Search

Objective: To assess pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) and optimized background regimen in treatment-experienced patients (6-17 years)., Design: Forty-eight-week, open-label, two-part, phase II study., Methods: In part I, 44 patients were randomized (1: 1 ratio) to receive a body weight-adjusted, adult-equivalent dose (group A) or a 20-33% higher DRV/r twice daily (b.i.d.) dose (group B). Pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy were assessed following 2-week dosing (part I), which determined dosing for part II (evaluated 48-week safety and efficacy)., Results: In part I, both groups met the protocol-specified criteria for pharmacokinetics and showed favorable tolerability and efficacy. The following body-weight doses were selected: DRV/r 375/50 mg b.i.d. (20-<30 kg), 450/60 mg b.i.d. (30-<40 kg) and 600/100 mg b.i.d. (> or =40 kg); these gave an AUC24h, C0h and Cmax of 102, 114 and 112%, respectively, versus the corresponding mean adult pharmacokinetic parameter. In part II, 80 patients received DRV/r (median age: 14 years, mean baseline HIV-1 RNA: 4.64 log(10)copies/ml). One patient (1%) discontinued (treatment-unrelated grade 3 anxiety). An abnormal mean baseline triglyceride level was normalized at 48 weeks (P < 0.01). At week 48, 65% had at least 1.0 log(10)HIV-1 RNA reduction; 59 and 48% achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 400 and less than 50 copies/ml, respectively (time-to-loss-of-virologic response). Mean age-adjusted weight z-score increased by 0.2 (P = 0.003)., Conclusion: In treatment-experienced children and adolescents, DRV/r showed comparable exposure to adults with appropriate dose selection, favorable safety and tolerability, improved body weight and significant virologic response. DRV/r is a valuable therapeutic option for this population.

Currently, the optimal boosting dose for saquinavir is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated the pharmacokinetics profiles in a cross over setting comparing saquinavir/ritonavir 1500/50 mg (plus NRTI backbone) to saquinavir/ritonavir 1500/100 mg in the same HIV-infected, Thai individuals. The 50% reduction of ritonavir boosting did not result in a change in the pharmacokinetics of saquinavir, whereas the ritonavir exposure was significantly lower when a dose of 50 mg was administered.

Objective: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics of efavirenz (EFV) and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) in HIV-infected persons requiring hemodialysis., Design: Prospective, observational study of HIV-infected hemodialysis patients receiving one 600 mg tablet daily of EFV (N = 13) or three 133.3/33.3 mg capsules twice daily of LPV/RTV (N = 13)., Methods: Twenty-four-hour EFV and 12-h LPV/RTV pharmacokinetics were assessed. Geometric mean ratios were calculated using historical controls with normal renal function. The effects of several candidate gene polymorphisms were also explored., Results: The geometric mean [95% confidence interval (CI); percentage of coefficient of variation (% CV)] Cmin, Cmax, and area under the curve (AUC) for the EFV group were 1.81 microg/ml (0.93, 3.53; 103%), 5.04 microg/ml (3.48, 7.29; 72%), and 71.5 microg h/ml (43.2, 118.3; 93%), respectively. These parameters were 2.76 microg/ml (1.86, 4.11; 53%), 8.45 microg/ml (6.41, 11.15; 52%), and 69.6 microg h/ml (55.6, 87.2; 37%) for LPV and 0.08 microg/ml (0.05, 0.14; 63%), 0.58 microg/ml (0.44, 0.76; 41%), and 3.74 microg h/ml (2.91, 4.80; 37%) for RTV. The AUC geometric mean ratios (90% CI) for EFV, LPV, and RTV were 132% (89, 197), 81% (67, 97), and 92% (76, 111), respectively. LPV Cmin was lower than expected in the hemodialysis group. Higher EFV concentrations were associated with the CYP2B6 516G>T polymorphism., Conclusion: The pharmacokinetics of EFV and LPV/RTV in hemodialysis suggests that no dosing adjustments are necessary in treatment-naive patients. As HIV-infected hemodialysis patients are disproportionately black, the increased frequency of the CYP2B6 516G>T polymorphism may lead to higher EFV levels. The potentially lower LPV trough levels in this population suggest that LPV/RTV should be used with caution in protease-inhibitor-experienced patients.

