Doravirine dose selection and 96-week safety and efficacy versus efavirenz in antiretroviral therapy-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in a Phase IIb trial

In Silico Pharmacokinetics Evaluation of Forgiveness for Doravirine and Rilpivirine

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the concentrations of rilpivirine (RLP) and doravirine (DOR) after 3 days-off using simulations from population pharmacokinetics models.

METHODS

The authors conducted a series of 500 sets of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations to examine the steady-state conditions for 2 common dosage levels: 25 mg/d for RLP and 100 mg/d for DOR. These simulations were conducted under 2 scenarios: 1 without drug cessation and another after a 3-day break. The validity of the implementation was established through a comparison of median trough concentrations (C24h) with previously reported data. Subsequently, the proportion of simulated patients with C24h and C72h after 3 days-off (C72h/3do) that exceeded the inhibitory concentration 50 (IC50), 5.2 mcg/L for DOR and 20.5 mcg/L for RLP respectively, was calculated. The inhibitory quotient (IQ) was also computed, which was 6 times IC50 for DOR and 4.5 times IC50 for RLP. Finally, nomograms were constructed to estimate the probability of having C72h/3do > IC50 or > IQ for different ranges of C24h.

RESULTS

Simulated C24h median ± SD for RLP were 61.8 ± 0.4 mcg/L and for DOR 397 ± 0 mcg/L. For RLP, 99.3 ± 0.1% exceeded IC50 at C24h, 16.4 ± 0.4% at C72h/3do, and none surpassed the IQ threshold. In contrast, DOR had 100% ± 0% above IC50 at C24h, 93.6 ± 0.2% at C72h/3do, and 58.6 ± 0.5% exceeded the IQ.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that treatment with DOR may offer a more forgiving therapeutic profile than RLP, given the larger proportion of patients achieving effective drug exposure with DOR. However, it is important to acknowledge a significant limitation of this study, namely, the assumption that drug concentration is a perfect surrogate for drug effectiveness.

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Doravirine/Lamivudine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Fixed-Dose Combination Tablets in Adolescents Living With HIV: Results Through Week 96 from IMPAACT 2014

BACKGROUND

IMPAACT 2014 study is a phase I/II, multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized study of doravirine (DOR) co-formulated with lamivudine (3TC) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) as fixed-dose combination (DOR FDC) in adolescents with HIV-1. We report the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of DOR FDC through 96 weeks.

METHODS

Participants were adolescents aged 12 to <18 years who weighed at least 45 kg and who were either antiretroviral (ARV)-naïve or virologically suppressed without documented resistance mutations to DOR/3TC/TDF. The efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL assessed at weeks 48 and 96 using the observed failure approach. Safety and tolerability outcomes were incidence of adverse events (AEs) and treatment discontinuations.

RESULTS

A total of 45 adolescents, median age 15 (range, 12-17) years, 58% females, were enrolled and 2 (4.4%) participants were ARV naïve. Of the 45 participants, 42 (93.3%) completed the study and 41 (91.1%) completed the study treatment. At week 48, 41/42 (97.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 87.4-99.9) and week 96, 37/40 (92.5%; 95% CI, 79.6-98.4) participants had achieved or maintained HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL. There were no treatment-related discontinuations due to AEs and no drug-related AEs ≥grade 3 or deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

We found once-daily dosing of DOR FDC to be safe and well tolerated for maintaining viral suppression through 96 weeks in adolescents living with HIV-1.

Lipids and Transaminase in Antiretroviral-Treatment-Experienced People Living with HIV, Switching to a Doravirine-Based vs. a Rilpivirine-Based Regimen: Data from a Real-Life Setting

