Search

Background: Cabotegravir (CAB) is a novel strand-transfer integrase inhibitor being developed for HIV treatment and prevention. CAB is formulated both as an immediate-release oral tablet for daily administration and as a long-acting injectable suspension (long-acting CAB [CAB LA]) for intramuscular (IM) administration, which delivers prolonged plasma exposure to the drug after IM injection. HIV Prevention Trials Network study 077 (HPTN 077) evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of CAB LA in HIV-uninfected males and females at 8 sites in Brazil, Malawi, South Africa, and the United States. Methods and findings: HPTN 077 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2a trial. Healthy individuals age 18–65 years at low HIV risk were randomized (3:1) to receive CAB or placebo (PBO). In the initial oral phase, participants received 1 daily oral tablet (CAB or PBO) for 4 weeks. Those without safety concerns in the oral phase continued and received injections in the injection phase (Cohort 1: 3 injections of CAB LA 800 mg or 0.9% saline as PBO IM every 12 weeks for 3 injection cycles; Cohort 2: CAB LA 600 mg or PBO IM for 5 injection cycles; the first 2 injections in Cohort 2 were separated by 4 weeks, the rest by 8 weeks). The primary analysis included weeks 5 to 41 of study participation, encompassing the injection phase. The cohorts were enrolled sequentially. Primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included pharmacokinetics and events occurring during the oral and injection phases. Between February 9, 2015, and May 27, 2016, the study screened 443 individuals and enrolled 110 participants in Cohort 1 and 89 eligible participants in Cohort 2. Participant population characteristics were as follows: 66% female at birth; median age 31 years; 27% non-Hispanic white, 41% non-Hispanic black, 24% Hispanic/Latino, 3% Asian, and 6% mixed/other; and 6 transgender men and 1 transgender woman. Twenty-two (11%) participants discontinued the oral study product; 6 of these were for clinical or laboratory adverse events (AEs). Of those who received at least 1 CAB LA injection, 80% of Cohort 1 and 92% of Cohort 2 participants completed all injections; injection course completion rates were not different from those in the PBO arm. Injection site reactions (ISRs) were common (92% of Cohort 1 and 88% of Cohort 2 participants who received CAB LA reported any ISR). ISRs were mostly Grade 1 (mild) to Grade 2 (moderate), and 1 ISR event (Cohort 1) led to product discontinuation. Grade 2 or higher ISRs were the only AEs reported more commonly among CAB LA recipients than PBO recipients. Two Grade 3 (severe) ISRs occurred in CAB recipients, 1 in each cohort, but did not lead to product discontinuation in either case. Seven incident sexually transmitted infections were diagnosed in 6 participants. One HIV infection occurred in a participant 48 weeks after last injection of CAB LA: CAB was not detectable in plasma both at the time of first reactive HIV test and at the study visit 12 weeks prior to the first reactive test. Participants in Cohort 2 (unlike Cohort 1) consistently met prespecified pharmacokinetic targets of at least 95% of participants maintaining CAB trough concentrations above PA-IC90, and 80% maintaining trough concentrations above 4× PA-IC90. Study limitations include a modest sample size, a short course of injections, and a low-risk study population. Conclusions: In this study, CAB LA was well tolerated at the doses and dosing intervals used. ISRs were common, but infrequently led to product discontinuation. CAB LA 600 mg every 8 weeks met pharmacokinetic targets for both male and female study participants. The safety and pharmacokinetic results observed support the further development of CAB LA, and efficacy studies of CAB LA for HIV treatment and prevention are in progress. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov Trial number: . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) treatment in children is usually prescribed using actual body weight. This may result in inappropriately high doses in obese children. Methods: Retrospective audit of all paediatric patients treated with rhGH 2010–14 at a tertiary paediatric hospital in the UK. Change in height SDS and IGF-I SDS during the first year of treatment was stratified by initial BMI SDS in a mixed cohort, and a subgroup of GH deficient (GHD) patients. Alternative doses for those BMI SDS ≥2.0 (Obese) were calculated using BSA, IBW and LBW. Results: 354 patients (133 female) received rhGH, including 213 (60.2%) with GHD. Obesity was present in 40 patients (11.3%) of the unselected cohort, and 32 (15.0%) of the GHD cohort. For GHD patients, gain in height SDS was directly related to BMI SDS, except in obese patients (p<0.05). For both the entire cohort, and GHD patients only, IGF-1 SDS was significantly higher in obese patients (p<0.0001 for both groups). Cross sectional data identified 265 children receiving rhGH, 81 (30.5%) with a BMI-SDS ≥1.75. Alternate prescribing strategies for rhGH prescribing in obese patients suggest a saving of 27% - 38% annually. Conclusions: Gain in IGF-I SDS is greater in obese children, and is likely to be related to relatively higher doses of rhGH. Additional gain in height was not achieved at the higher doses administered to obese children. Alternative dosing strategies in the obese patient population should be examined in rigorous clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]