Objective: Previous research in healthy volunteers has demonstrated that rifampicin and adjusted doses of lopinavir/ritonavir soft-gel capsules resulted in adequate exposure to lopinavir. Our objective was to study the combined use of rifampicin and the newly introduced lopinavir/ritonavir tablets., Methods: A total of 40 healthy volunteers were planned to start with 600 mg rifampicin once daily from days 1-5. From days 6-15, volunteers were randomized to receive lopinavir/ritonavir tablets dosed as either 600/150 or 800/200 mg twice daily, both in addition to 600 mg rifampicin once daily. A 12 h pharmacokinetic curve was planned on day 15. Safety assessments were conducted regularly throughout the study period., Results: Eleven volunteers started as the first group in this study. No major complaints occurred during day 1-5 (rifampicin only). After addition of lopinavir/ritonavir, eight volunteers suffered from both nausea and vomiting, one from nausea only, and one from vomiting only. On day 7, increases in aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase (AST/ALT) levels were reported in all volunteers and on day 8, the study was prematurely terminated. The AST/ALT levels continued to rise and peaked (grade 2, n = 2; grade 3, n = 1; grade 4, n = 8) on days 9-10. All values returned to normal within 6 weeks., Conclusions: The study showed a high incidence of adverse events when a higher than standard dose of the new lopinavir/ritonavir tablets was combined with rifampicin. In the future, this drug combination should not be given to healthy volunteers. Liver function should be carefully monitored when rifampicin and lopinavir/ritonavir are combined in patients.

Background: Adequate antiretroviral exposure during pregnancy is critical to prevent the vertical transmission of HIV and for maternal health. Pregnancy can alter drug kinetics. We assessed the pharmacokinetics of atazanavir/ritonavir (300/100 mg a day) during pregnancy., Methods: An intensive steady-state 24-h pharmacokinetic profile of atazanavir was performed in the third trimester of pregnancy and postpartum. Maternal and umbilical cord blood samples were obtained at delivery. We measured atazanavir by reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography., Results: Seventeen women completed the study. Antepartum, the atazanavir geometric mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) was 28 510 ng.h/l, the maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) was 2 591 ng/ml and the 24-h postdose concentration (Ctrough) was 486 ng/ml. The same postpartum parameters were 30 465 ng.h/l, 2 878 ng/ml and 514 ng/ml, respectively. The antepartum to postpartum ratio for AUC0-24 was 0.94 and for Ctrough was 0.96, indicating equivalence, whereas Cmax values were slightly although not significantly lower. The ratio of cord blood/maternal atazanavir concentration in 14 paired samples was 0.13., Conclusion: Atazanavir exposure during the third trimester of pregnancy is similar to that observed in the non-pregnant period. Over the whole dosing interval, therapeutic drug concentrations well above the wild-type HIV 90% inhibitory concentration are maintained. Atazanavir crosses the placenta, potentially providing further protection for the newborn. As pregnancy does not appear to alter atazanavir exposure, no dose adjustment is required in pregnant women. Results suggest that atazanavir is a reasonable component of HAART during pregnancy.

