Raltegravir as functional monotherapy leads to virological failure and drug resistance in highly treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients

Patient perspectives on de-simplifying their single-tablet co-formulated antiretroviral therapy for societal cost savings

OBJECTIVES

The incremental costs of expanding antiretroviral (ARV) drug treatment to all HIV-infected patients are substantial, so cost-saving initiatives are important. Our objectives were to determine the acceptability and financial impact of de-simplifying (i.e. switching) more expensive single-tablet formulations (STFs) to less expensive generic-based multi-tablet components. We determined physician and patient perceptions and acceptance of STF de-simplification within the context of a publicly funded ARV budget.

METHODS

Programme costs were calculated for patients on ARVs followed at the Southern Alberta Clinic, Canada during 2016 (Cdn$). We focused on patients receiving Triumeq® and determined the savings if patients de-simplified to eligible generic co-formulations. We surveyed all prescribing physicians and a convenience sample of patients taking Triumeq® to see if, for budgetary purposes, they felt that de-simplification would be acceptable.

RESULTS

Of 1780 patients receiving ARVs, 62% (n = 1038) were on STF; 58% (n = 607) of patients on STF were on Triumeq®. The total annual cost of ARVs was $26 222 760. The cost for Triumeq® was $8 292 600. If every patient on Triumeq® switched to generic abacavir/lamivudine and Tivicay® (dolutegravir), total costs would decrease by $4 325 040. All physicians (n = 13) felt that de-simplifying could be safely achieved. Forty-eight per cent of 221 patients surveyed were agreeable to de-simplifying for altruistic reasons, 27% said no, and 25% said maybe.

CONCLUSIONS

De-simplifying Triumeq® generates large cost savings. Additional savings could be achieved by de-simplifying other STFs. Both physicians and patients agreed that selective de-simplification was acceptable; however, it may not be acceptable to every patient. Monitoring the medical and cost impacts of de-simplification strategies seems warranted.

Therapy-Emergent Drug Resistance to Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors in HIV-1 Patients: A Subgroup Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are a novel class of anti-HIV agents that show high activity in inhibiting HIV-1 replication. Currently, licensed INSTIs include raltegravir (RAL), elvitegravir (EVG) and dolutegravir (DTG); these drugs have played a critical role in AIDS therapy, serving as additional weapons in the arsenal for treating patients infected with HIV-1. To date, long-term data regarding clinical experience with INSTI use and the emergence of resistance remain scarce. However, the literature is likely now sufficiently comprehensive to warrant a meta-analysis of resistance to INSTIs.

METHODS

Our team implemented a manuscript retrieval protocol using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) via the Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. We screened the literature based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and then performed a quality analysis and evaluation using RevMan software, Stata software, and the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). We also performed a subgroup analysis. Finally, we calculated resistance rates and risk ratios (RRs) for the three types of drugs.

