Switch to maraviroc with darunavir/r, both QD, in patients with suppressed HIV-1 was well tolerated but virologically inferior to standard antiretroviral therapy: 48-week results of a randomized trial

Evaluating fostemsavir as a therapeutic option for patients with HIV

ABSTRACIntroduction: Despite the unquestionable success of antiretroviral therapy achieved in recent years, there are still cases of heavily treated patients who do not achieve or struggle to maintain undetectable HIV-RNA due to drug resistance. New antiretroviral options are needed to address this issue.Area covered: The authors first provide an overview of fostemsavir and its role in the treatment of HTE PLWH. Data from pre-clinical and clinical studies are reviewed and the pharmacokinetic and farmacodynamic properties are highlited. Drug-drug interactions and safety data from available clinical studies are also discussed.Expert opinion: Fostemsavir is a promising antiretroviral belonging to the class of entry inhibitors; its novel mechanism of action represents a very important innovation. Its use will be limited to the heavy-treatment-experienced patient population. This use will have to be monitored to avoid abuse and waste of a molecule that for some patients may represent a life-saving drug.

Maraviroc as a potential HIV-1 latency-reversing agent in cell line models and ex vivo CD4 T cells

Recent studies have suggested that the CCR5 antagonist maraviroc (MVC) may exert an HIV-1 latency reversal effect. This study aimed at defining MVC-mediated induction of HIV-1 in three cell line latency models and in ex vivo CD4 T cells from six patients with suppressed viraemia. HIV-1 induction was evaluated in TZM-bl cells by measuring HIV-1 LTR-driven luciferase expression, and in ACH-2 and U1 latently infected cell lines by measuring cell-free (CFR) and cell-associated (CAR) HIV-1 RNA by qPCR. NF-κB p65 was quantified in nuclear extracts by immunodetection. In ex vivo CD4 T cells, CAR, CFR and cell-associated DNA (CAD) were quantified at baseline and 1-7-14 days post-induction (T1, T7, T14). At T7 and T14, the infectivity of the CD4 T cells co-cultured with MOLT-4/CCR5 target cells was evaluated in the TZM-bl assay (TZA). Results were expressed as fold activation (FA) with respect to untreated cells. No LTR activation was observed in TZM-bl cells at any MVC concentration. NF-κB activation was only modestly upregulated (1.6±0.4) in TZM-bl cells with 5 µM MVC. Significant FA of HIV-1 expression was only detected at 80 µM MVC, namely on HIV-1 CFR in U1 (3.1±0.9; P=0.034) and ACH-2 cells (3.9±1.4; P=0.037). CFR was only weakly stimulated at 20 µM in ACH-2 (1.7±1.0 FA) cells and at 5 µM in U1 cells (1.9±0.5 FA). Although no consistent pattern of MVC-mediated activation was observed in ex vivo experiments, substantial FA values were detected sparsely on individual samples with different parameters. Notably, in one sample, MVC stimulated all parameters at T7 (2.3±0.2 CAD, 6.8±3.7 CAR, 18.7±16.7 CFR, 7.3±0.2 TZA). In conclusion, MVC variably induces HIV-1 production in some cell line models not previously used to test its latency reversal potential. In ex vivo CD4 T cells, MVC may exert patient-specific HIV-1 induction; however, clinically relevant patterns, if any, remain to be defined.

Two drugs regimens for HIV

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the evidence for two-drug regimens (2DR) for HIV treatment accumulates and 2DR start to enter consensus guidelines, this review covers the history, rationale and current evidence for 2DR in first-line and switch settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Until recently, most evidence for 2DR was for boosted protease inhibitor-based therapies but now we have large, randomized trials to support the use of dolutegravir (DTG)-based 2DR, both for initial therapy and suppressed switch, with high efficacy and no emergent resistance at failure.

SUMMARY

2DR will increasingly form part of the choice we are able to offer people with HIV but we must consider some of the limitations to ensure these regimens are used in the most clinically appropriate manner.

Risks and benefits of reducing the number of drugs to treat HIV-1 infection

Introduction: Despite the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral therapy, new treatment options are needed to address the concerns of patients and physicians regarding long-term toxicities, costs, and convenience of lifelong antiretroviral therapy. To achieve this goal, one strategy is to reduce the number of drugs in the antiretroviral regimen.Areas covered: We review the recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of reduced drug regimens and their potential risks and benefits. There is currently strong evidence showing that some two-drug regimens have a comparable efficacy and short-term safety compared to standard three-drug regimens. The fixed-dose combination of dolutegravir/lamivudine is already an alternative for many treatment-naïve and virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected adults supported by large randomized clinical trials. The co-formulation dolutegravir plus rilpivirine is also a switch strategy for maintenance therapy. Long-acting injectable cabotegravir plus rilpivirine has already regulatory approval, and islatravir plus doravirine is an expected option in the near future. Some two-drug regimens have not been as successful.Expert opinion: Long-term safety issues of these two-drug regimens remain to be determined, but with the overwhelming evidence available in virological control and short-term safety, the potential benefits of some of these two-drug regimens appear to outweigh the risks.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of dual therapy with a boosted PI plus lamivudine for maintenance of virological suppression: GeSIDA study 9717

Background

Dual therapy (DT) with a ritonavir-boosted PI (PI/r) plus lamivudine has proven non-inferior (12% margin) to triple therapy (TT) with PI/r plus two nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors [N(t)RTIs] in four clinical trials. It remains unclear whether DT is non-inferior based on the US FDA endpoint (virological failure with a margin of 4%) or in specific subgroups.