Objective: To improve the pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors, boosting with low-dose ritonavir is performed. However, toxicity, storage conditions and high costs of antiretroviral treatment may necessitate interruption of ritonavir. Ketoconazole was investigated as a potential booster of once-daily (o.d.) saquinavir., Methods: In a single-group, two-period design, 25 virologically and immunologically stable patients on saquinavir/ritonavir 2000/100 mg o.d. were switched to saquinavir/ketoconazole 2000/400 mg o.d. for 2 weeks. Two steady-state pharmacokinetic curves were recorded at both periods., Results: Fourteen females and 11 male patients were included. Median age was 34 years [interquartile range (IQR), 32-42 years], body weight 54 kg (IQR, 47-59 kg) and body mass index 21 kg/m (19-23 kg/m). The mean saquinavir area under the curve (AUC) during boosting with ritonavir was 57.93 +/- 27.96 mg/h/l, maximum observed concentration (Cmax) was 7.50 +/- 3.45 mg/l and concentration at 24 h (Cmin) was 0.35 +/- 0.30 mg/l. When ketoconazole was used, the saquinavir AUC, Cmax, and Cmin were 12.00 +/- 6.97 mg/h/l, 2.43 +/- 1.35 mg/l and 0.03 +/- 0.04 mg/l, respectively., Conclusion: Boosting with ketoconazole resulted in 80% lower exposure to saquinavir. Although saquinavir AUC might still be adequate for treatment, concentrations at 24 h reached levels below the recommended trough concentrations of 0.1 mg/l, which may result in selection of resistant HIV-1 viral strains. Therefore, boosting of saquinavir by ketoconazole is not recommended.

HAART has decreased the incidence of AIDS and death among HIV-infected individuals dramatically. This approach often becomes cumbersome to patients, involving multiple drugs administered on varying schedules. We investigated the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability of a once-daily regimen of fosamprenavir, tenofovir, emtricitabine and ritonavir in HIV-infected treatment-naive subjects. No clinically significant interaction between the drugs was noted, and the regimen showed good efficacy and tolerability over the course of 48 weeks.

Large intra-individual variability in plasma levels may limit the interest of therapeutic drug monitoring based on a single determination. Indinavir concentrations were determined both in plasma and hair samples, and correlated with concomitant plasma HIV-RNA in 43 HIV-infected patients. In multivariate analysis, significant association was found between HIV-RNA below 50 copies/ml and indinavir concentrations in hair but not in plasma, suggesting that hair concentrations gave more extensive information on drug exposure than a single plasma sample.

Background: Optimal antiretroviral exposure during pregnancy is critical for prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission and for maternal health. Pregnancy can alter antiretroviral pharmacokinetics. Our objective was to describe lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) pharmacokinetics during pregnancy., Methods: We performed intensive steady-state 12-h pharmacokinetic profiles of lopinavir and ritonavir (three capsules: LPV 400 mg/r 100 mg) at 30-36 weeks gestation and 6-12 weeks postpartum. Maternal and umbilical cord blood samples were obtained at delivery. We measured LPV and ritonavir by reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. Target LPV area under concentration versus time curve (AUC) was > or = 52 microg h/ml, the estimated 10th percentile LPV AUC in non-pregnant historical controls (mean AUC = 83 microg h/ml)., Results: Seventeen women completed antepartum evaluations; average gestational age was 35 weeks. Geometric mean antepartum LPV AUC was 44.4 microg h/ml [90% confidence interval (CI), 38.7-50.9] and 12-h post-dose concentration (C12h) was 1.6 microg/ml (90% CI, 1.1-2.5). Twelve women completed postpartum evaluations; geometric mean LPV AUC was 65.2 microg h/ml (90% CI, 49.7-85.4) and C12h was 4.6 microg/ml (90% CI, 3.7-5.7). The geometric mean ratio of antepartum/postpartum LPV AUC was 0.72 (90% CI, 0.54-0.96). Fourteen of 17 (82%) pregnant and three of 12 (25%) postpartum women did not meet our target LPV AUC. The ratio of cord blood/maternal LPV concentration in ten paired detectable samples was 0.2 +/- 0.13., Conclusions: LPV/r exposure during late pregnancy was lower compared to postpartum and compared to non-pregnant historical controls. Small amounts of lopinavir cross the placenta. The pharmacokinetics, safety, and effectiveness of increased LPV/r dosing during the third trimester of pregnancy should be investigated.

