The 48-week efficacy of once-daily saquinavir/ritonavir in patients with undetectable viral load after 3 years of antiretroviral therapy

Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic of once-daily boosted saquinavir (1500/100 mg) together with 2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in real life: a multicentre prospective study

Background

Ritonavir-boosted saquinavir (SQVr) is nowadays regarded as an alternative antiretroviral drug probably due to several drawbacks, such as its high pill burden, twice daily dosing and the requirement of 200 mg ritonavir when given at the current standard 1000/100 mg bid dosing. Several once-daily SQVr dosing schemes have been studied with the 200 mg SQV old formulations, trying to overcome some of these disadvantages. SQV 500 mg strength tablets became available at the end of 2005, thus facilitating a once-daily regimen with fewer pills, although there is very limited experience with this formulation yet.

Methods

Prospective, multicentre study in which efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of a regimen of once-daily SQVr 1500/100 mg plus 2 NRTIs were evaluated under routine clinical care conditions in either antiretroviral-naïve patients or in those with no previous history of antiretroviral treatments and/or genotypic resistance tests suggesting SQV resistance. Plasma SQV trough levels were measured by HPLV-UV.

Results

Five hundred and fourteen caucasian patients were included (47.2% coinfected with hepatitis C and/or B virus; 7.8% with cirrhosis). Efficacy at 52 weeks (plasma RNA-HIV <50 copies/ml) was 67.7% (CI₉₅: 63.6 - 71.7%) by intention-to-treat, and 92.2% (CI₉₅: 89.8 - 94.6%) by on-treatment analysis. The reasons for failure were: dropout or loss to follow-up (18.4%), virological failure (7.8%), adverse events (3.1%), and other reasons (4.6%). The high rate of dropout may be explained by an enrollement and follow-up under routine clinical care condition, and a population with a significant number of drug users. The median SQV Cmin (n = 49) was 295 ng/ml (range, 53-2172). The only variable associated with virological failure in the multivariate analysis was adherence (OR: 3.36; CI95, 1.51-7.46, p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Our results suggests that SQVr (1500/100 mg) once-daily plus 2 NRTIs is an effective regimen, without severe clinical adverse events or hepatotoxicity, scarce lipid changes, and no interactions with methadone. All these factors and its once-daily administration suggest this regimen as an appropriate option in patients with no SQV resistance-associated mutations.

Once-daily treatment with saquinavir mesylate (2000 mg) and ritonavir (100 mg) together with a fixed-dose combination of abacavir/lamivudine (600/300 mg) or tenofovir/emtricitabine (245/200 mg) in HIV-1-infected patients

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the feasibility and pharmacokinetics of a once-daily regimen of 2000 mg saquinavir mesylate boosted with 100 mg ritonavir.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients successfully treated with 1000 mg saquinavir boosted with 100 mg ritonavir twice daily together with two nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors [N(t)RTIs] who were switched to 2000 mg saquinavir with 100 mg ritonavir once daily with unchanged N(t)RTI therapy were analysed. CD4 cells, HIV-RNA PCR and metabolic parameters were compared between baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after the switch. Saquinavir and ritonavir drug levels were measured before and a median of 3 weeks after switching from twice to once daily at 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12 and 24 h after intake of the medication. The area under the serum concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) was calculated using the trapezoidal rule.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients (16 males, median age of 41 years) with a median CD4 cell count of 464 cells/mm(3) were analysed. HIV-RNA PCR remained <500 copies/mL for all patients. After switching from 100 mg twice daily to 100 mg once daily, the AUC(0-24) for ritonavir decreased significantly [21 874 to 10 267 ng.h/mL, geometric mean ratio (GMR) = 0.47; P < 0.001], whereas the AUC(0-24) for saquinavir decreased only marginally from 35 000 to 34 490 ng.h/mL (GMR = 0.99; P = 0.426). The CD4 cell count and the fasting metabolic parameters remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily treatment with ritonavir-boosted saquinavir was well tolerated and resulted in similar saquinavir drug exposure despite much lower ritonavir concentrations when compared with a twice-daily dosing schedule.

Pharmacokinetic analysis to assess forgiveness of boosted saquinavir regimens for missed or late dosing

OBJECTIVES

One potential concern of once-daily protease inhibitor administration is low trough concentrations and ultimately the 'forgiveness' or robustness in comparison with the originally licensed twice-daily dose. To give an estimation of 'forgiveness', we determined the length of time plasma drug concentrations were below target in HIV-infected patients receiving saquinavir/ritonavir regimens.