RESULTS

We identified 26 references via the database search. A meta-analysis of the RAL data revealed that the resistance rate was 3.9% (95% CI = 2.9%-4.9%) for the selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, the RAL resistance rate reached 40.9% (95% CI = 8.8%-72.9%) for the selected observational studies (OBSs). The rates of resistance to RAL that were associated with HIV subtypes A, B, and C as well as with more complex subtypes were 0.1% (95% CI = -0.7%-0.9%), 2.5% (95% CI = 0.5%-4.5%), 4.6% (95% CI = 2.7%-6.6%) and 2.2% (95% CI = 0.7%-3.7%), respectively. The rates of resistance to EVG and DTG were 1.2% (95% CI = 0.2%-2.2%) and 0.1% (95% CI = -0.2%-0.5%), respectively. Furthermore, we found that the RRs for antiviral resistance were 0.414 (95% CI = 0.210-0.816) between DTG and RAL and 0.499 (95% CI = 0.255-0.977) between EVG and RAL. When RAL was separately co-administered with nuclear nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) or protease inhibitors (PIs), the rates of resistance to RAL were 0.2% (95% CI = -0.1%-0.5%) and 0.2% (95% CI = -0.2%-0.6%), respectively. The ten major integrase mutations (including N155H, Y143C/R, Q148H/R, Y143Y/H, L74L/M, E92Q, E138E/A, Y143C, Q148Q and Y143S) can reduce the sensitivity of RAL and EVG. The resistance of DTG is mainly shown in 13 integrase mutations (including T97T/A, E138E/D, V151V/I, N155H, Q148, Y143C/H/R, T66A and E92Q).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results reveal that the DTG resistance rate was lower than the RAL resistance rate in a head-to-head comparison. Moreover, we confirmed that the EVG resistance rate was lower than the RAL resistance rate. In addition, our results revealed that the resistance rate of RAL was lower than that of efavirenz. The rates of resistance to RAL, EVG and DTG were specifically 3.9%, 1.2% and 0.1%, respectively. Compared with other types of antiviral drugs, the rates of resistance to INSTIs are generally lower. Unfortunately, the EVG and DTG resistance rates could not be compared because of a lack of data.

Treatment durability and virological response in treatment-experienced HIV-positive patients on an integrase inhibitor-based regimen: an Australian cohort study

Background: Integrase inhibitors (INSTI) are a newer class of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs that offer additional treatment options for experienced patients. Our aim is to describe treatment durability and virological outcomes in treatment-experienced HIV-positive patients using INSTI-based regimens. Methods: All patients in the Australian HIV Observational Database who had received an INSTI-based regimen ≥ 14 days as well as previous therapy were included in the study. We defined two groups of treatment-experienced patients: (1) those starting a second-line regimen with INSTI; and (2) highly experienced patients, defined as having prior exposure to all three main ARV classes, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors, before commencing INSTI. Survival methods were used to determine time to viral suppression and treatment switch, stratified by patient treatment experience. Covariates of interest included age, gender, hepatitis B and C co-infection, previous antiretroviral treatment time, patient treatment experience and baseline viral load. Results: Time to viral suppression and regimen switching from INSTI initiation was similar for second-line and highly experienced patients. The probability of achieving viral suppression at 6 months was 77.7% for second-line patients and 68.4% for highly experienced patients. There were 60 occurrences of regimen switching away from INSTI observed over 1274.0 person-years, a crude rate of 4.71 (95% CI: 3.66-6.07) per 100 person-years. Patient treatment experience was not a significant factor for regimen switch according to multivariate analysis, adjusting for relevant covariates. Conclusions: We found that INSTI-based regimens were potent and durable in experienced HIV-positive patients receiving treatment outside clinical trials. These results confirm that INSTI-based regimens are a robust treatment option.

Efficacy of raltegravir switching strategies in HIV-infected patients with suppressed viraemia according to the genotypic sensitivity score

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The lack of antiretroviral (ARV) backbone activity associated with raltegravir has been proposed as the main explanation for virological relapse observed in patients with undetectable viraemia who are switched from a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) to raltegravir. However ARV activity remains difficult to assess in this context. The aim of our study was to precisely assess the ARV backbone activity in patients with undetectable viraemia who underwent raltegravir switching strategies and to evaluate the efficacy of such switching strategies based on the genotypic sensitivity score (GSS).

