Search

BackgroundThe central nervous system (CNS) is a likely reservoir of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), vulnerable to viral rebound, inflammation, and clinical changes upon stopping antiretroviral therapy (ART). It is critical to evaluate the CNS safety of studies using analytic treatment interruption (ATI) to assess HIV remission.MethodsThirty participants who started ART during acute HIV infection underwent CNS assessments across 4 ATI remission trials. ART resumption occurred with plasma viral load >1000 copies/mL. CNS measures included paired pre- vs post-ATI measures of mood, cognitive performance, and neurologic examination, with elective cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling, brain diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS).ResultsMedian participant age was 30 years old and 29/30 were male. Participants’ median time on ART before ATI was 3 years, and ATI lasted a median of 35 days. Post-ATI, there were no differences in median mood scores or neurologic findings and cognitive performance improved modestly. During ATI, a low level of CSF HIV-1 RNA was detectable in 6 of 20 participants with plasma viremia, with no group changes in CSF immune activation markers or brain DTI measures. Mild worsening was identified in post-ATI basal ganglia total choline MRS, suggesting an alteration in neuronal membranes.ConclusionNo adverse CNS effects were observed with brief, closely monitored ATI in participants with acutely treated HIV, except an MRS alteration in basal ganglia choline. Further studies are needed to assess CNS ATI safety in HIV remission trials, particularly for studies using higher thresholds to restart ART and longer ATI durations.

Background Developing a cross-clade, globally effective HIV vaccine remains crucial for eliminating HIV. Methods This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2a study enrolled healthy HIV-uninfected adults at low risk for HIV infection. They were randomized (1:4:1) to receive 4 doses of an adenovirus 26-based HIV-1 vaccine encoding 2 mosaic Gag and Pol, and 2 mosaic Env proteins plus adjuvanted clade C gp140 (referred to here as clade C regimen), bivalent protein regimen (clade C regimen plus mosaic gp140), or placebo. Primary end points were safety and antibody responses. Results In total 152/155 participants (clade C, n = 26; bivalent protein, n = 103; placebo, n = 26) received ≥1 injection. The highest adverse event (AE) severity was grade 3 (local pain/tenderness, 12%, 2%, and 0% of the respective groups; solicited systemic AEs, 19%, 15%, 0%). HIV-1 mosaic gp140-binding antibody titers were 79 595 ELISA units (EU)/mL and 137 520 EU/mL in the clade C and bivalent protein groups (P < .001) after dose 4 and 16 862 EU/mL and 25 162 EU/mL 6 months later. Antibody response breadth against clade C gp140 and clade C/non-clade C gp120 was highest in the bivalent protein group. Conclusions Adding mosaic gp140 to the clade C regimen increased and broadened the elicited immune response without compromising safety or clade C responses. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02935686.

Summary Background Bioinformatically designed mosaic antigens increase the breadth of HIV vaccine-elicited immunity. This study compared the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a newly developed, tetravalent Ad26 vaccine with the previously tested trivalent formulation. Methods This randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2a study (TRAVERSE) was done at 11 centres in the USA and one centre in Rwanda. Eligible participants were adults aged 18 to 50 years, who were HIV-uninfected, healthy at screening based on their medical history and a physical examination including laboratory assessment and vital sign measurements, and at low risk of HIV infection in the opinion of study staff, who applied a uniform definition of low-risk guidelines that was aligned across sites. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to tetravalent and trivalent groups. Participants in tetravalent and trivalent groups were then further randomly assigned at a 5:1 ratio to adenovirus 26 (Ad26)-vectored vaccine and placebo subgroups. Randomisation was stratified by region (USA and Rwanda) and based on a computer-generated schedule using randomly permuted blocks prepared under the sponsor's supervision. We masked participants and investigators to treatment allocation throughout the study. On day 0, participants received a first injection of tetravalent vaccine (Ad26.Mos4.HIV or placebo) or trivalent vaccine (Ad26.Mos.HIV or placebo), and those injections were repeated 12 weeks later. At week 24, vaccine groups received a third dose of tetravalent or trivalent together with clade C gp140, and this was repeated at week 48, with placebos again administered to the placebo group. All study vaccines and placebo were administered by intramuscular injection in the deltoid muscle. We assessed adverse events in all participants who received at least one study injection (full analysis set) and Env-specific binding antibodies in all participants who received at least the first three vaccinations according to the protocol-specified vaccination schedule, had at least one measured post-dose blood sample collected, and were not diagnosed with HIV during the study (per-protocol set). This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02788045 . Findings Of 201 participants who were enrolled and randomly assigned, 198 received the first vaccination: 110 were in the tetravalent group, 55 in the trivalent group, and 33 in the placebo group. Overall, 185 (93%) completed two scheduled vaccinations per protocol, 180 (91%) completed three, and 164 (83%) completed four. Solicited, self-limiting local, systemic reactogenicity and unsolicited adverse events were similar in vaccine groups and higher than in placebo groups. All participants in the per-protocol set developed clade C Env binding antibodies after the second vaccination, with higher total IgG titres after the tetravalent vaccine than after the trivalent vaccine (10 413 EU/mL, 95% CI 7284–14 886 in the tetravalent group compared with 5494 EU/mL, 3759–8029 in the trivalent group). Titres further increased after the third and fourth vaccinations, persisting at least through week 72. Other immune responses were also higher with the tetravalent vaccine, including the magnitude and breadth of binding antibodies against a cross-clade panel of Env antigens, and the magnitude of IFNγ ELISPOT responses (median 521 SFU/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs] in the tetravalent group and median 282 SFU/106 PBMCs in the trivalent group after the fourth vaccination) and Env-specific CD4+ T-cell response rates after the third and fourth vaccinations. No interference by pre-existing Ad26 immunity was identified. Interpretation The tetravalent vaccine regimen was generally safe, well-tolerated, and found to elicit higher immune responses than the trivalent regimen. Regimens that use this tetravalent vaccine component are being advanced into field trials to assess efficacy against HIV-1 infection. Funding National Institutes of Health, Henry M Jackson Foundation for Advancement of Military Medicine and the US Department of Defense, Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT, & Harvard, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention.

