Search

Understanding persistence of humoral immune responses elicited by vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is critical for informing the duration of protection and appropriate booster timing. We developed a mechanistic model to characterize the time course of humoral immune responses in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-seronegative adults after primary vaccination with the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S. The persistence of antibody responses was quantified through mechanistic modeling-based simulations. Two biomarkers of humoral immune responses were examined: SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies determined by wild-type virus neutralization assay (wtVNA) and spike protein-binding antibodies determined by indirect spike protein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (S-ELISA). The persistence of antibody responses was defined as the period of time during which wtVNA and S-ELISA titers remained above the lower limit of quantification. A total of 442 wtVNA and 1,185 S-ELISA titers from 82 and 220 participants, respectively, were analyzed following administration of a single dose of Ad26.COV2.S (5 × 10

Objective For the treatment of HIV-1-related brain disease and for the prevention of the brain becoming a viral reservoir, it is important that antiretroviral agents reach sufficient concentrations in the CNS. To date, human brain pharmacokinetic data are solely derived from lumbar cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and mostly originate from single samples. Design We determined concentrations of antiretroviral drugs in serial samples of ventricular CSF and compared these to the concentrations in serum and lumbar CSF of these patients. Methods Two treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients received external ventricular drainage for obstructive hydrocephalus. Starting with a combination antiretroviral regimen (cART), ventricular CSF, and subsequently lumbar CSF, with parallel serum, was frequently collected. Drug concentrations were determined and CSF-to-serum ratios were calculated. Results High concentrations, resulting in high CSF-to-serum ratios, were found in the ventricular CSF of the three substances zidovudine, lamivudine and indinavir, whereas this was not observed for stavudine, ritonavir, saquinavir and efavirenz. Concentrations of zidovudine and lamivudine were up to four times greater in CSF from the ventricles than in lumbar CSF of the same patient. The zidovudine concentrations in the ventricular CSF exceeded serum concentrations by a factor of 1.4. Conclusion Unexpectedly high concentrations of some antiretrovirals in the ventricular CSF, the site close to the brain parenchyma where HIV is located, should be considered when the cART regimen is aiming at CNS viral replication.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the drug–drug interaction between pimodivir, a novel, non‐nucleoside polymerase basic protein 2 (PB2) subunit inhibitor of the influenza A virus polymerase complex, and oseltamivir, to assess the feasibility of this combination therapy. Furthermore, single‐ and multiple‐dose pharmacokinetics and safety of pimodivir in healthy volunteers were assessed. METHODS: In Part 1 of this open‐label Phase 1 study, healthy volunteers (n = 18) were randomized to one of six cross‐over treatment sequences, each comprising administration of oseltamivir 75 mg or pimodivir 600 mg or combination thereof twice daily on Days 1–4, followed by a single morning dose on Day 5. Between each treatment session, there was a minimum 5‐day washout period. In Part 2, healthy volunteers (n = 16) randomly received pimodivir 600 mg or placebo (3:1) twice daily on Days 1–9, followed by a single morning dose on Day 10. Pharmacokinetics of pimodivir, oseltamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: In Part 1, co‐administration of pimodivir with oseltamivir increased the C (max) of pimodivir by 31% (90% CI: 0.92–1.85) with no change in C (min) or AUC(12h). Pimodivir had no effect on oseltamivir or oseltamivir carboxylate pharmacokinetics. In Part 2, after single‐ and multiple‐dose administration of pimodivir, there was a 1.2‐ and 1.8‐fold increase in C (max) and AUC(12h), respectively, between Day 1 and Day 10. The most frequently reported treatment‐emergent adverse event was diarrhoea (n = 7 each in Part 1 and 2). CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with pimodivir and oseltamivir in healthy volunteers showed no clinically relevant drug–drug interactions. No safety concerns were identified with pimodivir 600 mg twice daily alone or in combination with oseltamivir 75 mg twice daily.

The ability to dose antiretroviral agents once daily simplifies the often complex therapeutic regimens required for the successful treatment of HIV infection. Thus, once-daily dosing can lead to improved patient adherence to medication and, consequently, sustained virological suppression and reduction in the risk of emergence of drug resistance. Several trials have evaluated once-daily darunavir/ritonavir in combination with other antiretrovirals (ARTEMIS and ODIN trials) or as monotherapy (MONET, MONOI and PROTEA trials) in HIV-1-infected adults. Data from ARTEMIS and ODIN demonstrate non-inferiority of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir against a comparator and, together with pharmacokinetic data, have established the suitability of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients with no darunavir resistance-associated mutations. The findings of ARTEMIS and ODIN have led to recent updates to treatment guidelines, whereby once-daily darunavir/ritonavir, given with other antiretrovirals, is now a preferred treatment option for antiretroviral-naive adult patients and a simplified treatment option for antiretroviral-experienced adults who have no darunavir resistance-associated mutations. Once-daily dosing with darunavir/ritonavir is an option for treatment-naive and for treatment-experienced paediatric patients with no darunavir resistance-associated mutations based on the findings of the DIONE trial and ARIEL substudy. This article reviews the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety and tolerability of once-daily boosted darunavir. The feasibility of darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy as a treatment approach for some patients is also discussed. Finally, data on a fixed-dose combination of 800/150 mg of darunavir/cobicistat once daily are presented, showing comparable darunavir bioavailability to that obtained with 800/100 mg of darunavir/ritonavir once daily.

Objectives TMC310911 is a novel HIV type-1 (HIV-1) protease inhibitor with broad in vitro antiviral activity. In this phase 2a, open-label randomized study, the antiviral activity, pharmacokinetics, and safety and tolerability of ritonavir-boosted TMC310911 was assessed. Methods In this study, treatment-naive HIV-1 patients (aged 18-60 years) received 1 of the 4 dosing regimens of TMC310911: 150 mg twice-daily (bid) (n = 8), 300 mg bid (n = 8), 75 mg bid (n = 9), or 300 mg once-daily (qd) (n = 8), for 14 days, all coadministered with 100 mg of ritonavir, as only antiretroviral therapy. Results The mean change from baseline in HIV-1 RNA (log10 copies per milliliter; primary efficacy endpoint) was -1.30 (75 mg bid), -1.14 (150 mg bid), -1.07 (300 mg bid), and -1.06 (300 mg qd) on day 8 and -1.53 (75 mg bid), -1.79 (150 mg bid), -1.69 (300 mg bid), and -1.55 (300 mg qd) on day 15. At steady state (day 14), the mean maximum plasma concentration and mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours tended to increase dose proportionally for bid doses; TMC310911 daily exposures for the 300 mg qd treatment and 150 mg bid treatment were comparable. The most common (≥ 10%) treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (27.3%) and nausea (12.1%); no deaths or serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in this study. Conclusions Combination treatment with TMC310911 and ritonavir showed potent antiviral activity (>1.5 log10 copies/mL decrease in plasma HIV-1 RNA) at all evaluated doses, and treatment was generally safe and well tolerated.

Objectives To evaluate safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of TMC310911, a novel human immunodeficiency virus type-1 protease inhibitor. Methods Healthy participants aged 18-55 years with body mass index 18-30 kg/m were enrolled in 2 phase 1 studies. In the first-in-human, single-dose study, 18 participants received placebo or TMC310911 (75-2000 mg) in the double-blind phase and 8 participants received 300 or 600 mg of TMC310911 [administered alone or with 100 mg ritonavir twice daily (bid)] in the subsequent open-label phase. The multiple-dose double-blind study included 5 successive treatment sessions wherein healthy participants received placebo or TMC310911 [300 mg bid, 600 mg once daily or 150 mg bid (plus 100 mg ritonavir bid), 900 mg bid (alone) or 300 mg bid (plus ritonavir 50 mg bid)]; in all sessions, TMC310911 and ritonavir were administered for 6 and 9 days, respectively. Results In the single-dose study, no dose-limiting toxicity was observed up to 2000 mg of TMC310911. Systemic exposure to TMC310911 generally increased in a dose-proportional manner after the single- or multiple-dose administrations. Coadministration of ritonavir increased the systemic exposure to TMC310911. The mean Cmax and area under plasma concentration-time curve values (single-dose: 1200 mg TMC310911) were higher under fasted conditions than in fed condition. In both studies, most treatment-emergent adverse events were related to gastrointestinal system. Conclusions TMC310911 exhibited a linear pharmacokinetic profile after the single- (up to 2000 mg) and multiple-dose (up to 900 mg) administrations; ritonavir improved the pharmacokinetic profile of TMC310911. TMC310911 was generally safe and tolerable when administered with or without ritonavir.