Background: The HIV protease inhibitor (PI) atazanavir does not impair insulin sensitivity acutely but ritonavir and lopinavir induce insulin resistance at therapeutic concentrations., Objective: To test the hypothesis that atazanavir combined with a lower dose of ritonavir would have significantly less effect on glucose metabolism than lopinavir/ritonavir in vitro and clinically., Methods: Glucose uptake was measured following insulin stimulation in differentiated human adipocytes in the presence of ritonavir (2 micromol/l) combined with either atazanavir or lopinavir (3-30 micromol/l). These data were examined clinically using the hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp and oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) in 26 healthy HIV-negative men treated with atazanavir/ritonavir (300/100 mg once daily) and lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg twice daily) for 10 days in a randomized cross-over study., Results: Atazanavir inhibited glucose uptake in vitro significantly less than lopinavir and ritonavir at all concentrations. Ritonavir (2 micromol/l) combined with either atazanavir or lopinavir (3-30 micromol/l) did not further inhibit glucose uptake. During euglycemic clamp, there was no significant change from baseline insulin sensitivity with atazanavir/ritonavir (P = 0.132), while insulin sensitivity significantly decreased with lopinavir/ritonavir from the baseline (-25%; P < 0.001) and from that seen with atazanavir/ritonavir (-18%; P = 0.023). During OGTT, the HOMA insulin resistance index significantly increased from baseline at 120 min with atazanavir/ritonavir and at 150 min with lopinavir/ritonavir. The area under the curve of glucose increased significantly with lopinavir/ritonavir but not with atazanavir/ritonavir., Conclusions: Both glucose uptake in vitro and clinical insulin sensitivity in healthy volunteers demonstrate differential effects on glucose metabolism by the combination PI atazanavir/ritonavir and lopinavir/ritonavir.

Introduction: Recent studies have described reduced absorption of certain protease inhibitors when administered with agents known to increase gastric pH. No clinically significant interactions between saquinavir absorption and gastric pH have previously been shown. We evaluated the effect of omeprazole, a proton-pump-inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics of the recently developed saquinavir-500 mg formulation co-administered with ritonavir., Methods: Eighteen healthy subjects (n = 6 women and 12 men) received 1000/100 mg saquinavir/ritonavir twice daily in an open-label study for 15 days. On days 11-15, subjects were administered omeprazole 40 mg daily with the morning dose. Serial plasma samples were collected for 12-h pharmacokinetic profiles of saquinavir and ritonavir on days 10 and 15 and safety analysis on days 1, 4, 10, 15 and 29., Results: The geometric mean and 95% confidence interval (CI), for the area under time-concentration curve (AUC; ng h/ml), trough plasma concentration (C trough; ng/ml) and maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax; ng/ml) of saquinavir were 20599 (14396-29360) and 37511 (28733-48970); 737 (482-1127) and 1521 (1039-2227); 3227 (2370-4393) and 5611 (4507-7710) on days 10 and 15, respectively, with geometric mean ratios of 1.82, 2.06 and 1.75. No significant changes were observed in saquinavir elimination half life, ritonavir pharmacokinetic parameters or in safety laboratory tests. No unexpected adverse events attributed to study medication were noted., Conclusions: In the presence of omeprazole, total saquinavir plasma exposure is significantly increased (82% increase in AUC). The mechanism of this interaction requires elucidation. Despite the significant increase in saquinavir exposure, no short term toxicities were observed.

