Virological Characterization of Patients Failing Darunavir/Ritonavir or Lopinavir/Ritonavir Treatment in the Artemis Study: 96-Week Analysis

Abstract

Background

In the Phase III ARTEMIS Trial, treatment-naive patients received once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg (n=343) or lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 800/200 mg (total daily dose; n=346) plus fixed-dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. The primary outcome measure was non-inferiority of DRV/r versus LPV/r (HIV type-1 [HIV-1] RNA<50 copies/ml). Here, a detailed 96-week resistance analysis is presented.

Methods

Virological failures (VFs) were defined as patients who had lost (rebounders) or who had never achieved (never suppressed) HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml after week 12. Genotypic and phenotypic determinations were performed on plasma samples with HIV-1 RNA≥50 copies/ml. The end point was defined as the last on-treatment visit with available genotype and/or phenotype.

Results

The VF rate was significantly lower in DRV/r (12%, n=40) versus LPV/r patients (17%, n=59; P=0.0437). Among DRV/r patients, 24 rebounded and 16 were never suppressed, whereas among LPV/r patients, 33 rebounded and 26 were never suppressed. Transient HIV-1 RNA increases (≥50 copies/ml) occurred in 50% (n=12) DRV/r and 48% (n=16) LPV/r rebounders; these viral levels returned to undetectable by end point without any changes to the study regimen. No major (primary) protease inhibitor (PI) resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) developed in VFs with an available genotype at baseline and end point, and almost all developing minor PI RAMs were polymorphic. At end point, all VFs with available phenotypes at baseline and end point remained susceptible to all PIs, including study PIs.

Conclusions

The VF rate was lower with DRV/r than LPV/r. The findings of this resistance analysis confirmed the lack of development of major PI RAMs and the preservation of phenotypic susceptibility to all PIs in patients with VF.

References

Perno

C.F.

, Moyle

, Tsoukas

, Ratanasuwan

, Gatell

, Schechter

Overcoming resistance to existing therapies in HIV-infected patients: the role of new antiretroviral drugs. J Med Virol 2008; 80: 565–576.

Hirsch

M.S.

, Günthard

H.F.

, Schapiro

J.M.

Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1 infection: 2008 recommendations of an International AIDS Society–USA panel. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 266–285.

US Department of Health and Human Services panel on antiretroviral guidelines for adults and adolescents. Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents. 1–161. (Updated 1 December 2009. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf.

World Health Organization. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action (2003). (Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s4883e/s4883e.pdf.

De Meyer

, Azijn

, Surleraux

TMC114, a novel human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitor active against protease inhibitor-resistant viruses, including a broad range of clinical isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 2314–2321.

de Béthune

M.P.

, Hertogs

Screening and selecting for optimized antiretroviral drugs: rising to the challenge of drug resistance. Curr Med Res Opin 2006; 22: 2603–2612.

Tibotec, Inc. PREZISTA™ (darunavir) prescribing information. (Updated January 2010. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://www.prezista.com.

European Medicines Agency. PREZISTA™ (darunavir) summary of product characteristics (Updated October 2009. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://www.emea.europa.eu/humandocs/PDFs/EPAR/prezista/emea-combined-h707en.pdf.

Mills

A.M.

, Nelson

, Jayaweera

Once-daily darunavir/ritonavir vs. lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected patients: 96-week analysis. AIDS 2009; 23: 1679–1688.

10.

Ortiz

, DeJesus

, Khanlou

Efficacy and safety of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir versus lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients at week 48. AIDS 2008; 22: 1389–1397.

11.

Cohen

The ARTEMIS trial: once-daily darunavir/ ritonavir in the management of treatment-naive, HIV-infected patients. HIV Therapy 2009; 3: 121–133.

12.

Los Alamos National Laboratory. HIV-1 subtype and circulating recombinant form reference sequences (Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://hiv.lanl.gov.

13.

De Meyer

, Vangeneugden

, Lefebvre

Phenotypic and genotypic determinants of resistance to TMC114: pooled analysis of POWER 1, 2 and 3. 15th International HIV Drug Resistance Workshop. 13–17 June 2006, Sitges, Spain. Abstract 73.

14.

Abbott Laboratories. KALETRA^® (lopinavir/ritonavir) prescribing information. (Updated October 2009. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://www.kaletra.com.

