Search

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.

PIANO (NCT00665847) investigated etravirine pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety in children and adolescents. Treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients (≥6 to

UNLABELLED Once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg), plus other antiretrovirals, is recommended for HIV-1-infected patients. Low therapy adherence is linked with poor outcomes. Pill burden can impact adherence. An 800-mg darunavir tablet would reduce pill burden. OBJECTIVES To assess the relative oral bioavailability (NCT01052883) and bioequivalence (NCT01308658) of a darunavir 800-mg tablet vs. 2 × 400-mg tablets. METHODS In two phase I, open-label, randomized, crossover, single-center studies, healthy volunteers received once-daily ritonavir (100 mg, days 1 - 5) and a single 800-mg darunavir dose: 2 × 400-mg tablets (reference) or 1 × 800- mg tablet (test) on day 3 and vice versa after a ≥ 7-day wash-out. Each study had fasted (n = 16 (bioavailability); n = 83 (bioequivalence)) and fed panels (n = 16; n = 45, respectively). Pharmacokinetic profiles and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS No volunteers discontinued for treatment-related reasons. Least-square mean ratios (test vs. reference) for darunavir maximum plasma concentrations (C(max)), area under the concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC(0-∞)) were: 1.06 and 1.15 (bioavailability), and 1.02 and 1.00 (bioequivalence), respectively (fasted); 0.89 and 0.88 (bioavailability), and 0.96 and 0.98 (bioequivalence), respectively (fed). 90% confidence intervals (CI) were within 80.00 - 125.00%, except bioavailability AUC(0-∞) (fed and fasted conditions). Median time to C(max) was comparable for both formulations. No clinically relevant differences in adverse events or laboratory abnormalities occurred between formulations. CONCLUSIONS Bioequivalence was demonstrated for the 800-mg darunavir tablet (fasted and fed conditions). This formulation can reduce pill burden and potentially increase adherence for HIV-1-infected patients in whom once-daily darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg is appropriate.

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.

This study compared the bioavailability of two candidate fixed-dose combinations (FDCs: G003 and G004) of darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg with that of darunavir 800 mg and ritonavir 100 mg coadministered as single agents. Short-term safety and tolerability of the FDC formulations were also assessed. This open-label trial included 36 healthy volunteers and assessed steady-state pharmacokinetics of darunavir over 3 randomized, 10-day treatment sequences, under fed conditions. Blood samples for determination of plasma concentrations of darunavir and cobicistat or ritonavir were taken over 24 hours on day 10 and analyzed by liquid-chromatography tandem mass-spectroscopy. Darunavir AUC24h following administration of the FDCs (G003: 74,780 ng ∙ h/mL and G004: 76,490 ng ∙ h/mL) was comparable to that following darunavir/ritonavir (78,410 ng ∙ h/mL), as was Cmax (6,666 and 6,917 ng/mL versus 6,973 ng/mL, respectively). Modestly lower C0h (1,504 and 1,478 ng/mL versus 2,015 ng/mL) and Cmin (1,167 and 1,224 ng/mL versus 1,540 ng/mL) values were seen with the FDCs. Short-term tolerability of the FDCs was comparable to that of darunavir/ritonavir when administered as single agents. The most common adverse events reported were headache, gastrointestinal upset, or rash. Cobicistat is an effective pharmacoenhancer of darunavir when administered as an FDC. Short-term administration of darunavir/ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat was generally well tolerated.

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.

This 2-part, phase 1, open-label, randomized, crossover study (NCT00752310) assessed ritonavir-boosted darunavir bioavailability (oral suspension vs. tablets), and steady-state darunavir pharmacokinetics (suspension). Part 1: 20 healthy adults randomly received 3 treatments with a ≥7-day washout between treatments; twice-daily ritonavir (100 mg, days 1-5) with darunavir (600 mg, day 3) as 2 × 300-mg tablets (fed, reference), or 6 mL of a 100-mg/mL suspension (fed or fasted, test). Part 2: 18 healthy volunteers received twice-daily darunavir (suspension, 600 mg days 1-6, one dose day 7) with twice-daily ritonavir (100 mg, days 1-9). Darunavir pharmacokinetics were evaluated (part 1 day 3; part 2 day 7). Safety/tolerability were assessed. In part 1, 90% confidence intervals for darunavir Cmax and AUC were all within 80-125% for suspension (fed or fasted) versus tablets (fed). Steady-state darunavir (suspension) pharmacokinetics in part 2 were similar to historic controls (tablets). No clinically relevant differences in adverse events or laboratory abnormalities occurred between treatments. Darunavir administered as an oral suspension or tablets (both with low-dose ritonavir) showed comparable bioavailability in healthy adults after a single dose. Steady-state darunavir pharmacokinetics (suspension, 600/100 mg twice daily) were consistent with historic controls; this formulation is considered suitable for pediatric use and for adults who cannot swallow tablets.