Objective: To assess the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of lopinavir (LPV), ritonavir (RTV) and atazanavir (ATV) as a double-boosted protease inhibitor regimen in HIV-infected adults., Methods: Sixteen patients who started LPV/RTV (400/100 mg b.i.d.) and ATV (300 mg q.d.) were enrolled in the study group (arm A). LPV pharmacokinetics were compared to those of two historical groups: arm B, 15 patients who received LPV/RTV (400/100 mg b.i.d.); and arm C, 25 patients who received LPV/RTV/saquinavir (SQV) (400/100/1000 mg b.i.d.). ATV pharmacokinetics were compared to those of 15 consecutive patients who received ATV and RTV (300/100 mg q.d.) (arm D). Drug concentrations were measured by HPLC., Results: LPV concentrations were significantly higher in arm A than in arms B and C. Median (interquartile range) LPV area under the curve (AUC)0-12 values were 115.7 (99.8-136.5), 85.2 (68.3-109.2) and 85.1 (60.6-110.1) microg/h/ml, respectively. C(max) values were 12.2 (10.7-14.5), 9.5 (6.8-13.9) and 10.0 (6.9-13.6) microg/ml, respectively. C(min) values were 9.1 (7.1-10.4), 5.6 (4.7-8.2) and 5.5 (4.2-7.5) microg/ml, respectively. No difference was observed for ATV AUC0-24 or C(max) between arms A and D. ATV C(min) values were 1.07 (0.61-1.79) in arm A and 0.58 (0.32-0.83) in arm D (P = 0.001). Treatment was not discontinued in any patient because of adverse effects. At 24 weeks, viral load was < 50 copies/ml in 13 of 16 patients., Conclusions: The combination of ATV and LPV/RTV provided high plasma concentrations of both PI, which seemed to be appropriate for patients with multiple prior therapeutic failures, yielding good tolerability and substantial antiviral efficacy.

Objective: The normalized inhibitory quotient (NIQ) has been proposed as a measure for refining the precision of HIV resistance testing when selecting antiretroviral therapy (ART). We undertook an assessment of NIQ and 48-week virological outcome in patients commencing ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) regimens., Design: A cohort of 87 HIV-infected individuals who all had extensive prior exposure to ART were assigned a new boosted PI regimen following resistance testing. PI therapy consisted of lopinavir, indinavir, saquinavir and amprenavir at 50, 32, 11 and 6%, respectively. Fold change (FC) for each PI was determined from the resistance test at baseline. Trough drug concentration (Cmin) was determined at week 4., Methods: NIQ was derived individually by taking the logarithm of the ratio of Cmin/FC divided by the fixed ratio of population mean trough drug concentration/clinical cut off. Associations between viral load (VL) response over 48 weeks with baseline VL, FC, Cmin, NIQ and selected PI were assessed., Results: Mean change from baseline VL reduced by 0.83 log at week 48. In multivariate analyses, baseline VL and NIQ were the parameters most associated with change from baseline VL at week 48 (P = 0.012 and 0.003, respectively). FC, Cmin and selected PI were not significantly associated with VL changes., Conclusion: In this cohort of highly treatment-experienced individuals treated with boosted PI regimens, baseline VL and NIQ were significantly predictive of virological response over 48 weeks whereas FC and Cmin were not. These results support the use of a NIQ at week 4, as a tool for predicting response to therapy in this setting.

