Variable adherence to prescribed dosing regimens for protease inhibitors: scope and outcomes:

Pharmacokinetic interaction between maraviroc and fosamprenavir-ritonavir: an open-label, fixed-sequence study in healthy subjects

This open-label, fixed-sequence, phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction between maraviroc (MVC) and ritonavir-boosted fosamprenavir (FPV/r) in healthy subjects. In period 1, subjects received 300 mg of MVC twice daily (BID; cohort 1) or once daily (QD; cohort 2) for 5 days. In period 2, cohort 1 subjects received 700/100 mg of FPV/r BID alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 700/100 mg BID plus MVC at 300 mg BID on days 11 to 20; cohort 2 subjects received FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD plus MVC at 300 mg QD on days 11 to 20. Pharmacokinetic parameters, assessed on day 5 of period 1 and on days 10 and 20 of period 2, included the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), the concentration at end of dosing interval (Cτ), and the area under the curve over dosing interval (AUCτ). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. MVC geometric mean AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ were increased by 149, 52, and 374%, respectively, after BID dosing with FPV/r, and by 126, 45, and 80%, respectively, after QD dosing. Amprenavir (the active form of the prodrug fosamprenavir) and ritonavir exposures were decreased in the presence of MVC with amprenavir AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ decreased by 34 to 36% in the presence of FPV/r plus maraviroc BID and by 15 to 30% with FPV/r plus MVC QD both compared to FPV/r alone. The overall all-causality adverse-event (AE) incidence rate was 96.4%; all AEs were of mild or moderate severity. Commonly reported treatment-related AEs (>20% of patients overall) included diarrhea, fatigue, abdominal discomfort, headache, and nausea. No serious AEs or deaths occurred. In summary, maraviroc exposure increased in the presence of FPV/r, whereas MVC coadministration decreased amprenavir and ritonavir exposures. MVC dosed at 300 mg BID with FPV/r is not recommended due to concerns of lower amprenavir exposures; however, no dose adjustment is warranted with MVC at 150 mg BID in combination with FPV/r based on the available clinical data. MVC plus FPV/r was generally well tolerated; no new safety signals were detected.

Effect of adherence as measured by MEMS, ritonavir boosting, and CYP3A5 genotype on atazanavir pharmacokinetics in treatment-naive HIV-infected patients

We investigated population pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV), using drug intake times exactly recorded by the Medication Event Monitoring System. The ANRS 134-COPHAR 3 trial was conducted in 35 HIV-infected treatment-naive patients. ATV (300 mg), ritonavir (100 mg), and tenofovir (300 mg) + emtricitabine (200 mg), in bottles with MEMS caps, were taken once daily for 6 months. Six blood samples were collected at week 4 to measure drug concentrations, and trough levels were measured bimonthly. A model integrating ATV and ritonavir pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics used nonlinear mixed effects. Use of exact dosing data halved unexplained variability in ATV clearance. The ritonavir-ATV interaction model suggested that optimal boosting effect is achievable at lower ritonavir exposures. Patients with at least one copy of the CYP3A5*1 allele exhibited 28% higher oral clearance. We provide evidence that variability in ATV pharmacokinetics is defined by adherence, CYP3A5 genotype, and ritonavir exposure.

The impact of once-nightly versus twice-daily dosing and baseline beliefs about HAART on adherence to efavirenz-based HAART over 48 weeks: the NOCTE study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of once-nightly versus twice-daily dosing and beliefs about highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) on adherence to efavirenz-based HAART in antiretroviral-naive patients.

METHODS

A multicenter, open-label, 48-week, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive once nightly didanosine plus lamivudine, or twice-daily combivir (zidovudine plus lamivudine) both in combination with efavirenz. Medication Event Monitoring Systems were used to compile drug-dosing histories. Beliefs about HAART (necessity and concerns) were measured at baseline using validated questionnaires. Perceptions of HAART intrusiveness were assessed after 4 weeks.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients were randomized (44 once-nightly and 43 twice-daily). Overall adherence was higher among the once-nightly arm (P = 0.0327). Eighty-one percent once-nightly and 62% twice-daily patients persisted with treatment for 48 weeks (P = 0.0559). Regimen execution was similar between both arms. Participants were significantly less likely to persist with HAART if their initial concerns about HAART were high relative to their perceived need for treatment (P = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in adherence observed between once-nightly and twice-daily dosing was driven by a difference in persistence with treatment. Psychological preparation for starting HAART should address patients' perceptions of necessity for HAART and concerns about adverse effects to maximize persistence with treatment.

A probabilistic approach for the evaluation of pharmacological effect induced by patient irregular drug intake

Fine individual drug intake data, generally collected by electronic monitoring devices, reveal that individual marked random patterns are likely to persist through long therapeutic periods. This work aims to establish the relationship between irregularity in drug intake and its potential impact on therapeutic outcomes, which will also serve as a basis for more objective interventions. First we proposed a direct way to extract the necessary information representing the patient drug intake history. To provide a fair evaluation of the pharmacological performance, we revisited several classical pharmacological indices and proposed new ones in the stochastic context of patient's drug intake irregularity. To illustrate our procedure, we have considered two cases of HIV treatment using a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra@) for once daily and twice daily regimens. We have quantified the impact on therapeutic effect of various characteristics in dosing histories, namely missing doses and deviations from nominal times. Using our newly defined pharmacological indices, we clearly showed the ability of our probabilistic approach in measuring the impact of noncompliance. As a direct fallout, we have discussed strategies to attenuate the impact of noncompliance through an optimal design of dosing regimen.