METHODS

Seventy-seven pharmacokinetic profiles (saquinavir/ritonavir 1000/100 mg twice daily, n = 34; 1600/100 mg once daily, n = 26; 2000/100 mg once daily, n = 17) from five studies were combined, presented as twice- and once-daily percentiles (P10-P90) and compared. At percentiles where trough concentrations fell below the alleged minimum effective concentration (MEC; 100 ng/mL), the length of time below MEC was determined.

RESULTS

Saquinavir concentrations were below MEC at P10 for 0.7 h for twice-daily saquinavir/ritonavir when compared with 8.6 and 6.6 h for 1600/100 and 2000/100 mg once daily, respectively. At P25, 1600/100 mg once daily produced suboptimal concentrations for 5.5 h in contrast to 0.5 h for 2000/100 mg once daily.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we provide substantive data that indicate once-daily saquinavir, in particular 1600/100 mg, is not as robust as the twice-daily regimen based on a population of UK patients; this raises concern over late or missed doses. However, pharmacokinetic data can only ever be a guide to the impact on long-term efficacy.

Predictive factors for immunological and virological endpoints in Thai patients receiving combination antiretroviral treatment

BACKGROUND

Routine CD4 count and HIV viral load monitoring is a financial barrier in developing countries.

METHODS

We assessed factors associated with CD4 counts < or =200 cells/microL and detectable viral load in Thai HIV-infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) at the HIV Netherlands Australia Thailand Research Collaboration and the Thai Red Cross AIDS Research Centre (HIV-NAT). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models for multiple treatment failures were used to determine factors related to CD4 counts < or =200 cells/microL and detectable viral load. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models for CD4 counts < or =200 cells/microL were developed with and without viral load in order to build models applicable to contexts in which viral load is not available.

RESULTS

Four hundred and seventeen patients were included in the study. Fifty-four per cent were male, and the median CD4 count and log(10) viral load at baseline were 283 cells/microL and 4.3 log(10) HIV-1 RNA copies/mL, respectively. Independent factors related to CD4 count < or =200 cells/microL were CD4 count at baseline [hazards ratio (HR) 0.20/100 cells/microL; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17-0.23] and changes in CD4 count (HR 0.22/100 cells/microL; 95% CI 0.17-0.28). Factors in multivariate models (in which viral load was considered for inclusion) were CD4 count at baseline (HR 0.21/100 cells/microL; 95% CI 0.18-0.24), changes in CD4 count (HR 0.25/100 cells/microL; 95% CI 0.19-0.32) and detectable viral load (HR 1.94; 95% CI 1.20-3.13). Predictive factors (independent of viral load) were triple ART or highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) (HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.22-0.36) and detectable viral load at baseline (HR 2.96; 95% CI 2.24-3.91). Conclusions CD4 count at baseline and changes in CD4 count were important in predicting CD4 counts < or =200 cells/microL. Triple ART and detectable viral load at baseline were important in predicting detectable viral load.

Efficacy of Low-Dose Boosted Saquinavir Once Daily Plus Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors in Pregnant HIV-1-Infected Women With a Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Strategy

The efficacy of low-dose, ritonavir-boosted saquinavir (SQV/rtv) once daily plus 2 nucleoside retrotranscriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in pregnant human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1-infected women was prospectively evaluated, ensuring a SQV minimum concentration (Cmin) >/=100 ng/mL with a therapeutic drug monitoring strategy. The primary clinical endpoint was the percentage of women with an HIV-RNA viral load (VL) of <50 copies/mL at the time of delivery. Forty-nine pregnancy episodes were included, with a median CD4 count and VL of 441/muL and 3710 copies/mL, respectively. Two patients were lost to follow-up and 1 patient discontinued treatment because of abdominal discomfort. SQV levels were in excess of the target Cmin in 43 of 46 episodes (93.4%) in which the end of pregnancy was reached on 1200/100 mg daily. The dosage was increased to 1600/100 mg in the remaining 3 episodes to achieve the target levels. By an intention-to-treat analysis, VL was undetectable at delivery in 43 episodes (87.7%; 95% confidence interval, 78.5-96.9) after a median of 18 weeks of treatment (range, 3-39). In the 3 episodes remaining, VLs of 110,400 copies/mL and no available data were observed after only 3 weeks of treatment. Mild adverse events attributable to SQV/rtv occurred in 6 of 49 pregnancies (12.2%). No cases of HIV vertical transmission were observed. The pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability of this regimen suggest that once-daily low-dose boosted SQV may be considered an appropriate option in PI-naive or limited-PI-experienced HIV-infected pregnant women. Nevertheless, therapeutic drug monitoring is advisable to maintain appropriate levels throughout pregnancy.

