Efficacy and safety of 48 weeks of enfuvirtide 180 mg once-daily dosing versus 90 mg twice-daily dosing in HIV-infected patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and antiviral activity of once-daily (qd) enfuvirtide (ENF) compared with twice daily (bid) ENF. METHOD: T20-401 was a phase 2, open-label, randomized, 48-week pilot study comparing ENF 180 mg qd versus ENF 90 mg bid, added to an optimized background (OB) regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive ENF 180 mg qd given as two 90-mg injections (n = 30) or one 90-mg injection bid (n = 31), plus OB. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a HIV-1 RNA viral load <400 copies/mL. Adherence, pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability parameters, including injection site reactions (ISRs), were compared between treatment arms. RESULTS: At Week 48, 23.3% of patients on once daily versus 22.6% on twice daily (p = .969) reached <400 copies/mL and 13.3% and 22.6% (p = .323), respectively, reached <50 copies/mL. The proportion reporting 1 adverse event or ISRs was comparable between arms, despite an increased incidence of grade 4 erythema (13% vs. 0%), induration (33% vs. 12%), and ecchymosis (7% vs. 0%) on twice daily versus once daily. ENF adherence (95% of prescribed doses) was higher on once daily (80.0%) versus twice daily (58.1%). CONCLUSION: The antiviral efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 180 mg ENF qd appeared comparable with that of 90 mg ENF bid at Week 48, although the study was not powered to demonstrate the noninferiority of once daily versus twice daily.

TORO: ninety-six-week virologic and immunologic response and safety evaluation of enfuvirtide with an optimized background of antiretrovirals.

The additional 48-week optional treatment extension of the T-20 versus Optimized Regimen Only (TORO) studies evaluated long-term safety and efficacy of enfuvirtide (ENF) through week 96 in patients receiving ENF plus optimized background (OB) and patients switching to ENF plus OB from OB alone. Patient randomization was 2:1 to ENF plus OB (n = 663) and OB (n = 334), of which 89.7% and 89.8% were male, 89.3% and 88.6% were Caucasian, and median age was 41 and 42 years, respectively. HIV risk factors were comparable between the ENF plus OB and OB groups with the major factors being 65.2% versus 66.2% homosexual contact, 17.8% versus 19.8% heterosexual contact, 4.1% versus 4.8% bisexual contact, respectively, and 6.9% injection drug use in both groups. OB patients were allowed to switch to ENF plus OB at virologic failure before week 48 and required to switch at week 48 to continue in the study (n = 230). Efficacy and safety assessments were conducted for each group. At week 96, 55% of ENF plus OB subjects completed the study and 26.5% achieved a viral load of less than 400 copies per milliliter (17.5% achieved less than 50 copies per milliliter). Viral load and CD4 mean change from baseline was -2.1 and -1.1 log(10) HIV-1-RNA copies per milliliter and +166 and +116 CD4 cells/mm(3) for ENF plus OB and switch patients, respectively. No new ENF-related safety issues emerged in weeks 48-96. Injection site reactions led to discontinuation in 7% and 10% of ENF plus OB and switch patients, respectively. In conclusion, these data demonstrate durable efficacy and safety of ENF over 96 weeks and that early use of ENF in combination with other agents for the treatment of antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected subjects is beneficial.

Week-12 response to therapy as a predictor of week 24, 48, and 96 outcome in patients receiving the HIV fusion inhibitor enfuvirtide in the T-20 versus Optimized Regimen Only (TORO) trials.