Doravirine (DOR) is a newly approved non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). We aimed to investigate, in a real-life setting, how switching to a DOR-based regimen rather than a rilpivirine (RPV)-based regimen impacted metabolic and hepatic safety. The analysis included 551 antiretroviral treatment (ART)-experienced people living with HIV (PLWH), starting RPV-based or DOR-based regimens with viral load < 200 copies/mL, baseline (T0), and at least one control visit (6-month visit, T1). We enrolled 295 PLWH in the RPV and 256 in the DOR cohort. At T1, total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein-C (LDL-C), and triglycerides significantly decreased in both DOR and RPV cohorts, while high-density lipoprotein-C (HDL-C) only decreased in RPV-treated people. Consistently, the TC/HDL-C ratio declined more markedly in the DOR (-0.36, p < 0.0001) than in the RPV cohort (-0.08, p = 0.25) (comparison p = 0.39). Similar trends were observed when excluding the PLWH on lipid-lowering treatment from the analysis. People with normal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels showed a slight ALT increase in both cohorts, and those with baseline ALT > 40 IU/L experienced a significant decline (-14 IU/L, p = 0.008) only in the DOR cohort. Lipid profile improved in both cohorts, and there was a significant reduction in ALT in PLWH with higher-than-normal baseline levels on DOR-based ART.

Comparison of Efavirenz and Doravirine Developmental Toxicity in an Embryo Animal Model

In the past, one of the most widely used non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) of HIV infection was efavirenz (EFV), which is already used as a cost-effective treatment in developing countries due to its efficacy, tolerability, and availability. However, EFV also demonstrates several adverse effects, like hepatotoxicity, altered lipid profile, neuropsychological symptoms, and behavioral effects in children after in utero exposure. In 2018, another NNRTI, doravirine (DOR), was approved due to its similar efficacy but better safety profile. Preclinical safety studies demonstrated that DOR is not genotoxic and exhibits no developmental toxicity or effects on fertility in rats. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos have been widely accepted as a vertebrate model for pharmacological and developmental studies. We used zebrafish embryos as an in vivo model to investigate the developmental toxicity of DOR compared to EFV. After exposure of the embryos to the drugs from the gastrula stage up to different developmental stages (30 embryos for each arm, in three independent experiments), we assessed their survival, morphology, hatching rate, apoptosis in the developing head, locomotion behavior, vasculature development, and neutral lipid distribution. Overall, DOR showed a better safety profile than EFV in our model. Therapeutic and supra-therapeutic doses of DOR induced very low mortality [survival rates: 92, 90, 88, 88, and 81% at 1, 5, 10, 25, and 50 μM, respectively, at 24 h post fecundation (hpf), and 88, 85, 88, 89, and 75% at the same doses, respectively, at 48 hpf] and mild morphological alterations compared to EFV exposure also in the sub-therapeutic ranges (survival rates: 80, 77, 69, 63, and 44% at 1, 5, 10, 25, and 50 μM, respectively, at 24 hpf and 72, 70, 63, 52, and 0% at the same doses, respectively, at 48 hpf). Further, DOR only slightly affected the hatching rate at supra-therapeutic doses (97, 98, 96, 87, and 83% at 1, 5, 10, 25, and 50 μM, respectively, at 72 hpf), while EFV already strongly reduced hatching at sub-therapeutic doses (83, 49, 11, 0, and 0% at 1, 5, 10, 25, and 50 μM, respectively, at the same time endpoint). Both DOR at therapeutic doses and most severely EFV at sub-therapeutic doses enhanced apoptosis in the developing head during crucial phases of embryo neurodevelopment and perturbed the locomotor behavior. Furthermore, EFV strongly affected angiogenesis and disturbed neutral lipid homeostasis even at sub-therapeutic doses compared to DOR at therapeutic concentrations. Our findings in zebrafish embryos add further data confirming the higher safety of DOR with respect to EFV regarding embryo development, neurogenesis, angiogenesis, and lipid metabolism. Further studies are needed to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying the better pharmacological safety profile of DOR, and further human studies are required to confirm these results in the zebrafish animal model.

Efficacy and Safety of Two-Drug Regimens That Are Approved from 2018 to 2022 for the Treatment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Disease and Its Opportunistic Infections

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a type of virus that targets the body's immune cells. HIV infection can be divided into three phases: acute HIV infection, chronic HIV infection, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). HIV-infected people are immunosuppressed and at risk of developing opportunistic infections such as pneumonia, tuberculosis, candidiasis, toxoplasmosis, and Salmonella infection. The two types of HIV are known as HIV-1 and HIV-2. HIV-1 is the predominant and more common cause of AIDS worldwide, with an estimated 38 million people living with HIV-1 while an estimated 1 to 2 million people live with HIV-2. No effective cures are currently available for HIV infection. Current treatments emphasise the drug's safety and tolerability, as lifelong management is needed to manage HIV infection. The goal of this review is to study the efficacy and safety of newly approved drugs from 2018 to 2022 for the treatment of HIV by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA). The drugs included Cabotegravir and Rilpivirine, Fostemsavir, Doravirine, and Ibalizumab. From the review, switching to doravirine/lamivudine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) was shown to be noninferior to the continuation of the previous regimen, efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EFV/FTC/TDF) in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1. However, DOR/3TC/TDF had shown a preferable safety profile with lower discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs), lower neuropsychiatric AEs, and a preferable lipid profile. Ibalizumab was also safe, well tolerated, and had been proven effective against multiple drug-resistant strains of viruses.

