Dolutegravir or Darunavir in Combination with Zidovudine or Tenofovir to Treat HIV.

The World Health Organization recommends dolutegravir with two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. Evidence is limited for the efficacy of this regimen when NRTIs are predicted to lack activity because of drug resistance, as well as for the recommended switch of an NRTI from tenofovir to zidovudine. In a two-by-two factorial, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients for whom first-line therapy was failing (HIV-1 viral load, ≥1000 copies per milliliter) to receive dolutegravir or ritonavir-boosted darunavir and to receive tenofovir or zidovudine; all patients received lamivudine. The primary outcome was a week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter, assessed with the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm (noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the primary outcome, 12 percentage points). We enrolled 464 patients at seven sub-Saharan African sites. A week 48 viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in 90.2% of the patients in the dolutegravir group (212 of 235) and in 91.7% of those in the darunavir group (210 of 229) (difference, -1.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.7 to 3.7; P = 0.58; indicating noninferiority of dolutegravir, without superiority) and in 92.3% of the patients in the tenofovir group (215 of 233) and in 89.6% of those in the zidovudine group (207 of 231) (difference, 2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.32; indicating noninferiority of tenofovir, without superiority). In the subgroup of patients with no NRTIs that were predicted to have activity, a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter was observed in more than 90% of the patients in the dolutegravir group and the darunavir group. The incidence of adverse events did not differ substantially between the groups in either factorial comparison. Dolutegravir in combination with NRTIs was effective in treating patients with HIV-1 infection, including those with extensive NRTI resistance in whom no NRTIs were predicted to have activity. Tenofovir was noninferior to zidovudine as second-line therapy. (Funded by Janssen; NADIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03988452.).

Paton NI ，Musaazi J ，Kityo C ，Walimbwa S ，Hoppe A ，Balyegisawa A ，Kaimal A ，Mirembe G ，Tukamushabe P ，Ategeka G ，Hakim J ，Mugerwa H ，Siika A ，Asienzo J ，Castelnuovo B ，Kiragga A ，Kambugu A ，NADIA Trial Team ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of dolutegravir or darunavir in combination with lamivudine plus either zidovudine or tenofovir for second-line treatment of HIV infection (NADIA): week 96 results from a prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non

WHO guidelines recommend dolutegravir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for second-line HIV therapy, with NRTI switching from first-line tenofovir to zidovudine. We aimed to examine whether dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir, the best-in-class protease inhibitor drug, and whether maintaining tenofovir in second-line therapy is non-inferior to switching to zidovudine. In this prospective, multicentre, open-label, factorial, randomised, non-inferiority trial (NADIA), participants with confirmed HIV first-line treatment failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies per mL) were recruited at seven clinical sites in Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Following a 2 × 2 factorial design and stratified by site and screening HIV-1 RNA concentration, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive a 96-week regimen containing either dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (800 mg of darunavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir once daily) in combination with either tenofovir (300 mg once daily) plus lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or zidovudine (300 mg twice daily) plus lamivudine (150 mg twice daily). The NRTI drugs allocated by randomisation were administered orally in fixed-dose combination pills; other drugs were administered orally as separate pills. The previously reported primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 48 weeks. Here, we report the main secondary outcome: the proportion of participants with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 400 copies per mL at 96 weeks (non-inferiority margin 12%). We analysed this outcome and safety outcomes in the intention-to-treat population, which excluded only those who were randomly assigned in error and withdrawn before receiving trial drugs. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03988452, and is complete. Between July 30 and Dec 18, 2019, we screened 783 patients and enrolled 465. One participant was randomly assigned in error and immediately withdrawn. The remaining 464 participants were randomly assigned to receive either dolutegravir (n=235) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=229) and to receive lamivudine plus either tenofovir (n=233) or zidovudine (n=231). At week 96, 211 (90%) of 235 participants in the dolutegravir group and 199 (87%) of 229 participants in the darunavir group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 2·9, 95% CI -3·0 to 8·7), indicating non-inferiority. Nine (4%) participants (all in the dolutegravir group) developed dolutegravir resistance; no participants developed darunavir resistance (p=0·0023). In the other randomised comparison, 214 (92%) of 233 patients in the tenofovir group and 196 (85%) of 231 patients in the zidovudine group had HIV-1 RNA less than 400 copies per mL (percentage point difference 7·0, 95% CI 1·2 to 12·8), showing non-inferiority and indicating the superiority of tenofovir (p=0·019). The proportions of participants with any grade 3-4 adverse event were similar between the dolutegravir (26 [11%]) and darunavir (28 [12%]) groups and between the tenofovir (22 [9%]) and zidovudine (32 [14%]) groups. There were no deaths related to study medication. Dolutegravir-based and darunavir-based regimens maintain good viral suppression during 96 weeks; dolutegravir is non-inferior to darunavir but is at greater risk of resistance in second-line therapy. Tenofovir should be continued in second-line therapy, rather than being switched to zidovudine. Janssen.