Objective: To assess the pharmacokinetic interaction of saquinavir and lopinavir/ritonavir., Design: Patients from the Frankfurt HIV cohort with limited reverse transcriptase inhibitor (RTI) options received the protease inhibitor (PI) combination of saquinavir (soft-gel capsules, 1000 mg twice a day) plus lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg twice a day), without RTI (LOPSAQ group). A control group received the same doses of saquinavir and ritonavir plus two to three RTI (RITSAQ group). A steady-state 12 h pharmacokinetic assessment was performed., Methods: Plasma levels of saquinavir, ritonavir and lopinavir were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrophotometry. Minimum and maximum plasma concentrations (Cmin and Cmax), the clearance (Cltot) and the area under the concentration time curve (AUC) were calculated., Results: Data were collected from 45 patients (LOPSAQ) and 32 patients (RITSAQ). There was no significant difference between the groups for median saquinavir Cmin, Cmax, Cltot and AUC (LOPSAQ: 543 ng/ml, 2300 ng/ml, 1020 ml/min and 16 977 ng*h/ml; RITSAQ: 427 ng/ml, 2410 ng/ml, 1105 ml/min and 15 130 ng*h/ml). Median ritonavir Cmin, Cmax and AUC were lower, the Cltot was higher in the LOPSAQ group (78 ng/ml, 428 ng/ml and 2972 ng*h/ml, 551 ml/min) compared with RITSAQ (194 ng/ml, 683 ng/ml and 6506 ng*h/ml, 266 ml/min; P < 0.001). Lopinavir levels were similar to historical data., Conclusion: Effective plasma levels of both saquinavir and lopinavir can be achieved by the co-administration of saquinavir soft-gel capsules and lopinavir/ritonavir. This boosted double PI combination could be an effective option for patients with limited RTI options.

Objective: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and tolerability of a low-dose boosted indinavir (IDV)/ritonavir (RTV) regimen [100 mg RTV/400 mg IDV twice daily (bid)] in patients previously receiving a standard IDV regimen [800 mg three times a day (tid)]., Methods: In a prospective, open-label, cross-over trial, patients with plasma HIV RNA < 200 copies/ml receiving an IDV-containing regimen (800 mg tid) were switched to an RTV/IDV (100/400 mg bid)-containing regimen. Minimal and maximal IDV plasma concentrations ( Cmin and Cmax ) were determined before the switch (day 0), at week 2 and week 4 after the switch. The CD4 cell count and plasma HIV RNA were determined at day 0, week 2 and week 4, then every 8 weeks. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with plasma HIV RNA below 200 copies ml at week 48., Results: Twenty patients were enrolled. At baseline, on IDV 800 mg tid, median IDV Cmin was 194 ng/ml and median IDV Cmax was 8449 ng/ml. On RTV/IDV (100/400 mg), median IDV Cmin increased to 536 ng/ml at week 2 and 475 ng/ml at week 4, while Cmax decreased to 2983 ng/ml at week 2 and 2997 ng/ml at week 4 ( P < 0.001). The median area under the IDV plasma concentration-time curve measured in seven patients was 25 126 ng.h/ml, and the IDV half-life (t1/2 ) was 4.4 h. All patients had plasma HIV RNA remaining < 200 copies/ml at week 48. Tolerability of RTV/IDV was excellent., Conclusion: RTV/IDV (100/400 mg bid) yields significantly higher IDV plasma Cmin and lower IDV Cmax values relative to the standard IDV regimen, thereby improving both tolerability and efficacy.

Objective: To assess the HIV-1-RNA response and drug concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum during treatment with saquinavir (SQV)/ritonavir (RTV) or SQV/RTV plus stavudine (d4T) in HIV-1 -infected patients., Design: A multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial., Methods: A total of 208 protease inhibitor (PI) and d4T-naive, HIV-1-infected patients were treated with RTV 400 mg twice daily and SQV 400 mg twice daily with or without d4T 40 mg twice daily. Intensification with reverse transcriptase inhibitors was allowed if serum HIV RNA remained above 400 copies/ml after 12 weeks. In 27 volunteers, CSF and serum HIV RNA were measured at baseline, weeks 12 and 48, using the Roche Amplicor and the ultrasensitive assay. In 22 patients, serum and CSF drug concentrations were determined at week 12., Results: The median baseline serum and CSF HIV-RNA concentrations were 4.81 and 3.21 log10 copies/ml, respectively. A difference in the proportion of patients with a CSF HIV-RNA level below the limit of quantification (< LLQ) after 12 weeks was found: four out of 14 (RTV/SQV) versus 12 out of 13 (RTV/SQV/d4T) (P = 0.001). The same results were found using the ultrasensitive assay. Patients with a baseline HIV-RNA level < LLQ in CSF remained < LLQ, regardless of the treatment regimen. Treatment with RTV/SQV alone was the only independent predictor of a CSF HIV-RNA level > LLQ at week 12 in logistic regression analysis (P = 0.005). CSF RTV and SQV concentrations were < LLQ in most patients., Conclusion: RTV/SQV alone cannot suppress detectable CSF HIV-1-RNA levels to < LLQ after 12 weeks of treatment in the majority of patients. CSF drug concentrations of RTV and SQV < LLQ may explain the suboptimal antiretroviral effect in the CSF.