Real-life use of Doravirine in treatment-experienced people living with HIV: A multicenter Italian study

Use of doravirine (DOR), a new nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors recently approved for HIV treatment, is still unclear in clinical practice and real-life data are scarce. We retrospectively investigated the rationale for switching people with HIV to DOR-containing/-based regimens in a real-life cohort. Among 132 patients (68.9% males, median age 56 years), the main reasons to start DOR were prevention of toxicities (39.4%) and dyslipidemia (18.2%). DOR was combined with integrase inhibitors in 40.9% cases, and in 25.7% of patients, DOR was prescribed without availability of a genotypic resistance test. Twenty-four weeks after the switch to DOR-containing/-based regimens, no significant changes in CD4+ T-cell count, CD4/CD8 ratio, detectable HIV-RNA, serum creatinine levels, and body weight were detected. By contrast, a significant reduction in lipids (both cholesterol and triglycerides) was observed in 52 patients for whom a follow-up assessment was available (P = .008 and .01, respectively). Our data confirmed that switching to DOR-containing/-based regimens may have a favorable impact on lipid profile and a neutral impact on weight gain. However, more data are needed to support its use in patients who do not have a genotypic test available or have an extensive nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors-associated resistance, as well as its use in a dual regimen, especially in combination with second-generation integrase inhibitors.

Statistical tests for two-stage adaptive seamless design using short- and long-term binary outcomes

The adaptive seamless design combining phases II and III into a single trial has been shown growing interest for improving the efficiency of drug development, becoming the most frequent adaptive design type. It typically consists of two stages, the trial objectives being often different in each stage. The primary objectives are to select optimal experimental treatment group(s) in the first stage and compare the efficacy between the selected treatment and control groups in the second stage. In this article, we focus on a two-stage adaptive seamless design, for which treatment selection is based on the short-term binary endpoint and treatment comparison is based on the long-term binary endpoint. We thus propose an exact conditional test as a final analysis, based on the bivariate binomial distribution and given the selected treatment with the most promising short-term endpoint response rate from an interim analysis. Additionally, the mid- p $$ p $$ approach is incorporated to improve conservativeness for an exact test. Simulation studies were conducted to compare the proposed methods with a method based on the combination test. The proposed exact method controlled for type I error rate at the nominal level, regardless of the number of initial treatments or the correlation between short- and long-term endpoints. In terms of the treatment comparison power, the proposed methods are more powerful than that based on the combination test in the scenarios, with only one treatment being effective.

Removal of doravirine by haemodialysis in people living with HIV with end-stage renal disease

Objectives

To evaluate the effect of haemodialysis on doravirine concentrations in people living with HIV (PLWH) undergoing routine haemodialysis.

Methods

An exploratory clinical trial that included PLWH undergoing intermittent haemodialysis was undertaken. After enrolment (day 1), doravirine 100 mg once daily was added to stable combined ART for 5 days. On day 6, blood samples were collected from each participant at the beginning and at the end of a dialysis session. Additionally, paired samples of blood entering (‘in’) and leaving (‘out’) the dialyser and the resulting dialysate were collected during the dialysis session to evaluate drug removal during dialysis. Doravirine concentrations in plasma and in the dialysate were determined by LC-MS/MS. The ratio of doravirine concentrations in plasma after/before the haemodialysis session and the haemodialysis extraction coefficient were calculated for each participant. The study was registered at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04689737).

Results

Eight participants (six male) were included. The median (range) age and BMI were 49.5 (28–67) years and 23.6 (17.9–34.2) kg/m2, respectively. The doravirine dialysis extraction ratio was 34.3% (25.8%–41.4%). The ratio of doravirine concentrations in plasma after/before the haemodialysis session was 0.8 (0.6–1.0). At the end of the haemodialysis session (time post-dose 20.8–27.3 h), doravirine concentrations in plasma were 785 (101–1851) ng/mL.

