Simplification to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus continuation of ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor with emtricitabine and tenofovir in adults with virologically suppressed HIV (STRATEGY-PI): 48 week results o

Patients with HIV on antiretroviral therapy might benefit from regimen simplification to reduce pill burden and dosing frequency. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of simplifying the treatment regimen for adults with virologically suppressed HIV infection from a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor and emtricitabine plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir) regimen to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir. STRATEGY-PI is a 96 week, international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial in which HIV-infected adults with a plasma HIV-1 RNA viral load of less than 50 copies per mL for at least 6 months who were taking a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor with emtricitabine plus tenofovir were randomly assigned (2:1) either to switch to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir or to continue on their existing regimen. Key eligibility criteria included no history of virological failure, no resistance to emtricitabine and tenofovir, and creatinine clearance of 70 mL/min or higher. Neither participants nor investigators were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48, based on a US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm for the modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded major protocol violations (prohibited resistance or not receiving a protease inhibitor at baseline). We prespecified non-inferiority with a 12% margin; if non-inferiority was established, superiority was tested as per a prespecified sequential testing procedure. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01475838. Between Dec 12, 2011, and Dec 20, 2012, 433 participants were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study drug. Of these participants, 293 were assigned to switch to the simplified regimen (switch group) and 140 to remain on their existing regimen (no-switch group); after exclusions, 290 and 139 participants, respectively, were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. At week 48, 272 (93·8%) of 290 participants in the switch group maintained a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL, compared with 121 (87·1%) of 139 in the no-switch group (difference 6·7%, 95% CI 0·4-13·7; p=0·025). The statistical superiority of the simplified regimen was mainly caused by a higher proportion of participants in the no-switch group than in the switch group discontinuing treatment for non-virological reasons; virological failure was rare in both groups (two [1%] of 290 vs two [1%] of 139). We did not detect any treatment-emergent resistance in either group. Adverse events leading to discontinuation were rare in both groups (six [2%] of 293 vs four [3%] of 140). Switching to the simplified regimen was associated with a small, non-progressive increase from baseline in serum creatinine concentration. Nausea was more common in the switch group than in the no-switch group, but rates of diarrhoea and bloating decreased compared with baseline from week 4 to week 48 in the switch group, whereas there were generally no changes for these symptoms in the no-switch group. Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir might be a useful regimen simplification option for virologically supressed adults with HIV taking a multitablet ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor regimen. Gilead Sciences.

Arribas JR ，Pialoux G ，Gathe J ，Di Perri G ，Reynes J ，Tebas P ，Nguyen T ，Ebrahimi R ，White K ，Piontkowsky D ... -  《-》

Switching to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus continuation of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor with emtricitabine and tenofovir in virologically suppressed adults with HIV (STRATEGY-NNRTI): 48 week r

Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir) might be a safe and efficacious switch option for virologically suppressed patients with HIV who have neuropsychiatric side-effects on a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or who are on a multitablet NNRTI-containing regimen and want a regimen simplification. We assessed the non-inferiority of such a switch compared with continuation of an NNRTI-containing regimen. STRATEGY-NNRTI is a 96 week, international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority trial enrolling adults (≥18 years) with HIV-1 and plasma HIV RNA viral load below 50 copies per mL for at least 6 months on an NNRTI plus emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen. With a computer-generated randomisation sequence, we randomly allocated participants (2:1; blocks of six, stratified by efavirenz use at screening) to switch to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir (switch group) or continue the NNRTI plus emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen (no-switch group). Key eligibility criteria included no history of virological failure and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 70 mL per min or greater. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma viral loads below 50 copies per mL at week 48 based on a snapshot algorithm with a non-inferiority margin of 12% (assessed by modified intention to treat). This trial is ongoing and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01495702. Between Dec 29, 2011, and Dec 13, 2012, we randomly allocated 439 participants to treatment: 290 participants in the switch group and 143 participants in the no-switch group received treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. At week 48, 271 (93%) of 290 participants in the switch group and 126 (88%) of 143 participants in the no-switch group maintained plasma viral loads below 50 copies per mL (difference 5·3%, 95% CI -0·5 to 12·0; p=0·066). We detected no treatment-emergent resistance in either group. Safety events leading to discontinuation were uncommon in both groups: six (2%) of 291 participants in the switch group and one (1%) of 143 in the no-switch group. Coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir seems to be efficacious and well tolerated in virologically suppressed adults with HIV and might be a suitable alternative for patients on an NNRTI with emtricitabine and tenofovir regimen considering a regimen modification or simplification. Gilead Sciences.