Objective: To investigate the steady-state pharmacokinetics of a once-daily dosing regimen of saquinavir soft gelatin capsules in combination with a low dose of ritonavir in HIV-1-infected individuals., Design: Open-label, multi-dose, pharmacokinetic pilot study., Patients: Seven HIV-1-infected individuals who were treated with saquinavir hard gelatin capsules 400 mg twice daily + ritonavir liquid formulation 400 mg twice daily were switched to saquinavir soft gelatin formulation 1600 mg once daily in combination with ritonavir liquid formulation 200 mg once daily (day 0). Patients were instructed to ingest saquinavir and ritonavir simultaneously in the morning and with a meal., Methods: Steady-state pharmacokinetics of saquinavir and ritonavir were assessed during a 24 h dosing interval after 2 weeks of continued therapy (day 14). Plasma saquinavir and ritonavir concentrations were measured using a validated high performance liquid chromatography assay. In addition, plasma HIV-1 RNA, and fasting total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, and triglyceride levels were measured on days 0 and 14. A non-compartmental pharmacokinetic method was used to calculate the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC[0-24h]), the maximum and trough plasma concentrations (Cmax and Cmin), the time to reach Cmax (Tmax), the elimination half-life (t1/2), the apparent clearance (Cl/F), and the apparent volume of distribution (V/F)., Results: Median (range) values of the pharmacokinetic parameters for saquinavir after 2 weeks of treatment were: AUC[0-24h], 19,802h* ng/ml (3720-74,016); Cmax, 2936 ng/ml (573-6848); Cmin, 84 ng/ml (11-854); Tmax, 3.5 h (3.0-4.0), t1/2, 6.8 h (4.6-10.2); Cl/F, 81 l/h (22-430); V/F, 1189 l (215-3086). Ritonavir concentrations were always below the 90% effective concentration of 2100 ng/ml (median Cmax, 1323 ng/ml; range, 692-1528 ng/ml). No significant changes were observed for total serum cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein levels between days 0 and 14 (P > or = 0.24). In six out of seven patients the fasting serum triglyceride levels were lower 2 weeks after the treatment switch (median decrease was 32%, P = 0.03). No significant changes in plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations were observed between days 0 and 14. The regimen was generally well tolerated., Conclusions: This pharmacokinetic study indicates that the combination of 1600 mg of saquinavir (soft gelatin capsules) and 200 mg of ritonavir (liquid formulation) in a once-daily dosing regimen generally results in therapeutic plasma concentrations of saquinavir. Due to the large interindividual variation in saquinavir exposure, the monitoring of saquinavir concentrations in plasma is warranted. These pharmacokinetic findings rationalize the further clinical evaluation of once-daily dosing of this combination of protease inhibitors.