Objectives: Drug– drug interactions between etravirine and rifabutin or clarithromycin were examined in two separate open-label, randomized, two-period, crossover trials in HIV-negative, healthy volunteers. Methods: Rifabutin study: 16 participants received 300 mg of rifabutin once daily (14 days) and then 800 mg of etravirine twice daily (Phase 2 formulation; 21 days) plus 300 mg of rifabutin once daily (days 8 –21). Clarithromycin study: 16 participants received 200 mg of etravirine twice daily (commercial formulation; 8 days) and then 500 mg of clarithromycin twice daily (13 days) plus 200 mg of etravirine twice daily (days 6– 13). A 14 day washout period between treatments was mandatory in both studies. Full pharmacokinetic profiles of each drug and safety/tolerability were assessed. Results: Rifabutin decreased etravirine exposure by 37%; etravirine decreased rifabutin and 25-O-desacetyl rifabutin exposure by 17%. Clarithromycin increased etravirine exposure by 42%, whereas etravirine decreased clarithromycin exposure by 39% and increased 14-OH clarithromycin exposure by 21%. No serious adverse events were reported in either trial. Conclusions: Short-term etravirine coadministration with rifabutin or clarithromycin was well tolerated. Etravirine can be coadministered with 300 mg of rifabutin once daily in the absence of an additional potent cytochrome P450 inducer. No dose adjustments are required upon etravirine/clarithromycin coadministration, but alternatives to clarithromycin are recommended when used for Mycobacterium avium complex prophylaxis or treatment.

The drug-drug interaction between rifabutin (RFB) and darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) was examined in a randomized, three-way crossover study of HIV-negative healthy volunteers who received DRV/r 600/100 mg twice a day (BID) (treatment A), RFB 300 mg once a day (QD) (treatment B), and DRV/r 600/100 mg BID plus RFB 150 mg every other day (QOD) (treatment C). The sequence of treatments was randomized, and each treatment period lasted 12 days. Full pharmacokinetic profiles were determined for DRV, ritonavir, and RFB and its active metabolite, 25- O -desacetylrifabutin (desRFB), on day 13. The DRV and ritonavir areas under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to 12 h (AUC 12h ) increased by 57% and 66%, respectively, in the presence of RFB. The RFB exposure was comparable between treatment with RFB QD alone (treatment B) and treatment with DRV/r plus RFB QOD (treatment C); however, based on least-square means ratios, the minimum plasma concentration ( C min ) increased by 64% and the maximum plasma concentration ( C max ) decreased by 28%, respectively. The exposure (AUC within the dosage interval and at steady state [AUC τ ]) to desRFB was considerably increased (by 881%) following treatment with DRV/r/RFB. The exposure to the parent drug plus the metabolite increased 1.6-fold in the presence of DRV/r. Adverse events (AEs) were more commonly reported during combined treatment (83% versus 44% for RFB and 28% for DRV/r); similarly, grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 17% versus 11% and 0%, respectively, of volunteers. Eighteen of 27 volunteers (66.7%) prematurely discontinued the trial; all volunteers discontinuing for safety reasons ( n = 9) did so during RFB treatment phases. These results suggest that DRV/r may be coadministered with RFB with a dose adjustment of RFB to 150 mg QOD and increased monitoring for RFB-related AEs. Based on the overall safety profile of DRV/r, no dose adjustment of DRV/r is considered to be warranted. Given the safety profile seen with the combination of RFB with a boosted protease inhibitor in this and other studies, it is not recommended to conduct further studies with this combination in healthy volunteers.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • The protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) nevirapine (NVP) are used in combination with other antiretroviral agents and they may be co-administered for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. • There is the potential for a pharmacokinetic interaction between NVP and DRV/r, since these drugs use similar metabolic pathways. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • This study assesses for the first time the extent of the drug–drug interaction between NVP and DRV/r in the relevant population of HIV-1-infected patients. AIM To investigate the pharmacokinetic interaction between darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) and nevirapine (NVP) in 19 HIV-infected patients. METHODS An open-label, randomized, crossover study. Patients received Treatment A [NVP 200 mg b.i.d. plus ≥2 nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs)] and Treatment B [A plus DRV/r 300/100 mg b.i.d. (DRV oral solution)] or Treatment B2 [A plus DRV/r 400/100 mg b.i.d. (DRV tablet)] in two 14-day sessions. RESULTS Mean NVP AUC12h increased by 27% [least square means ratio 1.27 (95% confidence interval 1.02, 1.58)]. Mean DRV and ritonavir exposures were similar to historical data. Co-administration was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS DRV/r and NVP have no clinically relevant interaction. No dose adjustments are required.

Etravirine, a next-generation nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, and raltegravir, an integrase strand transfer inhibitor, have separately demonstrated potent activity in treatment-experienced, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. An open-label, sequential, three-period study with healthy, HIV-seronegative subjects was conducted to assess the two-way interaction between etravirine and raltegravir for potential coadministration to HIV-infected patients. In period 1, 19 subjects were administered 400 mg raltegravir every 12 h (q12 h) for 4 days, followed by a 4-day washout; in period 2, subjects were administered 200 mg etravirine q12 h for 8 days; and in period 3, subjects were coadministered 400 mg raltegravir and 200 mg etravirine q12 h for 4 days. There was no washout between periods 2 and 3. Doses were administered with a moderate-fat meal. Etravirine had only modest effects on the pharmacokinetics of raltegravir, while raltegravir had no clinically meaningful effect on the pharmacokinetics of etravirine. For raltegravir coadministered with etravirine relative to raltegravir alone, the geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 90% confidence interval (CI) were 0.90 and 0.68 to 1.18, respectively, for the area under the concentration curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC0-12), 0.89 and 0.68 to 1.15, respectively, for the maximum concentration of drug in serum (Cmax), and 0.66 and 0.34 to 1.26, respectively, for the trough drug concentration (C12); the GMR (90% CI) for etravirine coadministered with raltegravir relative to etravirine alone was 1.10 (1.03, 1.16) for AUC0-12, 1.04 (0.97, 1.12) forCmax, and 1.17 (1.10, 1.26) forC12. All drug-related adverse clinical experiences were mild and generally transient in nature. No grade 3 or 4 adverse experiences or discontinuations due to adverse experiences occurred. Coadministration of etravirine and raltegravir was generally well tolerated; the data suggest that no dose adjustment for either drug is necessary.

OBJECTIVE TMC125-C223 is an open-label, partially blinded, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two dosages of etravirine (TMC125), a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with activity against wild-type and NNRTI-resistant HIV-1. DESIGN A total of 199 patients were randomly assigned 2: 2: 1 to twice-daily etravirine 400 mg, 800 mg and control groups, respectively. The primary endpoint was a change in viral load from baseline at week 24 in the intention-to-treat population. METHODS Patients had HIV-1 with genotypic resistance to approved NNRTIs and at least three primary protease inhibitor (PI) mutations. Etravirine groups received an optimized background of at least two approved antiretroviral agents [nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) and/or lopinavir/ritonavir and/or enfuvirtide]. Control patients received optimized regimens of at least three antiretroviral agents (NRTIs or PIs and/or enfuvirtide). RESULTS The mean change from baseline in HIV-1 RNA at week 24 was -1.04, -1.18 and -0.19 log10 copies/ml for etravirine 400 mg twice a day, 800 mg twice a day and the control group, respectively (P < 0.05 for both etravirine groups versus control). Etravirine showed no dose-related effects on safety and tolerability. No consistent pattern of neuropsychiatric symptoms was observed. There were few hepatic adverse events, and rashes were predominantly early onset and mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSION Etravirine plus an optimized background significantly reduced HIV-1-RNA levels from baseline after 24 weeks in patients with substantial NNRTI and PI resistance, and demonstrated a favorable safety profile compared with control.