Background Experimental human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 vaccines frequently elicit antibodies against HIV-1 that may react with commonly used HIV diagnostic tests, a phenomenon known as vaccine-induced seropositivity/seroreactivity (VISP/VISR). We sought to determine, under clinic conditions, whether a patient-controlled HIV test, OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test, detected HIV-1 vaccine-induced antibodies. Methods Plasma assessment of HIV-1 cross-reactivity was examined in end-of-study samples from 57 healthy, HIV-uninfected participants who received a candidate vaccine that has entered Phase 2B and 3 testing. We also screened 120 healthy, HIV-uninfected, unblinded HIV-1 vaccine participants with VISP/VISR for an assessment using saliva. These participants came from 21 different parent vaccine protocols representing 17 different vaccine regimens, all of which contained an HIV-1 envelope immunogen. OraQuick ADVANCE was compared with results from concurrent blood samples using a series of commercial HIV screening immunoassays. Results Fifty-seven unique participant plasma samples were assayed in vitro, and only 1 (1.8%) was reactive by OraQuick ADVANCE. None of the 120 clinic participants (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0% to 3.7%) tested positive by OraQuick ADVANCE, and all were confirmed to be uninfected by HIV-1 viral ribonucleic acid testing. One hundred eighteen of the 120 (98.3%) participants had a reactive HIV test for VISP/VISR: 77 (64%) had at least 1 reactive fourth-generation HIV-1 diagnostic test (P, Experimental HIV-1 vaccines frequently elicit antibodies which cross-react with common HIV diagnostic tests. Vaccine-induced seropositivity/seroreactivity (VISP/VISR) can be problematic for clinical trial volunteers. We tested a point-of-care HIV test, OraQuick ADVANCE, to determine if it could detect VISP/VISR.

Replication-incompetent adenoviral vectors have been under investigation as a platform to carry a variety of transgenes, and express various antigens as a basis for preventive or therapeutic vaccine development. A replication incompetent adenoviral vector based on human adenovirus type 26 (Ad26) has been evaluated in several clinical trials. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) was formed to evaluate the safety and features of recombinant viral vector vaccines. This paper reviews the biological features of the Ad26 vectors, including tabulation of safety and risk assessment characteristics of Ad26 vector-based vaccines. Substantial information on immunogenicity, clinical safety, biological characteristics and manufacturing are reported. In the Ad26 vector, deletion of the E1 gene, rendering the vector replication incompetent and providing space for transgene insertion, is combined with additional genetic engineering for vaccine manufacturability and transgene expression optimization. These vaccines are manufactured using the E1-complementing PER.C6® cell line, a continuous, human cell-line that can be cultured in serum-free medium in a suspension to high cell densities, providing an effective and flexible system for high-yield manufacturing. Ad26 vector vaccines have favorable thermostability profiles, compatible with vaccine supply chains. Safety data are compiled in the Ad26 vaccine safety database version 4.0, with unblinded data from 23 ongoing and completed clinical studies for a total of 3912 participants in Ebola, HIV, Malaria, RSV and Filovirus Ad26-based vaccine programs. Overall, all Ad26-based vaccines have been well tolerated, with no significant safety issues identified from the available data in the current Ad26 vaccine safety database. Evaluation of Ad26-based vaccines to further characterize the safety profile is continuing, with more than 90,000 participants vaccinated as of 1st July 2020 (cut-off date). Extensive evaluation of immunogenicity in humans shows strong and durable humoral and cellular immune responses. Clinical trials have not shown meaningful impact of pre-existing immunity to Ad26 on vaccine immunogenicity, even in the presence of Ad26 neutralizing antibody titers or Ad26-targeting T cell responses at baseline. The first vaccine, against Ebola virus, that makes use of the Ad26 vector, received marketing authorization from EC on 1st July 2020, as part of the Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA BN Filo vaccine regimen. New developments based on the Ad26 vector are underway, including a COVID-19 vaccine, which is currently in clinical evaluation.

We administered Ad26, modified vaccinia Ankara vectors containing mosaic HIV-1 antigens or placebo in 26 individuals who initiated antiretroviral therapy during acute human immunodeficiency virus infection as an exploratory study to determine the safety and duration of viremic control after treatment interruption. The vaccine was safe and generated robust immune responses, but delayed time to viral rebound compared to that in placebo recipients by only several days and did not lead to viremic control after treatment interruption (clinical trial NCT02919306).

