Search

Assays to identify infectious organisms are critical for diagnosis and enabling the development of therapeutic agents. The demonstration that individuals with a 32-bp deletion within the CCR5 locus were resistant to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, while those heterozygous for the mutation progressed more slowly, led to the discovery of maraviroc (MVC), a CCR5 antagonist. As MVC is only active against CCR5-tropic strains of HIV, it was critical to develop a diagnostic assay to identify appropriate patients. Trofile™, a novel phenotypic tropism assay, was used to identify patients with CCR5-tropic virus for the MVC development program. Results of these clinical studies demonstrated that the assay correctly identified patients likely to respond to MVC. Over time, the performance characteristics of the phenotypic assay were enhanced, necessitating retesting of study samples. Genotypic tropism tests that have the potential to allow for local use and more rapid turnaround times are also being developed., (© 2015 New York Academy of Sciences.)

Purpose: The maraviroc (MVC) expanded access program (EAP) was initiated to increase MVC availability to patients with limited treatment options. Darunavir (DRV), raltegravir (RAL), and etravirine (ETV) were either recently approved or under regulatory review at study initiation and available for coadministration with MVC. Thus, the safety of MVC in combination with new antiretroviral therapies (ARVs) could be assessed. This open-label safety study of MVC was conducted at 262 sites worldwide in 1032 R5 HIV-positive treatment-experienced patients with limited/no therapeutic options., Methods: Study visits included screening, baseline, end of study or early discontinuation, and follow-up 30 days after last dose. Interim visits for HIV-1 RNA and CD4 cell counts occurred according to local HIV infection management guidelines. Safety data were analyzed overall and by subgroup based on ARV combination [MVC+optimized background therapy (OBT), MVC ± OBT+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL, MVC ± OBT+RAL+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL+ETV ± DRV/r]., Results: Most (90.3%) adverse events (AEs) were of mild or moderate severity with few grade 3/4 events, discontinuations, or temporary discontinuations/dose reductions due to AEs or serious AEs. Similar results were observed across subgroups. Of treated patients, 79.9% and 50% had HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/ml and < 50 copies/ml respectively, at the end of the study, early termination visits, or at last known status. Tropism changes and selection of MVC-resistant R5 virus, including high-level MVC dependence, were mechanisms of viral escape., Conclusion: MVC was well tolerated with virologic suppression observed in most patients.

Background: Maraviroc-containing regimens are known to achieve virological suppression in many treatment-experienced patients. This study aimed to evaluate a more rigorous methodological approach to resistance-response analysis in large clinical studies and to better establish which subpopulations of patients were most likely to benefit from maraviroc by refining and extending previous subgroup analyses from the MOTIVATE studies., Methods: Individual weighted optimized background therapy (OBT) susceptibility scores were calculated by combining genotypic or phenotypic resistance testing with prior drug use information. Virological response (HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 48) using each of these methods was compared with a commonly used method of counting active drugs. Baseline predictors of virological response, including weighted or unweighted scoring, maraviroc use, baseline CD4(+) T-cell count, HIV-1 plasma viral load and tropism, were assessed by logistic regression modelling., Results: Genotypic or phenotypic weighted methods were similarly predictive of virological response and better than counting active drugs. Weighted scoring and baseline CD4(+) T-cell count were the strongest predictors of virological response (P<0.0001): ≈70% of maraviroc patients with a weighted score ≥2 had a virological response, rising to ≈80% when the baseline CD4(+) T-cell count was ≥50 cells/mm(3)., Conclusions: Approximately 80% of patients with a CD4(+) T-cell count ≥50 cells/mm(3) receiving maraviroc with the equivalent of at least two fully active agents achieved HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 48 in the MOTIVATE studies. Genotypic and phenotypic weighted scores were similarly predictive of virological response.