Conclusions

Despite moderate removal of doravirine by haemodialysis, trough doravirine concentrations in plasma after the haemodialysis sessions remained in excess of the protein-binding-adjusted EC50 (5 ng/mL). Doravirine dosage adjustments are unnecessary in PLWH undergoing intermittent haemodialysis.

Doravirine: its role in HIV treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed evidence concerning the novel nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor doravirine, aiming to identify situations where it may be selected in preference to integrase inhibitors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Doravirine is licenced for the treatment of HIV-1 in North America and Europe. In two multicentre randomized controlled trials, noninferiority with comparator drugs efavirenz and darunavir/ritonavir was observed at 96 weeks. Doravirine is associated with a lower incidence of neuropsychiatric side effects relative to efavirenz, and favourable lipid changes relative to darunavir over 96 weeks. A lower incidence of weight gain, relative to indirect comparisons with integrase inhibitors, was observed. Doravirine has a high genetic barrier to resistance with retained activity in the presence of single NNRTI mutations K103N, Y181C and G190A. Primary drug resistance is infrequent and may be higher in South Africa relative to European populations. Doravirine may be used in renal or hepatic impairment and has a low potential for drug-drug interactions.

SUMMARY

Doravirine is a well tolerated and effective agent in ART-naive patients. Direct comparison with integrase inhibitors, and evidence on the outcomes of treatment with doravirine in the presence of prior NNRTI experience are required to better elucidate which patients will benefit most from doravirine therapy.

Brief Report: Switching to DOR/3TC/TDF Maintains HIV-1 Virologic Suppression Through Week 144 in the DRIVE-SHIFT Trial

BACKGROUND

In the primary analysis of the DRIVE-SHIFT trial, switching to doravirine/lamivudine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) maintained suppression of HIV-1 through week 48. Here, we present long-term efficacy and safety outcomes through week 144 of the DRIVE-SHIFT trial.

METHODS

This phase 3, randomized, open-label trial evaluated switching from a stable antiretroviral regimen to once-daily DOR/3TC/TDF in adults with HIV-1 suppressed for ≥6 months and no previous virologic failure. Participants switched at day 1 [immediate switch group (ISG); n = 447] or week 24 [delayed switch group (DSG); n = 209]. Nine ISG participants who completed week 48 but did not enter extension-1 were excluded from week 144 efficacy analyses.

RESULTS

At week 144, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was maintained in 80.1% of the ISG (351/438) and 83.7% of the DSG (175/209), while 2.7% (12/438) and 4.8% (10/209), respectively, had HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL (Food and Drug Administration Snapshot approach). Protocol-defined virologic failure after switch occurred in 2.1% of ISG (9/438) and 3.3% of DSG (7/209); no viral resistance to doravirine was detected in 4 participants with samples available. Reductions in fasting lipids were observed at 24 weeks after switch and maintained through week 144. The mean weight change from switch to week 144 was +1.4 kg for ISG and +1.2 kg for DSG. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis (16.2%), headache (12.3%), and diarrhea (9.1%). Overall, 4.1% discontinued because of adverse events, and no deaths occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm that switching to once-daily DOR/3TC/TDF is a generally well-tolerated option for maintaining viral suppression in adults considering a change in therapy.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02397096.

Comparative safety review of recommended, first-line single-tablet regimens in patients with HIV

Introduction Different single-tablet regimens (STRs), containing one or two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus an anchor drug, are available for the use in naïve, HIV-infected patients. Despite some restrictions in the use of particular regimens in certain situations (e.g., HBV coinfection), International guidelines do not provide indications to prefer any regimen over others concerning the tolerability profile. We aimed to assess advantages and disadvantages of the most prescribed STRs.Areas covered An extensive review of articles published in English language was conducted on PubMed, looking for evidence about STRs in naïve, HIV-infected population. Safety outcomes of registrational trials were assessed, giving priority to studies directly comparing STRs included in our research (abacavir/lamivudine/dolutegravir, tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine/bictegravir, lamivudine/dolutegravir, tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine/darunavir/cobicistat, tenovofir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine/doravirine). Data from cohort studies and meta-analyses were also assessed, extrapolating the main evidence about the combinations of interest.Expert opinion Integrase inhibitors (InsTIs)-based regimens have few interruptions for adverse events and few drug-related adverse events, with tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine/dolutegravir and lamivudine/dolutegravir being the most tolerable ones. However, neuropsychiatric adverse events and metabolic issues could prompt the alternative use of darunavir or doravirine-based combinations, even if a superior safety profile of these combinations over InSTIs has yet to be demonstrated.