15.

Boehringer Ingelheim. APTIVUS^® (tipranavir) prescribing information. Boehringer Ingelheim (Updated June 2009. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://www.aptivus.com.

16.

Miller

M.D.

, Margot

, Lu

Genotypic and phenotypic predictors of the magnitude of response to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate treatment in antiretroviral-experienced patients. J Infect Dis 2004; 189: 837–846.

17.

Johnson

V.A.

, Brun-Vezinet

, Clotet

Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: 2007. Top HIV Med 2007; 15: 119–125.

18.

Molina

J.M.

, Andrade-Villanueva

, Echevarria

Atazanavir/ritonavir vs lopinavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients: CASTLE 96 week efficacy and safety. 48th Annual ICAAC/IDSA. 25–28 October 2008, Washington, DC, USA. Abstract H-1250d.

19.

Johnson

V.A.

, Brun-Vezinet

, Clotet

Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: December 2009

Top HIV Med 2009; 17: 138–145.

20.

Walsh

J.C.

, Mandalia

, Gazzard

B.G.

Responses to a 1 month self-report on adherence to antiretroviral therapy are consistent with electronic data and virological treatment outcome. AIDS 2002; 16: 269–277.

21.

Paterson

D.L.

, Swindells

, Mohr

Adherence to protease inhibitor therapy and outcomes in patients with HIV infection. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 21–30.

22.

Shafer

R.W.

, Rhee

S.Y.

, Pillay

HIV-1 protease and reverse transcriptase mutations for drug resistance surveillance. AIDS 2007; 21: 215–223.

23.

Stanford University HIV Drug Resistance Database. Mutation prevalence according to subtype and treatment (Updated January 2010. Accessed 09 February 2010.) Available from http://hivdb.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/MutPrevBySubtypeRx.cgi.

24.

Nelson

, Girard

P.M.

, DeMasi

Adherence to darunavir/ritonavir and lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive, HIV-infected patients in ARTEMIS: 96-week data. 15th Annual Conference of the British HIV Association (BHIVA). 1–3 April 2009, Liverpool, UK. Abstract 0207.

25.

Hammer

S.M.

, Eron

J.J.

Jr. , Reiss

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2008 recommendations of the International AIDS Society–USA panel. JAMA 2008; 300: 555–570.

26.

De Wit

, Keuleers

, Gustin

Binding kinetics of protease inhibitors to wild-type and multi-drug resistant HIV-1 proteases: a mechanistic study of the genetic barrier to resistance of darunavir. 14th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. 25–28 February 2007, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Abstract M-166.

27.

Lima

, Harrigan

, Montaner

J.S.

Increased reporting of detectable plasma HIV-1 RNA levels at the critical threshold of 50 copies per milliliter with the TaqMan assay in comparison to the Amplicor assay. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2009; 51: 3–6.

28.

Pattery

, De Wolf

, Verlinden

Efficiency of HIV-1 PR-RT genotyping on clinical isolates with viral load less than 1000 copies/ml: a 12 year analysis. Reviews in Antiviral Therapy and Infectious Diseases. 2010; 1: 3.

29.

Zazzi

Lack of major resistance mutations in HIV-1 protease at failure of boosted protease inhibitor-based first-line antiretroviral treatment. Rev Antivir Ther 2007; 2: 4–12.

30.

Wood

, Hogg

R.S.

, Yip

, Harrigan

P.R.

, O'Shaughnessy

M.V.

, Montaner

J.S.

The impact of adherence on CD4 cell count responses among HIV-infected patients. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2004; 35: 261–268.

31.

Moore

D.M.

, Hogg

R.S.

, Yip

Discordant immunologic and virologic responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy are associated with increased mortality and poor adherence to therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2005; 40: 288–293.

32.

Walmsley

, Avihingsanon

, Slim

Gemini: a noninferiority study of saquinavir/ritonavir versus lopinavir/ritonavir as initial HIV-1 therapy in adults. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2009; 50: 367–374.

33.

Eron

Jr. , Yeni

, Gathe

Jr. . The KLEAN study of fosamprenavir-ritonavir versus lopinavir-ritonavir, each in combination with abacavir-lamivudine, for initial treatment of HIV infection over 48 weeks: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2006; 368: 476–482.