Background and objective: To investigate the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between the protease inhibitors darunavir (DRV, TMC114) coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (darunavir/r), and atazanavir in HIVnegative, healthy volunteers. Methods: This was an open-label, randomised, three-period, crossover study. Darunavir/r (400/100mg twice daily), atazanavir/r (300/100mg once daily) or darunavir/r (400/100mg twice daily) plus atazanavir (300mg once daily) were administered in three separate sessions, with a washout period of at least 7 days between regimens. The follow-up lasted 30 days. Twenty-three healthy volunteers participated. Pharmacokinetic assessments were performed at steady-state on day 7. Plasma drug concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between treatments. The safety and tolerability of the study medications were monitored throughout. Results: Darunavir pharmacokinetics were unaffected by atazanavir. No change in overall exposure to atazanavir was observed during coadministration with darunavir/r. However, there was a 52% increase in minimum atazanavir plasma concentration (least squares mean ratio [90% CI 0.99, 2.34]). Mean systemic exposure to ritonavir was increased by 65% and 106%, respectively, with the combination treatment compared with darunavir/r alone or atazanavir/r alone. There were no apparent differences in mean changes in lipids between the darunavir/r, atazanavir/r or darunavir/r plus atazanavir regimens. Hyperbilirubinaemia and ocular icterus were reported with atazanavir-containing regimens. Conclusion: Atazanavir at a dose of 300mg once daily can be coadministered with a darunavir/r twice-daily regimen without any dose adjustment if there is a clinical need to combine darunavir/r and atazanavir in HIV-1-infected patients.

Background. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of multiple drugs in a large human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patient population, the virtual phenotype profiles for HIV in the plasma and CSF compartments, and the correlation of these profiles with exposure to antiretroviral therapy need to be further investigated. Methods. Drug concentrations in CSF and plasma were concomitantly determined for a large group of HIV-infected individuals receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Samples were analyzed using a validated method consisting of liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry. For patients with detectable levels of virus, genotypic analysis was performed, followed by a virtual phenotype study. Results. Sixty-three HIV-infected patients were included in the study, 78% of whom were affected by neurological disease. Drug concentrations in CSF specimens were undetectable for didanosine, efavirenz, nelfinavir, and concomitantly administered ritonavir and saquinavir. CSF concentrations were higher for nevirapine, with a median CSF-to-plasma concentration ratio of 0.63, followed by lamivudine (0.23), stavudine (0.20), and indinavir (0.11). In 18 of the 40 patients with virtual phenotype data available for virus recovered from CSF samples and from plasma samples, differences in fold-change of resistance between the CSF virus and the plasma virus were noted for at least 1 drug. Factors associated with having differences in fold-change of resistance were number of drugs to which the patient had been exposed (P = .02) and presence of neurological disease (P = .05). A significant association was found between duration of therapy and fold-change of resistance in CSF and plasma isolates. Conclusions. Antiretrovirals have different levels of penetration in the CSF, with several drugs achieving only low CSF concentrations. CSF isolates have different resistance profiles than do plasma isolates. Effective treatment decisions for CSF manifestations of disease may require better knowledge of drug penetration and the drug susceptibility of HIV in the CSF.

To determine the impact of HIV-1 drug resistance at baseline and antiretroviral drug levels (DL) during follow-up on virologic response to the next antiretroviral regimen.Baseline genotypic and phenotypic susceptibility was obtained for plasma virus from patients failing a protease inhibitor-containing regimen. Untimed plasma antiretroviral DL were performed and the distribution of DL after 12 weeks of follow-up was classified as above (DLHigh) or below (DLLow) the median. Inhibitory quotients [IQ = (DL at week 12)/(fold change in IC50 to wild-type)] were determined for each drug in the regimen. Primary outcome was change in log10 plasma HIV-1 RNA viral load (DeltaVL) from baseline to 12 weeks.There were 137 patients who had baseline resistance data available for the antiretroviral drugs used in the salvage regimen, and DL at week 12. Each drug with DLHigh was associated with DeltaVL = -0.40 (P = 0.0002) while each drug with DLLow had DeltaVL = -0.16 (P = 0.11). In multivariate models DeltaVL associated with each active drug (defined by genotype) with DLHigh was -0.48 log10 (P0.0001), and with each active drug with DLLow was -0.22 (P = 0.03). The DeltaVL was -0.18 if no drugs in the regimen had an IQmedian, compared to -0.58 for one drug, -1.06 for two drugs, -0.86 for three drugs, and -1.44 for four or five drugs with IQmedian (P0.0001 for trend).In salvage therapy, both the number of active drugs and the DL for each drug in the new regimen determine the antiviral response.

For a number of antiretroviral drugs, prolonged suppression of viral replication is related to drug exposure. Therefore, it is important to maintain stable concentrations during prolonged therapy. While studies suggest that saquinavir concentrations decrease over time, we show that concentrations of zidovudine, stavudine, lamivudine, abacavir, and nevirapine in serum and cerebrospinal fluid are stable during 2 years of therapy.

Bedaquiline has recently been approved for the treatment of pulmonary multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) as part of combination therapy in adults. It is metabolized primarily by the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 3A4 (CYP3A4) to a less-active N-monodesmethyl metabolite. Phase I and Phase II studies in healthy subjects and patients with drug-susceptible or multidrug-resistant TB have assessed the pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interaction profile of bedaquiline. Potential interactions have been assessed between bedaquiline and first- and second-line anti-TB drugs (rifampicin, rifapentine, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, ethambutol, kanamycin, ofloxacin and cycloserine), commonly used antiretroviral agents (lopinavir/ritonavir, nevirapine and efavirenz) and a potent CYP3A inhibitor (ketoconazole). This review summarizes the pharmacokinetic profile of bedaquiline as well as the results of the drug-drug interaction studies.

We evaluated the pharmacokinetics of stavudine (d4T) and didanosine (ddI) in neonates. Eight neonates born to human immunodeficiency virus-infected mothers were enrolled to receive 1 mg of d4T per kg of body weight twice daily and 100 mg of ddI per m 2 once daily in combination with nelfinavir for 4 weeks after birth. Pharmacokinetic evaluations were performed at 14 and 28 days of age. For d4T, on days 14 and 28, the median areas under the concentration-time curves from 0 to 12 h (AUC 0–12 s) were 1,866 and 1,603, ng · h/ml, respectively, and the median peak concentrations ( C max s) were 463 and 507 ng/ml, respectively. For ddI, on days 14 and 28, the median AUC 0–10 s were 1,573 and 1,562 h · ng/ml, respectively, and the median C max s were 627 and 687 ng/ml, respectively. Systemic levels of exposure to d4T were comparable to those seen in children, suggesting that the pediatric dose of 1 mg/kg twice daily is appropriate for neonates at 2 to 4 weeks of age. Levels of exposure to ddI were modestly higher than those seen in children. Whether this observation warrants a reduction of the ddI dose in neonates is unclear.

Limited data are available on antiretroviral drug concentrations in seminal plasma during a dosing interval. Further, since human ejaculate is composed of fluids originating from the testes, the seminal vesicles, and the prostate, all having different physiological characteristics, drug concentrations in total seminal plasma do not necessarily reflect concentrations in the separate compartments. Five human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients on nevirapine (NVP; 200 mg twice a day [b.i.d.]) and/or indinavir (IDV; 800 mg b.i.d. with ritonavir, 100 mg b.i.d.) regimens used a split ejaculate technique to separate seminal plasma in two fractions, representing fluids from the testes and prostate (first fraction) and fluids from the seminal vesicles (second fraction). Split-ejaculate samples were provided at 0, 2, 5, and 8 h after drug ingestion, on separate days after 3 days of sexual abstinence. NVP and IDV showed time-dependent concentrations in seminal plasma, with peak concentrations in both fractions at 2 and 2 to 5 h, respectively, after drug ingestion. The NVP concentrations were not significantly different between the first and second fractions of the ejaculate at all time points measured and were in the therapeutic range, except for the predose concentration in two patients. The median (range) predose IDV concentrations in the first and second fractions of the ejaculate were 448 (353 to 1,015) ng/ml and 527 (240 to 849) ng/ml, respectively (P= 0.7). In conclusion, NVP and IDV concentrations in seminal plasma are dependent on the time after drug ingestion. Furthermore, our data suggest that NVP and IDV achieve therapeutic concentrations in both the testes and prostate and the seminal vesicles throughout the dosing interval.