Rilpivirine is a human immunodeficiency virus Type 1 (HIV-1) non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Objective: Rilpivirine metabolism involves cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4). This trial (ClinicalTrials. gov number: NCT00739622) evaluated the interaction between rilpivirine and ethinylestradiol/norethindrone (combination oral contraceptives) which are metabolized by multiple pathways including CYP3A4. Methods: During three consecutive 28-day cycles 18 HIV-negative females received once-daily ethinylestradiol (35 mug)/norethindrone (1 mg) (Days 1 - 21); Days 22 - 28 were pill-free. Only in Cycle 3 was once-daily rilpivirine (25 mg) co-administered (Days 1 - 15). Minimum and maximum plasma concentrations (Cmin; Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours (AUC24h) of ethinylestradiol/norethindrone (Day 15 Cycles 2 and 3) and rilpivirine (Day 15 Cycle 3) were evaluated. Results: Rilpivirine coadministration had no effect on (least square mean ratio 90% confidence interval) ethinylestradiol Cmin (1.09 1.03 - 1.16) or AUC24h (1.14 1.10 - 1.19) but increased Cmax by 17% (1.17 1.06 - 1.30) which is unlikely to affect ethinylestradiol pharmacodynamics. Norethindrone pharmacokinetics were unaffected by rilpivirine (AUC24h: 0.89 0.84 - 0.94; Cmin: 0.99 0.90 - 1.08; Cmax: 0.94 0.83 - 1.06). Steady-state rilpivirine pharmacokinetics with ethinylestradiol/norethindrone was comparable with historical data for rilpivirine alone. Rilpivirine with ethinylestradiol/norethindrone was generally well tolerated. No new safety events were identified. Conclusions: Co-administration of rilpivirine at the therapeutic dosing regimen with ethinylestradiol/norethindrone does not affect hormone pharmacokinetics and is therefore unlikely to affect the efficacy or safety of this oral hormonal contraceptive. Rilpivirine pharmacokinetics was not affected by ethinylestradiol/norethindrone. Rilpivirine (25 mg once daily) can be co-administered with ethinylestradiol/norethindrone-based contraceptives without dose modification.

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.

Objectives Three studies were conducted to assess the pharmacokinetics, methods of administration and ease of swallowability of etravirine tablets. Methods Two randomized studies in healthy adults investigated the single-dose pharmacokinetics of etravirine in various dosage strengths and the effects of dispersion in water and film-coating. A third study explored swallowability of etravirine 200-mg tablets in HIV-infected patients. First study: 37 volunteers received 1 × 100-mg non-coated tablet (reference), 4 × 25-mg noncoated tablets and 1 × 100-mg non-coated tablet dispersed in 100 ml water. Second study: 24 volunteers received 2 × 100-mg non-coated tablets (reference), 2 × 100-mg coated tablets, 1 × 200-mg non-coated and 1 × 200-mg coated tablet. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined using non-compartmental analysis and least square means (LSM) ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Third study: 49 virologically-suppressed patients already on an etravirine-containing regimen rated the swallowability of two etravirine formulations (200-mg non-coated and 200-mg coated tablets). Results In the first study LSM ratios (90% CI) for the etravirine area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) administered either as 4 × 25-mg tablets or 100-mg tablet dispersed were: 0.91 (0.85 to 0.98) and 0.97 (0.90 to 1.03), respectively. In the second study, when comparing a 200-mg non-coated and coated tablet to 2 × 100-mg non-coated tablets, LSM ratios for etravirine AUC were 98 to 99%. In the third study, more patients rated the 200-mg than the 100-mg tablets as acceptable to swallow (70% vs. 43%). Conclusions Comparable etravirine exposures were observed regardless of formulation or method of administration (i.e., dispersion); 200-mg tablets were rated as easier to swallow than 100-mg tablets.