Summary Background Current efficacy studies of a mosaic HIV-1 prophylactic vaccine require four vaccination visits over one year, which is a complex regimen that could prove challenging for vaccine delivery at the community level, both for recipients and clinics. In this study, we evaluated the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of shorter, simpler regimens of trivalent Ad26.Mos.HIV expressing mosaic HIV-1 Env/Gag/Pol antigens combined with aluminium phosphate-adjuvanted clade C gp140 protein. Methods We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 trial (IPCAVD010/HPX1002) at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, MA, USA. We included healthy, HIV-uninfected participants (aged 18–50 years) who were considered at low risk for HIV infection and had not received any vaccines in the 14 days before study commencement. We randomly assigned participants via a computer-generated randomisation schedule and interactive web response system to one of three study groups (1:1:1) testing different regimens of trivalent Ad26.Mos.HIV (5 × 1010 viral particles per 0·5 mL) combined with 250 μg adjuvanted clade C gp140 protein. They were then assigned to treatment or placebo subgroups (5:1) within each of the three main groups. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until the end of the follow-up period. Group 1 received Ad26.Mos.HIV alone at weeks 0 and 12 and Ad26.Mos.HIV plus adjuvanted gp140 at weeks 24 and 48. Group 2 received Ad26.Mos.HIV plus adjuvanted gp140 at weeks 0, 12, and 24. Group 3 received Ad26.Mos.HIV alone at week 0 and Ad26.Mos.HIV plus adjuvanted gp140 at weeks 8 and 24. Participants in the control group received 0·5 mL of 0·9% saline. All study interventions were administered intramuscularly. The primary endpoints were Env-specific binding antibody responses at weeks 28, 52, and 72 and safety and tolerability of the vaccine regimens for 28 days after the injection. All participants who received at least one vaccine dose or placebo were included in the safety analysis; immunogenicity was analysed using the per-protocol population. The IPCAVD010/HPX1002 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02685020 . We also did a parallel preclinical study in rhesus monkeys to test the protective efficacy of the shortened group 3 regimen. Findings Between March 7, 2016, and Aug 19, 2016, we randomly assigned 36 participants to receive at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo, ten to each vaccine group and two to the corresponding placebo group. 30 (83%) participants completed the full study, and six (17%) discontinued it prematurely because of loss to follow-up, withdrawal of consent, investigator decision, and an unrelated death from a motor vehicle accident. The two shortened regimens elicited comparable antibody titres against autologous clade C Env at peak immunity to the longer, 12-month regimen: geometric mean titre (GMT) 41 007 (95% CI 17 959–93 636) for group 2 and 49 243 (29 346–82 630) for group 3 at week 28 compared with 44 590 (19 345–102 781) for group 1 at week 52). Antibody responses remained increased (GMT >5000) in groups 2 and 3 at week 52 but were highest in group 1 at week 72. Antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis, Env-specific IgG3, tier 1A neutralising activity, and broad cellular immune responses were detected in all groups. All vaccine regimens were well tolerated. Mild-to-moderate pain or tenderness at the injection site was the most commonly reported solicited local adverse event, reported by 28 vaccine recipients (93%) and two placebo recipients (33%). Grade 3 solicited systemic adverse events were reported by eight (27%) vaccine recipients and no placebo recipients; the most commonly reported grade 3 systemic symptoms were fatigue, myalgia, and chills. The shortened group 3 regimen induced comparable peak immune responses in 30 rhesus monkeys as in humans and resulted in an 83% (95% CI 38·7–95, p=0·004 log-rank test) reduction in per-exposure acquisition risk after six intrarectal challenges with SHIV-SF162P3 at week 54, more than 6 months after final vaccination. Interpretation Short, 6-month regimens of a mosaic HIV-1 prophylactic vaccine elicited robust HIV-specific immune responses that were similar to responses elicited by a longer, 12-month schedule. Preclinical data showed partial protective efficacy of one of the short vaccine regimens in rhesus monkeys. Further clinical studies are required to test the suitability of the shortened vaccine regimens in humans. Such shortened regimens would be valuable to increase vaccine delivery at the community level, particularly in resource-limited settings. Funding Ragon Institute (Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard University; Cambridge, MA, USA) and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention (Leiden, Netherlands).

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

BACKGROUND: Mosaic immunogens are bioinformatically engineered human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) sequences designed to elicit clade-independent coverage against globally circulating HIV-1 strains. METHODS: This phase 1, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial enrolled healthy HIV-uninfected adults who received 2 doses of a modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA)–vectored HIV-1 bivalent mosaic immunogen vaccine or placebo on days 0 and 84. Two groups were enrolled: those who were HIV-1 vaccine naive (n = 15) and those who had received an HIV-1 vaccine (Ad26.ENVA.01) 4–6 years earlier (n = 10). We performed prespecified blinded cellular and humoral immunogenicity analyses at days 0, 14, 28, 84, 98, 112, 168, 270, and 365. RESULTS: All 50 planned vaccinations were administered. Vaccination was safe and generally well tolerated. No vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. Both cellular and humoral cross-clade immune responses were elicited after 1 or 2 vaccinations in all participants in the HIV-1 vaccine–naive group. Env-specific responses were induced after a single immunization in nearly all subjects who had previously received the prototype Ad26.ENVA.01 vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: No safety concerns were identified, and multiclade HIV-1–specific immune responses were elicited. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02218125.