Objective: To compare the steady state plasma pharmacokinetics of 1000 mg of saquinavir (SQV) in a soft-gel capsule (SGC) formulation in combination with 100 mg of ritonavir (RTV) (capsules) in a twice-daily dosing regimen in HIV-1-infected individuals with historical controls who used 400 mg of SQV in a hard-gel capsule (HGC) formulation in combination with 400 mg of RTV and to investigate the plasma pharmacokinetics of the 1000 mg/100 mg regimen after normal and high-fat breakfasts. Design: Open-label, crossover, steady-state pharmacokinetic study. Methods: Six HIV-1-infected individuals who used either 1200 mg of SQV (SGC or HGC) three times daily or 400 mg twice daily in combination with 400 mg of RTV twice daily were included. Each patient was switched to 1000 mg of SQV SGC twice daily in combination with 100 mg of RTV twice daily. After 14 days, the patients came to the hospital for assessment of a pharmacokinetic profile during 12 hours. Patients were randomized to receive a high-fat (±45 g of fat) or normal (±20 g of fat) breakfast. After 7 days, a second pharmacokinetic profile was assessed after ingestion of the drugs with the alternate breakfast. A noncompartmental pharmacokinetic method was used to calculate the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC 0 12h ), the maximum plasma concentration (C max ), the plasma trough concentration (C 12h ), and the elimination half-life in plasma (t 1/2 ). The obtained pharmacokinetic parameters were compared with those of 12 patients using SQV HGC (400 mg twice daily) in combination with RTV (400 mg twice daily). Results: The median values of the pharmacokinetic parameters for SQV SGC (1000 mg twice daily, normal breakfast) were: AUC 0-12h , 18.84 h * mg/L; C max , 3.66 mg/L; C 12h , 0.40 mg/L; and t 1/2 , 3.0 hours. The median values of the pharmacokinetic parameters for SQV HGC (400 mg twice daily, normal breakfast) were: AUC 0 12h , 6.99 h * mg/L; C max , 1.28 mg/L; C 12h , 0.23 mg/L; and t 1/2 , 3.9 hours. The exposure to SQV in the dosing regimen of 1000 mg twice daily in combination with 100 mg of RTV twice daily was significantly higher than the exposure to SQV in a dosing regimen of 400 mg twice daily in combination with 400 mg of RTV twice daily. The pharmacokinetic parameters of SQV SGC in the dosing regimen of 1000 mg twice daily in combination with 100 mg of RTV twice daily were not significantly different after ingestion of a high-fat or normal breakfast (p >.35). Conclusions: The combination of 1000 mg of SQV SGC twice daily and 100 mg of RTV twice daily resulted in a higher exposure to SQV compared with the exposure to SQV obtained when SQV is used in the 400 mg/400 mg twice-daily combination with RTV. In this small number of patients, no significant differences in exposure were seen after ingestion of either a normal or high-fat breakfast. From a pharmacokinetic perspective, the combination of 1000 mg of SQV SGC twice daily and 100 mg of RTV twice daily seems to be a good option for further clinical evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To explore relationships between exposure to nevirapine and the virological response in HIV-1-infected individuals participating in the INCAS trial. METHODS: The elimination rate constant of plasma HIV-1 RNA (k) was calculated during the first 2 weeks of treatment with nevirapine, zidovudine and didanosine in 51 antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients. The relationships between the value of k, the time to reach an undetectable HIV-1 RNA concentration in plasma (

AIMS: To study the effect of fluconazole on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of the protease inhibitors ritonavir and saquinavir in HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: Five subjects treated with saquinavir and three with ritonavir received the protease inhibitor alone (saquinavir 1200 mg three times daily, ritonavir 600 mg twice daily) on day 1, and the same protease inhibitor in combination with fluconazole (400 mg on day 2 and 200 mg on days 3 to 8). Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined on days 1 and 8. RESULTS: In the saquinavir group, the median increase in the area under the plasma concentration vs time curve was 50% from 1800 microg l(-1) h to 2700 microg l(-1) h (P = 0.04, median increase: 900 microg l(-1) h; 2.5 and 97.5 percentile: 500-1300), and 56% for the peak concentration in plasma (from 550 to 870 microg l(-1), P = 0.04; median increase: 320 microg l(-1) h, 2.5 and 97.5 percentile: 60-450 microg l(-1)). In the ritonavir group, there were no detectable changes in the pharmacokinetic parameters on addition of fluconazole. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the favourable safety profile of saquinavir, dose adjustments are probably not necessary with concomitant use of fluconazole, as is the case for ritonavir.

Contains fulltext : 178173.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of indinavir in human immunodeficiency virus-infected children as part of a prospective, open, uncontrolled, multicenter study in The Netherlands. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected children were monitored over 6 months of treatment with zidovudine (120 mg/m(2) every 8 h [q8h]), lamivudine (4 mg/kg of body weight q12h), and indinavir (33mg/kg of metabolic weight [MW] q8h). Four weeks after the start of treatment, the steady-state pharmacokinetics of indinavir were determined by high-pressure liquid chromatography. If patients had an indinavir area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of below 10 or above 30 mg/liter. h, a dose increase or a dose reduction was made and pharmacokinetic measurements were repeated 4 weeks later. Nineteen patients started with the dose of 33 mg/kg of MW q8h. The median AUC (range) was 10.5 (2.8 to 51.0) mg/liter. h. The median AUC (range) in 17 children treated with 50 mg/kg of MW q8h was 20.6 (4.1 to 38.7) mg/liter. h. Finally, five patients had a dose increase to 67 mg/kg of MW q8h, resulting in a median AUC (range) of 36.6 (27.2 to 80.0) mg/liter. h. After 6 months of treatment, there were 11 children with an AUC of below 20 mg/liter. h, of whom 5 (45%) had a detectable viral load, while this was the case in none of the 11 children with an AUC of higher than 20 mg/liter. h. We conclude that the optimal dose of indinavir in children to obtain drug exposure similar to that observed in adult patients is 50 mg/kg of MW q8h, which approximates 600 mg/m(2) q8h. It would even be better to adjust the indinavir dose based on an AUC of greater than 20 mg/liter. h.

The steady-state pharmacokinetics of efavirenz and nevirapine, when used in combination to treat human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected subjects, were investigated. HIV-1-infected persons who had used efavirenz (600 mg once daily) for > or =2 weeks were eligible for study inclusion. The plasma pharmacokinetics of efavirenz were determined over 24 h. Subsequently, nevirapine (400 mg once daily) was added to the regimen. After 4 weeks, the pharmacokinetics of efavirenz and nevirapine were assessed over 24 h. The differences between the pharmacokinetic parameters of efavirenz with and without nevirapine were analyzed, and the pharmacokinetics of nevirapine were compared with those in historical control patients. The exposure to efavirenz when combined with nevirapine was significantly decreased by 22% (area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve), 36% (minimum plasma concentration), and 17% (maximum plasma concentration). Nevirapine pharmacokinetics appear to be unaffected by coadministration of efavirenz, compared with data from historical control patients.