The objective of the study was to determine the impact of food and different meal types on the pharmacokinetics of rilpivirine, a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. In this open-label, randomized, crossover study, healthy volunteers received a single, oral 75 mg dose of rilpivirine either with a normal-fat breakfast (reference), under fasting conditions, with a high-fat breakfast, or with a protein-rich nutritional drink. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by non-compartmental methods and analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. Safety was assessed throughout. The least-squares mean ratio for area under the plasma concentration-time curve to last timepoint was 0.57 (90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.72) under fasting conditions compared to dosing with a normal-fat breakfast. With a high-fat breakfast or only a protein-rich nutritional drink, the corresponding values were 0.92 (90% CI: 0.80-1.07) and 0.50 (90% CI: 0.41-0.61), respectively, compared to dosing with a normal-fat breakfast. Under all conditions, rilpivirine was generally safe and well tolerated. Administration of rilpivirine under fasting conditions or with only a protein-rich nutritional drink substantially lowered the oral bioavailability when compared to administration with a normal-fat breakfast. Rilpivirine bioavailability was similar when administered with a high-fat or normal-fat breakfast. Rilpivirine should always be taken with a meal to ensure adequate bioavailability.

Background A previous study investigating coadministration of etravirine, a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, and lopinavir/ritonavir soft-gel formulation resulted in nonclinically relevant changes in etravirine and lopinavir exposure. The current study evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and the lopinavir/ritonavir melt extrusion formulation. Method Sixteen human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative volunteers were randomized to either treatment sequence A/B or B/A, with 14 days— washout between treatments (treatment A: etravirine 200 mg bid for 8 days; treatment B: lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg bid for 16 days with etravirine 200 mg bid on days 9-16). Steady-state pharmacokinetics were assessed for all antiretrovirals alone and coadministered; pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained by noncompartmental analysis. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Results Coadministration of etravirine and lopinavir/ritonavir resulted in a 35% decrease in etravirine exposure. Smaller decreases (

The nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor etravirine, approved for use in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients, is a substrate and inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and a substrate and inhibitor of CYP2C9/CYP2C19. Pharmacokinetic interactions and safety of etravirine 200 mg twice daily coadministered with fluconazole 200 mg daily or voriconazole 200 mg twice daily, both inhibitors of CYP3A4, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19, were evaluated in an open-label, randomized, 3-period crossover trial in 18 HIV-negative volunteers. Based on least squares means (LSM) ratios, coadministration of etravirine with fluconazole or voriconazole resulted in higher etravirine exposures (area under plasma concentration-time curve from 0-12 hours [AUC(12) (h) ] 1.86- and 1.36-fold, respectively). Fluconazole pharmacokinetics were unchanged with etravirine coadministration (AUC(12) (h) LSM ratio: 0.94), and voriconazole plasma concentrations were slightly raised (AUC(12) (h) LSM ratio: 1.14). All treatments and combinations were well tolerated, with no grade 3 or 4 adverse events observed during treatment. There was 1 adverse event-related trial withdrawal during treatment with fluconazole alone (leukocyturia). The most frequent adverse events were headache and blurred vision (11 and 8 volunteers, respectively), with blurred vision occurring exclusively during voriconazole-alone treatment. Pharmacokinetic interactions between etravirine and fluconazole or voriconazole are not expected to be clinically relevant; no dose adjustments are required during coadministration.