Maraviroc is the first CCR5 antagonist to be approved for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. It is generally well tolerated, with a similar side-effect profile to placebo in controlled studies. Many agents used to treat HIV disease are associated with the potential for hepatotoxicity. The hepatic effects of maraviroc were analyzed across all Pfizer-sponsored maraviroc clinical trials, in which 2350 volunteers received maraviroc. Although sporadic hepatic enzyme abnormalities were reported in 34 phase 1/2a studies of up to 28-day duration, they demonstrated no dose relationship or association with hyperbilirubinemia. In the four phase 2b/3 studies in antiretroviral -naive and antiretroviral-experienced patients, there was no significant imbalance in hepatic enzyme abnormalities or hepatobiliary adverse events in maraviroc versus comparator arms up to week 96. The findings were similar in patients coinfected with hepatitis B and/or C virus, although the number of coinfected patients was small. No patient met the strict definition for Hy's Law. Two participants reported severe hepatotoxicity and although other potential causes were present, the contribution of maraviroc to these events could not be excluded. This analysis suggests that maraviroc does not present significant risks to hepatic safety when taken at the recommended doses in the populations studied.

Purpose: The MOTIVATE studies assessed maraviroc with optimized background therapy (OBT) in treatment-experienced patients with R5 HIV-1. This post hoc analysis compared outcomes between patients with and without HIV-1 resistance to epsilon3 classes of antiretrovirals at screening (triple-class-resistant [TCR] versus not-TCR [nTCR])., Methods: Week 48 changes (N = 635) in HIV-1 RNA and CD4+ cells were compared between TCR and nTCR groups receiving twice-daily maraviroc+OBT or placebo+OBT., Results: HIV-1 RNA change from baseline on maraviroc was significantly greater in the nTCR group (-2.05 vs -1.74 log(10) copies/mL; 95% CI difference 0.05-0.58 log(10)) though proportions <400 or <50 copies/mL were not. Week 48 CD4 increases were significantly greater in the nTCR group overall (mean +150 vs +110 cells/mm(3); 95% CI difference 18-62 cells/mm(3)) and in those with <50 RNA copies/mL (nTCR +192 vs +126 cells/mm(3); 95% CI difference, 19-93 cells/mm(3)) or receiving > or = 2 active OBT agents (weighted score; nTCR +184 vs +125 cells/mm3; 95% CI difference 8-110 cells/mm(3))., Conclusions: Virologic suppression on maraviroc was greater in the nTCR than the TCR group, though proportions <50 or 400 copies/mL were not significantly different. Optimal CD4 increases on maraviroc appeared to accrue from initiation before development of TCR virus.

Background: The MERIT (Maraviroc versus Efavirenz in Treatment-Naive Patients) study compared maraviroc and efavirenz, both with zidovudine-lamivudine, in antiretroviral-naive patients with R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection., Methods: Patients screened for R5 HIV-1 were randomized to receive efavirenz (600 mg once daily) or maraviroc (300 mg once or twice daily) with zidovudine-lamivudine. Coprimary end points were proportions of patients with a viral load <400 and <50 copies/mL at week 48; the noninferiority of maraviroc was assessed., Results: The once-daily maraviroc arm was discontinued for not meeting prespecified noninferiority criteria. In the primary 48-week analysis (n = 721), maraviroc was noninferior for <400 copies/mL (70.6% for maraviroc vs 73.1% for efavirenz) but not for <50 copies/mL (65.3% vs 69.3%) at a threshold of -10%. More maraviroc patients discontinued for lack of efficacy (11.9% vs 4.2%), but fewer discontinued for adverse events (4.2% vs 13.6%). In a post hoc reanalysis excluding 107 patients (15%) with non-R5 screening virus by the current, more sensitive tropism assay, the lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the difference between treatment groups was above -10% for each end point., Conclusions: Twice-daily maraviroc was not noninferior to efavirenz at <50 copies/mL in the primary analysis. However, 15% of patients would have been ineligible for inclusion by a more sensitive screening assay. Their retrospective exclusion resulted in similar response rates in both arms Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: (NCT00098293) .