Summary Background More than 1·8 million new cases of HIV-1 infection were diagnosed worldwide in 2016. No licensed prophylactic HIV-1 vaccine exists. A major limitation to date has been the lack of direct comparability between clinical trials and preclinical studies. We aimed to evaluate mosaic adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26)-based HIV-1 vaccine candidates in parallel studies in humans and rhesus monkeys to define the optimal vaccine regimen to advance into clinical efficacy trials. Methods We conducted a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1/2a trial (APPROACH). Participants were recruited from 12 clinics in east Africa, South Africa, Thailand, and the USA. We included healthy, HIV-1-uninfected participants (aged 18–50 years) who were considered at low risk for HIV-1 infection. We randomly assigned participants to one of eight study groups, stratified by region. Participants and investigators were blinded to the treatment allocation throughout the study. We primed participants at weeks 0 and 12 with Ad26.Mos.HIV (5 × 10 10 viral particles per 0·5 mL) expressing mosaic HIV-1 envelope (Env)/Gag/Pol antigens and gave boosters at weeks 24 and 48 with Ad26.Mos.HIV or modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA; 10 8 plaque-forming units per 0·5 mL) vectors with or without high-dose (250 μg) or low-dose (50 μg) aluminium adjuvanted clade C Env gp140 protein. Those in the control group received 0·9% saline. All study interventions were administered intramuscularly. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of the vaccine regimens and Env-specific binding antibody responses at week 28. Safety and immunogenicity were also assessed at week 52. All participants who received at least one vaccine dose or placebo were included in the safety analysis; immunogenicity was analysed using the per-protocol population. We also did a parallel study in rhesus monkeys (NHP 13-19) to assess the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of these vaccine regimens against a series of six repetitive, heterologous, intrarectal challenges with a rhesus peripheral blood mononuclear cell-derived challenge stock of simian-human immunodeficiency virus (SHIV-SF162P3). The APPROACH trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02315703. Findings Between Feb 24, 2015, and Oct 16, 2015, we randomly assigned 393 participants to receive at least one dose of study vaccine or placebo in the APPROACH trial. All vaccine regimens demonstrated favourable safety and tolerability. The most commonly reported solicited local adverse event was mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site (varying from 69% to 88% between the different active groups vs 49% in the placebo group). Five (1%) of 393 participants reported at least one grade 3 adverse event considered related to the vaccines: abdominal pain and diarrhoea (in the same participant), increased aspartate aminotransferase, postural dizziness, back pain, and malaise. The mosaic Ad26/Ad26 plus high-dose gp140 boost vaccine was the most immunogenic in humans; it elicited Env-specific binding antibody responses (100%) and antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis responses (80%) at week 52, and T-cell responses at week 50 (83%). We also randomly assigned 72 rhesus monkeys to receive one of five different vaccine regimens or placebo in the NHP 13-19 study. Ad26/Ad26 plus gp140 boost induced similar magnitude, durability, and phenotype of immune responses in rhesus monkeys as compared with humans and afforded 67% protection against acquisition of SHIV-SF162P3 infection (two-sided Fisher's exact test p=0·007). Env-specific ELISA and enzyme-linked immunospot assay responses were the principal immune correlates of protection against SHIV challenge in monkeys. Interpretation The mosaic Ad26/Ad26 plus gp140 HIV-1 vaccine induced comparable and robust immune responses in humans and rhesus monkeys, and it provided significant protection against repetitive heterologous SHIV challenges in rhesus monkeys. This vaccine concept is currently being evaluated in a phase 2b clinical efficacy study in sub-Saharan Africa (NCT03060629). Funding Janssen Vaccines & Prevention BV, National Institutes of Health, Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT and Harvard, Henry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, US Department of Defense, and International AIDS Vaccine Initiative.

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.

Objectives PIANO (Paediatric study of Intelence As an NNRTI Option; TMC125-C213; NCT00665847) assessed the safety/tolerability, antiviral activity and pharmacokinetics of etravirine plus an optimized background regimen (OBR) in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected children (≥ 6 to 95% adherent by questionnaire and 39% by pill count. Forty-one patients experienced virological failure (VF; time-to-loss-of-virological-response non-VF-censored algorithm) (29 nonresponders; 12 rebounders). Of 30 patients with VF with paired baseline/endpoint genotypes, 18 (60%) developed nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations, most commonly Y181C. Mean etravirine area under the plasma concentration–time curve over 12 h (AUC0–12h; 5216 ng h/mL) and C0h (346 ng/mL) were comparable to adult target values. Conclusions Results with etravirine 5.2 mg/kg bid (with OBR) in this treatment-experienced paediatric population and etravirine 200 mg bid in treatment-experienced adults were comparable. Etravirine is an NNRTI option for treatment-experienced paediatric patients.

Background ODIN (once-daily darunavir in treatment-experienced patients) was a 48-week, phase III, randomized, open-label trial comparing once-daily (qd) darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg with twice-daily (bid) DRV/r 600/100 mg, both with an optimized background regimen [OBR; at least two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs)], in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected adults with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at screening. Week 48 analyses of virological response by subgroups are reported. Methods A total of 590 patients were randomized to receive qd (n = 294) or bid (n = 296) DRV/r. Virological response (HIV-1 RNA 50 000 copies/mL. Response rates for the qd and bid treatment arms by baseline CD4 cell count were also similar (69.6 vs. 65.2% for

Objective This paper presents the final analysis of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) vs. lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults. Methods ARTEMIS (AntiRetroviral Therapy with TMC114 ExaMined In naive Subjects; NCT00258557) was a randomized, open-label, phase-III, 192-week trial. Patients were stratified by baseline HIV-1 RNA and CD4 count, and randomized to once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg or LPV/r 800/200 mg total daily dose (either once or twice daily) plus tenofovir/emtricitabine. Results Of 689 randomized patients receiving treatment (DRV/r: 343; LPV/r: 346), 85 and 114 patients in the DRV/r and LPV/r arms, respectively, had discontinued by week 192. Noninferiority was shown in the primary endpoint of virological response (HIV-1 RNA Conclusion Over 192 weeks, once-daily DRV/r was noninferior and statistically superior in virological response to LPV/r, with a more favourable gastrointestinal profile, demonstrating its suitability for long-term use in treatment-naive patients.

Long-term potent activity of antiretrovirals is essential for HIV-1-infected, treatment-experienced patients. TITAN (TMC114/r In Treatment-experienced pAtients Naive to lopinavir) compared Week-96 efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r). Treatment-experienced, LPV-naive, HIV-1-infected patients were randomised to DRV/r 600/100 mg bid or LPV/r 400/100 mg bid plus optimised background regimen (≥ 2 NRTIs/NNRTIs). 595 patients were enrolled (mean baseline HIV-1 RNA: 4.30 log10 copies/mL; median CD4 count: 232 cells/mm3). At Week 96, more DRV/r than LPV/r patients achieved HIV-1 RNA400 copies/mL (66.8% versus 58.9% [intent-to-treat (ITT)/time-to-loss of virological response (TLOVR)], estimated difference 8.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7-16.7), demonstrating the primary endpoint of non-inferiority of DRV/r (p0.001); the difference in response was statistically significant (p = 0.034). For the secondary efficacy parameter (HIV-1 RNA50 copies/mL) at Week 96, response to DRV/r was 60.4% versus 55.2% for LPV/r (ITT-TLOVR), estimated difference 5.8%, 95% CI: -2.3-13.9. Virological failure (VF; HIV-1 RNA400 copies/mL) with DRV/r (13.8%) was nearly half that with LPV/r (25.6%). Discontinuations due to adverse events were 8.1% for both DRV/r and LPV/r. Treatment-related grade 2-4 diarrhoea was 8.1% (DRV/r) versus 15.2% (LPV/r). Increases in triglycerides and total cholesterol were less pronounced with DRV/r. At 96 weeks, noninferiority (HIV-1 RNA400 copies/mL) of DRV/r over LPV/r was maintained; the difference in response was statistically significant. VF rate and treatment-related grade 2-4 diarrhoea were lower with DRV/r versus LPV/r.

Background Long-term (96-week) efficacy and safety of the protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) was evaluated in HIV type-1 (HIV-1)-infected patients with extensive prior treatment experience in the POWER 1, 2 and 3 trials. Methods Patients with HIV-1 RNA≥1,000 copies/ml and ≥1 primary PI mutation were randomized to receive either DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily plus an optimized background regimen (OBR), or an investigator- selected control PI (CPI) plus OBR (POWER 3 was a DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily single-arm study). The proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNAResults In total, 467 patients received DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily; 124 patients received CPI(s). At week 96, 39% of DRV/r patients in POWER 1 and 2 (pooled analysis) versus 9% of CPI patients achieved HIV-1 RNA+ T-cell count increase for DRV/r at 96 weeks was 133 cells/mm3 in POWER 1 and 2 and 103 cells/mm3 in POWER 3. Grade 2–4 treatment-emergent adverse events at least possibly related to DRV/r (≥2% incidence, excluding laboratory abnormalities) were diarrhoea (3%), vomiting (3%), nausea (2%) and headache (2%). Conclusions Treatment with DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily was well tolerated and led to sustained virological and immunological responses in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients over 96 weeks.

Tibotec BVBA, Mechelen, BelgiumBackgroundDarunavir (TMC114) is a new HIV protease inhibitor (PI).DesignThis Phase I, randomized, open-label trial compared the effects of darunavir plus low-dose ritonavir(RTV) (darunavir/RTV) with those of atazanavir/RTV on lipid and glucose parameters.MethodsForty-nine HIV-negative, healthy male volunteers received RTV 100mg once a day (qd) for 7 days,followed by either darunavir/RTV 800/100mg qd (n525) or atazanavir/RTV 300/100mg qd (n524)for 21 days. Mean changes in fasting lipid and glucose parameters at day 28 were calculated usingpost-RTV alone (day 7) and baseline (day 1) values as references. Short-term safety, tolerabilityand RTV pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated.ResultsAfter 7 days of RTV treatment, the mean triglyceride concentration increased by approximately30mg/dL in both groups, changes in other lipid and glucose parameters were relatively small. Meanconcentrations of lipids and glucose over the treatment period were mostly similar between thetreatment groups. Mean changes from day 7 to day 28 for the darunavir/RTV and atazanavir/RTVgroups, respectively, were 3.6 and 0.5mg/dL for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; 5.0 and5.3mg/dL for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; 4.9 and 1.2 mg/dL for total cholesterol; 6.4 and14.0 mg/dL for triglycerides; 1.7 and 2.4mg/dL for glucose; and 1.4 and 0.3mg/dL forinsulin. No grade 3 or 4 lipid or glucose laboratory abnormalities were reported. Treatment-emergent hyperbilirubinaemia was reported for all volunteers (including five grade 4 cases) duringatazanavir/RTV treatment.ConclusionsCo-administration of darunavir or atazanavir with low-dose RTV resulted in minor and similarchanges in lipid and glucose parameters in HIV-negative healthy volunteers.Keywords: atazanavir, darunavir, HIV, lipids, metabolic, protease inhibitors, TMC114Accepted 20 November 2008

Objective: Elvitegravir (EVG) is in phase 3 development in combination with ritonavir (RTV)-boosted protease inhibitors in treatment-experienced, HIV-infected patients. Two studies evaluated pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions among EVG and RTV-boosted tipranavir (TPV/r) or darunavir (DRV/r). Methods: Healthy volunteers received EVG/r alone (study 1: 200/100 mg once daily; study 2: 125/100 mg once daily), TPV/r (500/200 mg twice daily) or DRV/r (600/100 mg twice daily) alone, and EVG (200 or 125 mg as applicable) added to TPV/r (500/200 mg twice daily) or DRV/r (600/100 mg twice daily) in a randomized crossover design, with assessment of steady-state PK for EVG, TPV, DRV, and RTV. Safety was assessed by clinical monitoring. Studies were powered to conclude lack of an interaction if the 90% confidence interval for the geometric mean ratios of the AUCtau and Cmax for EVG, TPV, and DRV were within predefined no-effect boundaries. Trough concentrations were also assessed. Results: No subjects discontinued for adverse events during treatment with EVG/r alone. On coadministration, AUCtau and Cmax of EVG and TPV and EVG and DRV were within prespecified no-effect boundaries versus treatment alone; trough concentrations were also not substantially altered. Conclusions: The PK of EVG and TPV or DRV were not altered after coadministration of EVG with TPV/r or DRV/r. EVG PK was similar with varied RTV doses of 100 mg once daily, 100 mg twice daily, or 200 mg twice daily. EVG can be added to TPV/r or DRV/r regimens without dose adjustment.

BackgroundWe assessed etravirine resistance in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected children ( n=41)/adolescents ( n=60) who received twice-daily etravirine 5.2 mg/kg and a background regimen (boosted protease inhibitor plus nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors, optional enfuvirtide/raltegravir) in a Phase II, open-label, multicentre trial (PIANO).MethodsIn addition to phenotypes, viral genotypes were assessed by population and deep sequencing (PS and DS) in virological failures (VFs; baseline and end point) and responders (baseline). Minority resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were defined as those with frequencies above 1% and not detected with PS.ResultsBy week 48, 41/101 (40.6%) patients experienced VF; 17/41 (41.5%) VFs and 22/54 (40.8%) responders had ≥1 baseline etravirine RAM by PS, mainly A98G, K101E, V106I and G190A. Baseline minority etravirine RAMs ( n) were detected in 8/40 VFs (V90I [2], A98G [1], L100I [1], V106I [1], E138G [1] and Y181C [2]) and 5/38 responders (V90I [3], A98G [1], V106I [1] and E138G [1]). The most frequent emerging non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor RAMs detected by PS (≥3 VFs; n) were the etravirine RAMs Y181C (8), V90I (3), L100I (3) and E138A (3). In 15 of 29 (51.7%) VFs with baseline DS/PS and end point PS data, ≥1 emerging etravirine RAM was detected by PS, which was not detected at baseline by DS in most cases (12/15 [80.0%]). In 10/26 (38.5%) VFs with baseline/end point DS data, ≥1 additional emerging minority etravirine RAM was detected.ConclusionsPatterns of etravirine resistance in adults, adolescents and children experiencing VF are similar. The presence of minority etravirine RAMs at baseline was not consistently associated with treatment failure. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00665847.

A current focus in HIV management is improving adherence by minimizing pill burden with convenient formulations, including fixed-dose combinations (FDCs). Darunavir, a HIV protease inhibitor, co-administered with low-dose ritonavir (800/100 mg once daily), is recommended in guidelines in combination with other antiretrovirals for HIV patients with no darunavir resistance-associated mutations. Cobicistat is an alternative agent to ritonavir for boosting plasma drug levels of darunavir among other antiretrovirals. Cobicistat is a more specific cytochrome P450 3A inhibitor than ritonavir without enzyme-inducing properties. This review describes the differing effects of cobicistat and ritonavir on metabolic enzymes, which explains their differing drug-drug interactions, and summarizes some of the studied drug-drug interactions for cobicistat. It also outlines the clinical development and data for a once-daily darunavir/cobicistat FDC. This FDC thus allows for a once-daily treatment regimen (including background antiretrovirals) with reduced pill burden.

BACKGROUND ARIEL (Darunavir in treatment-experienced pediatric population) was a phase II, open-label study assessing safety and antiviral activity of darunavir/ritonavir twice daily with an optimized background regimen (OBR) in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected pediatric patients (3 to

Objectives. TEACH (NCT00896051) was a randomized, open-label, two-arm Phase II trial to investigate the pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and atazanavir/ritonavir and safety and efficacy in treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients.Methods. After a two-week lead-in of two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg, 44 patients received etravirine 200 mg bid with one NRTI, plus atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg or 400/100 mg qd (n=22each group) over 48 weeks.Results. At steady-state etravirine with atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg qd or 400/100 mg qd decreased atazanavirCmin⁡by 18% and 9%, respectively, with no change inAUC24 horCmax⁡versus atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg qd alone (Day −1). EtravirineAUC12 hwas 24% higher and 16% lower with atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 or 400/100 mg qd, respectively, versus historical controls. At Week 48, no significant differences were seen between the atazanavir/ritonavir groups in discontinuations due to adverse events (9.1% each group) and other safety parameters, the proportion of patients with viral load Conclusions. Etravirine 200 mg bid can be combined with atazanavir/ritonavir 300/100 mg qd and an NRTI in HIV-1-infected, treatment-experienced patients without dose adjustment.

For patients treated with telaprevir, peginterferon, and ribavirin, futility rules have been developed to prevent needless drug exposure and minimize development of drug-resistant variants for patients who have little or no chance of achieving a sustained virologic response. We performed retrospective analyses of data from phase 3 trials and validated the current futility rule. All therapy should be stopped for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients if hepatitis C virus RNA levels are greater than 1000 IU/mL at weeks 4 or 12, or if hepatitis C virus RNA is detectable at week 24.