Objective: The appearance of rash is one of the most frequent and limiting side-effects during the first 4 weeks of treatment with nevirapine (NVP). We explored the efficacy and safety of four different strategies for reducing the incidence of this complication. Patients and methods: Four-hundred and sixty-nine patients were assigned randomly to accomplish the induction phase of NVP following either the standard recommendation of 200 mg daily during the first 2 weeks (n = 166), or any of three new strategies: adding prednisone 50 mg each other day during the first 2 weeks (n = 93); using a slowly escalating dose, beginning with 100 mg daily the first week, and increasing the dose by 100 mg/week up to the full daily dose of 400 mg (n = 107); and combining both the addition of prednisone with the slowly escalating dose (n = 103). A pharmacokinetic substudy was performed in seven patients receiving 100 mg of NVP during the first week. Results: The incidence of rash diminished from 18.7% using the standard recommendation to 9.2% using the alternative approaches (P = 0.003). Rash appeared in 11.2%, 8.6%, and 7.7% of subjects assigned to receive the slowly escalating dose, prednisone, or both, respectively, without significant differences among them. The rate of drug discontinuation was also diminished by one-half using the new approaches (8.5% versus 4.3%; P = 0.06). NVP plasma concentrations within the first week of treatment using 100 mg daily were above the 90% inhibitory concentration for wild-type HIV-1 in all instances. Conclusion: The incidence of rash complicating the first few weeks of treatment with NVP can be diminished by adding corticosteroids for 2 weeks to the standard recommendation, or by using a slowly escalating dose. This second approach is proven to be pharmacokinetically safe.

OBJECTIVE To determine the concentrations of nevirapine (NVP), lamivudine (3TC) and stavudine (D4T) in seminal and blood plasma in HIV-1-infected men. METHODS Twelve HIV-1-infected men on NVP-containing regimens including 3TC (n = 8) or D4T (n = 11) provided 23 blood plasma and 22 seminal plasma samples for drug concentration and viral load quantitation. Concentrations of all drugs were assessed by sensitive validated high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) assays. Blood plasma and seminal plasma viral loads were measured using nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA). Samples were grouped according to time after drug ingestion, 0-2, 2-4, 4-8 and 8-12 h. For matched seminal and blood plasma samples, obtained within 1 h of each other, a seminal:blood plasma ratio was calculated. RESULTS The concentration of NVP in seminal plasma appeared to mirror the concentrations in blood plasma. Absolute median seminal plasma NVP concentrations at 0-2, 2-4, 4-8 and 8-12 h were 3.1 microg/ml (range 1.7-4.89), 2.68 microg/ml (2.5-3.9), 2.5 microg/ml (2.3-2.7) and 3.09 microg/ml (1.3-9.1). The median seminal:blood plasma ratios for the four time periods were 0.54 (range 0.34-0.85), 0.83 (range 0.43-1.08), 0.53 (0.48-0.59), and 0.61 (0.59-0.78). 3TC and D4T appeared to reach concentrations in seminal plasma of a similar magnitude or higher than concentrations in blood plasma. The median seminal plasma viral load for all patients was less than 800 copies/ml (range < 800-11000). The median blood plasma viral load was less than 400 copies/ml (< 400-1100). CONCLUSION NVP reaches concentrations in the semen approximately 60% of those in the blood plasma throughout the 12 h dosing period. In a smaller dataset, 3TC and D4T concentrations in blood plasma and seminal plasma were similar. These data may well have implications for the evolution of drug-resistant virus within the genital tract.

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.Prospective, non-randomized interventional study.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.Six patients showed complete virological success (HIV-RNA200 copies/ml at week 12) which was sustained for a median follow-up of 6.3 months. Partial virological response (decrease of HIV-RNA of1 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.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.

The penetration of 3'-amino-3'-deoxythmidine (AMT) into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of HIV-1-infected patients has been investigated. In 23 patients who used zidovudine (ZDV) chronically, CSF and plasma samples were assayed for AMT and ZDV. The influences of time between ZDV oral administration and lumbar puncture, of ZDV dose, and of the medical indication for lumbar puncture based on the concentration of AMT in CSF and on the CSF-plasma concentration ratio were investigated. AMT can be detected in the CSF after oral administration of ZDV; concentrations of AMT in CSF ranged from 0.75 to 4.8 ng/ml (median, 1.7 ng/ml). The median CSF-plasma concentration ratio was 1, and equaled that for ZDV. CSF and plasma concentrations of AMT were approximately threefold higher in patients with cerebral toxoplasmosis; the CSF-plasma concentration ratio remained equal to unity in these cases. This phenomenon might be caused by a pharmacokinetic interaction between AMT and pyrimethamine, sulfadiazine, folinic acid, or a combination of these. The clinical relevance of AMT, especially the possibility of decreased efficacy of ZDV, throughout the body and in the central nervous system, and the involvement of this metabolite in ZDV-induced myelosuppression, remains to be established.

Rilpivirine (RPV, TMC278, Edurant ® ) is a next-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), which demonstrated high virologic response rates and non-inferiority versus efavirenz in two Phase III trials in HIV-infected patients through 96 weeks [1,2]. RPV has been shown to inhibit P-glycoprotein (P-gp) in vitro with an apparent IC 50 of 9.2µM (3.4µg/mL). This study evaluated the in-vivo effect of steady-state RPV 25mg once daily (qd) on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of the probe P-gp substrate digoxin. This was a Phase I, open-label, randomised, crossover trial in 22 HIV-negative volunteers. Participants received in one session a single 0.5mg dose of digoxin, and in another session RPV 25mg qd for 16 days with a single 0.5mg dose of digoxin in the morning of Day 11. All study drugs were taken with a breakfast. Pharmacokinetic profiles of digoxin in plasma and urine were determined over 144 hours after dosing in each session. Steady-state RPV 24-hour pharmacokinetic profiles in plasma were determined on Day 11. Plasma and urine samples were analysed using validated LC-MS/MS methods. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated with non-compartmental methods. The least square (LS) means and associated 90% confidence intervals (CI) of treatment ratios were calculated based on log-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the trial. Digoxin pharmacokinetic parameters and statistical results are summarised in Table 1. The plasma and urine digoxin pharmacokinetics were unaffected by co-administration of steady-state RPV. The 90% CIs of the LS means ratios of the main pharmacokinetic parameters were contained within the 0.80-1.25 boundaries of no effect. The terminal elimination half-life of digoxin was similar in the absence or the presence of steady-state RPV. RPV pharmacokinetic parameters were comparable to those in previous clinical trials in healthy volunteers. Administration of digoxin and RPV was generally safe and well tolerated. There were no discontinuations due to adverse events. In conclusion, RPV does not affect the pharmacokinetics of the probe P-gp substrate digoxin. In vivo, at the recommended RPV dose of 25mg qd, the observed in-vitro inhibition of P-gp by RPV is not clinically relevant. (Published: 11 November 2012) Citation: Abstracts of the Eleventh International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection Crauwels H et al. Journal of the International AIDS Society 2012, 15 (Suppl 4):18337 http://www.jiasociety.org/index.php/jias/article/view/18337 | http://dx.doi.org/10.7448/IAS.15.6.18337

The effects of darunavir-ritonavir at 600 and 100 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) alone, 200 mg of etravirine b.i.d. alone, or 600 and 100 mg of darunavir-ritonavir b.i.d. with 200 mg etravirine b.i.d. at steady state on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc, and vice versa, in healthy volunteers were investigated in two phase I, randomized, two-period crossover studies. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with darunavir-ritonavir increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC 12 ) for maraviroc 4.05-fold relative to 150 mg of maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine decreased the maraviroc AUC 12 by 53% relative to 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir increased the maraviroc AUC 12 3.10-fold relative to 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Maraviroc did not significantly affect the pharmacokinetics of etravirine, darunavir, or ritonavir. Short-term coadministration of maraviroc with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or both was generally well tolerated, with no safety issues reported in either trial. Maraviroc can be coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir. Maraviroc should be dosed at 600 mg b.i.d. with etravirine in the absence of a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) (i.e., a boosted protease inhibitor) or at 150 mg b.i.d. when coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir with or without etravirine.

Objective: To investigate the potential for a pharmacokinetic interaction between darunavir (DRV, TMC114, Prezista®), indinavir (IDV, Crixivan®) and low-dose ritonavir (RTV, Norvir®). Methods: In three 7-day sessions, 17 HIV-negative healthy volunteers received treatment A (DRV/r 400/100 mg b.i.d.), treatment B (IDV/r 800/100 mg b.i.d.) and treatment C (DRV/r 400/100 mg b.i.d. + IDV 800 mg b.i.d.). On day 7, full pharmacokinetic profiles of DRV, IDV and RTV were determined. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Results: Based on the least-squares means ratios, the steady-state exposure (area under the curve, AUC12h) and plasma concentrations (Cmin and Cmax) of IDV were increased by 23, 125 and 8%, respectively, when DRV was co-administered. The co-administration of IDV with DRV/r resulted in increases of 24, 44 and 11% for, respectively, DRV AUC12h, Cmin and Cmax, compared with administration of DRV/r alone. Eight volunteers discontinued due to an adverse event. Overall, adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were more commonly reported during treatments including IDV. Conclusions: When used in combination with DRV/r, dose adjustment of IDV from 800 mg b.i.d. to 600 mg b.i.d. may be warranted in cases of intolerance.