Etravirine (formerly TMC125) is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with activity against wild-type and NNRTI-resistant strains of HIV-1. Etravirine has been approved in several countries for use as part of highly active antiretroviral therapy in treatment-experienced patients. In vivo, etravirine is a substrate for, and weak inducer of, the hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzyme 3A4 and a substrate and weak inhibitor of CYP2C9 and CYP2C19. Etravirine is also a weak inhibitor of P-glycoprotein. An extensive drug-drug interaction programme in HIV-negative subjects has been carried out to assess the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between etravirine and a variety of non-antiretroviral drugs. Effects of atorvastatin, clarithromycin, methadone, omeprazole, oral contraceptives, paroxetine, ranitidine and sildenafil on the pharmacokinetic disposition of etravirine were of no clinical relevance. Likewise, etravirine had no clinically significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of fluconazole, methadone, oral contraceptives, paroxetine or voriconazole. No clinically relevant interactions are expected between etravirine and azithromycin or ribavirin, therefore, etravirine can be combined with these agents without dose adjustment. Fluconazole and voriconazole increased etravirine exposure 1.9- and 1.4-fold, respectively, in healthy subjects, however, no increase in the incidence of adverse effects was observed in patients receiving etravirine and fluconazole during clinical trials, therefore, etravirine can be combined with these antifungals although caution is advised. Digoxin plasma exposure was slightly increased when co-administered with etravirine. No dose adjustments of digoxin are needed when used in combination with etravirine, however, it is recommended that digoxin levels should be monitored. Caution should be exercised in combining rifabutin with etravirine in the presence of certain boosted HIV protease inhibitors due to the risk of decreased exposure to etravirine. Although adjustments to the dose of clarithromycin are unnecessary for the treatment of most infections, the use of an alternative macrolide (e.g. azithromycin) is recommended for the treatment of Mycobacterium avium complex infection since the overall activity of clarithromycin against this pathogen may be altered when co-administered with etravirine. Dosage adjustments based on clinical response are recommended for clopidogrel, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (e.g. atorvastatin) and for phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors (e.g. sildenafil) because changes in the exposure of these medications in the presence of co-administered etravirine may occur. When co-administered with etravirine, a dose reduction or alternative to diazepam is recommended. When combining etravirine with warfarin, the international normalized ratio (INR) should be monitored. Systemic dexamethasone should be co-administered with caution, or an alternative to dexamethasone be found as dexamethasone induces CYP3A4. Caution is also warranted when co-administering etravirine with some antiarrhythmics, calcineurin inhibitors (e.g. ciclosporin) and antidepressants (e.g. citalopram). Co-administration of etravirine with some antiepileptics (e.g. carbamazepine and phenytoin), rifampicin (rifampin), rifapentine or preparations containing St John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) is currently not recommended as these are potent inducers of CYP3A and/or CYP2C and may potentially decrease etravirine exposure. Antiepileptics that are less likely to interact based on their known pharmacological properties include gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam and pregabalin. Overall, pharmacokinetic and clinical data show etravirine to be well tolerated and generally safe when given in combination with non-antiretroviral agents, with minimal clinically significant drug interactions and no need for dosage adjustments of etravirine in any of the cases, or of the non-antiretroviral agent in the majority of cases studied.

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.

Etravirine is an effective and well-tolerated recently approved non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) for HIV type-1-infected patients with previous antiretroviral treatment experience. Considering the importance of combining antiretrovirals for their optimal use in treating HIV, a number of drug–drug interactions with etravirine and other antiretrovirals have been evaluated. Etravirine is a weak inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A and a weak inhibitor of CYP2C9/CYP2C19 and P-glycoprotein, and although etravirine is metabolized by the CYP enzyme system, the extent of clinically relevant interactions with other antiretrovirals is limited. Etravirine can be combined with all currently available nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors without dose adjustments, but not with other NNRTIs. Available data indicate that etravirine can be coadministered with most of the currently available ritonavir-boosted HIV protease inhibitors. Coadministration with tipranavir/ritonavir or unboosted HIV protease inhibitors is not recommended because of clinically relevant changes in exposure to etravirine or the coadministered HIV protease inhibitor, respectively. Etravirine can be coadministered with the integrase inhibitors elvitegravir/ritonavir or raltegravir, and with the fusion inhibitor enfuvirtide, without dose adjustments. Dose adjustment of the C–C chemokine receptor type-5 antagonist maraviroc is required, with the type of adjustment depending on whether a boosted HIV protease inhibitor is included in the regimen. In conclusion, etravirine can be combined with most antiretrovirals, with no clinically meaningful effect on drug exposure or safety/tolerability profiles.

Background Etravirine, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) active against NNRTI-resistant HIV, is an inducer of CYP3A4 and an inhibitor of CYP2C9/19. Study Design The effect of etravirine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ethinylestradiol and norethindrone was assessed in 30 HIV-negative females. Following a run-in cycle with ethinylestradiol/norethindrone, the pharmacokinetics of ethinylestradiol and norethindrone was assessed on Day 15 of Cycle 2. Etravirine 200 mg bid was coadministered on Day 1 to Day 15 of Cycle 3, with pharmacokinetic assessments of ethinylestradiol, norethindrone and etravirine on Day 15. Results When combined with etravirine, the least-squares means (LSM) ratios (90% confidence interval) for ethinylestradiol AUC 24h , C max and C min were 1.22 (1.13���1.31), 1.33 (1.21���1.46) and 1.09 (1.01���1.18), respectively, compared to administration alone. LSM ratios for norethindrone parameters were 0.95 (0.90���0.99), 1.05 (0.98���1.12) and 0.78 (0.68���0.90), respectively. Conclusion These changes are not considered clinically relevant. No loss in contraceptive efficacy is expected when coadministered with etravirine.