Clinical and pharmacokinetic data support once-daily low-dose boosted saquinavir (1,200 milligrams saquinavir with 100 milligrams ritonavir) in treatment-naive or limited protease inhibitor-experienced human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients

We evaluated the plasma and intracellular pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of once-daily low-dose boosted saquinavir (SQVr; 1,200 of saquinavir [SQV] with 100 mg of ritonavir) plus two nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in treatment-naive or limited protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. A prospective study without entry restrictions on the plasma HIV-RNA (VL) or CD4 cell count was carried out. Plasma and intracellular SQV levels were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Efficacy was evaluated by an intention-to-treat analysis; treatment failure was defined as virological failure (a VL of >50 copies/ml after 24 weeks or a confirmed rebound to >50 copies/ml) or interruption for any reason. A total of 151 patients were included in the study (106 of them either had never received PI or had no previous virological failure on PIs) and could be characterized as follows: previous C3 stage, 28.9%; injection-drug users, 69.1%; subjects with chronic viral hepatitis, 53%; and subjects with cirrhosis, 10%. The median baseline CD4 level was 184/mul, and the median VL was 4.8 log(10) copies/ml. Median C(max), area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h, and C(min) plasma and intracellular SQV levels were 3,672 and 10,105 ng/ml, 34,283 and 99,535 ng.h/ml, and 359 and 1,062 ng/ml, respectively. The efficacy as determined by intention to treat at 52 weeks was 69.7% (96% in the on-treatment analysis), with similar results regardless of the baseline VL and CD4 counts. Only five patients had virological failure despite adequate C(min) levels, but with a poor adherence (the only variable related to virological failure). Adverse events caused the withdrawal of the treatment in four patients (2.6%). In conclusion, given the pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, and tolerability of this regimen, once-daily low-dose SQVr may be considered a treatment option in treatment-naive or limited PI-experienced HIV-infected patients, with the additional benefit of being currently the least-expensive PI-based regimen available.

Once-daily therapies for the treatment of HIV infection

For patients initiating antiretroviral therapy, there are several well-tolerated once-daily regimens from which to choose. Once-daily antiretroviral therapy may be ideal for patient adherence and convenience. However, results of a few recent clinical trials exploring new once-daily regimens have shown that one cannot assume that any three-drug combination will be successful. Once-daily therapy options for treatment-experienced patients are more limited but may be successful depending on prior antiretroviral treatment exposure and resistance mutations. Current approaches to once-daily therapy include simplifying successful regimens and investigating novel antiretroviral agents with long half-lives.

Implementation of an Antiretroviral Access Program for HIV-1-Infected Individuals in Resource-Limited Settings

BACKGROUND

We assessed the effectiveness and safety of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in HIV-1-infected patients in resource-limited African countries. HIV-1 screening, therapy, counseling, monitoring, training, and education were provided free of charge.

METHODS

In an open-label cohort program, 206 antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients who could not afford HAART were recruited in 4 urban clinics in Senegal, Côte d'Ivoire, Uganda, and Kenya and were treated with saquinavir boosted with ritonavir (1600/100 mg once daily), lamivudine (150 mg twice daily), and zidovudine (300 mg twice daily). The primary outcome was a plasma viral load (pVL) of <400 copies/mL after 96 weeks of treatment. Secondary analyses included CD4 cell count changes and the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events.