METHODS

Patients with a plasma human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA level of <50 copies/mL on a stable two ARV-class regimen were enrolled if they switched one of their ARV drugs to raltegravir 400 mg twice daily. The GSS was calculated using a genotyping test performed on the HIV-1 RNA of the last plasma measurement with a HIV-1 RNA level of >50 copies/mL before the switch and on the results of all previous genotyping tests. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a plasma HIV-1 RNA level of <50 copies/mL at week 24.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were enrolled in this study. The proportion of patients with a plasma HIV-1 RNA level of <50 copies/mL at week 24 was 92.9 % (range 83.0-97.2 %) in the intent-to-treat analysis and 98.1 % (90.0-99.7 %) in per-protocol analysis. When the backbone was fully active, the proportion was 100.0 % (86.7-100.0 %) at week 24 and week 48 in the per-protocol analysis. We observed a decrease in plasma total cholesterol and triglycerides of -12.7 % (p = 0.005) and -26.5 % (p = 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Raltegravir switching strategies are effective when the associated backbone is fully active according to the GSS. In the context of undetectable viraemia, where ARV activity remains difficult to assess, the determination of the GSS requires the entire ARV history of the patient and all previous HIV-RNA genotyping test results.

A cohort study of treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients treated with raltegravir: factors associated with virological response and mutations selected at failure

This study aimed to identify factors associated with virological response (VR) to raltegravir (RAL)-containing regimens in 468 treatment-experienced but integrase inhibitor-naive HIV-1 patients receiving a RAL-containing regimen. VR was defined at Month 6 (M6) as HIV-1 RNA viral load (VL) <50 copies/mL. The impacts on VR of baseline integrase mutations, VL, CD4 count, genotypic sensitivity score for nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors, and the number of new antiretrovirals used for the first time associated with RAL were investigated. For patients with VL >50 copies/mL at M6, integrase mutations selected were characterised. Median baseline VL was 4.2 log(10)copies/mL (IQR 3.3-4.9 log(10) copies/mL) and CD4 count was 219 cells/mm(3) (IQR 96-368 cells/mm(3)). At M6, 71% of patients were responders. In multivariate analysis, baseline VL and CD4 count and ≥ 2 new antiretrovirals among darunavir, etravirine, maraviroc and enfuvirtide were associated with VR to RAL. Neither HIV-1 subtype nor baseline integrase polymorphisms were associated with VR to RAL. Among 63 failing patients at M6, selection of ≥ 1 change in the integrase gene was observed in 49 (77.8%), and 27/63 (42.9%) were considered as RAL-associated resistance mutations. Factors independently associated with the occurrence of ≥ 1 RAL-associated resistance mutation were VL at failure >3 log(10) and having no new drugs associated with RAL. RAL showed great potency in treatment-experienced patients. The number of new drugs associated with RAL was an important factor associated with VR. HIV-1 subtype and baseline integrase polymorphisms do not influence the RAL VR.

Clinical use of HIV integrase inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Optimal regimen choice of antiretroviral therapy is essential to achieve long-term clinical success. Integrase inhibitors have swiftly been adopted as part of current antiretroviral regimens. The purpose of this study was to review the evidence for integrase inhibitor use in clinical settings.

Methods

MEDLINE and Web-of-Science were screened from April 2006 until November 2012, as were hand-searched scientific meeting proceedings. Multiple reviewers independently screened 1323 citations in duplicate to identify randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials and cohort studies on integrase inhibitor use in clinical practice. Independent, duplicate data extraction and quality assessment were conducted.

Results

48 unique studies were included on the use of integrase inhibitors in antiretroviral therapy-naive patients and treatment-experienced patients with either virological failure or switching to integrase inhibitors while virologically suppressed. On the selected studies with comparable outcome measures and indication (n = 16), a meta-analysis was performed based on modified intention-to-treat (mITT), on-treatment (OT) and as-treated (AT) virological outcome data. In therapy-naive patients, favorable odds ratios (OR) for integrase inhibitor-based regimens were observed, (mITT OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59–0.86). However, integrase inhibitors combined with protease inhibitors only did not result in a significant better virological outcome. Evidence further supported integrase inhibitor use following virological failure (mITT OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11–0.66), but switching to integrase inhibitors from a high genetic barrier drug during successful treatment was not supported (mITT OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.89–2.31). Integrase inhibitor-based regimens result in similar immunological responses compared to other regimens. A low genetic barrier to drug-resistance development was observed for raltegravir and elvitegravir, but not for dolutegravir.