Background: Maraviroc, a CCR5 antagonist, is active against R5 but not X4 or dual- or mixed-tropic strains of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). A phase 2b study was conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of maraviroc in combination with optimized background therapy in treatment-experienced patients infected with dual- or mixed-tropic HIV-1., Methods: Treatment-experienced patients with an HIV-1 RNA level 5000 copies/mL who had received 3 classes of drugs and/or were infected with virus resistant to 2 drug classes and were infected with non-R5 HIV-1 were randomized to receive optimized background therapy plus maraviroc (once or twice daily) or placebo. The primary end point was change in HIV-1 RNA level from baseline to 24 weeks., Results: Among 167 patients infected with dual- or mixed-tropic HIV-1, baseline mean HIV-1 RNA levels were >5 log(10) copies/mL and median CD4(+) cell counts were <50 cells/microL. From baseline to 24 weeks, patients who received placebo demonstrated a mean decrease in HIV-1 RNA levels of 0.97 log(10) copies/mL, compared with mean decreases of 0.91 and 1.20 log(10) copies/mL for those who received maraviroc once (P =.83) or twice (P +.38) daily, respectively. Mean increases in CD4(+) cell counts from baseline were 36 cells/microL for patients who received placebo, 60 cells/microL among patients who received maraviroc once daily, and 62 cells/microL among patients who received maraviroc twice daily. The incidences of serious adverse events were similar among groups., Conclusions: In this exploratory study involving extensively treatment-experienced patients with advanced, non-R5 HIV-1 infection, neither superiority nor noninferiority was statistically demonstrated for either maraviroc dosage compared with placebo at 24 weeks of treatment., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00098748 .

Background: CC chemokine receptor 5 antagonists are a new class of antiretroviral agents., Methods: We conducted two double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies--Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2--with patients who had R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) only. They had been treated with or had resistance to three antiretroviral-drug classes and had HIV-1 RNA levels of more than 5000 copies per milliliter. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three antiretroviral regimens consisting of maraviroc once daily, maraviroc twice daily, or placebo, each of which included optimized background therapy (OBT) based on treatment history and drug-resistance testing. Safety and efficacy were assessed after 48 weeks., Results: A total of 1049 patients received the randomly assigned study drug; the mean baseline HIV-1 RNA level was 72,400 copies per milliliter, and the median CD4 cell count was 169 per cubic millimeter. At 48 weeks, in both studies, the mean change in HIV-1 RNA from baseline was greater with maraviroc than with placebo: -1.66 and -1.82 log(10) copies per milliliter with the once-daily and twice-daily regimens, respectively, versus -0.80 with placebo in MOTIVATE 1, and -1.72 and -1.87 log(10) copies per milliliter, respectively, versus -0.76 with placebo in MOTIVATE 2. More patients receiving maraviroc once or twice daily had HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (42% and 47%, respectively, vs. 16% in the placebo group in MOTIVATE 1; 45% in both maraviroc groups vs. 18% in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). The change from baseline in CD4 counts was also greater with maraviroc once or twice daily than with placebo (increases of 113 and 122 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 54 in MOTIVATE 1; increases of 122 and 128 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 69 in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). Frequencies of adverse events were similar among the groups., Conclusions: Maraviroc, as compared with placebo, resulted in significantly greater suppression of HIV-1 and greater increases in CD4 cell counts at 48 weeks in previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 who were receiving OBT. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00098306 and NCT00098722.), (2008 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Background: We conducted subanalyses of the combined results of the Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2 studies to better characterize the efficacy and safety of maraviroc in key subgroups of patients., Methods: We analyzed pooled data from week 48 from the two studies according to sex, race or ethnic group, clade, CC chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) delta32 genotype, viral load at the time of screening, the use or nonuse of enfuvirtide in optimized background therapy (OBT), the baseline CD4 cell count, the number of active antiretroviral drugs coadministered, the first use of selected background agents, and tropism at baseline. Changes in viral tropism and the CD4 count at treatment failure were evaluated. Data on aminotransferase levels in patients coinfected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) were also analyzed., Results: A treatment benefit of maraviroc plus OBT over placebo plus OBT was shown in all subgroups, including patients with a low CD4 cell count at baseline, those with a high viral load at screening, and those who had not received active agents in OBT. Analyses of the virologic response according to the first use of selected background drugs showed the additional benefit of adding a potent new drug to maraviroc at the initiation of maraviroc therapy. More patients in whom maraviroc failed had a virus binding to the CXC chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) at failure, but there was no evidence of a decrease in the CD4 cell count at failure in such patients as compared with those in whom placebo failed. Subanalyses involving patients coinfected with HBV or HCV revealed no evidence of excess hepatotoxic effects as compared with baseline., Conclusions: Subanalyses of pooled data from week 48 indicate that maraviroc provides a valuable treatment option for a wide spectrum of patients with R5 HIV-1 infection who have been treated previously. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00098306 and NCT00098722.), (2008 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Aims: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of single and multiple oral doses of maraviroc in healthy volunteers., Methods: Three double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation studies with either single or multiple doses of maraviroc were conducted in healthy volunteers. Plasma and urine samples were collected to investigate the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc and evaluate any changes with respect to dose and duration/frequency of dosing. Safety and toleration of maraviroc were also assessed., Results: Maraviroc is rapidly absorbed following oral administration, and plasma T(max) is achieved within 0.5-4.0 h postdose. Steady-state plasma concentrations are achieved after 7 consecutive days of dosing. Although the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc is nonproportional over the dose range studied (3-1200 mg), the degree of nonproportionality is small at clinically relevant doses. Renal clearance is approximately 10-12 l h(-1) and appears unaffected by increasing maraviroc doses. Maraviroc does not significantly modulate the activity of CYP2D6 or CYP3A4 at clinically relevant doses. There were no serious adverse events in any of these studies, and doses up to 900 mg were generally well tolerated, with postural hypotension being the dose-limiting event. There was no pattern or dose relationship observed with maraviroc with regard to laboratory abnormalities, including hepatic transaminases. No clinically significant increases in QTc were noted at clinically relevant doses., Conclusions: Maraviroc is absorbed into the systemic circulation and reaches steady state by day 7 of multiple dosing. It does not significantly influence the activity of major drug-metabolizing enzymes and is well tolerated at clinically relevant doses, with most adverse events being mild or moderate.