Review of Doravirine Resistance Patterns Identified in Participants During Clinical Development

Background:

Doravirine (DOR) is a novel non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) approved for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with no known DOR resistance-associated mutations. DOR was rationally designed to address limitations associated with other approved NNRTIs, particularly resistance from common NNRTI resistance-associated mutants containing K103N, Y181C, or G190A reverse transcriptase substitutions.

Setting:

Data to date from both in vitro studies and clinical trials have been compiled to summarize the resistance profile of DOR.

Methods:

We analyzed data from in vitro studies and phase 2 and 3 trials to assess the emergence of resistance-associated mutations and their impact on efficacy among participants treated with DOR.

Results:

DOR exhibited a distinct resistance profile compared with efavirenz and rilpivirine in vitro and in vivo; mutant viruses that were resistant to DOR showed limited cross-resistance to efavirenz and rilpivirine. In clinical trials, the development of DOR resistance-associated substitutions in reverse transcriptase was uncommon.

Conclusion:

Overall, minimal cross-resistance across NNRTIs was observed for DOR and limited development of DOR-related resistance. These data should assist clinicians in further understanding the resistance profile of DOR, so appropriate treatment decisions can be made for their patients.

Efficacy, safety and central nervous system effects after switch from efavirenz/tenofovir/emtricitabine to doravirine/tenofovir/lamivudine

OBJECTIVE

Doravirine is an alternative treatment option for individuals who do not tolerate efavirenz. We assessed efficacy, safety, and CNS effects in adults with HIV-1 and CNS complaints who switched from an efavirenz-based regimen to a doravirine-based regimen.

DESIGN

Multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial (NCT02652260).

METHODS

Virologically suppressed adults receiving efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir (EFV/FTC/TDF), or its components, with ongoing EFV-associated CNS toxicity grade 2 or higher (DAIDS criteria) were switched to doravirine/lamivudine/tenofovir (DOR/3TC/TDF) on day 1 (Immediate Switch Group [ISG]) or after 12 weeks (Deferred Switch Group [DSG]). CNS toxicity data were collected by self-administered questionnaire. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with any grade 2 or higher CNS toxicity at week 12. Secondary endpoints included virologic response and effect on fasting lipids.

RESULTS

Eighty-six participants (58% men, 56% black, median age 41 years, median 4 years on prior EFV regimen) were enrolled (43 ISG, 43 DSG) and included in the analyses. At week 12, 42% of ISG and 37% of DSG had at least 1 grade 2 or higher CNS toxicity [difference 4.7%, 95% CI (-16 to 25%); P = 0.33]. At 24 weeks postswitch, HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml was maintained in 95.3% of participants, and fasting lipids were significantly decreased (LDL-cholesterol -11.0, non-HDL-cholesterol -13.2, HDL-cholesterol -7.7, total cholesterol -20.9, and triglycerides -13.0 mg/dl).

CONCLUSION

In participants who had CNS complaints while receiving EFV/FTC/TDF, improvement in CNS toxicities attributable to EFV was not significantly different after switching to DOR/3TC/TDF compared with remaining on EFV/FTC/TDF. Virologic efficacy was maintained and lipid profiles improved after switching to DOR/3TC/TDF.