Objective Two open-label, randomized, cross-over trials in healthy volunteers were conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Methods Etravirine was administered as either 800 mg twice a day (bid) (phase II formulation in Study 1) or 200 mg bid (phase III formulation in Study 2) for 8 days followed by a 12 h pharmacokinetic evaluation. After a minimum of 14 days washout, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg once a day was administered for 16 days. Volunteers were randomized to receive co-administration of etravirine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on either days 1–8 or days 9–16 followed by a 12 h pharmacokinetic evaluation for etravirine on day 8 or 16, respectively. Plasma and urine tenofovir concentrations were determined on days 8 and 16 over 24 h. Results The least square mean (LSM) ratio [90% confidence interval (CI)] for the area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC12 h) for etravirine co-administered with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs. etravirine alone was 0.69 (0.61–0.79) and 0.81 (0.75–0.88) in Studies 1 and 2, respectively. The LSM ratio (90% CI) for the effect of etravirine on tenofovir AUC24 h was 1.16 (1.09–1.23) in Study 1 and 1.15 (1.09–1.21) in Study 2. Conclusions These alterations are not considered clinically relevant for either drug and no dose adjustment is necessary when etravirine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate are co-administered.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Drug–drug interactions with acid-suppressing agents were previously described with several other antiretroviral drugs. • Etravirine (TMC125) is a next-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, metabolized by CYP3A and CYP2C enzymes with demonstrated efficacy in treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients. • The effect of acid-suppressing agents on the pharmacokinetics of etravirine was unknown. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • No clinically relevant effect was shown on the pharmacokinetics of etravirine when co-administered with ranitidine or omeprazole, drugs that increase gastric pH. • A drug–drug interaction due to CYP2C19 inhibition by omeprazole has been identified. • Etravirine can be co-administered with proton pump inhibitors and H2 antagonists without dose adjustments. Aims Etravirine is a next-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with activity against wild-type and NNRTI-resistant HIV. Proton pump inhibitors and H2-antagonists are frequently used in the HIV-negative-infected population, and drug–drug interactions have been described with other antiretrovirals. This study evaluated the effect of steady-state omeprazole and ranitidine on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of etravirine. Methods In an open-label, randomized, one-way, three-period crossover trial, HIV-negative volunteers randomly received a single dose of 100 mg etravirine alone (treatment A); 11 days of 150 mg ranitidine b.i.d. (treatment B); and 11 days of 40 mg omeprazole q.d. (treatment C). A single dose of 100 mg etravirine was co-administered on day 8 of sessions 2 and 3. Each session was separated by a 14-day wash-out. Results Nineteen volunteers (seven female) participated. When a single dose of etravirine was administered in the presence of steady-state ranitidine, etravirine least squares means ratios (90% confidence interval) for AUClast and Cmax were 0.86 (0.76, 0.97) and 0.94 (0.75, 1.17), respectively, compared with administration of etravirine alone. When administered with steady-state omeprazole, these values were 1.41 (1.22, 1.62) and 1.17 (0.96, 1.43), respectively. Co-administration of a single dose of etravirine and ranitidine or omeprazole was generally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions Ranitidine slightly decreased etravirine exposure, whereas omeprazole increased it by approximately 41%. The increased exposure of etravirine when co-administered with omeprazole is attributed to CYP2C19 inhibition. Considering the favourable safety profile of etravirine, these changes are not clinically relevant. Etravirine can be co-administered with proton pump inhibitors and H2 antagonists without dose adjustments.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Ketoconazole is a potent inhibitor of the cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme system. • Co-administration of ketoconazole and drugs primarily metabolized by the cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme system may result in increased plasma concentrations of the drugs, which could increase or prolong both therapeutic and adverse effects. • Therefore, unless otherwise specified, appropriate dosage adjustments may be necessary. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS • The current study was conducted to determine the extent of interaction between the potent CYP3A inhibitor, ketoconazole, and the CYP 3A substrate, darunavir (given alone and with low-dose ritonavir). • This information provides data on the pharmacokinetic boosting ability of ketoconazole and serves as important guidance to HIV-infected patients and their treating physicians with regard to appropriate (co-)administration of darunavir/ritonavir and ketoconazole. Aims To investigate the interaction between ketoconazole and darunavir (alone and in combination with low-dose ritonavir), in HIV–healthy volunteers. Methods Volunteers received darunavir 400 mg bid and darunavir 400 mg bid plus ketoconazole 200 mg bid, in two sessions (Panel 1), or darunavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg bid, ketoconazole 200 mg bid and darunavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg bid plus ketoconazole 200 mg bid, over three sessions (Panel 2). Treatments were administered with food for 6 days. Steady-state pharmacokinetics following the morning dose on day 7 were compared between treatments. Short-term safety and tolerability were assessed. Results Based on least square means ratios (90% confidence intervals), during darunavir and ketoconazole co-administration, darunavir area under the curve (AUC12h), maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and minimum plasma concentration (Cmin) increased by 155% (80, 261), 78% (28, 147) and 179% (58, 393), respectively, compared with treatment with darunavir alone. Darunavir AUC12h, Cmax and Cmin increased by 42% (23, 65), 21% (4, 40) and 73% (39, 114), respectively, during darunavir/ritonavir and ketoconazole co-administration, relative to darunavir/ritonavir treatment. Ketoconazole pharmacokinetics was unchanged by co-administration with darunavir alone. Ketoconazole AUC12h, Cmax and Cmin increased by 212% (165, 268), 111% (81, 144) and 868% (544, 1355), respectively, during co-administration with darunavir/ritonavir compared with ketoconazole alone. Conclusions The increase in darunavir exposure by ketoconazole was lower than that observed previously with ritonavir. A maximum ketoconazole dose of 200 mg day−1 is recommended if used concomitantly with darunavir/ritonavir, with no dose adjustments for darunavir/ritonavir.

What is already known about this subject • Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and some of the HIV protease inhibitors show drug–drug interactions that cannot be predicted based on their metabolic profiles. • Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and HIV protease inhibitors are often combined as part of antiretroviral therapy. What this study adds • TMC114 (darunavir) is the latest HIV protease inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and is used in combination with low-dose ritonavir. • This study shows for the first time the extent of the drug–drug interaction between tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and TMC114 combined with low-dose ritonavir and compares the interaction observed with other HIV protease inhibitors. Aim TMC114 is a new HIV protease inhibitor, used in combination with low-dose ritonavir (TMC114/r) as a pharmacokinetic enhancer. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is a nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Both antiretrovirals show activity against wild-type and resistant HIV. An open-label crossover study was conducted in HIV – healthy volunteers to investigate the potential for a pharmacokinetic interaction between TMC114/r and tenofovir. Methods Two groups, each of six volunteers, were evaluated in two consecutive sessions. In session 1, volunteers received TMC114/r (300/100 mg bid) for 7 days, followed by a wash-out period of at least 6 days. In session 2, volunteers received TMC114/r (300/100 mg bid) plus TDF (300 mg qd). Results When TMC114/r and TDF were coadministered, tenofovir plasma concentrations (Cmin and Cmax), and area under the curve (AUC24 h) increased by 37%, 24% and 22%, respectively. When TDF and ritonavir were coadministered, TMC114 plasma Cmin, Cmax and AUC12 h increased by 24%, 16% and 21%, respectively. There were no changes in the urinary excretion of unchanged tenofovir or TMC114 during coadministration. Administration of TMC114/r in HIV– healthy volunteers with or without TDF was well tolerated. Conclusions The interaction between TMC114/r and tenofovir is not clinically relevant and no dose adjustments are required when these drugs are coadministered.