Paton NI ，Musaazi J ，Kityo C ，Walimbwa S ，Hoppe A ，Balyegisawa A ，Asienzo J ，Kaimal A ，Mirembe G ，Lugemwa A ，Ategeka G ，Borok M ，Mugerwa H ，Siika A ，Odongpiny ELA ，Castelnuovo B ，Kiragga A ，Kambugu A ，NADIA Trial Team ... -  《Lancet HIV》

Dolutegravir plus boosted darunavir versus recommended standard-of-care antiretroviral regimens in people with HIV-1 for whom recommended first-line non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy has failed (D(2)EFT): an open-label, randomised, ph

Randomised comparative data on efficacy and safety of second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) after failure of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) across diverse geographical settings are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate optimal second-line ART for people with HIV. D2EFT is a completed international, randomised, open-label, phase 3b/4 trial evaluating three second-line ART strategies in adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 for whom first-line NNRTI therapy has failed. The study was done at 28 sites across 14 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It was originally designed to compare recommended standard of care (ritonavir-boosted darunavir [800 mg darunavir plus 100 mg ritonavir once daily] plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs; dosed once or twice daily]) with a novel nucleoside sparing regimen of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with ritonavir-boosted darunavir. The study was adapted during the first year to add a third arm of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with fixed tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg once daily) plus either lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or emtricitabine (200 mg once daily). Participants were randomly assigned with a computer-generated, blocked randomisation scheme (block size of two) stratified by site, previous tenofovir disoproxil fumarate use, and HIV viral load. The trial was designed to evaluate non-inferiority of either interventional arm against standard of care for the primary outcome of virological suppression, as determined by HIV RNA load of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 12%. Comparisons were made with a modified intention-to-treat population, including all participants randomly assigned but excluding administrative withdrawals. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03017872. 1190 individuals were screened; 828 participants were enrolled between Nov 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2021. Two participants were unable to receive their assigned regimen for administrative reasons; and 826 participants were included in analyses. Median age was 39 years (IQR 33-46), and 450 (54%) participants were female. Baseline median CD4 count was 206 cells per μL (23-354) and median HIV RNA was 15 400 copies per mL (3600-65 986). The proportion of participants with HIV RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks was 194 (75%) of 257 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs group, 222 (84%) of 264 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus dolutegravir group, and 227 (78%) of 291 in the dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine group. Compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs, the difference in virological suppression was 8·6% (95% CI 1·7 to 15·5; p=0·016) for dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir and 6·7% (-1·2 to 14·4; p=0·093) for dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine. Six deaths occurred, none of which were related to treatment. 19 pregnancies (11 livebirths) occurred with no congenital defects. In individuals experiencing failure of an NNRTI-based first-line ART, a switch to either dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir or dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine, without universal access to genotyping, was non-inferior in achieving viral suppression compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs. These global data support the most recent WHO treatment guidelines. UNITAID; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, USA; National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia; ViiV Healthcare; and Janssen.

D2EFT Study Group 《Lancet HIV》

Efficacy and safety of dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, and efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate HIV antiretroviral therapy regimens started in pregnancy (IMPAACT 2

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) during pregnancy is important for both maternal health and prevention of perinatal HIV-1 transmission; however adequate data on the safety and efficacy of different ART regimens that are likely to be used by pregnant women are scarce. In this trial we compared the safety and efficacy of three antiretroviral regimens started in pregnancy: dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate; dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; and efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. This multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 22 clinical research sites in nine countries (Botswana, Brazil, India, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, the USA, and Zimbabwe). Pregnant women (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed HIV-1 infection and at 14-28 weeks' gestation were eligible. Women who had previously taken antiretrovirals in the past were excluded (up to 14 days of ART during the current pregnancy was permitted), as were women known to be pregnant with multiple fetuses, or those with known fetal anomaly or a history of psychiatric illness. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using a central computerised randomisation system. Randomisation was done using permuted blocks (size six) stratified by gestational age (14-18, 19-23, and 24-28 weeks' gestation) and country. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg, and once-daily oral fixed-dose combination emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate 25 mg; once-daily oral dolutegravir 50 mg, and once-daily oral fixed-dose combination emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg; or once-daily oral fixed-dose combination of efavirenz 600 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of participants with viral suppression, defined as an HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 200 copies per mL, at or within 14 days of delivery, assessed in all participants with an HIV-1 RNA result available from the delivery visit, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -10% in the combined dolutegravir-containing groups versus the efavirenz-containing group (superiority was tested in a pre-planned secondary analysis). Primary safety outcomes, compared pairwise among treatment groups, were the occurrence of a composite adverse pregnancy outcome (ie, either preterm delivery, the infant being born small for gestational age, stillbirth, or spontaneous abortion) in all participants with a pregnancy outcome, and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher maternal and infant adverse events in all randomised participants. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03048422. Between Jan 19, 2018, and Feb 8, 2019, we enrolled and randomly assigned 643 pregnant women: 217 to the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate group, 215 to the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group, and 211 to the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. At enrolment, median gestational age was 21·9 weeks (IQR 18·3-25·3), the median HIV-1 RNA concentration among participants was 902·5 copies per mL (152·0-5182·5; 181 [28%] of 643 participants had HIV-1 RNA concentrations of <200 copies per mL), and the median CD4 count was 466 cells per μL (308-624). HIV-1 RNA concentrations at delivery were available for 605 (94%) participants. Of these, 395 (98%) of 405 participants in the combined dolutegravir-containing groups had viral suppression at delivery compared with 182 (91%) of 200 participants in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (estimated difference 6·5% [95% CI 2·0 to 10·7], p=0·0052; excluding the non-inferiority margin of -10%). Significantly fewer participants in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate group (52 [24%] of 216) had a composite adverse pregnancy outcome than those in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (70 [33%] of 213; estimated difference -8·8% [95% CI -17·3 to -0·3], p=0·043) or the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (69 [33%] of 211; -8·6% [-17·1 to -0·1], p=0·047). The proportion of participants or infants with grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ among the three groups. The proportion of participants who had a preterm delivery was significantly lower in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate group (12 [6%] of 208) than in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (25 [12%] of 207; -6·3% [-11·8 to -0·9], p=0·023). Neonatal mortality was significantly higher in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (ten [5%] of 207 infants) than in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate group (two [1%] of 208; p=0·019) or the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (three [2%] of 202; p=0·050). When started in pregnancy, dolutegravir-containing regimens had superior virological efficacy at delivery compared with the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimen. The dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate regimen had the lowest frequency of composite adverse pregnancy outcomes and of neonatal deaths. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the National Institute of Mental Health.