Objectives: To assess whether the neurological or gastrointestinal adverse effects of ritonavir correlate with parameters of ritonavir systemic exposure., Methods: Peak (Cmax) and trough (Cmin) ritonavir plasma levels were compared in 11 patients experiencing side-effects (group A) versus 10 patients without side-effects (group B). Ritonavir was administered with the following escalation dosing scheme: 300, 400, 500 mg twice a day for 3, 4, and 5 days, respectively, then the full dose of 600 mg twice a day. Blood sampling was done in group A within 24 h of the occurrence of side-effects and in group B after at least 3 days of the full dosage regimen., Results: Both Cmax and Cmax were significantly higher (Mann-Whitney U test) in patients with side-effects. Cmax was [median (interquartile range)] 26.7 (22.7-33.3) mg/l versus 16.2 (13.4-17.0) mg/l (P = 0.001) and Cmin was 12.6 (9.1-13.9) versus 7.5 (4.9-8.6) mg/l (P = 0.002)., Conclusion: Patients with higher ritonavir concentrations are at a higher risk of experiencing neurological or gastrointestinal side-effects. Individualization of the dosage regimen, e.g. a downward titration of the ritonavir dose in patients with side-effects, guided by plasma level monitoring, may result in a substantial increase in the percentage of patients tolerating ritonavir without increasing the risk of treatment failure as a result of suboptimal systemic exposure.

Objective: To explore the steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of indinavir in twice daily dosing regimens with and without the co-administration of 100 mg ritonavir., Design: Observational pharmacokinetic study., Patients: HIV-1-infected individuals who use indinavir alone (1200 mg twice daily, n = 6), or the combination of 100 mg ritonavir twice daily plus either 800 mg (n = 6), or 1200 mg indinavir twice daily (n = 2)., Methods: Steady-state pharmacokinetics of indinavir and ritonavir were assessed by drawing 12 blood samples during an 8-h period after ingestion of the medication., Results: Significant differences were observed for indinavir pharmacokinetics between the dosing regimens indinavir 1200 mg twice daily alone and indinavir/ ritonavir 800/100 mg twice daily with respect to the mean trough concentration (0.21 and 0.99 microg/ml, respectively, P = 0.002), the mean maximum concentration (13.79 and 8.74 microg/ml, respectively, P = 0.028), and for the mean plasma elimination half-life (1.6 and 3.2 h, respectively, P = 0.001). The combination indinavir/ritonavir 1200/100 mg twice daily led to very high exposure to indinavir and was not well tolerated. However, the combination indinavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg twice daily was well tolerated and resulted in therapeutic concentrations of indinavir with improved trough concentrations and similar maximum concentrations as observed with the licensed dosage of 800 mg three times daily., Conclusion: Combination of indinavir and 100 mg ritonavir in twice daily dosing regimens significantly affects the pharmacokinetic profile of indinavir. The results of this observational study provide a pharmacologic basis for the combination of indinavir (800 mg) and ritonavir (100 mg) in twice daily dosing regimens.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of salvage regimens containing ritonavir and saquinavir in patients failing highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), and to correlate outcome with plasma concentrations of protease inhibitors., Design: Prospective, non-randomized interventional study., Subjects and Methods: Thirty extensively pretreated HIV-infected patients with virological failure under HAART were treated with ritonavir (400 mg twice daily) and saquinavir (600 mg twice daily) and at least one reverse transcriptase inhibitor. HIV-RNA, CD4 cell counts and plasma concentrations of protease inhibitors were determined, and patients were monitored for toxicity at monthly intervals., Results: Six patients showed complete virological success (HIV-RNA <200 copies/ml at week 12) which was sustained for a median follow-up of 6.3 months. Partial virological response (decrease of HIV-RNA of >1 log10 at week 12) was achieved by a further three patients. Patients with a virological response had significantly higher CD4 cell increases than patients without virological response (mean increase at week 12: 66x10(6) cells/l versus 6x10(6) cells/l; P = 0.01). No clinical events were observed during 6 months of follow-up. Neither the use of a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) nor the number of newly introduced drugs influenced the virological response. Plasma concentrations of protease inhibitors did not statistically differ between patients with and without success. Toxicity included gastrointestinal disturbances, lipid abnormalities and liver dysfunction., Conclusions: In extensively pretreated patients, salvage regimens containing ritonavir and saquinavir had only limited and short-term anti-HIV activity and were associated with substantial toxicity. Plasma concentrations of saquinavir were not predictive for virological response.