Cumulative antiretroviral exposure can result in multiclass HIV drug resistance. Experimental antiretroviral agents offer limited therapeutic benefit as resistance quickly develops after their introduction as a sole new agent.To assess the pharmacokinetic profile, safety and virological response of two novel investigational antiretroviral agents when used in combination in HIV-1-infected subjects with multidrug-resistant virus.HIV-1-infected subjects, with current virological failure on a stable antiretroviral regimen with no viable treatment options were assigned to a regimen comprising two new investigational agents, etravirine, a novel nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, and darunavir, a novel protease inhibitor, plus nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (and enfuvirtide in selected patients) for 24 weeks. Virological, immunological and safety parameters were collected. Detailed pharmacokinetic assessments of darunavir and etravirine were determined on days 7 and 28.Follow up of 24 weeks was achieved by 10/12 patients. Median reduction in HIV RNA was 2.7 log10 copies/ml (range, 2.3-3.9) and increase in CD4 lymphocytes was 113 cells/microl (range, 41-268). HIV RNA was40 copies/ml in nine. No serious adverse events were recorded. Plasma exposure to darunavir was similar to historic control data and exposure to etravirine similar to historic data when etravirine was administered with a boosted protease inhibitor.This first study to assess the use of etravirine and darunavir in HIV-1-infected subjects with no treatment options showed highly effective virological and immunological responses over 24 weeks of therapy with no new safety concerns or unexpected pharmacokinetic interactions.

Darunavir (DRV; TMC114; Prezista) is a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitor used in combination with low-dose ritonavir (RTV) (DRV/r) as a pharmacokinetic enhancer. Protease inhibitor absorption may be decreased during coadministration of drugs that limit stomach acid secretion and increase gastric pH. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of ranitidine and omeprazole on the plasma pharmacokinetics of DRV and RTV in HIV-negative healthy volunteers. Sixteen volunteers completed the study and received DRV/r, DRV/r plus ranitidine, and DRV/r plus omeprazole, in three separate sessions. Treatment was given for 4 days with an additional morning dose on day 5, and regimens were separated by a washout period of 7 days. Samples were taken over a 12-h period on day 5 for the assessment of DRV and RTV plasma concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters assessed included DRV area under the curve, maximum plasma concentration, and trough plasma concentration. The least-squares mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals are reported with treatment of DRV/r alone as a reference. Compared with DRV/r alone, no significant changes in DRV pharmacokinetic parameters were observed during coadministration of DRV/r and either ranitidine or omeprazole. Treatment regimens were generally well tolerated, and no serious adverse events were reported. In conclusion, coadministration of DRV/r and ranitidine or omeprazole was well tolerated by the volunteers. Ranitidine and omeprazole did not have a significant influence on DRV pharmacokinetics. No dose adjustments are required when DRV/r is coadministered with omeprazole or ranitidine.

To evaluate antiviral activity, pharmacokinetics, tolerability and safety of TMC278, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), when given as a 25, 50, 100 or 150 mg once-daily dose for 7 days to antiretroviral-naive HIV-infected subjects.Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa clinical trial.Participants were 47 antiretroviral naive HIV-infected subjects. Primary outcome was the change in plasma HIV-1 RNA viral load from baseline to day 8. Secondary outcomes were evaluation of pharmacokinetics of TMC278, immunologic changes, safety and tolerability, and evolution of viral genotypic and phenotypic patterns.Patients treated with TMC278 achieved a median decrease in plasma viral load from baseline of 1.199 log10 copies/ml compared with a 0.002 log10 copies/ml gain in the placebo group (P0.01). A significantly higher proportion of subjects in the TMC278 groups obtained a viral load decrease of1.0 log10 compared with the placebo group (25/36 versus 0/11) (P0.01). No significant dose differences were noted in either antiviral effect or safety. No genotypic changes associated with antiretroviral resistance were detected between baseline and the end of the trial. Plasma concentrations of TMC278 were above the target concentration (13.5 ng/ml) at all time points for all TMC278-treated subjects. The most common reported adverse event was headache (TMC278 14%; placebo 18%).TMC278 showed antiviral activity when given as monotherapy for 7 days at all doses studied and the drug was safe and well tolerated. Trials of longer treatment duration with TMC278, in combination with other antiretroviral drugs, are underway to assess the long-term durability of antiviral response, safety and tolerability.

The safety, efficacy, and mutual interactions of combination amprenavir with lopinavir/ritonavir as deep salvage treatment were investigated in a prospective 24-week pilot study. HIV-infected patients (n = 22) with virologic failure to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-NRTIs, and at least 2 protease inhibitors received 400/100 mg of lopinavir/ritonavir with 600 mg of amprenavir every 12 hours combined with NRTIs. Patients receiving the same doses of lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 10) or amprenavir with ritonavir (n = 8) were chosen as controls for pharmacokinetic analyses. Mean changes from baseline HIV RNA levels and CD4 counts after 24 weeks were -1.13 log 10 copies/mL and +88 × 10 6 cells/L, respectively. The mean plasma trough concentration (C min )and peak concentration (C max ) of amprenavir were 104% and 228% lower and the C min of lopinavir was 46% lower in patients in whom the drugs were coadministered than in controls. There were 4 permanent drug discontinuations because oftoxicity. An inhibitory quotient (IQ) of amprenavir higher than 0.8 was the best predictor of virologic outcome at 24 weeks, even after adjusting for amprenavir C min or phenotypic susceptibility. Deep salvage therapy using lopinavir/ritonavir with amprenavir is sufficiently safe and shows partial efficacy. When these drugs are coadministered, therapeutic drug monitoring should be employed and the IQ can be used to determine target drug levels.

Contains fulltext : 57117.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) Differences in virologic response were compared in 32 HIV-infected children with a nelfinavir trough concentration either below (n=7) or above (n=25) 0.8 mg/L. Virologic response at week 48 was observed in 29% of children with subtherapeutic nelfinavir troughs versus 80% in children with therapeutic nelfinavir troughs (P=.02).

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) can suppress viral replication and prolong patient life substantially. However, HAART can fail for a number of reasons, including incomplete adherence, pharmacokinetic factors and the emergence of resistance. Because the number of possible antiretroviral combinations is limited, the use of existing treatment options must be optimized. Whether the application of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in routine clinical practice may help with this purpose remains a subject of debate. However, TDM has been introduced in some centres despite the lack of guidelines for optimal use of this test.In October 2000, a panel of experts met in Perugia, Italy, to discuss the key issues surrounding the introduction of TDM into routine clinical practice. The purpose of the meeting was to achieve a consensus among panel members on the following issues: (i) validity of data suggesting the utility of TDM in HAART; (ii) patient categories and clinical settings in which TDM may be of most benefit; (iii) target levels of antiretroviral agents; (iv) influence of covariables on target levels of drugs; (v) blood sampling and dosage adjustment strategies; and (vi) future research steps needed to elucidate issues regarding the applicability of TDM in clinical practice.This report, which has been updated to include data published or presented at conferences up to the end of August 2001, summarizes the data presented and issues discussed at the meeting. This article will guide the reader through the data and discussions that have allowed the panel to formulate a series of position statements regarding the current status and future applications of TDM in antiretroviral therapy. These statements have been formulated to provide suggestions for the design of future TDM clinical trials, as well as to provide useful points of reflection for centres in which TDM is already in use.

The pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir (NFV) in neonates younger than 4 weeks of age was assessed. Three cohorts of HIV-exposed neonates were enrolled in cohorts to receive 15, 30, and 45 mg of NFV/kg twice daily in combination with stavudine and didanosine for 4 weeks after birth. Trough NFV concentrations (C(min)) were measured at 1 and 7 days of age. Intensive pharmacokinetic evaluations were performed at 14 and 28 days of age. The median NFV C(min) values in the 15 mg/kg (6 patients), 30 mg/kg (5), and 45 mg/kg (11) cohorts at 1, 7, 14, and 28 days of age were 0.19, 1.21, 0.51, and 0.33; 1.02, 3.18, 0.73, and 0.55; and 0.67, 3.21, 0.70, and 0.73 mg/L, respectively. The median area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve values over 12 hours in the three cohorts at 14 and 28 days of age were 14.4 and 8.7, 19.4 and 15.8, and 23.4 and 18.5 (h. mg)/L, respectively. No serious adverse events were observed. In conclusion, the systemic exposure of NFV decreased after 7 days of age, possibly because of hepatic enzyme maturation, autoinduction of NFV metabolism, and/or changes in NFV absorption. The highly variable systemic exposure observed in the study indicates that therapeutic drug monitoring seems warranted to ensure adequate NFV dosing in this population.

