Pharmacologic Perspectives for Once-Daily Antiretroviral Therapy

Clinically Stable Treatment-Experienced Adults Receiving Tenofovir and Didanosine

METHOD

Analysis of virological, immunological, and clinical data over 24 weeks of treatment of drug-experienced patients administered didanosine (ddI) and tenofovir (TDF) plus either PI or NNRTI (17 patients) compared to 14 patients on ddI plus lamivudine and to 19 patients on ddI plus stavudine.

RESULTS

Patients treated with TDF and ddI do not have a higher risk of early immunological or virological failure.

CONCLUSION

Treatment success and increase in CD4+ lymphocytes may depend, among other factors, on historical CD4+ nadir. These data agree with previous work and argue against preemptive switches for fear of side effects or immunological/virological failure away from a successful ddI-TDF combination in clinically stable drug-experienced patients.

Pharmacological considerations for tenofovir and emtricitabine to prevent HIV infection

The use of antiretroviral medications in HIV-negative individuals as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising approach to prevent HIV infection. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and emtricitabine exhibit desirable properties for PrEP including: favourable pharmacokinetics that support infrequent dosing; few major drug-drug or drug-food interactions; an excellent clinical safety record; and pre-clinical evidence for efficacy. Several large, randomized, controlled clinical trials are evaluating the safety and efficacy of TDF and emtricitabine for this new indication. A thorough understanding of variability in drug response will help determine future investigations in the field and/or implementation into clinical care. Because tenofovir and emtricitabine are nucleos(t)ide analogues, the HIV prevention and toxicity effects depend on the triphosphate analogue formed intracellularly. This review identifies important cellular pharmacology considerations for tenofovir and emtricitabine, which include drug penetration into relevant tissues and cell types, race/ethnicity/pharmacogenetics, gender, cellular activation state and appropriate episodic or alternative dosing strategies based on pharmacokinetic principles. The current state of knowledge in these areas is summarized and the future utility of intracellular pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics for the PrEP field is discussed.

Pharmacotherapy of pediatric and adolescent HIV infection

Significant advances have been made in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection over the past two decades. Improved therapy has prolonged survival and improved clinical outcome for HIV-infected children and adults. Sixteen antiretroviral (ART) medications have been approved for use in pediatric HIV infection. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has issued "Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Pediatric HIV Infection", which provide detailed information on currently recommended antiretroviral therapies (ART). However, consultation with an HIV specialist is recommended as the current therapy of pediatric HIV therapy is complex and rapidly evolving.

Steady-state pharmacokinetics of abacavir in plasma and intracellular carbovir triphosphate following administration of abacavir at 600 milligrams once daily and 300 milligrams twice daily in human immunodeficiency virus-infected subjects

Abacavir (ABC) is administered either at 600 mg once daily (ABC 600 mg QD) or 300 mg twice daily (ABC 300 mg BID) in anti-human immunodeficiency virus (anti-HIV) combination therapy. Although ABC plasma pharmacokinetics following each regimen has been well defined, no study has directly compared the regimens with respect to pharmacokinetics of ABC's active intracellular anabolite, carbovir-triphosphate (CBV-TP). In an open-label, two-period, crossover study, 34 HIV-infected male and female subjects stabilized on antiretroviral regimens containing either ABC 600 mg QD or ABC 300 mg BID received their usual doses on days -1 and 1 and then switched regimens for days 2 to 11. Serial blood samples collected on days 1 and 11 were assayed for plasma ABC and intracellular CBV-TP concentrations using validated high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods. Analysis of variance with a mixed-effect model was performed for treatment and gender comparisons. In 27 evaluable subjects, the regimens provided bioequivalent ABC daily areas under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) and comparable CBV-TP concentrations at the end of the dosing interval (C(tau)). As expected, ABC QD resulted in 109% higher ABC maximum concentrations of drug in plasma (C(max)) than did ABC BID. ABC QD also resulted in 32% higher CBV-TP AUC(0-24) and 99% higher CBV-TP C(max) than did ABC BID. Females had a 38% higher weight-adjusted ABC AUC(0-24) and 81% higher weight-adjusted CBV-TP AUC(0-24) than did males. Virologic suppression was maintained during regimen switch, and no tolerability differences between regimens were observed. In conclusion, this study showed that ABC 600 mg QD and ABC 300 mg BID regimens led to similar intracellular CBV-TP C(tau) values, thus providing pharmacokinetic support for the interchangeability of these two regimens. Women had higher intracellular CBV-TP exposure than did men.

Randomized study of dual versus single ritonavir-enhanced protease inhibitors for protease inhibitor-experienced patients with HIV

PURPOSE

To compare activity and safety of a regimen containing lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) + fosamprenavir (FPV) to regimens with LPV/r or FPV + r and to test the hypothesis that a ritonavir-enhanced dual protease inhibitor (PI) regimen has better antiviral activity.

METHOD

This study was a multicenter, open-label, randomized study. HIV-infected adults with prior PI failure were selectively randomized based on prior PI experience to either LPV/r, FPV + r, or LPV/r + FPV. All patients received tenofovir DF and 1 to 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar across arms. Study enrollment and follow-up were stopped early (N = 56) because pharmacokinetic analyses showed significantly lower LPV and FPV exposures in the dual-PI arm. At Week 24, proportions achieving >1 log10 decline in HIV RNA or <50 copies/mL in the dual-PI versus single-PI arms combined were 75% vs. 61% in intent-to-treat (ITT, p = .17) and 100% vs. 64% in as-treated (AT) analyses (p = .02), respectively. Median CD4+ T cell/mm3 increases were 81 vs. 41 (ITT, p = .4) and 114 vs. 43 (AT, p = .08), respectively. Clinical events and toxicity rates were not different between arms.

CONCLUSION

The trial was unable to show a difference between dual versus single PIs in ITT analyses but favored dual PIs in AT analyses.

Impact of ribavirin dose reductions in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 patients completing peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin treatment

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To maximize sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin has been genotype-specific (1 vs non-1). We evaluated the effects of ribavirin and peginterferon alfa-2a dose reductions on SVR in patients infected with HCV genotype 1.

METHODS

Data were pooled from 569 patients enrolled in 2 phase III trials of 48 weeks of treatment with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin. All patients were evaluated for the effect of cumulative drug exposure on 4- and 12-week responses, and the 427 patients who completed treatment were evaluated for effect of drug exposure on SVR.

RESULTS

Of patients who completed treatment, more had reductions (< or =97% cumulative dose) of ribavirin than of peginterferon alfa-2a (43% vs 27%). Neither early virologic response nor SVR was affected adversely by ribavirin reductions when the cumulative ribavirin exposure was greater than 60%. The SVR was reduced significantly (P = .0006) in patients with less than the 60% cumulative ribavirin dose and was associated with prolonged periods of dose reduction, temporary interruptions, or premature cessation of ribavirin. Ribavirin dose reductions had minimal impact on SVR in patients who achieved rapid virologic response, defined as undetectable HCV RNA levels after 4 weeks, even when they received less than the 60% cumulative ribavirin dose. In contrast, SVR was reduced markedly in patients who had ribavirin dose reductions and did not achieve rapid virologic response.

CONCLUSIONS

Minor ribavirin dose reductions to manage adverse events do not appear to affect SVR adversely, unless cumulative exposure is less than 60%. Prospective studies, however, are required to establish the impact of ribavirin dose reduction on SVR.

Pharmacogenetic characteristics of indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine therapy in HIV-infected adults: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate relationships among indinavir, lamivudine-triphosphate, and zidovudine-triphosphate pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics with polymorphisms in CYP3A5, MDR1, MRP2, MRP4, BCRP, and UGT1A1 genes.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective pilot investigation among 33 subjects who participated in a randomized pharmacological study of indinavir, lamivudine, and zidovudine. Subjects were defined as genetic variant carriers or not. Relationships were investigated with multivariable regression. Indinavir clearance was adjusted for African American race; triphosphates for sex; and HIV-response for study arm, drug exposure, and baseline HIV-RNA.