BACKGROUND: Early virological response to antiretroviral therapy is predictive of long-term treatment outcome in therapy-naive patients. In treatment-experienced patients, such correlations are less well defined, because initial responses may be less pronounced and transient because of accumulated cross-resistance to prior therapies. Our objectives were to explore how the virological and immunological status of treatment-experienced patients at an early time point (week 12) during enfuvirtide-based therapy predicted their responses at weeks 24, 48, and 96 in the T-20 versus Optimized Regimen Only (TORO) trials. METHODS: Post hoc, modified, on-treatment and intent-to-treat analyses were performed to determine whether the relationship between virological and immunological outcomes at weeks 24, 48, and 96 were predicted by the patients' week-12 responses to therapy. RESULTS: Using a modified on-treatment analysis for patients who, by week 12, achieved a decrease in their HIV-1 RNA load of > or =1 log10 copies/mL, 39.2% (95% CI, 33.6%-44.8%) and 59.5% (95% CI, 53.8%-65.1%) achieved a viral load of <50 copies/mL or <400 copies/mL at week 96, respectively, compared with 1.3% (95% CI, 0%-3.8%) and 2.6% (95% CI, 0%-6.1%) of patients, respectively, who did not achieve an early virological response. Using the same modified on-treatment analysis method for patients who, at week 12, achieved a CD4 cell count increase of > or =50 cells/mm3, 87.2% (95% CI, 82.6-91.8) maintained or improved this response through week 96, compared with 56.6% (95% CI, 47.5-65.8) of patients who did not achieve this early categorical immunological response. CONCLUSION: Enfuvirtide-based treatment regimens are associated with a rapid and durable response. Week-12 virological and immunological responses to treatment with enfuvirtide are predictive of subsequent outcomes in triple-class treatment-experienced patients.

Durable efficacy of enfuvirtide over 48 weeks in heavily treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in the T-20 versus optimized background regimen only 1 and 2 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The T-20 Versus Optimized Background Regimen Only (TORO) 1 and TORO 2 clinical trials are open-label, controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 studies comparing enfuvirtide plus an optimized background (OB) of antiretrovirals (n = 661) with OB alone (n = 334) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: The primary objective at week 48 was to investigate durability of efficacy, as measured by the percentage of patients maintaining their week 24 response or improving. Efficacy analyses used the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 73.7% of patients randomized to the enfuvirtide group remained on treatment through week 48 versus 21.3% originally randomized to the control group. At week 48, a higher proportion of week 24 responders maintained their response or were new responders in the enfuvirtide group than in the control group in each responder category: HIV-1 RNA level > or =1.0 log(10) change from baseline, <400 copies/mL and <50 copies/mL (37.4%, 30.4%, and 18.3% in the enfuvirtide group vs. 17.1%, 12.0%, and 7.8% in the control group, respectively; P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). CD4 cell count increases from baseline were twice as great in the enfuvirtide group as in the control group. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate durable efficacy of enfuvirtide plus OB over 48 weeks.

Safety of enfuvirtide in combination with an optimized background of antiretrovirals in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected adults over 48 weeks.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral tolerability is a critical factor contributing to treatment outcome. The T-20 Versus Optimized Background Regimen Only (TORO) studies assessed the safety and efficacy of enfuvirtide in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: A total of 997 patients were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to an optimized background antiretroviral regimen plus enfuvirtide (n = 663) or an optimized background regimen alone (control group; n = 334). Control patients could switch to enfuvirtide on virologic failure. RESULTS: In total, 26.5% of patients randomized to enfuvirtide and 36.6% to the control group discontinued study treatment before week 48; the percentage of patients withdrawn for safety reasons (including adverse events [AEs], deaths, and laboratory abnormalities) was 14.0% in the enfuvirtide group and 11.6% in the control group. Injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred in 98% of enfuvirtide patients and led to treatment discontinuation in 4.4%. Treatment-related (defined as possibly, probably, or remotely) AE rates per 100 patient-years were lower with enfuvirtide (96.2) than in the control group (149.9); diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue, the most frequently reported AEs, were significantly less frequent with enfuvirtide than in the control group. Pneumonia was significantly more frequent in patients treated with enfuvirtide (6.7 vs. 0.6 events per 100 patient-years), although the incidence was within expected ranges for this population. Lymphadenopathy was also higher in enfuvirtide-treated patients (7.1 vs. 1.2 events per 100 patient-years) for control patients. CONCLUSION: The addition of enfuvirtide to an optimized background regimen does not exacerbate AEs commonly associated with antiretrovirals. ISRs limited treatment in <5% of patients.