Introduction : COBI, a PK enhancer with no ARV activity is a more selective cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A inhibitor than ritonavir (RTV), does not induce CYP isozymes, and thus has less potential for drug-drug interactions. COBI boosts DRV PK as effectively as RTV in healthy volunteers. Materials and Methods : This 48-week, phase IIIb, open-label, single-arm, US multicentre study (NCT01440569) included HIV-infected treatment-nave and experienced adults with no DRV RAMs, viral load (VL) ≥1000 c/mL, eGFR ≥80 mL/min and genotypic sensitivity to investigator-selected N[t]RTIs. Patients received DRV/COBI 800/150 mg qd (as single agents) plus two fully active N[t]RTIs. The primary endpoint was any treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs through Week 24. We report 48-week safety, efficacy and PK/PD results in treatment-nave patients. Results : Of 313 ITT patients, 295 were treatment-nave (94%). In the treatment-nave cohort, 90% were male, 60% white and 294 (99.7%) received a TDF-containing regimen. Median baseline (BL) VL was 4.8 log 10 c/mL and CD4 + 370 cells/mm 3 . Treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs regardless of causality were reported in 21 (7%) patients. AEs regardless of causality (any grade; ≥10% of patients) were: diarrhoea (27%), nausea (23%), URTI (15%) and headache (12%). Sixteen (5%) patients had AEs leading to study drug discontinuation, most frequently rash (three patients), hypersensitivity and nausea (two patients each). Consistent with the known inhibition of tubular creatinine secretion by COBI, there was a mean increase from BL in serum creatinine by week 2 (0.09 mg/dL), remaining stable through week 48 (mean 0.10 mg/dL increase from BL). At week 48, 83% of patients achieved VL

Coinfection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) may require treatment with an HIV non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), for example, rilpivirine or etravirine, and an HCV direct-acting antiviral drug such as telaprevir. In a two-panel, two-way, crossover study, healthy volunteers were randomized to receive etravirine 200 mg twice daily ± telaprevir 750 mg every 8 hours or rilpivirine 25 mg once daily ± telaprevir 750 mg every 8 hours. Pharmacokinetic assessments were conducted for each drug at steady-state when given alone and when coadministered; statistical analyses were least-square means with 90% confidence intervals. Telaprevir minimum plasma concentration (Cmin), maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) decreased 25%, 10%, and 16%, respectively, when coadministered with etravirine and 11%, 3%, and 5%, respectively, when coadministered with rilpivirine. Telaprevir did not affect etravirine pharmacokinetics, but increased rilpivirine Cmin, Cmax, and AUC by 93%, 49%, and 78%, respectively. Both combinations were generally well tolerated. The small decrease in telaprevir exposure when coadministered with etravirine is unlikely to be clinically relevant. The interaction between telaprevir and rilpivirine is not likely to be clinically relevant under most circumstances. No dose adjustments are deemed necessary when they are coadministered.

Background: Once-daily (qd) darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100mg was evaluated in two randomised and controlled Phase III trials, showing high response rates in treatment-naive (ARTEMIS; TMC114-C211) and treatment-experienced patients with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (ODIN; TMC114-C229). Treatment interruptions, medical co-morbidities, drug-drug interactions, and challenges to adherence can decrease exposures and result in suboptimal DRV coverage. Consequences of suboptimal dosing could be detrimental to patients, namely the selection of drug-resistant HIV strains. No relevant relationship between DRV area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours (AUC 24h ) or plasma trough concentrations (C 0h ) and efficacy or safety were observed in ARTEMIS or ODIN [1,2]. The PK/PD analysis for efficacy has been extended using a generalized additive model (GAM). Methods: A univariate GAM analysis was undertaken for each trial, exploring the relationship between DRV C 0h and virological response at Week 48. A quadratic spline (2 degrees of freedom) was selected, based on the Akaike information criterion value. Additionally, a linear logistic regression model was applied to model virologic response as a function of DRV C 0h . Results: In ARTEMIS, there was no relationship between DRV C 0h and the observed virological response or virological response predicated in the GAM analysis, with no indication that lower values within the observed DRV C 0h range are associated with lower predicted virological response (Figure A). The mean predicted virological response was 92.8% in the total population (N=304). A 50% reduction in DRV C 0h would result in a similar predicted mean virological response (93.9%). In ODIN, for values of DRV C 0h up to 3000ng/mL, there was no clear relationship between DRV C 0h and observed virological response. The GAM analysis showed a counter-intuitive inverse relationship between DRV C 0h and predicted virological response (Figure B). The mean predicted virological response was 80.6% in the total population (N=252). For each trial, similar results to GAM were obtained when a linear logistic regression model was applied. Conclusion: In patients who received 800/100mg qd DRV/r in the ARTEMIS and ODIN trials, a reduction in DRV C 0h of up to 50% is not associated with a reduced virologic response at Week 48, as predicted by both the GAM and logistic regression model. DRV/r doses below 800/100mg qd should not be administered. (Published: 11 November 2012) Citation: Abstracts of the Eleventh International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection Kakuda T et al. Journal of the International AIDS Society 2012, 15 (Suppl 4):18338 http://www.jiasociety.org/index.php/jias/article/view/18338 | http://dx.doi.org/10.7448/IAS.15.6.18338

Highly active antiretroviral therapy regimens, consisting of a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) and 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, are established first-line regimens for HIV-infected patients. However, a common adverse effect in patients receiving PIs is dyslipidemia, characterized by increases in plasma levels of triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and total cholesterol (TC). These lipid changes, as well as other well-described risk factors, may predispose patients to the development of cardiovascular disease, an important comorbidity, especially as the lifespan of HIV-infected patients has increased dramatically in recent years. Among PIs, ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) and, more recently, ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r) have demonstrated potent antiviral efficacy with more favorable lipid profiles than other PIs. This review provides an overview of the lipid effects of DRV/r. Studies with DRV/r in healthy volunteers and in both treatment-naive and -experienced patients have demonstrated that changes in tri-glycerides and TC are comparable to those seen with ATV/r.