RESULTS

Genetically determined CYP3A5 expressors had 44% faster indinavir oral clearance versus nonexpressors (P = 0.002). MRP2-24C/T variant carriers had 24% faster indinavir oral clearance (P = 0.05). Lamivudine-triphosphate concentrations were elevated 20% in MRP4 T4131G variant carriers (P = 0.004). A trend for elevated zidovudine-triphosphates was observed in MRP4 G3724A variant carriers (P = 0.06). The log10 changes in HIV-RNA from baseline to week 52 were -3.7 for MDR1 2677 TT, -3.2 for GT, and -2.2 for GG (P < 0.05). Bilirubin increases were 2-fold higher in UGT1A1 [TA]7/[TA]7 genotypes. No relationships were identified with BCRP.

DISCUSSION

Novel relationships were identified among genetic variants in drug transporters and indinavir, lamivudine-triphosphate, and zidovudine-triphosphate concentrations. CYP3A5 expression was associated with faster indinavir oral clearance. These pilot data provide a scientific basis for more rational utilization of antiretroviral drugs.

Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

A new formulation combining fixed doses of the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors emtricitabine (200mg) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir DF; 300 mg) with the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor efavirenz (600 mg) represents the first once-daily, one-tablet antiretroviral regimen. Co-formulated efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF demonstrated bioequivalence to concomitant administration of the individual agents in a pharmacokinetic trial in healthy volunteers (n = 48). Co-formulated efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF has not been evaluated in clinical trials. However, a once-daily regimen of efavirenz, emtricitabine and tenofovir DF (administered as individual agents) was superior to once-daily efavirenz plus twice-daily co-formulated lamivudine/zidovudine in terms of virological suppression, immunological recovery and adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study medications in a randomised, multicentre, noninferiority study in treatment-naive patients with HIV infection (n = 517). Both regimens are currently recommended as initial antiretroviral therapy. Preliminary data suggest that co-formulated efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF, like the individual agents in combination with other antiretroviral drugs, is generally well tolerated. CNS adverse events, primarily headache and dizziness, were the most common treatment-emergent, drug-related adverse events in the pharmacokinetic study involving the co-formulation.

Emtricitabine

Emtricitabine (Emtriva) is an orally administered nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) that is indicated in combination with other antiretroviral agents in the treatment of HIV infection in adults. As a component of antiretroviral therapy (ART), emtricitabine effectively reduces and/or maintains suppression of viral load in ART-naive adults or ART-experienced adults switching from stable combination regimens, and is generally well tolerated. Emtricitabine is a component of preferred initial HIV combination therapy regimens; it can be used in place of lamivudine as part of the dual NRTI backbone in non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)- and protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens. Moreover, preliminary data from a randomised, open-label study suggest that emtricitabine plus tenofovir DF, a preferred dual-NRTI combination, is better tolerated than co-formulated lamivudine/zidovudine, another preferred dual-NRTI combination, resulting in a higher persistent virological response rate, as analysed using the US FDA time to loss of virological response (TLOVR) algorithm. With the convenience of once-daily (single pill) administration, no dietary restrictions and a favourable drug interaction and tolerability profile, emtricitabine should facilitate patient adherence to treatment, which, in turn, is central to the success of antiretroviral therapy. Similarly, emtricitabine is attractive as an option for ART-experienced stable adults requiring regimen simplification.

Atazanavir

Atazanavir (Reyataz) is a novel protease inhibitor (PI) approved for use in combination with other antiretroviral drugs for the treatment of HIV infection. In antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced patients the drug is administered with low-dose ritonavir (i.e. boosted). In the US, unboosted atazanavir is also approved for use in ART-naive patients. In adult patients with HIV infection, atazanavir-containing highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimens provided marked improvements in virological and immunological markers and was generally well tolerated. Furthermore, recommended atazanavir regimens were no less effective than, and generally as well tolerated as, other HAART regimens in these patients, including regimens containing co-formulated lopinavir/ritonavir. Atazanavir may have an advantage over other PIs because of its favourable effect on lipid profiles, once-daily dosing, low capsule burden and, in patients with low prior PI exposure, a favourable resistance profile. Given these advantages and taking into consideration between-country differences in the approved indications, atazanavir is a valuable option as the PI component of HAART for the management of HIV infection in adult ART-naive patients, particularly where metabolic complications are a concern, and as a first- or second-line PI in combination with low-dose ritonavir in adult ART-experienced patients.