Prognostic staging of extensively pretreated patients with advanced HIV-1 disease.

PURPOSE: Determinants of therapeutic success are poorly characterized in patients with extensive HAART experience. Positive prognostic factors (PPFs) in the TORO trials could serve as the basis for a prognostically meaningful staging of treatment-experienced patients initiating a new antiretroviral regimen. METHOD: In TORO, triple-class-experienced patients with viral load (VL) > or = 5,000 copies/mL received an optimized background regimen of 3-5 antiretrovirals (based on treatment history and baseline resistance testing) +/- enfuvirtide (n = 995). Clinically relevant baseline PPFs that were predictive of 48-week virologic outcomes were identified via multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: The likelihood of VL < 400 copies/mL at 48 weeks (ITT analysis) was greater for those patients who had baseline CD4 count > or = 100 cells/mm3 (odds ratio [OR] 2.1; 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.5, 3.1); baseline VL < 5 log10 copies/mL (OR 1.8; 95% CIs 1.2, 2.6); received < or = 10 prior antiretrovirals (OR 2.4; 95% CIs 1.6, 3.4); or received > or = 2 active antiretrovirals in their background treatment regimen (OR 2.3; 95% CIs 1.6, 3.3). Overall, 67% of triple-class-experienced patients who met all four prognostic criteria and received enfuvirtide achieved VL < 400 copies/mL at 48 weeks vs. 43% for non-enfuvirtide patients (p < .05). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was done separately in each of the randomization arms of the study. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide guidance for physicians on expected outcomes in treatment-experienced patients and should be of value in their clinical management, as well as in stratifying participants in clinical trials involving treatment-experienced patients.

Enfuvirtide: the first therapy to inhibit the entry of HIV-1 into host CD4 lymphocytes.

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) based on combinations of drugs that target key enzymes in the life-cycle of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has considerably reduced morbidity and mortality from HIV infection since its introduction in the mid-1990s. However, the growing problem of the emergence of HIV strains that are resistant not only to individual drugs, but to whole drug classes, means that agents with new mechanisms of action are needed. Here, we describe the discovery and development of enfuvirtide (Fuzeon), the first drug to inhibit the entry of HIV-1 into host cells.

Enfuvirtide, an HIV-1 fusion inhibitor, for drug-resistant HIV infection in North and South America.

BACKGROUND: The T-20 vs. Optimized Regimen Only Study 1 (TORO 1) was a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of enfuvirtide (T-20), a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) fusion inhibitor. METHODS: Patients from 48 sites in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil with at least six months of previous treatment with agents in three classes of antiretroviral drugs, resistance to drugs in these classes, or both, and with at least 5000 copies of HIV-1 RNA per milliliter of plasma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive enfuvirtide plus an optimized background regimen of three to five antiretroviral drugs or such a regimen alone (control group). The primary efficacy end point was the change in the plasma HIV-1 RNA level from base line to week 24. RESULTS: A total of 501 patients underwent randomization, and 491 received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one measurement of plasma HIV-1 RNA after treatment began. The two groups were balanced in terms of the median base-line HIV-1 RNA level (5.2 log10 copies per milliliter in both groups), median CD4+ cell count (75.5 cells per cubic millimeter in the enfuvirtide group, and 87.0 cells per cubic millimeter in the control group), demographic characteristics, and previous antiretroviral therapy. At 24 weeks, the least-squares mean change from base line in the viral load (intention-to-treat, last observation carried forward) was a decrease of 1.696 log10 copies per milliliter in the enfuvirtide group, and a decrease of 0.764 log10 copies per milliliter in the control group (P<0.001). The mean increases in CD4+ cell count were 76 cells per cubic millimeter and 32 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively (P<0.001). Reactions at the site of the injections were reported by 98 percent of patients receiving enfuvirtide. There were more cases of pneumonia in the enfuvirtide group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of enfuvirtide to an optimized antiretroviral regimen provided significant antiretroviral and immunologic benefit through 24 weeks in patients who had previously received multiple antiretroviral drugs and had multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection.