patients. We identified 17 patients in our pharmacokinetic database taking this combination and found conflicting results. Plasma concentrations of both ATV and lopinavir were modestly, although not significantly, decreased when the drugs were coadministered. Therefore, patients should be selected carefully for this regimen and frequent clinical and therapeutic drug monitoring is strongly advised.

Tenofovir comedication does not impair the steady-state pharmacokinetics of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in HIV-1-infected adults

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the steady-state pharmacokinetics of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir when coadministered with tenofovir in HIV-1-infected adult patients.

DESIGN

Forty adult HIV-1-infected patients received either atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg once daily and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors with (n = 20) or without (n = 20) tenofovir-disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir-DF) 300 mg once daily. Twenty-four-hour pharmacokinetics were assessed after at least 2 weeks of therapy according to a standardised therapeutic drug monitoring protocol.

METHODS

Atazanavir/ritonavir plasma concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, and the geometric means of minimum and maximum concentrations (C(min), C(max)), the area under the time-concentration curve (AUC), half-life (t(1/2)) and total clearance (CL(tot)) were subject to a matched pairs-analysis. Patients' pairs were matched for gender, ethnicity, weight and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) status.

RESULTS

The respective geometric means (90% CI) for atazanavir C(min), C(max) and AUC with tenfovir vs. without tenofovir were 405 (314-523) vs. 417 (304-572) ng/ml, 3,022 (2,493-3,664) vs. 2,817 (2,341-3,390) ng/ml and 34,822 (29,315-41,363) vs. 32,101 (26,206-39,321) ng x h/ml showing no significant differences between the groups. Atazanavir plasma concentrations measured at week 5 of therapy or later were lower than in the first 4 weeks (T-test for C(max), p = .080; AUC, p = .050 and CL(tot), p = .051).

CONCLUSIONS

The coadministration of tenofovir-DF did not impair the plasma concentrations of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in a pharmacokinetic analysis of patient pairs matched for gender, ethnicity, weight and CDC status.

Beneficial Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Atazanavir and Lopinavir/Ritonavir

BACKGROUND

The combination of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) and atazanavir (ATV) with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors has been used as a salvage regimen in HIV-infected patients. Because these agents, to various degrees, are substrates, inducers, and inhibitors of CYP450 3A4, there is concern for alterations in the pharmacokinetics (PK) of these combined agents.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the steady-state PK interactions between ATV, ritonavir (RTV), and LPV when coadministered at various doses.

METHODS

HIV-negative subjects (n = 15) received a combination of ATV, RTV, and LPV in the following sequence: period I (days 1-10), ATV/r at a dose of 300/100 mg once daily; period II (days 11-24), ATV at a dose of 300 mg once daily plus LPV/r at a dose of 400/100 mg twice daily; and period III (days 25-34), ATV/r at a dose of 300/100 mg once daily plus LPV/r at a dose of 400/100 mg twice daily. Intensive PK analysis was performed on days 10, 24, and 34. A paired t test was used for pairwise comparison of log-transformed PK parameters of ATV and LPV.

RESULTS

In period II, the ATV minimum concentration (Cmin) geometric mean (GM) was higher compared with period I (GM: 0.75 vs. 0.51 microg/mL, geometric mean ratio (GMR) = 1.45, 90% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19 to 1.77; P = 0.006). The ATV area under the concentration-time curve from dosing to 24 hours after the dose (AUC0-24; GM: 36.40 vs. 39.62 microg.h/mL, GMR = 0.92, 90% CI: 0.80 to 1.05; P = 0.28) did not differ, however. The addition of 100 mg of RTV in period III did not significantly increase the ATV Cmin (GM: 0.84 vs. 0.75 microg/mL, GMR = 1.13, 90% CI: 0.91 to 1.40; P = 0.34) or ATV AUC0-24 (GM: 39.59 vs. 36.40 microg.h/mL, GMR = 1.09, 90% CI: 0.99 to 1.20; P = 0.14) compared with period II. The additional RTV in period III resulted in a higher LPV Cmin (GM: 5.12 vs. 3.99 microg/mL, GMR = 1.28, 90% CI: 1.15 to 1.43; P = 0.001), but the LPV areas under the concentration-time curve from dosing to 12 hours after the dose and maximum concentration were not significantly different. LPV PK parameters in period II were comparable to those of historical control subjects receiving LPV/r at a dose of 400/100 mg twice daily. All studied regimens were well tolerated. Indirect hyperbilirubinemia was the only grade 3 and 4 abnormality reported, which was expected given that ATV competitively inhibits UGTIA1 and has not been shown to result in other hepatic abnormalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ATV at a dose of 300 mg once daily plus LPV/r at a dose of 400/100 mg twice daily resulted in an appropriate PK profile for ATV and LPV and could be further evaluated in treatment-experienced patients requiring a dual-boosted protease inhibitor-containing regimen.