Background An open-label, randomized, crossover study was performed to investigate the effect of multiple doses of darunavir co-administered with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of the oral contraceptives ethinyl estradiol (EE) and norethindrone (NE) (commercial name of the combined drug Ortho-Novum 1/35) in 19 HIV-negative healthy women. Methods In session 1, participants received 35 μg EE and 1.0 mg NE from days 1 to 21. In session 2, participants received the same oral contraceptive treatment as in session 1 on days 1 to 21 plus DRV/r (600 mg/100 mg twice daily) on days 1 to 14. Pharmacokinetic assessments were performed on day 14 for each session. Results Steady-state systemic exposure to EE and NE decreased when DRV/r was co-administered, based on the ratio of least square means of the minimum plasma concentration (Cmin), the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), and the area under the curve (AUC24h) of EE (which decreased by 62%, 32% and 44%, respectively) and NE (which decreased by 30%, 10% and 14%, respectively) compared with administration of EE and NE alone. Five participants discontinued the study due to grade 2 cutaneous events, as required per protocol, during treatment with EE and NE in combination with DRV/r. There were no clinically relevant findings for laboratory and cardiovascular parameters. Conclusions The pharmacokinetic interaction observed here is considered to be clinically relevant as EE concentrations are considerably reduced when DRV/r is co-administered with EE and NE. Alternative or additional contraceptive measures should be used when oestrogen-based contraceptives are co-administered with DRV/r.

Background: Etravirine (TMC125), a next-generation nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown antiviral efficacy in 2 large Phase 3 trials. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown that etravirine is not associated with proarrhythmic potential. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) from healthy and HIV 1–infected volunteers showed no clinically relevant changes. Objective: To evaluate the effect of 2 etravirine dosing regimens on QT/corrected QT interval (QTc) in HIV-negative volunteers and assess pharmacokinetic and additional safety parameters. Methods: A double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, 4-period crossover trial was conducted in 41 HIV-negative volunteers. Participants received 4 regimens: etravirine 200 mg twice daily, etravirine 400 mg once daily, moxifloxacin 400 mg once daily (positive control), and placebo in separate 8-day sessions, with each followed by a washout period of 14 or more days. On days -1, 1, and 8 of each session, ECGs were recorded at 11 time points over 12 hours. Pharmacokinetic profiles of etravirine regimens were evaluated and safety was assessed. Results: Thirty-seven subjects completed the study. For etravirine, the upper limit of the 90% CIs of mean time-matched differences in QTc determined using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) was below 10 msec at all time points, the threshold for prolonged QT as defined by regulatory guidelines. The maximum mean (90% CI) difference of time-matched changes in QTcF versus placebo on day 1 was +0.1 msec (–2.6 to 2.9), -0.2 msec (-2.6 to 2.1), and +10.1 msec (7.3 to 12.8) for etravirine 200 mg twice daily, etravirine 400 mg once daily, and moxifloxacin, respectively. On day 8, these values were +0.6 msec (-2.1 to 3.3), -1.0 msec (-4.4 to 2.5), and +10.3 msec (6.8 to 13.9), respectively. Etravirine produced no clinically significant changes in other ECG parameters. No significant differences between males and females were observed. Both etravirine regimens had similar pharmacokinetic exposure and safety profiles. Conclusions: Etravirine does not prolong the QTc interval. No clinically relevant ECG changes were observed in HIV-negative volunteers. Short-term dosing of etravirine in HIV-negative volunteers was generally safe and well tolerated.

TMC125 is a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with potent in vitro activity against wild-type and NNRTI-resistant HIV-1. TMC125 is an inducer of CYP3A and an inhibitor of CYP2C. This trial evaluated the effect of TMC125 on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of methadone. In an open-label, add-on, 1-way interaction trial, 16 male HIV-negative volunteers on stable methadone maintenance therapy received 100 mg TMC125 bid for 14 days. Plasma concentrations and pharmacokinetic parameters of R- and S-methadone isomers were determined on days -1, 7, and 14 and of TMC125 on days 7 and 14. Safety and tolerability were assessed. The LSmeans ratios (90% confidence interval) for A UC 24h , C max , and C min of the pharmacologically active R-methadone were 1.08 (1.02-1.13), 1.03 (0.97-1.09), and 1.12 (1.05-1.19), respectively, on day 7 and 1.06 (0.99-1.13), 1.02 (0.96-1.09), and 1.10 (1.02-1.19), respectively, on day 14 compared with methadone alone. No withdrawal symptoms were observed; dose adjustment of methadone was not required. The concomitant administration of TMC125 and methadone was generally safe and well tolerated. TMC125 has no clinically relevant effect on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of methadone. No dose adjustment for methadone is anticipated when coadministered with TMC125.