Background: Maraviroc, a noncompetitive antagonist of the CCR5 coreceptor, was recently approved in the USA as a treatment of HIV infection. For antiretroviral agents that target the virus, antiviral effect can be related to some extent to plasma drug concentrations. For CCR5 antagonists that target the host cells, receptor occupancy in vivo might be a better predictor of efficacy. AIMS To develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) model that describes CCR5 receptor occupancy by maraviroc after oral administration at different doses in healthy volunteers and HIV-positive patients and to assess the relevance of receptor occupancy in predicting the decrease in viral load (HIV-1 RNA copies ml(-1)) in HIV-positive patients., Methods: Receptor occupancy data from 88 individuals enrolled in two multiple dose trials were included in the population PK-receptor binding model. Out of the 88 individuals, 25 were HIV-1-infected patients and had viral load measurements, whereas the remaining 63 were healthy volunteers. Doses ranged from 3 mg b.i.d. to 600 mg q.d. A previously published PK-PD disease model describing the effect of maraviroc on the viral load was updated by replacing its PD module by the receptor occupancy model. Simulated viral load-time profiles with the updated model were compared with the profiles observed in patients., Results: The majority of measured plasma concentrations were associated with receptor occupancy > or = 50% even at the lowest dose of 3 mg b.i.d. A simple direct E(max) model appeared to describe satisfactorily the PK-receptor occupancy relationship. The estimated K(D) was around 0.0894 ng ml(-1), far below the operational in vivo antiviral IC(50) of 8 ng ml(-1). Accordingly, simulations led to marked overprediction of the decrease in viral load-time profiles., Conclusions: Maraviroc receptor occupancy close to the maximum is required to induce a significant decrease in viral load, indicating that in vivo CCR5 receptor occupancy by maraviroc is not a direct measure of drug inhibitory activity. Considering the imprecision of the measurement in the upper flat part of the maraviroc concentration vs. percent CCR5 occupancy curve, it can reasonably be concluded that routine monitoring of receptor occupancy as a biomarker for maraviroc efficacy will not be helpful. Based on this analysis, it was decided not to use receptor occupancy as a biomarker of viral load inhibition during the development of CCR5 antagonist compounds.