Conclusion

In first-line therapy, integrase inhibitors are superior to other regimens. Integrase inhibitor use after virological failure is supported as well by the meta-analysis. Careful use is however warranted when replacing a high genetic barrier drug in treatment-experienced patients switching successful treatment.

Monitoring the emergence of resistance mutations in patients infected with HIV-1 under salvage therapy with raltegravir in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: a follow-up study

The present study describes a follow-up of a prospective and observational cohort of patients infected with HIV-1 and treated with raltegravir for salvage therapy in Brazil. Two groups of patients were analyzed: switching from T20 to RAL (Group 1, n = 9) and salvage therapy containing RAL (Group 2, n = 10). Blood samples were drawn for CD4(+) T-cell counts and HIV-1 viral load determinations. Protease, reverse transcriptase, and integrase genotyping were performed at baseline and at the time of virologic failure. CD4(+) T-cells increased at 6 and 12 months in both groups; HIV-1 viral load was continuously suppressed for Group 1, and for Group 2 it significantly decreased after starting a RAL-containing regimen. Three out of 10 patients from Group 2 could not suppress HIV-1 viral load. The mutations Q148H + G140S were observed for two patients and for the third patient only mutations to PR/RT inhibitors were detected. The genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) was analyzed for all patients of Group 2 and both patients who developed resistance to raltegravir presented a GSS < 2.0 for the RAL-containing scheme, which could be associated to the lack of effectiveness of the proposed scheme. The present study describes, for the first time in Brazil, the close follow-up of a series of patients using a raltegravir-containing HAART, showing the safety of the enfuvirtide switch to RAL and the effectiveness of a therapeutic regimen with RAL in promoting immune reconstitution and suppressing HIV replication, as well as documenting the occurrence of resistance to integrase inhibitors in the country.

96 Week follow-up of HIV-infected patients in rescue with raltegravir plus optimized backbone regimens: a multicentre Italian experience

BACKGROUND

Long term efficacy of raltegravir (RAL)-including regimens in highly pre-treated HIV-1-infected patients has been demonstrated in registration trials. However, few studies have assessed durability in routine clinical settings.

METHODS

Antiretroviral treatment-experienced patients initiating a RAL-containing salvage regimen were enrolled. Routine clinical and laboratory follow-up was performed at baseline, week 4, 12, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Data were censored at week 96.

RESULTS

Out of 320 patients enrolled, 292 (91.25%) subjects maintained their initial regimen for 96 weeks; 28 discontinued prematurely for various reasons: death (11), viral failure (8), adverse events (5), loss to follow-up (3), consent withdrawal (1). Eight among these 28 subjects maintained RAL but changed the accompanying drugs. The mean CD4+ T-cell increase at week 96 was 227/mm(3); 273 out of 300 patients (91%), who were still receiving RAL at week 96, achieved viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL). When analyzing the immuno-virologic outcome according to the number of drugs used in the regimen, 2 (n = 45), 3 (n = 111), 4 (n = 124), or >4 (n = 40), CD4+ T-cell gain was similar across strata: +270, +214, +216, and +240 cells/mm(3), respectively, as was the proportion of subjects with undetectable viral load. Laboratory abnormalities (elevation of liver enzymes, total cholesterol and triglycerides) were rare, ranging from 0.9 to 3.1%. The mean 96-week total cholesterol increase was 23.6 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

In a routine clinical setting, a RAL-based regimen allowed most patients in salvage therapy to achieve optimal viral suppression for at least 96 weeks, with relevant immunologic gain and very few adverse events.