[Recommendations from the GESIDA/Spanish AIDS Plan regarding antiretroviral treatment in adults with human immunodeficiency virus infection (update January 2007)]

OBJECTIVE

This consensus document is an update of antiretroviral therapy (ART) recommendations for adult patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1).

METHODS

To formulate these recommendations, a panel composed of members of the Grupo de Estudio de Sida (GESIDA; AIDS Study Group) and the Plan Nacional sobre el Sida (PNS; Spanish AIDS Plan) reviewed the advances in the current understanding of the pathophysiology of HIV, the safety and efficacy findings from clinical trials, and the results from cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in biomedical journals or presented at scientific meetings over the last years. Three levels of evidence were defined according to the source of the data: randomized studies (level A), cohort or case-control studies (level B), and expert opinion (level C). The decision to recommend, consider or not recommend ART was established in each situation.

RESULTS

Currently, the treatment of choice for chronic HIV infection is the combination of three drugs of two different classes, including 2 nucleosides or nucleotide analogs (NRTI) plus 1 non-nucleoside (NNRTI) or 1 boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r). Initiation of ART is recommended in patients with symptomatic HIV infection. In asymptomatic patients, initiation of ART is recommended on the basis of CD4+ lymphocyte counts and plasma viral load, as follows: 1) therapy should be started in patients with CD4+ counts of < 200 cells/microl; 2) therapy should be started in most patients with CD4+ counts of 200-350 cells/microl, although it can be delayed when CD41 count persists at around 350 cells/microL and viral load is low, and 3) initiation of therapy can be delayed in patients with CD4+ counts of > 350 cells/microL. The initial objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable viral load. Adherence to therapy plays an essential role in maintaining the antiviral response. Therapeutic options are limited with the development of cross resistance and ART failure. Genotype studies are useful in these cases. More information regarding the studies analyzed and the panel recommendations for adherence, toxicity, treatment during pregnancy, patients with hepatitis B or C virus co-infection, and post-exposure prophylaxis can be accessed at www.gesida.seimc.org.

CONCLUSIONS

CD4+ lymphocyte count is the most important reference factor for initiating ART in asymptomatic patients. The large number of available drugs, the increased sensitivity of tests to monitor viral load, and the ability to determine viral resistance is leading to a more individualized approach to therapy.

Lopinavir plus ritonavir: a novel protease inhibitor combination for HIV infections

Lopinavir is a protease inhibitor (PI) for the treatment of HIV infection that was specifically designed to overcome the shortcomings of earlier agents in this class. It is the only PI coformulated with ritonavir, whose pharmacological boosting effect results in a highly potent, well-tolerated, clinically effective antiretroviral agent with a high genetic barrier to resistance. Lopinavir/ritonavir is a recommended first-line option for antiretroviral-naive patients initiating PI-based therapy, and has an equally important role in the management of treatment-experienced individuals. Its favorable pharmacological and clinical characteristics have recently prompted investigators to explore its potential novel applications in HIV monotherapy and double-boosted regimens.

Atazanavir/ritonavir: a valuable once-daily HIV protease inhibitor with little impact on lipid profile

Atazanavir is the first once-daily azapeptide HIV protease inhibitor that may offer simpler and safer protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy, as it has been associated with less hyperlipemia and diarrhea compared with the other drugs of the same class. The typical side effect of atazanavir is an asymptomatic increase in serum unconjugated bilirubin. Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir has proved to be effective in treatment-naive HIV-infected individuals, and there is no evidence that it leads to the selection of mutations conferring cross-resistance to other protease inhibitors. Its efficacy in patients harboring drug-resistant variants is not statistically different from that of the reference protease inhibitor, lopinavir/ritonavir. It has been approved by the US FDA for use in drug-experienced HIV-infected patients, although atazanavir/ritonavir-based regimens have now been included among those recommended by the International AIDS Society  – USA Panel and the Department of Health and Human Services Panel as initial treatment. The aim of this article is to describe the pharmacological characteristics of atazanavir/ritonavir, and the results of the main clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of this antiretroviral combination.