RESULTS

The median age of the patient group was 36 years, 38% were male, 35% of the patients had AIDS, the median CD4 count was 119 cells/microL, and the median pVL was 304,210 copies/mL. Overall, 65%/52% (on treatment [OT]/intent to treat [ITT]) of the patients had a pVL <400 copies/mL after 96 weeks of follow-up. This proportion varied significantly between sites, however; although in Nairobi and Dakar, 51%/40% and 56%/46% (OT/ITT) were found, respectively, Abidjan and Kampala showed proportions of 69%/54% and 83%/69% (OT/ITT), respectively. The median increase in the CD4 count was 198 cells/microL (interquartile range: 86-319 cells/microL), ranging from 191 to 292 cells/microL between the sites. Fourteen patients (6.8%) died between 8 and 96 weeks of follow-up, whereas 18 (9%) developed an AIDS-defining event between 8 and 96 weeks of follow-up. Non-HIV-related serious adverse events occurred in 55 patients (26.7%), of whom 13 were diagnosed with severe anemia. Thirty-five patients (17%) changed treatment for toxicity reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a statistically significant difference was observed between sites with respect to virologic success, overall virologic and immunologic responses to HAART in resource-limited African settings can be as good as in Western settings. There were some difficulties (eg, laboratory, logistics, proper training) during the early phase of the program. Therefore, provision of adequate medical care, counseling, proper instruction, and education of patients and medical staff during the entire study is warranted in such programs, with special care in the early phase.

Pharmacokinetics of saquinavir hard-gel/ritonavir and atazanavir when combined once daily in HIV Type 1-infected individuals administered different atazanavir doses

The pharmacokinetics and short-term safety of atazanavir 150 and 200 mg, when coadministered with saquinavir/ritonavir 1600/100 mg once daily, were evaluated. On day 1, atazanavir 150 mg once daily, was added to saquinavir/ritonavir regimens and sampling was performed to evaluate saquinavir, ritonavir, and atazanavir pharmacokinetics (day 11). Atazanavir was increased to 200 mg and pharmacokinetic assessment repeated (day 30). Geometric mean ratios (GMR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to compare saquinavir, ritonavir, and atazanavir pharmacokinetic parameters in the present study and for 14 of the subjects treated with saquinavir/ritonavir 1600/100 mg once daily without and with atazanavir 300 mg who participated in a previous trial. Geometric mean (GM) saquinavir AUC0-24, Ctrough, and Cmax were 30,589 and 32,312 ng . h/ml, 166 and 182 ng/ml, and 4267 and 4261 ng/ml when coadministered with atazanavir 150 and 200 mg (n = 18). On days 11 and 30, saquinavir and atazanavir Ctrough remained >100 ng/ml in 13/18, 14/18, 18/18, and 17/18 patients. Among the above mentioned 14 subjects, significant increases in saquinavir Ctrough (87%, 92%, 99%), Cmax (40%, 55%, 44%), and AUC0-24 (51%, 60%, 63%) were observed with atazanavir 300, 150, and 200 mg. Ritonavir AUC0-24 and Cmax were significantly increased with the addition of atazanavir 300 mg only. Atazanavir enhances saquinavir and ritonavir by a mechanism that requires elucidation. While saquinavir enhancement was apparently independent of atazanavir dose, atazanavir 300 mg produced an increase in ritonavir Cmax, which is not observed with lower atazanavir doses. Atazanavir-related hyperbilirubinemia was dose dependent. However, higher saquinavir and atazanavir exposure may be required to suppress HIV-resistant strain replication.

Interindividual variability of once-daily ritonavir boosted saquinavir pharmacokinetics in Thai and UK patients

OBJECTIVES

Differential exposure to saquinavir/ritonavir may lead to therapy failure. The objective was to identify factors that influence variability of saquinavir/ritonavir plasma concentrations.

METHODS

Saquinavir/ritonavir data, dosed as 1600/100 mg once daily, from three separate pharmacokinetic studies, in 45 patients from Thailand and the UK, were pooled. Pharmacokinetic parameters were based on non-compartmental analysis. Univariate analysis was performed with saquinavir as the dependent variable, and ritonavir area under the curve (AUC), gender, body weight, body mass index (BMI) and study site as independent variables. Variables with a P value <0.10 were included in a multivariate linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Higher saquinavir AUCs, maximum concentrations (Cmax) and minimum concentrations (Cmin) were seen in Thai patients than in UK patients. Univariate analysis showed associations between body weight, gender, study site and ritonavir AUC and saquinavir AUC (P < 0.05), whereas BMI (P = 0.13) did not. In the multivariate analysis, ritonavir AUC (P = 0.0001) and study site (P = 0.0021) were significantly related to saquinavir AUC (R2 = 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

The ritonavir AUC and study site appeared to be related to exposure of saquinavir. Study site should be viewed as the total of country- and study-specific differences--such as differences in lifestyle, environment, genetic background and dietary composition--between the analysed studies.