This was an open-label, crossover study to investigate the pharmacokinetic interaction between darunavir (TMC114), coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (darunavir/ritonavir), and the protease inhibitor saquinavir in HIV-negative healthy volunteers. Thirty-two volunteers were randomized into two cohorts (panel 1 and panel 2). In two separate sessions, panel 1 received 400/100 mg darunavir/ritonavir twice a day and 400/1000/100 mg darunavir/saquinavir/ritonavir twice a day; panel 2 received 1000/100 mg saquinavir/ritonavir twice a day and 400/1000/100 mg darunavir/saquinavir/ritonavir twice a day. All treatments were administered orally under fed conditions for 13 days with an additional single morning dose on day 14. Treatment sessions were separated by a washout period of at least 14 days. Twenty-six volunteers completed the study (n=14, panel 1; n=12, panel 2), whereas six discontinued as a result of adverse events. Coadministration of saquinavir with darunavir/ritonavir resulted in decreases of darunavir area under the curve and maximum and minimum plasma concentrations of 26%, 17%, and 42%, respectively, compared with administration of darunavir/ritonavir alone. Relative to treatment with saquinavir/ritonavir alone, saquinavir exposure was not significantly different with the addition of darunavir. Ritonavir area under the curve12h increased by 34% when saquinavir was added to treatment with darunavir/ritonavir. The coadministration of darunavir/saquinavir/ritonavir was generally well tolerated. Similar findings are expected with the approved 600/100 mg darunavir/ritonavir twice-a-day dose. The combination of saquinavir and darunavir/ritonavir is currently not recommended.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the pharmacokinetics of TMC125 (etravirine) and darunavir (DRV) with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r).DesignOpen-label, randomized, two-way crossover Phase I trial.MethodsThirty-two HIV-negative volunteers were randomized 1:1 to two panels. All received TMC125 100 mg twice daily for 8 days and, after 14 days washout, DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily for 16 days. During days 9–16, TMC125 100 or 200 mg twice daily was coadministered (Panel I or II, respectively).ResultsTwenty-three volunteers completed the trial. With DRV/r coadministration, mean exposure (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h [AUC12h]) to TMC125 given as 100 mg twice daily was decreased by 37%; maximum and minimum plasma concentrations (Cmaxand Cmin) were decreased by 32% and 49%, respectively. For TMC125 200 mg twice daily coadministered with DRV/r, AUC12h, Cmaxand Cminof TMC125 were 80%, 81% and 67% greater, respectively, versus TMC125 100mg twice daily alone. DRV pharmacokinetics were unchanged except a 15% increase in AUC12hwhen given with TMC125 200 mg twice daily.ConclusionsNo clinically relevant changes in DRV pharmacokinetics were observed when combined with TMC125; therefore DRV dose adjustment is not required. Coadministration of TMC125 100 mg twice daily with DRV/r decreased TMC125 exposure by 37%. The increase of TMC125 exposure by 80% when given as 200 mg twice daily reflects the higher dose and the interaction with DRV/r. The magnitude of this interaction is comparable to TMC125 interactions with other boosted PIs observed in Phase IIb trials in HIV-1-infected patients. As these trials demonstrated TMC125 efficacy, no dose adjustment of TMC125 is needed when combined with DRV/r.

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.

The authors investigated the steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir in HIV-1-infected children in a dosage of 30 mg/kg every 8 hours and 45 mg/kg every 12 hours in 12 HIV-1-infected children (aged 2.1 to 10.8 years) participating in an open-label study of nelfinavir in combination with stavudine and lamivudine. Median values of the primary pharmacokinetic parameters of nelfinavir 30 mg/kg every-8-hours (n = 8) and 45 mg/kg every 12 hours (n = 10) were, respectively, for the area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours, 90.5 and 71.9 h x microg/mL, for the trough concentration 1.9 and 1.0 microg/mL, and for the maximal concentration 6.3 and 5.2 microg/mL. Overall, a 7-fold interpatient variability was observed for the exposure to nelfinavir. Nelfinavir 30 mg/kg every-8-hours or 45 mg/kg every 12 hours in HIV-1-infected children generally resulted in plasma concentrations higher than those obtained in adults. However, due to a large interpatient variability in the exposure, individual dosage adjustments based on plasma concentrations may be necessary for both dosing regimens to ensure optimal treatment.

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.