Objective: To determine the feasibility of switching therapy for HIV-1-infected patients with plasma viral loads of 0.05 mg/L. Median values for the area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve from 0 to 24 hours (AUC(0-24h)), maximal concentration (C-max). and C-24h for SQV were 48.1 6.98 mg/L. and 0.17 mg/L respectively, Body weight was inversely correlated with SQV AUC(24h) and C-24h (p

OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate drug notations in outpatient medical records and in pharmacy records in a cohort of HIV-1–infected patients treated with antiretroviral drugs. METHODS: Data on 103 patients were obtained from January 1, 1998, through December 31, 1999, by medical chart review and collection of pharmacy records. Two analyses were performed. First, antiretroviral drugs and comedication in the pharmacy records were documented and compared with their appearance in the outpatient medical records. Second, a detailed comparison was performed at 5 time points during the study period for the antiretroviral drugs. Generic name, formulation, strength, and frequency of dosing as registered in the outpatient medical records were compared with those registered in the pharmacy records. RESULTS: Total drug dispensation was 1607 (366 and 1241 antiretroviral drugs and comedication, respectively). The first screening resulted in a total discrepancy of 55.1% (n = 885), of which 97.1% (n = 859) was attributed to the comedication and 2.9% (n = 26) to the antiretroviral drugs. The discrepancy for the antiretroviral drugs at the specific time points ranged from 5.1% to 12.6% when the generic name only was used, and from 7.1% to 17% when formulation, strength, and frequency of dosing were also taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: The observed discrepancy between outpatient medical records and pharmacy records mainly concerns the comedication. For the antiretroviral drugs fewer, but still substantial, discrepancies were observed. These results indicate that full exchange of information concerning drug use in this population between general practitioners and specialists (infectious disease) is lacking.

Contains fulltext : 185695.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for human immunodeficiency syndrome type 1 (HIV-1) infection is essential to sustain viral suppression and prevent drug resistance. We investigated adherence to HAART among patients in a clinical cohort study. METHODS: Patients receiving HAART had their plasma concentrations of protease inhibitors or nevirapine measured and completed a questionnaire on adherence. We determined the percentage of patients who reported taking all antiretroviral medication on time and according to dietary instructions in the past week. Drug exposure was compared between patients reporting deviation from their regimen and fully adherent patients. Among patients who received HAART for at least 24 weeks, we assessed the association between adherence and virologic outcome. RESULTS: A total of 224 of 261 eligible patients completed a questionnaire. Forty-seven percent reported taking all antiretroviral medication on time and according to dietary instructions. Patients who reported deviation from their regimen showed lower drug exposure compared with fully adherent patients (median concentration ratio, 0.81 vs 1.07; P =.001). Among those receiving HAART for at least 24 weeks, patients reporting deviation from their regimen were less likely to have plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 500 copies/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-11.6) compared with fully adherent patients. CONCLUSIONS: Only half of the patients took all antiretroviral medication in accordance with time and dietary instructions in the preceding week. Deviation from the antiretroviral regimen was associated with decreased drug exposure and a decreased likelihood of having suppressed plasma HIV-1 RNA loads. Patient adherence should remain a prime concern in the management of HIV-1 infection.

Objective: To assess the HIV-1-RNA response and drug concentrations in cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) and serum during treatment with saquinavir (SQV)/ritonavir (RIV) or SQV/RIV 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 RIV 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. (C) 2000 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.

Objective: To investigate and to compare the steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of nevirapine in a dosing regimen of 400 mg once daily versus 200 mg twice daily in HIV-1-infected individuals. Design: Open-label, randomized, cross-over study. Methods: Twenty HIV-1-infected individuals who already used nevirapine as part of their antiretroviral regimen were randomized to continue their current regimen (200 mg twice daily) or to switch to the alternate regimen (400 mg once daily). The steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of nevirapine were assessed after 2 weeks during a 24-h period. Subsequently, patients were switched to the alternate regimen and the pharmacokinetics of nevirapine were assessed again after 2 weeks. Noncompartmental methods were used to calculate the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC([24 h])), and the maximal (C(max)) and minimal plasma concentration (C(min)), the time to C(max) (t(max)), the plasma elimination half-life (t(1/2)), the apparent oral clearance (Cl/F) and the apparent volume of distribution (V/F). Differences in these pharmacokinetic parameters for the two dosing regimens were tested using ANOVA. Results: The exposure to nevirapine, as measured by the AUC([24 h]), was not significantly different between the 400 mg once daily and 200 mg twice daily dosing regimen (P = 0.60). Furthermore, the values for t(max), t(1/2) Cl/F and V/F were not significantly different between the two dosing regimens (P ≥ 0.08). However, C(max) and C(min) were higher and lower, respectively, when nevirapine was used in the once daily regimen as compared with the twice daily regimen. The median values for C(max) and C(min) as measured for the once daily and twice daily regimens were 6.69 and 5.74 μg/ml, respectively (P = 0.03), and 2.88 and 3.73 μg/ml, respectively (P < 0.01). Conclusion: These data show that the daily exposure to nevirapine, as measured by the plasma AUC([24 h]), is not different between a 400 mg once daily and a 200 mg twice daily dosing regimen. However, C(max) and C(min) are higher and lower, respectively, for the once daily regimen as compared with the twice daily regimen. The clinical implications of these differences remain to be established. (C) 2000 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.

Objective: To compare the viral suppression of two antiretroviral regimens using three drugs or five drugs. Design: Two open-label studies using a three-drug (zidovudine, lamivudine and ritonavir) and a five-drug regimen (zidovudine, lamivudine, abacavir, indinavir and nevirapine) in study-drug-naive patients, except for one in the five-drug study. Methods: Participants with ≤ 10,000 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml in plasma at baseline were compared by means of Kaplan-Meier curves for time to < 50 copies/ml, as well as linear regression analysis for the first phase of decline using log-transformed copy numbers. Results: The elimination rate constants For HIV-1 RNA in 15 participants of the three-drug study were compared with nine participants of the five-drug study. The level of < 50 copies/ml was reached earlier when using the five-drug than when using the three-drug regimen (P log rank = 0.0005): median time to reach this level was 4 weeks and 12 weeks, respectively. No differences were found in HIV-1 RNA elimination rate constants in the first 2 weeks after the initiation of therapy. When the viral load declines were calculated from day 2 onwards, adjusting for differences in pharmacological delay of the drugs used, again no differences in early viral load decline were found between the two regimens. Conclusion: With the five drugs used in this study, the median time to reach < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml was 8 weeks shorter than with the three-drug regimen. This finding shows that suppression of viral load in HIV-infection by standard triple-drug therapy can be improved upon.

Item does not contain fulltext

It has been hypothesized that didanosine has a low efficacy in the prevention and treatment of patients with the dementia complex of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) because "... the drug has not been detected in the cerebrospinal fluid". We investigated didanosine concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma of four patients with AIDS who were using didanosine chronically. Didanosine levels, 4 h after the last drug administration, averaged 0.16 (+/- 0.03) mumol/l in CSF and 0.70 (+/- 0.27) mumol/l in plasma. When compared with historical data from patients using zidovudine, didanosine concentrations in CSF appeared to be approximately half (on a molar base) those of zidovudine concentrations in the CSF. Whether this difference in CSF levels is the explanation for the presumed lower efficacy of didanosine in the prevention and treatment of AIDS dementia complex remains to be proven. However, it is clear from this study, in contrast with earlier suggestions, that didanosine is able to pass the blood-CSF barrier in human immunodeficiency virus-infected individuals.