Lockman S ，Brummel SS ，Ziemba L ，Stranix-Chibanda L ，McCarthy K ，Coletti A ，Jean-Philippe P ，Johnston B ，Krotje C ，Fairlie L ，Hoffman RM ，Sax PE ，Moyo S ，Chakhtoura N ，Stringer JS ，Masheto G ，Korutaro V ，Cassim H ，Mmbaga BT ，João E ，Hanley S ，Purdue L ，Holmes LB ，Momper JD ，Shapiro RL ，Thoofer NK ，Rooney JF ，Frenkel LM ，Amico KR ，Chinula L ，Currier J ，IMPAACT 2010/VESTED Study Team and Investigators ... -  《-》

Dolutegravir-Based or Low-Dose Efavirenz-Based Regimen for the Treatment of HIV-1.

An efavirenz-based regimen (with a 600-mg dose of efavirenz, known as EFV600) was the World Health Organization preferred first-line treatment for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection until June 2018. Given concerns about side effects, dolutegravir-based and low-dose efavirenz-based combinations have been considered as first-line treatments for HIV-1 in resource-limited settings. We conducted an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 noninferiority trial in Cameroon. Adults with HIV-1 infection who had not received antiretroviral therapy and had an HIV-1 RNA level (viral load) of at least 1000 copies per milliliter were randomly assigned to receive either dolutegravir or the reference treatment of low-dose efavirenz (a 400-mg dose, known as EFV400), combined with tenofovir and lamivudine. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter at week 48, on the basis of the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm. The difference between treatment groups was calculated, and noninferiority was tested with a margin of 10 percentage points. A total of 613 participants received at least one dose of the assigned regimen. At week 48, a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter was observed in 231 of 310 participants (74.5%) in the dolutegravir group and in 209 of 303 participants (69.0%) in the EFV400 group, with a difference of 5.5 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.6 to 12.7; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Among those with a baseline viral load of at least 100,000 copies per milliliter, a viral load of less than 50 copies per milliliter was observed in 137 of 207 participants (66.2%) in the dolutegravir group and in 123 of 200 participants (61.5%) in the EFV400 group, with a difference of 4.7 percentage points (95% CI, -4.6 to 14.0). Virologic failure (a viral load of >1000 copies per milliliter) was observed in 3 participants in the dolutegravir group (with none acquiring drug-resistance mutations) and in 16 participants in the EFV400 group. More weight gain was observed in the dolutegravir group than in the EFV400 group (median weight gain, 5.0 kg vs. 3.0 kg; incidence of obesity, 12.3% vs. 5.4%). In HIV-1-infected adults in Cameroon, a dolutegravir-based regimen was noninferior to an EFV400-based reference regimen with regard to viral suppression at week 48. Among participants who had a viral load of at least 100,000 copies per milliliter when antiretroviral therapy was initiated, fewer participants than expected had viral suppression. (Funded by Unitaid and the French National Agency for AIDS Research; NAMSAL ANRS 12313 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02777229.).

NAMSAL ANRS 12313 Study Group ，Kouanfack C ，Mpoudi-Etame M ，Omgba Bassega P ，Eymard-Duvernay S ，Leroy S ，Boyer S ，Peeters M ，Calmy A ，Delaporte E ... -  《-》