Background Darunavir requires pharmacokinetic enhancement to increase its bioavailability. Cobicistat is potentially an alternative pharmacokinetic booster to ritonavir. Bioequivalence of a darunavir/cobicistat fixed-dose combination (FDC) versus darunavir and cobicistat co-administered as single agents and the effect of a high-fat meal on the pharmacokinetics of the FDC were evaluated. Methods In this Phase I, open-label, randomized, three-panel, crossover study (NCT01619527), healthy volunteers received a single dose of darunavir (800 mg) with cobicistat (150 mg) as either an FDC or as single agents co-administered under fasted (panel 1, n=74) or fed (breakfast, panel 2, n=40) conditions, or as the FDC under fasted versus fed (high-fat breakfast) conditions (panel 3, n=19), with a ≥7 day washout period between treatments. Pharmacokinetic profiles, safety and tolerability were assessed. Results 90% confidence intervals of the least square mean ratios for darunavir and cobicistat maximum plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) were all within 80.00% and 125.00% in panels 1 and 2. Administration of the FDC with a high-fat breakfast significantly increased darunavir maximum plasma concentration 2.27-fold and AUC 1.63–1.70-fold, whereas cobicistat pharmacokinetics were unaffected. No volunteers discontinued due to adverse events (AEs). All AEs were grade 1 or 2. Overall, 27 (20%) and 26 (20%) volunteers had ≥1 AE at least possibly related to darunavir and cobicistat, respectively. Conclusions Bioequivalence of the darunavir/cobicistat 800/150-mg FDC was demonstrated versus darunavir and cobicistat co-administered as single agents under fasted or fed conditions. Food increased darunavir exposure, therefore, darunavir/cobicistat should be administered with food.

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.

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.

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.

Purpose: To describe the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel and to investigate the interaction potential with protease inhibitors (indinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir) and the nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor nevirapine, for which strong theoretical indications for clinically relevant drug interactions exist. Methods: The 24-h plasma pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel (Taxol, given at 100 mg/m2 by 3-h intravenous infusion) and concomitantly infused antiretroviral drugs were determined in a human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1)-infected male patient with refractory Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) during high-activity antiretroviral therapy and after discontinuation of this regimen. The plasma pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel, indinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, and nevirapine were closely monitored. Since all these drugs are extensively metabolized via the cytochrome P450 enzyme system and are substrates for the multidrug transporter P-glycoprotein, investigation of drug-drug interactions was considered important. Results: In this case report study the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel given concomitantly with various antiretroviral drugs were comparable with those of historical controls who had been treated with single-agent paclitaxel. The pharmacokinetics of indinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, and nevirapine were also not statistically significantly different from those recorded for historical controls. Paclitaxel was well tolerated and resulted in a significant clinical response in this patient. Conclusion: Dose adjustments of paclitaxel, indinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, or nevirapine are apparently not needed if HIV-1-associated KS is treated with paclitaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m2 as shown in the present case. It is stressed, however, that controlled studies are necessary to substantiate these preliminary case report findings.

All human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected patients who started to use indinavir (800 mg three times a day) as part of their triple drug regimen were included in a study to determine the importance of low plasma concentrations of indinavir as a cause of virological treatment failure. The indinavir concentration and a number of patient characteristics at baseline were tested as risk factors for virological treatment failure (defined as a viral load above 200 copies/ml after 24 weeks of treatment) in univariate and multivariate analyses; 65 patients were included. Virological treatment failure occurred in 36.9% of the patients. Multivariate analysis showed that a low plasma concentration of indinavir (odds ratio 0.1), a high viral load at baseline (odds ratio 2.6) and pretreatment with another protease inhibitor (odds ratio 10.0) were independent factors related to virological treatment failure. Monitoring of indinavir plasma concentrations may be an important tool for the optimization of triple drug combination therapy.

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.

In this review the clinical pharmacology of HIV protease inhibitors, a new class of antiretroviral drugs, is discussed. After considering HIV protease function and structure, the development of inhibitors of HIV protease is presented. Three protease inhibitors are reviewed in more detail: saquinavir, indinavir, and ritonavir. Clinical trial results with these agents are evaluated. Furthermore, adverse effects, resistance, dosage and administration, clinical pharmacokinetics, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships, and drug interactions are discussed.