7th International Workshop on Clinical Pharmacology of HIV Therapy 20-22 April 2006, Lisbon, Portugal

The 7th International Workshop on Clinical Pharmacology of HIV Therapy was held at the Alfa Corinthia Hotel in Lisbon, Portugal. Approximately 200 pharmacologists and other scientists interested in antiretroviral pharmacology were in attendance this year. The workshop invited five lecturers to speak on topics including priorities for HIV pharmacology research in developing countries, the role of modelling and simulation in antiviral drug development, hepatotoxic side effects of antiretrovirals, peptide CCR5 antagonists, and HIV pharmacoepidemiology. The workshop also convened round table discussions on the use of therapeutic drug monitoring including updated recommendations, penetration of antiretrovirals into the CNS and genital tract, and drug labelling for antiretroviral drugs under the new FDA format. In total, 87 abstracts were accepted for presentation at the meeting: 29 oral and 58 poster presentations. This article highlights select presentations from the workshop.

Pharmaceutical Approach to HIV Protease Inhibitor Atazanavir for Bioavailability Enhancement Based on Solid Dispersion System

Atazanavir (ATV) is a low oral bioavailability (BA) compound and, clinically, is generally coadministrated with ritonavir (RTV), which boosts the oral BA of ATV by inhibiting cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, and P-glycoprotein (Pgp) via the same metabolic pathway. However, depending on pharmacokinetic interaction, RTV-boosted ATV has great potential for other comedication. In this study we demonstrated the pharmaceutical approach to BA improvement of ATV without RTV in rats, based on the solid dispersion system using sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) as a carrier and Gelucire 50/13 as an absorption enhancer. ATV solid dispersions in SLS were prepared by a conventional solvent method and, at ratios of ATV to SLS of 1 : 2 and 1 : 3, were demonstrated to form an amorphous state in powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) analysis and exhibited 2.26- and 2.36-fold improvement in a dissolution test in comparison to bulk ATV, respectively. After oral administration to rats, ATV solid dispersion in SLS at a ratio of 1 : 2 showed a 3.5-fold increase in BA compared with bulk ATV. Moreover, the addition of Gelucire 50/13 to ATV solid dispersion, at a total ratio of Gelucire 50/13, ATV and SLS 1 : 1 : 2 gave 7.0- and 4.7-fold increase in Cmax and BA compared with bulk ATV, respectively, when the relative BA to RTV-boosted ATV reached 93%. The results in this study proved that a pharmaceutical approach could improve the bioavailability of ATV without pharmacokinetic interaction with RTV.

Pharmacokinetics of Darunavir (TMC114) and Atazanavir during Coadministration in HIV-Negative, Healthy Volunteers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To investigate the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between the protease inhibitors darunavir (DRV, TMC114) coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (darunavir/r), and atazanavir in HIV-negative, healthy volunteers.

METHODS

This was an open-label, randomised, three-period, crossover study. Darunavir/r (400/100mg twice daily), atazanavir/r (300/100mg once daily) or darunavir/r (400/100mg twice daily) plus atazanavir (300mg once daily) were administered in three separate sessions, with a washout period of at least 7 days between regimens. The follow-up lasted 30 days. Twenty-three healthy volunteers participated. Pharmacokinetic assessments were performed at steady-state on day 7. Plasma drug concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between treatments. The safety and tolerability of the study medications were monitored throughout.

RESULTS

Darunavir pharmacokinetics were unaffected by atazanavir. No change in overall exposure to atazanavir was observed during coadministration with darunavir/r. However, there was a 52% increase in minimum atazanavir plasma concentration (least squares mean ratio [90% CI 0.99, 2.34]). Mean systemic exposure to ritonavir was increased by 65% and 106%, respectively, with the combination treatment compared with darunavir/r alone or atazanavir/r alone. There were no apparent differences in mean changes in lipids between the darunavir/r, atazanavir/r or darunavir/r plus atazanavir regimens. Hyperbilirubinaemia and ocular icterus were reported with atazanavir-containing regimens.

CONCLUSION

Atazanavir at a dose of 300mg once daily can be coadministered with a darunavir/r twice-daily regimen without any dose adjustment if there is a clinical need to combine darunavir/r and atazanavir in HIV-1-infected patients.