Methods

We performed a systematic search (January 1990 to March 2017) of randomized controlled trials that compared switching of maintenance ART from TT to DT. The principal investigators were contacted and agreed to share study databases. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of DT to TT based on the current FDA endpoint (4% non-inferiority margin for virological failure at week 48). We also analysed whether efficacy was modified by gender, active HCV infection and type of PI. Effect estimates and 95% CIs were calculated using generalized estimating equation-based models.

Results

We found 881 references that yielded eight articles corresponding to four clinical trials (1051 patients). At week 48, 4% of patients on DT versus 3.04% on TT had experienced virological failure (difference 0.9%; 95% CI -1.2% to 3.1%), and 84.7% of patients on DT versus 83.2% on TT had <50 copies of HIV RNA/mL (FDA snapshot algorithm) (difference 1.4%; 95% CI -2.8% to 5.8%). Gender, active HCV infection and type of PI had no effect on differences in treatment efficacy between DT and TT.

Conclusions

DT was non-inferior to TT using both current and past FDA endpoints. The efficacy of DT was not influenced by gender, active HCV infection status, or type of PI.

Two-drug regimens for treatment of naïve HIV-1 infection and as maintenance therapy

As people live longer with HIV infection, there has been a resurgence of interest in challenging the use of three-drug therapy, including two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus a third drug, as initial treatment of HIV infection or for maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed individuals. Although initial studies showed poor efficacy and/or substantial toxicity, more recent regimens have held greater promise. The SWORD-1 and -2 studies were pivotal trials of dolutegravir plus rilpivirine as maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed patients with no history of drug resistance, leading to the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the regimen as a small, single tablet. More recently, the GEMINI-1 and -2 studies demonstrated that dolutegravir plus lamivudine is as safe and effective as the same regimen when combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve individuals. Together, these and other studies of novel two-drug regimens offer the potential for improved tolerability and simplicity, as well as a reduction in cost. We will review historical and recent trials of two-drug therapy for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.

Darunavir for the treatment of HIV infection

INTRODUCTION

Darunavir (DRV) was the last approved protease inhibitor (PI) and has been extensively used for the treatment of HIV in both naïve and experienced subjects due to its high genetic barrier and efficacy. The introduction in clinical practice of integrase strand transfer inhibitors limited its role in the management of naïve subjects and in antiretroviral treatment simplification strategies. However, recent data from trials that have investigated the new DRV/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) combination showed an excellent efficacy and tolerability of this coformulation both in naïve patients and in those with viral suppression, making D/C/F/TAF a new option for the treatment of HIV infection. Areas covered: The authors present and discuss the efficacy and safety data of DRV when used in antiretroviral-naïve, multiexperienced subjects and in the setting of treatment deintensification in subjects with viral suppression. Moreover, the authors evaluate the recent data from two different Phase III trials on D/C/F/TAF both in treatment-naïve and virologically suppressed subjects. Expert opinion: Although novel antiretroviral drugs may become available over time, DRV continues to represent a valuable option for multiexperienced subjects and has a role in simplification regimens. In addition, the convenience of D/C/F/TAF coformulation may be useful for the future management of HIV-infected subjects.

Current and emerging two-drug approaches for HIV-1 therapy in ART-naïve and ART-experienced, virologically suppressed patients

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend a 2-drug antiretroviral regimen as an alternative to triple antiretroviral therapy (ART) in selected patients to reduce long-term toxicity and costs.

AREAS COVERED

This review is intended to provide insight into the efficacy, safety and tolerability of 2-drug versus 3-drug ART in naïve and in treatment-experienced virologically-suppressed patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Dual therapy regimens are not feasible in HBV-coinfected individuals and should not be applied during pregnancy. Positive data on 2-drug ART in drug naïve patients are still limited, while, in virologically-suppressed individuals, several regimens have shown non-inferiority as compared to 3-drug regimens. The strongest evidence of efficacy applies to ritonavir-boosted PI regimens combined with lamivudine and to dolutegravir with rilpivirine. Dual therapies showed improved renal function and bone mineral density over tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based 3-drug regimens. There are also great expectations for ongoing phase 3 trials testing dolutegravir with lamivudine. New and future single tablet co-formulations of dual regimens are expected to improve their suitability. Despite the lack of comparison with tenofovir alafenamide-based 3-drug regimens, the 2-drug regimens showing consistent non-inferiority and safety versus 3-drug regimens will challenge the current paradigm of 3-drug ART.