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 pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the antiretroviral agent etravirine were evaluated in two phase III clinical trials. Pharmacokinetic data were available in 577 patients randomized to receive etravirine. The mean (SD) population-pharmacokinetics-derived area under the concentration–time curve at 12 h (AUC12 h) and concentration at 0 h (C0 h) were 5,501 (4,544) ng·h/ml and 393 (378) ng/ml, respectively. Hepatitis C coinfection raised etravarine exposure, and concomitant use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate lowered etravirine exposure, but these changes were not considered clinically relevant. Etravirine apparent oral clearance was not affected by age, weight, sex, race, hepatitis B coinfection status, creatinine clearance, or concomitant use of enfuvirtide. Virologic response (

The pharmacokinetics of some HIV protease inhibitors are altered in patients with hepatic impairment. The TMC114-C134 study assessed the pharmacokinetics and safety of darunavir/ritonavir 600 mg/100 mg twice daily in HIV-negative subjects with hepatic impairment (defined according to Child-Pugh classification A [mild] or B [moderate]) compared with matched, HIV-negative, healthy subjects.All subjects received darunavir/ritonavir 600 mg/100 mg twice daily for 6 days with a morning dose on day 7. Pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained up to 72 hours post-dose for darunavir and 12 hours post-dose for ritonavir on day 7. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.Darunavir pharmacokinetics in subjects with mild (n = 8) and moderate (n = 8) hepatic impairment were comparable to those in matched healthy control subjects (n = 16). In those with mild hepatic impairment, the least square mean ratios relative to healthy subjects for darunavir exposure (the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours) and for maximum and minimum plasma concentrations were 0.94 (90% CI 0.75, 1.17), 0.88 (90% CI 0.73, 1.07) and 0.83 (90% CI 0.63, 1.10), respectively. In those with moderate hepatic impairment, these values were 1.20 (90% CI 0.90, 1.60), 1.22 (90% CI 0.95, 1.56) and 1.27 (90% CI 0.87, 1.85), respectively. Ritonavir pharmacokinetics were comparable between healthy subjects and those with mild hepatic impairment, but mean exposure was 50% higher in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment. Darunavir/ritonavir was generally well tolerated, regardless of hepatic impairment. All adverse events were grade 1-2 in severity, except for a grade 3 increase in alanine aminotransferase reported in one subject with mild hepatic impairment. No adverse events led to discontinuation.The results of this study show that the pharmacokinetics of darunavir/ritonavir 600 mg/100 mg are not affected by mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Therefore, it is recommended that dose adjustments of darunavir/ritonavir are not required in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment.

Background: Etravirine is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with activity against both wild-type HIV and viruses harboring NNRTI resistance. Etravirine is mainly eliminated via the hepatobiliary route. Objectives: This study in HIV− patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment and healthy matched controls was conducted to explore the effects of mild and moderate hepatic impairment on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of etravirine and to provide guidance for the treatment of HIV+ patients with hepatic impairment. Methods: This open-label, multiple-dose study enrolled HIV− patients aged 18 to 65 years with mild or moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh score, 5–6 or 7–9, respectively) and healthy volunteers matched for age, sex, race, and body mass index (BMI). All subjects received etravirine 200 mg BID with food for 7 days and a morning dose on day 8. Etravirine pharmacokinetics over a period of 12 hours on days 1 and 8 were determined using noncompartmental methods and analyzed using linear mixed-effects modeling. Tolerability of etravirine was assessed based on the reported adverse events, laboratory investigations, ECG, and physical examination. Results: Each group comprised 8 subjects (mild hepatic impairment patients: 5 men, 3 women; median age, 57 years [range, 41–65 years]; BMI, 26 kg/m 2 [range, 20–32 kg/m 2 ]; moderate hepatic impairment patients: 6 men, 2 women; age, 54 years [range, 44–64 years]; BMI, 26 kg/m 2 [range, 22–32 kg/m 2 ]). All patients were white and light smokers. On day 8, the least squares mean ratios (90% CIs) of the logtransformed pharmacokinetic properties in patients with mild and moderate hepatic impairment were, respectively: C min , 0.87 (0.65–1.17) and 0.98 (0.68–1.42) μg/mL; C max , 0.79 (0.63–1.00) and 0.72 (0.54–0.96) ug/mL; and AUC 0–12 , 0.87 (0.69–1.09) and 0.82 (0.60–1.11) μg/mL/h. All treatment-emergent adverse events were considered mild to moderate; the most common were headache (50% in healthy controls) and fatigue and nausea (both 25% in patients with mild hepatic impairment). No clinically significant changes in laboratory parameters, physical examination including vital signs, or ECG were observed. One serious adverse event was reported during the follow-up period in a patient with moderate hepatic impairment due to hepatic cirrhosis secondary to alcoholism. This patient presented at screening with dilated cardiomyopathy and cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusions: In this Phase I pharmacokinetic study, no clinically relevant differences were observed between patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment and healthy matched subjects with regard to the pharmacokinetics of etravirine. Based on these findings in these HIV− volunteers, no dose adjustment of etravirine appears to be necessary in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Etravirine was generally well tolerated.

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.