Impact of low-level-viremia on HIV-1 drug-resistance evolution among antiretroviral treated-patients

BACKGROUND

Drug-resistance mutations (DRAM) are frequently selected in patients with virological failure defined as viral load (pVL) above 500 copies/ml (c/mL), but few resistance data are available at low-level viremia (LLV). Our objective was to determine the emergence and evolution of DRAM during LLV in HIV-1-infected patients while receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients presenting a LLV episode defined as pVL between 40 and 500 c/mL on at least 3 occasions during a 6-month period or longer while on the same ART. Resistance genotypic testing was performed at the onset and at the end of LLV period. Emerging DRAM was defined during LLV if never detected on baseline genotype or before.

RESULTS

48 patients including 4 naive and 44 pretreated (median 9 years) presented a LLV episode with a median duration of 11 months. Current ART included 2NRTI (94%), ritonavir-boosted PI (94%), NNRTI (23%), and/or raltegravir (19%). Median pVL during LLV was 134 c/mL. Successful resistance testing at both onset and end of the LLV episode were obtained for 37 patients (77%), among who 11 (30%) acquired at least 1 DRAM during the LLV period: for NRTI in 6, for NNRTI in 1, for PI in 4, and for raltegravir in 2. During the LLV period, number of drugs with genotypic resistance increased from a median of 4.5 to 6 drugs. Duration and pVL level of LLV episode, duration of previous ART, current and nadir CD4 count, number of baseline DRAM and GSS were not identified as predictive factors of resistance acquisition during LLV, probably due to limited number of patients.

CONCLUSION

Persistent LLV episodes below 500 c/ml while receiving ART is associated with emerging DRAM for all drug classes and a decreasing in further therapeutic options, suggesting to earlier consider resistance monitoring and ART optimization in this setting.

Modelling the spread of HIV immune escape mutants in a vaccinated population

Because cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs) have been shown to play a role in controlling human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and because CTL-based simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) vaccines have proved effective in non-human primates, one goal of HIV vaccine design is to elicit effective CTL responses in humans. Such a vaccine could improve viral control in patients who later become infected, thereby reducing onwards transmission and enhancing life expectancy in the absence of treatment. The ability of HIV to evolve mutations that evade CTLs and the ability of these ‘escape mutants’ to spread amongst the population poses a challenge to the development of an effective and robust vaccine. We present a mathematical model of within-host evolution and between-host transmission of CTL escape mutants amongst a population receiving a vaccine that elicits CTL responses to multiple epitopes. Within-host evolution at each epitope is represented by the outgrowth of escape mutants in hosts who restrict the epitope and their reversion in hosts who do not restrict the epitope. We use this model to investigate how the evolution and spread of escape mutants could affect the impact of a vaccine. We show that in the absence of escape, such a vaccine could markedly reduce the prevalence of both infection and disease in the population. However the impact of such a vaccine could be significantly abated by CTL escape mutants, especially if their selection in hosts who restrict the epitope is rapid and their reversion in hosts who do not restrict the epitope is slow. We also use the model to address whether a vaccine should span a broad or narrow range of CTL epitopes and target epitopes restricted by rare or common HLA types. We discuss the implications and limitations of our findings.

The evolution and spread of HIV strains that evade the immune response poses a major challenge to the development of an effective and robust HIV vaccine. We present a new mathematical tool that we use to dissect the drivers of the spread of these ‘immune escape mutants’ in a vaccinated population. Our study focuses on a vaccine that can reduce infectiousness and enhance longevity but does not provide sterilizing immunity. We show that in the absence of escape such a vaccine could reduce the prevalence of both infection and disease in the population. However, vaccine impact could be significantly abated by immune escape mutants, especially if they emerge rapidly and revert very slowly after transmission to hosts in whom the original selection pressure is absent. We also discuss the effect that vaccine breadth and the frequency with which different epitopes are targeted have upon vaccine impact.

Emerging integrase inhibitor resistance mutations in raltegravir-treated HIV-1-infected patients with low-level viremia

BACKGROUND

The emergence of integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI) resistance-associated mutations was examined in patients with low-level viremia after switching from enfuvirtide to raltegravir in the ANRS 138-Easier trial.