Pozniak A ，Markowitz M ，Mills A ，Stellbrink HJ ，Antela A ，Domingo P ，Girard PM ，Henry K ，Nguyen T ，Piontkowsky D ，Garner W ，White K ，Guyer B ... -  《-》

Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, coformulated with elvitegravir, cobicistat, and emtricitabine, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: two randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate can cause renal and bone toxic effects related to high plasma tenofovir concentrations. Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug with a 90% reduction in plasma tenofovir concentrations. Tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimens can have improved renal and bone safety compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens. In these two controlled, double-blind phase 3 studies, we recruited treatment-naive HIV-infected patients with an estimated creatinine clearance of 50 mL per min or higher from 178 outpatient centres in 16 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily oral tablets containing 150 mg elvitegravir, 150 mg cobicistat, 200 mg emtricitabine, and 10 mg tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide) or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) with matching placebo. Randomisation was done by a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4) and was stratified by HIV-1 RNA, CD4 count, and region (USA or ex-USA). Investigators, patients, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. All participants who received one dose of study drug were included in the primary intention-to-treat efficacy and safety analyses. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 as defined by the the US Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA) snapshot algorithm (pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 12%) and pre-specified renal and bone endpoints at 48 weeks. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01780506 and NCT01797445. We recruited patients from Jan 22, 2013, to Nov 4, 2013 (2175 screened and 1744 randomly assigned), and gave treatment to 1733 patients (866 given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide and 867 given E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate). E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, with 800 (92%) of 866 patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group and 784 (90%) of 867 patients in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group having plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (adjusted difference 2·0%, 95% CI -0·7 to 4·7). Patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide had significantly smaller mean serum creatinine increases than those given E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·08 vs 0·12 mg/dL; p<0·0001), significantly less proteinuria (median % change -3 vs 20; p<0·0001), and a significantly smaller decrease in bone mineral density at spine (mean % change -1·30 vs -2·86; p<0·0001) and hip (-0·66 vs -2·95; p<0·0001) at 48 weeks. Through 48 weeks, more than 90% of patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide or E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate had virological success. Renal and bone effects were significantly reduced in patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide. Although these studies do not have the power to assess clinical safety events such as renal failure and fractures, our data suggest that E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide will have a favourable long-term renal and bone safety profile. Gilead Sciences.

Sax PE ，Wohl D ，Yin MT ，Post F ，DeJesus E ，Saag M ，Pozniak A ，Thompson M ，Podzamczer D ，Molina JM ，Oka S ，Koenig E ，Trottier B ，Andrade-Villanueva J ，Crofoot G ，Custodio JM ，Plummer A ，Zhong L ，Cao H ，Martin H ，Callebaut C ，Cheng AK ，Fordyce MW ，McCallister S ，GS-US-292-0104/0111 Study Team ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of switching to fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1: 48 week results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, ph

Switching from therapy based on a boosted protease inhibitor to bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide could avoid drug interactions and unwanted side-effects in virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection, while maintaining a high barrier to resistance and providing a simplified once-daily, single-tablet regimen. Here, we report 48 week results of a phase 3 study investigating this switch. In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were enrolled at 121 outpatient centres in ten countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or higher, had been virologically suppressed (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) for 6 months or more before screening, and were on a regimen consisting of boosted atazanavir or darunavir plus either emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to switch to co-formulated once-daily bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg), herein known as the bictegravir group, or to remain on their baseline boosted protease inhibitor regimen, herein known as the boosted protease inhibitor group, for 48 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir at screening. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher at week 48 (by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 4%. Efficacy and safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is ongoing but not actively recruiting patients and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02603107. Between Dec 2, 2015, and July 15, 2016, 578 participants were randomly assigned and 577 were treated (290 in the bictegravir group and 287 in the boosted protease inhibitor group). At week 48, five participants (2%) in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had plasma HIV-1 RNA of 50 copies per mL or higher (difference 0·0%, 95·002% CI -2·5 to 2·5), thus switching to the bictegravir regimen was non-inferior to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy. The overall incidence and severity of adverse events was similar between groups, although headache occurred more frequently in the bictegravir group than in the boosted protease inhibitor group. 233 (80%) participants in the bictegravir group and 226 (79%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group had an adverse event. Only two (1%) participants in the bictegravir group and one (<1%) in the boosted protease inhibitor group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. 54 participants (19%) in the bictegravir group had drug-related adverse events compared with six (2%) in the protease inhibitor group. Fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide might be a safe and efficacious alternative to continued boosted protease inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection. Gilead Sciences.

Daar ES ，DeJesus E ，Ruane P ，Crofoot G ，Oguchi G ，Creticos C ，Rockstroh JK ，Molina JM ，Koenig E ，Liu YP ，Custodio J ，Andreatta K ，Graham H ，Cheng A ，Martin H ，Quirk E ... -  《Lancet HIV》

Patient-Reported Symptoms over 48 Weeks in a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3b Non-inferiority Trial of Adults with HIV Switching to Coformulated Elvitegravir, Cobicistat, Emtricitabine, and Tenofovir DF Versus Continuation of Ritonavir-Boosted Protease In

Gathe J ，Arribas JR ，Van Lunzen J ，Garner W ，Speck RM ，Bender R ，Shreay S ，Nguyen T ... -  《-》