Efficacy and safety of doravirine in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This research aims to study the safety and efficacy of doravirine in the treatment of HIV-1 (human immunodeficiency virus) patients. We conducted an electronic search in eight databases for the inclusion of eligible studies. We have only included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that study the safety and efficacy of doravirine in the treatment of HIV-1 adult patients. Six papers were included in this meta-analysis. For network (direct and indirect) estimates, the doravirine 100 mg treatment strategy found to have the highest efficacy (P score = 0.786) followed by doravirine 25 mg (P score = 0.684), efavirenz 600 mg (P score = 0.574), doravirine 200 mg (P score = 0.532), 100 mg ritonavir and plus 800 mg darunavir (P score = 0.416), and placebo (P score = 0.009), respectively. Regarding drug-related AE, the placebo group found to have the highest safety profile with the least AE rates (P score = 0.927) followed by doravirine 100 mg (P score = 0.720), 100 mg ritonavir and plus 800 mg darunavir (P score = 0.717), doravirine 25 mg (P score = 0.336), doravirine 200 mg (P score = 0.258), and efavirenz 600 mg (P score = 0.043), respectively. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference between DOR 100 mg in comparison with 100 mg ritonavir and plus 800 mg darunavir (OR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.23-5.74), DOR 25 mg (OR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.06-2.34), DOR 200 mg (OR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.17-4.59), or efavirenz 600 mg (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.17-1.98). Moreover, the pairwise (direct only) comparisons did not show a significant difference between doravirine (all doses) and other treatment groups. Doravirine could be counted as an efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated treatment option that is preferable to other regimens for the initial therapy of individuals with HIV-1 infection.

Changes in weight and BMI with first-line doravirine-based therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in weight and BMI in adults with HIV-1 at 1 and 2 years after starting an antiretroviral regimen that included doravirine, ritonavir-boosted darunavir, or efavirenz.

DESIGN

Post-hoc analysis of pooled data from three randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We evaluated weight change from baseline, weight gain at least 10%, and increase in BMI after 48 and 96 weeks of treatment with doravirine, ritonavir-boosted darunavir, or efavirenz-based regimens. Risk factors for weight gain and metabolic outcomes associated with weight gain were also examined.

RESULTS

Mean (and median) weight changes were similar for doravirine [1.7 (1.0) kg] and ritonavir-boosted darunavir [1.4 (0.6) kg] and were lower for efavirenz [0.6 (0.0) kg] at week 48 but were similar across all treatment groups at week 96 [2.4 (1.5), 1.8 (0.7), and 1.6 (1.0) kg, respectively]. No significant differences between treatment groups were found in the proportion of participants with at least 10% weight gain or the proportion with BMI class increase at either time point. Low CD4 T-cell count and high HIV-1 RNA at baseline were associated with at least 10% weight gain and BMI class increase at both timepoints, but treatment group, age, sex, and race were not.

CONCLUSION

Weight gains over 96 weeks were low in all treatment groups and were similar to the average yearly change in adults without HIV-1. Significant weight gain and BMI class increase were similar across the treatment groups and were predicted by low baseline CD4 T-cell count and high baseline HIV-1 RNA.

Population Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Analysis To Evaluate a Switch to Doravirine/Lamivudine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in People Living with HIV-1

Doravirine is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for treatment-naive participants in doravirine clinical studies was updated with data from switch participants in the DRIVE-SHIFT trial and used to estimate individual post hoc PK parameter values and evaluate the efficacy exposure-response relationship. The results support the 100-mg dose for people living with HIV switching to a doravirine-based regimen (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.

Doravirine is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for treatment-naive participants in doravirine clinical studies was updated with data from switch participants in the DRIVE-SHIFT trial and used to estimate individual post hoc PK parameter values and evaluate the efficacy exposure-response relationship. The results support the 100-mg dose for people living with HIV switching to a doravirine-based regimen (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under ClinicalTrials registration no. NCT02397096.)

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of the Novel HIV-1 Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor Doravirine: An Assessment of the Effect of Patient Characteristics and Drug-Drug Interactions

Doravirine (MK-1439) is a novel non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor indicated for the combination treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) infection. The recommended dose is 100 mg once daily. This review summarizes the pharmacokinetics of doravirine, the influence of intrinsic factors, and its drug-drug interaction (DDI) profile. Following oral administration, doravirine is rapidly absorbed (median time to maximum plasma concentration, 1-4 h) and undergoes cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A-mediated oxidative metabolism. Steady-state geometric means for AUC0-24, C24, and Cmax in individuals with HIV-1 following administration of doravirine 100 mg once daily are 37.8 μM·h, 930 nM, and 2260 nM, respectively. Age, gender, severe renal impairment, and moderate hepatic impairment have no clinically meaningful effect on doravirine pharmacokinetics, and there is limited potential for DDIs. No dose adjustment is necessary when doravirine is co-administered with strong CYP3A inhibitors. However, doravirine is contraindicated with strong CYP3A inducers (e.g., rifampin), and dose adjustment of doravirine is recommended for co-administration with the moderate CYP3A inducer, rifabutin. Included in this review are clinical trial data from phase I pharmacokinetic trials, including DDI trials and trials in participants with renal and hepatic disease but without HIV-1 infection (N = 326), as well as phase I, II, and III safety and efficacy trials in participants living with HIV-1 (N = 991). Based on these data, the pharmacokinetic profile of doravirine supports its use in diverse populations living with HIV-1 and allows co-administration with various antiretroviral agents and treatments for commonly occurring co-morbidities.

Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Doravirine and Its Major Metabolite to Support Dose Adjustment With Rifabutin

Doravirine, a novel nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1), is predominantly cleared by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and metabolized to an oxidative metabolite (M9). Coadministration with rifabutin, a moderate CYP3A4 inducer, decreased doravirine exposure. Based on nonparametric superposition modeling, a doravirine dose adjustment from 100 mg once daily to 100 mg twice daily during rifabutin coadministration was proposed. However, M9 exposure may also be impacted by induction, in addition to the dose adjustment. As M9 concentrations have not been quantified in previous clinical studies, a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model was developed to investigate the change in M9 exposure when doravirine is coadministered with CYP3A inducers. Simulations demonstrated that although CYP3A induction increases doravirine clearance by up to 4.4-fold, M9 exposure is increased by only 1.2-fold relative to exposures for doravirine 100 mg once daily in the absence of CYP3A induction. Thus, a 2.4-fold increase in M9 exposure relative to the clinical dose of doravirine is anticipated when doravirine 100 mg twice daily is coadministered with rifabutin. In a subsequent clinical trial, doravirine and M9 exposures, when doravirine 100 mg twice daily was coadministered with rifabutin, were found to be consistent with model predictions using rifampin and efavirenz as representative inducers. These findings support the dose adjustment to doravirine 100 mg twice daily when coadministered with rifabutin.

Doravirine and Its Potential in the Treatment of HIV: An Evidence-Based Review of the Emerging Data

The utility of doravirine in the management of HIV-1 infection is approved for use in patients who are antiretroviral-naïve as well as patients who have achieved stable virologic suppression and are interested in replacing their current antiretroviral therapy. The role of doravirine continues to evolve as data emerges on the potential for new combination therapy with the investigational agent, islatravir, as well as a potential strategy to minimize post-marketing safety concerns with recommended first-line agents, such as integrase inhibitors. The goal of this review is to assess recent and emerging data on the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, doravirine.

Comparative Bioavailability of Oral Granule Formulations of the HIV Antiretroviral Drugs Doravirine, Lamivudine, and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

Doravirine is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection, available as a single tablet in combination with other antiretroviral agents or as a fixed-dose regimen with lamivudine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). Alternative formulations of these drugs are being developed for individuals who have difficulty swallowing tablets. Two phase 1 trials were conducted, both in 24 healthy adults, to assess the pharmacokinetics of uncoated and coated oral granule formulations of doravirine, lamivudine, and TDF administered alone and with vanilla pudding or apple sauce. The pharmacokinetics for all uncoated granules, and of coated lamivudine and TDF granules, were similar to those of currently marketed tablets (geometric mean ratios [GMRs] 0.92-1.04). Coated doravirine granules had decreased AUC_0-∞ (11%) and C_max (23%) values versus the tablet. The pharmacokinetics were similar for uncoated and coated doravirine granules administered with or without pudding (GMRs 0.96-1.10); administration with apple sauce increased doravirine AUC_0-∞ (26-29%), C_max (56-59%), and C₂₄ (20-21%) versus administration of granules alone. Lamivudine granules administered with pudding or apple sauce decreased AUC_0-∞ and C_max (14-25%) versus granules alone. Tenofovir AUC_0-∞, C_max, and C₂₄ increased for TDF granules administered with pudding or apple sauce versus alone (11-23%). Pharmacokinetic differences when administering doravirine, lamivudine, or TDF as uncoated or coated granules versus tablets, or when granules were administered with (versus without) pudding or apple sauce, are not considered clinically meaningful, supporting further development of these granule formulations.