Objectives: To use a viral dynamics model to compare the effectiveness of in vivo viral inhibition of several doses of maraviroc (MVC;UK-427,857) and to use a modeling approach to support design decisions for a monotherapy study using various dosing regimens of maraviroc given with and without food., Design: The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model was developed using clinical data from a first monotherapy study (study A4001007). This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of maraviroc in 44 asymptomatic HIV-1-infected patients. Patients received maraviroc under food restrictions at 25 mg once daily or 50, 100, or 300 mg twice daily, or placebo for 10 days., Methods: Antiviral responses were assessed by measuring plasma HIV-1 RNA levels during screening, during randomization, at baseline, and daily during the 10 days of treatment and at days 11 to 15, 19, 22, 25, and 40. An integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model was developed using the mixed effects modeling approach with patients' pharmacokinetic profiles on the last day of treatment, HIV-1 RNA levels over time, and the individual viral susceptibility. The parameters derived from the viral dynamic model were used to calculate average viral inhibition fraction, decay rate of actively infected cells, and basic reproductive ratio for each treatment group. Monte Carlo simulation was then used to determine the distribution of viral load change across simulated patients over time for each regimen to be studied in another monotherapy study, A4001015., Results: The decline rate in the 300 mg twice daily group was comparable to that induced by potent protease inhibitor monotherapy, but was significantly slower than that in patients receiving combination therapy including both protease inhibitor and reverse transcriptase inhibitors. The efficacy of inhibition in vivo was estimated to range from 0.15 to 0.38 for the 25 mg once daily dose group and from 0.88 to 0.96 for the 300 mg twice daily dose group., Conclusions: The model has aided the analysis and interpretation of the clinical data. The use of a model-based approach for selecting doses can accelerate drug development by replacing some arms or trials with simulations.

Antagonists of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) coreceptor, CCR5, are being developed as the first anti-HIV agents acting on a host cell target. We monitored the coreceptor tropism of circulating virus, screened at baseline for coreceptor tropism, in 64 HIV-1-infected patients who received maraviroc (MVC, UK-427,857) as monotherapy for 10 days. Sixty-two patients harbored CCR5-tropic virus at baseline and had a posttreatment phenotype result. Circulating virus remained CCR5 tropic in 60/62 patients, 51 of whom experienced an HIV RNA reduction from baseline of >1 log(10) copies/ml, indicating that CXCR4-using variants were not rapidly selected despite CCR5-specific drug pressure. In two patients, viral load declined during treatment and CXCR4-using virus was detected at day 11. No pretreatment factor predicted the emergence of CXCR4-tropic virus during maraviroc therapy in these two patients. Phylogenetic analysis of envelope (Env) clones from pre- and posttreatment time points indicated that the CXCR4-using variants probably emerged by outgrowth of a pretreatment CXCR4-using reservoir, rather than via coreceptor switch of a CCR5-tropic clone under selection pressure from maraviroc. Phylogenetic analysis was also performed on Env clones from a third patient harboring CXCR4-using virus prior to treatment. This patient was enrolled due to a sample labeling error. Although this patient experienced no overall reduction in viral load in response to treatment, the CCR5-tropic components of the circulating virus did appear to be suppressed while receiving maraviroc as monotherapy. Importantly, in all three patients, circulating virus reverted to predominantly CCR5 tropic following cessation of maraviroc.

Background: The viral dynamics of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been widely studied and expressed as mathematic equations. For most of the current registered antiretroviral drugs, the pharmacokinetics is well characterized and some relationships with the viral load-time profiles in plasma from HIV patients have been established. The integration of these models in a pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD)-disease model can help toward a better understanding of the complexity of the interactions, as well as in the identification and clarification of the current model assumptions., Methods: This work describes the development of a generic PK-PD disease model for a short-term (10 days) monotherapy phase IIa study with a novel anti-HIV drug, maraviroc (UK-427,857). The disease component of the model was based on the model published by Bonhoeffer et al, which was adapted for short-term treatment and for the new mechanism of action, CCR5-receptor antagonism. The model parameters were derived from the literature, as well as from a model-based analysis of available phase IIa clinical data from another investigational antiretroviral drug. The PD component that links the plasma concentrations of maraviroc to the inhibition of virus replication was based on in vitro measurements of drug potency and took into account the difference in the in vitro and in vivo protein binding and the uncertainties regarding the interpretation of the in vitro to in vivo extrapolation of the 50% inhibitory concentration. Finally, the PK component was based on information obtained from a single-dose study in healthy volunteers., Results: The integrated PK-PD disease modeling allowed prediction of the effect on viral load of different maraviroc doses given as monotherapy to drug-naive patients., Conclusions: By making use of the available PK-PD disease model, the possible range of active oral doses for maraviroc in HIV-positive patients was estimated by simulation before any clinical trials were taking place. The use of a model-based approach for selecting doses for clinical phase IIa has improved and accelerated the drug's development. This model was a powerful tool for assisting in the design of clinical studies on new agents for treating HIV/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.