OBJECTIVE ODIN (Once-daily Darunavir In treatment-experieNced patients) was a phase III, 48-week, open-label study comparing once-daily vs. twice-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at screening. METHODS Patients with no DRV RAMs and receiving stable HAART for at least 12 weeks were stratified by HIV-1 RNA (≤ or > 50 000 copies/ml) and randomized to once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg or twice-daily DRV/r 600/100 mg and an optimized background regimen (≥2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors). Primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of once-daily vs. twice-daily DRV/r in confirmed virologic response (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/ml) at week 48. RESULTS Five hundred and ninety patients received once-daily (n = 294) or twice-daily (n = 296) DRV/r. Mean baseline HIV-1 RNA was 4.16 log10 copies/ml; median CD4 cell count was 228 cells/μl; and 53.9% had previously used at least one protease inhibitor. At week 48, 72.1% of once-daily and 70.9% of twice-daily patients achieved HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml (intent-to-treat/time-to-loss of virologic response). The difference in response between once-daily and twice-daily arms was 1.2% (95% confidence interval -6.1 to 8.5%; P < 0.001), establishing noninferiority of once-daily DRV/r versus twice-daily DRV/r. Median CD4 cell count increase was 100 (once-daily) and 94 cells/μl (twice-daily). Virologic failure rate was low and similar for both arms; only one patient (once-daily arm) developed primary protease inhibitor mutations. Once-daily DRV/r had a lower incidence of grade 2-4 triglyceride increases (5.2 vs. 11.0%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION Once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg was noninferior in virologic response to twice-daily DRV/r 600/100 mg at 48 weeks in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV RAMs, and with a more favorable lipid profile. These findings support use of once-daily DRV/r in this population.

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: The protease inhibitor darunavir has been shown to be efficacious in highly treatment-experienced patients with HIV infection, but needs to be assessed in patients with a broader range of treatment experience. We did a randomised, controlled, phase III trial (TITAN) to compare 48-week efficacy and safety of darunavir-ritonavir with that of lopinavir-ritonavir in treatment-experienced, lopinavir-naive patients. METHODS: Patients received optimised background regimen plus non-blinded treatment with darunavir-ritonavir 600/100 mg twice daily or lopinavir-ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority (95% CI lower limit for the difference in treatment response -12% or greater) for HIV RNA of less than 400 copies per mL in plasma at week 48 (per-protocol analysis). TITAN (TMC114-C214) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00110877. FINDINGS: Of 595 patients randomised and treated, 187 (31%) were protease inhibitor naive; 476 of 582 (82%) were susceptible to four or more protease inhibitors. At week 48, significantly more darunavir-ritonavir than lopinavir-ritonavir patients had HIV RNA of less than 400 copies per mL (77% [220 of 286] vs 68% [199 of 293]; estimated difference 9%, 95% CI 2-16). Fewer virological failures treated with darunavir-ritonavir than with lopinavir-ritonavir developed primary protease inhibitor mutations (21% [n=6] vs 36% [n=20]) and nucleoside analogue-associated mutations (14% [n=4] vs 27% [n=15]). Safety data were generally similar between the groups; grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 80 (27%) darunavir-ritonavir and 89 (30%) lopinavir-ritonavir patients. INTERPRETATION: In lopinavir-naive, treatment-experienced patients, darunavir-ritonavir was non-inferior to lopinavir-ritonavir treatment in terms of our virological endpoint, and should therefore be considered as a treatment option for this population. Udgivelsesdato: 2007

ODIN was a Phase IIIb, randomised, open-label trial showing non-inferiority of DRV/r 800/100mg qd vs 600/100mg bid (+ ≥2 NRTIs) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected adults with no DRV resistance-associated mutations at screening. We evaluated the effect of demographic and baseline (BL) disease parameters on virological response (VR) of qd vs bid DRV/r at Week 48. Supplement: Abstracts of the Tenth International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1758-2652-13-S4-info.pdf Conference: Tenth International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection 7-11 November 2010 Glasgow, UK (Published: 8 November 2010) doi:10.1186/1758-2652-13-S4-P25 Cite this article as: Sension et al.: Influence of demographic and disease parameters on virological response to once- vs twice-daily darunavir/ ritonavir (DRV/r) at week 48 in ODIN. Journal of the International AIDS Society 2010 13(Suppl 4):P25. Full text: PubMed Central: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3113026/

Purpose of the study In the randomised, controlled, Phase III TITAN trial, at week 96, significantly more patients on darunavir coadministered with low-dose ritonavir (DRV/r) than on lopinavir/r (LPV/r) achieved HIV-1 RNA

Background: Cobicistat is an alternative pharmacoenhancer to ritonavir. In healthy volunteers, darunavir exposure was comparable when darunavir 800 mg once daily was co-administered with cobicistat 150 mg once daily (as single agents or a fixed-dose combination) vs. with ritonavir 100 mg once daily. Methods: This 48-week, Phase IIIb, single-arm, US multicenter study (NCT01440569) evaluated safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg once daily (as single agents) plus two investigator-selected nucleoside/tide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (N[t]RTIs) in HIV-1-infected adults. Patients had no darunavir resistance-associated mutations (RAMs), plasma viral load (VL) ≥1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml, eGFR ≥80 ml/min and genotypic sensitivity to the two N[t]RTIs. The primary endpoint was any treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) through Week 24. Results: The majority of the 313 intent-to-treat patients were treatment-naive (295/313; 94%), male (89%), White (60%) and received a tenofovir-based regimen (99%). Median baseline VL and CD4 + count overall were 4.8 log10 HIV-1 RNA copies/ml and 361 cells/mm 3 , respectively. Overall, 86% of patients (268/313) completed the study. The majority of discontinuations were for AEs (15/313; 5%). The incidence of treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 AEs regardless of causality was 6% through Week 24 and 8% through Week 48. Most common AEs through Week 48 were diarrhea (27%) and nausea (23%), which were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Week 48 virologic response rates (% with VL