Pediatric HIV: new opportunities to treat children

Time to treatment disruption in children with HIV-1 randomized to initial antiretroviral therapy with protease inhibitors versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Choice of initial antiretroviral therapy regimen may help children with HIV maintain optimal, continuous therapy. We assessed treatment-naïve children for differences in time to treatment disruption across randomly-assigned protease inhibitor versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based initial antiretroviral therapy.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter phase 2/3, randomized, open-label trial in Europe, North and South America from 2002 to 2009. Children aged 31 days to <18 years, who were living with HIV-1 and treatment-naive, were randomized to antiretroviral therapy with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus a protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Time to first documented treatment disruption to any component of antiretroviral therapy, derived from treatment records and adherence questionnaires, was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimators and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The modified intention-to-treat analysis included 263 participants. Seventy-two percent (n = 190) of participants experienced at least one treatment disruption during study. At 4 years, treatment disruption probabilities were 70% (protease inhibitor) vs. 63% (non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for treatment disruptions comparing protease inhibitor vs. non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based regimens was 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.61 (adjusted HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.91-1.68). By study end, treatment disruption probabilities converged (protease inhibitor 81%, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor 84%) with unadjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84-1.48 (adjusted HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84-1.50). Reported reasons for treatment disruptions suggested that participants on protease inhibitors experienced greater tolerability problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Children had similar time to treatment disruption for initial protease inhibitor and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy, despite greater reported tolerability problems with protease inhibitor regimens. Initial pediatric antiretroviral therapy with either a protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor may be acceptable for maintaining optimal, continuous therapy.

Moving forward with treatment options for HIV-infected children

INTRODUCTION

Current international guidelines recommend to treat all HIV-1 infected patients regardless of CD4 cell count. Despite the remarkable worldwide progress for universal access to antiretroviral during the last decade, the pediatric population remains fragile due to lack of randomized studies, inappropriate antiretroviral formulations, adherence difficulties, drug toxicity and development of resistance.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the latest recommendations and advances for the treatment of HIV-infected children and highlights the potential complications of a lifelong antiretroviral treatment initiated early in life.

EXPERT OPINION

International guidelines recommend to start combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) as fast as possible in all children diagnosed with HIV-1. The principal goal is to improve survival and reduce mortality as well as rapidly decrease HIV reservoirs. This remains a challenge in resource-limited settings were diagnostic tools and treatment access may be limited. Different new strategies are in the pipeline such as immunotherapy in combination with very early cART initiation to seek remission or functional cure. For the time being and awaiting for long term remission or cure, there is a need for further pharmacokinetics studies, more pediatric formulations with improved palatability and implementation of randomized trials for the newer antiretroviral drugs.

The Need for Pediatric Formulations to Treat Children with HIV

Over 3.2 million children worldwide are infected with HIV, but only 24% of these children receive antiretroviral therapy (ART). ART adherence among children is a crucial part of managing human-immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and extending the life and health of infected children. Important causes of poor adherence are formulation- and regimen-specific properties, including poor palatability, large pill burden, short dosing intervals, and the complex storage and transportation of drugs. This review aims to summarize the various regimen- and formulation-based barriers to ART adherence among children to support the need for new and innovative pediatric formulations for antiretroviral therapy (ART). Detailing the arguments both for and against investing in the development of pediatric HIV medications, as well as highlighting recent advances in pediatric ART formulation research, provides a synopsis of the current data related to pediatric ART formulations and adherence.

Differences in taste between three polyethylene glycol preparations: a randomized double-blind study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Patients suffering from chronic constipation require long-term, regular therapy with laxatives. Literature regarding patient preference and acceptance in polyethylene glycol preparations is scarce. Therefore, this research aimed to identify preference between the three polyethylene glycol 3350, namely Molaxole(®), Movicol(®), and Laxtra Orange(®). Furthermore, taste is one of the most important factors leading to patients' adherence, particularly when the treatment lasts for a long time.

METHODS

In this randomized, cross-over double-blind study, 100 volunteers were recruited by advertisement. The volunteers were invited to taste the preparations and grade the taste using a five-point hedonic scale (extremely poor taste [1] to extremely good taste [5]). The volunteers were then asked to choose the most palatable preparation.

RESULTS

One hundred volunteers with a mean age of 35 years (range 20-61) were randomized (76 females). Molaxole(®), Movicol(®), and Laxtra Orange(®) had a mean hedonic score of 2.76 (SD: 0.82), 2.81 (SD: 0.76) and 3.12 (SD: 0.82) respectively. The hedonic taste score for Laxtra Orange(®) was significantly better than Molaxole(®) (P = 0.001) and Movicol(®) (P = 0.001). No difference was found between Molaxole(®) and Movicol(®) (P = 0.61). Molaxole(®) was the most preferred preparation for 19 volunteers (19%), Movicol(®) for 24 volunteers (25%) and Laxtra Orange(®) for 55 volunteers (56%). Two volunteers had no preference. The order in which volunteers tested the preparations had no influence on the taste results. No significant differences in age or gender were observed.

CONCLUSION

Laxtra Orange(®) was most palatable preparation. This may have implications for adherence in patients with chronic constipation.