METHODS

Integrase genes of plasma virus from raltegravir-treated patients in the Easier trial with low-level viremia (50-500 copies/ml) were sequenced to determine INSTI resistance-associated mutations. Baseline viral load, baseline and nadir CD4 cell count, antiretroviral treatment, genotypic susceptibility score, level of viremia and degree of treatment adherence during the study period were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients experienced at least one episode of low-level viremia while receiving raltegravir; integrase genotyping was successful in samples from 39 individuals (80%). Among them, three [7.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-20.9%] had significant INSTI resistance mutations consisting of N155H in two and P145S in one. Absence of these mutations from proviral DNA at baseline suggested selection of INSTI resistance during episodes of low-level viremia. No specific factors significantly associated with emergence of INSTI resistance mutations during low-level viremia were identified.

CONCLUSION

Emergence of INSTI resistance mutations can occur during episodes of low-level viremia in patients receiving raltegravir-containing regimens.

Resistance analyses in highly experienced patients failing raltegravir, etravirine and darunavir/ritonavir regimen

OBJECTIVES

ANRS 139 TRIO trial was a phase II noncomparative trial that evaluated in highly experienced patients, a combination of raltegravir, etravirine and darunavir boosted with ritonavir. We analyzed emergence of resistant viruses at the time of virological failure and investigated the impact of baseline integrase polymorphisms on virological failure occurrence.

METHODS

Bulk sequencing of protease, reverse transcriptase and integrase genes was performed for 103 patients at baseline and 14 patients at the time of virological failure. Additionally, integrase clonal analyses were performed at baseline and at virological failure in patients with successful integrase gene amplification. Impact of baseline integrase polymorphisms on virological failure occurrence was analyzed using Fisher exact and Wilcoxon tests.

RESULTS

In the 14 failing patients median viral load at virological failure was 90 copies/ml (interquartile range = 60-783). Emergence of darunavir and etravirine resistance mutations was observed at virological failure in only one and three patients, respectively. Raltegravir resistance mutations were found neither at baseline nor at the time of virologic failure. Integrase clonal analyses showed neither the presence nor the selection of minority variants carrying raltegravir resistance mutations at baseline or at virological failure. No impact of baseline integrase polymorphisms was observed on virological failure either at week 24 or at week 48.

CONCLUSION

Virological failure occurred in a small proportion of patients with low viral load. No raltegravir resistance mutations were observed using bulk sequencing or clonal analyses, and darunavir and etravirine resistance-associated mutations were detected in only one and three patients, respectively at virological failure. No impact of baseline integrase polymorphism was observed on virological failure occurrence.

Extended use of raltegravir in the treatment of HIV-1 infection: optimizing therapy

Raltegravir is the first licensed compound in 2007 of the new integrase inhibitor drug class. At the dose of 400 mg twice daily, raltegravir showed a potent antiviral action in antiretroviral-naïve patients when associated with tenofovir and emtricitabine. Raltegravir was also found to be highly active in antiretroviral-experienced patients with virological failure and displaying multiresistant virus, as shown with the BENCHMRK and ANRS 139 TRIO trials. Finally, the use of raltegravir was assessed in the context of a switch strategy in antiretroviral-experienced patients with virological success [human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA below detection limit], highlighting the following mandatory criteria in this strategy: the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors associated with raltegravir have to be fully active. In the different studies, raltegravir had a favorable safety and tolerability profile. In the clinical situation a switch in virologically suppressed patients receiving a protease inhibitor, an improvement of the lipid profile was observed. Overall, when analyzing the Phase II and III trials together, only a few patients on raltegravir discontinued for adverse events. The development of resistance to raltegravir mainly involved three resistance mutations in integrase gene: Q148H/K/R, N155H, and Y143C/H/R. In conclusion, raltegravir improved the clinical management of HIV-1 infection both in antiretroviral-naïve and in antiretroviral-experienced patients.