Influence of UGT1A1 and SLC22A6 polymorphisms on the population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of raltegravir in HIV-infected adults: a NEAT001/ANRS143 sub-study.

Using concentration-time data from the NEAT001/ARNS143 study (single sample at week 4 and 24), we determined raltegravir pharmacokinetic parameters using nonlinear mixed effects modelling (NONMEM v.7.3; 602 samples from 349 patients) and investigated the influence of demographics and SNPs (SLC22A6 and UGT1A1) on raltegravir pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Demographics and SNPs did not influence raltegravir pharmacokinetics and no significant pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships were observed. At week 96, UGT1A1*28/*28 was associated with lower virological failure (p = 0.012), even after adjusting for baseline CD4 count (p = 0.048), but not when adjusted for baseline HIV-1 viral load (p = 0.082) or both (p = 0.089). This is the first study to our knowledge to assess the influence of SNPs on raltegravir pharmacodynamics. The lack of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship is potentially an artefact of raltegravir's characteristic high inter and intra-patient variability and also suggesting single time point sampling schedules are inadequate to thoroughly assess the influence of SNPs on raltegravir pharmacokinetics.

A retrospective observational study to evaluate the clinical outcomes and routine management of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia treated with idelalisib and rituximab in the UK and Ireland (RETRO-idel).

Idelalisib (IDL) is an oral first-in-class phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase delta (PI3Kδ) inhibitor approved for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) alongside rituximab (R) since 2014. However, little data exist on routine practice. The RETRO-idel was a protocol-led, retrospective study of 110 patients [n = 27 front-line (1L)] who received IDL-R. The primary end-point was clinical overall response rate (ORR). The median (range) follow-up of the whole cohort was 30·2 (0·1-51·9) months. The median (range) age was 72 (48-89) years. Tumour protein p53-disruption was common [100% 1L, 32·5% relapsed/refractory (R/R)]. The best ORR (intention-to-treat) was 88·2% (1L 96·3%, R/R 85·5%). Overall, the median event-free survival (mEFS) was 20·3 months and time-to-next treatment was 29·2 months. The mEFS for 1L patients was 18·7 months and R/R patients was 21·7 months. The 3-year overall survival was 56·1% (95% confidence interval 45·7-65·3). IDL was discontinued in 87·3% (n = 96). More patients discontinued due to adverse events in the front-line setting (1L 63·0% vs. R/R 44·6%) and due to progressive disease in R/R patients (20·5% vs. 3·7% in 1L). Lower respiratory tract infection/pneumonia were reported in 34·5% (Grade ≥3, 19·1%), diarrhoea in 30·9% (Grade ≥3, 6·4%), and colitis in 9·1% (Grade ≥3, 5·5%). Overall, these data describe clear efficacy for IDL-R in routine practice. No new safety signals were identified, although careful management of known toxicities is required.

Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics of ritonavir-boosted darunavir in the presence of raltegravir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine in HIV-infected adults and the relationship with virological response: a sub-study of the NEAT001/ANRS143 randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: NEAT001/ANRS143 demonstrated non-inferiority of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) + twice-daily raltegravir (400 mg) versus darunavir/ritonavir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (245/200 mg once daily) in treatment-naive patients. We investigated the population pharmacokinetics of darunavir, ritonavir, tenofovir and emtricitabine and relationships with demographics, genetic polymorphisms and virological failure. METHODS: Non-linear mixed-effects models (NONMEM v. 7.3) were applied to determine pharmacokinetic parameters and assess demographic covariates and relationships with SNPs (SLCO3A1, SLCO1B1, NR1I2, NR1I3, CYP3A5*3, CYP3A4*22, ABCC2, ABCC10, ABCG2 and SCL47A1). The relationship between model-predicted darunavir AUC0-24 and C24 with time to virological failure was evaluated by Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 805 enrolled, 716, 720, 347 and 361 were included in the darunavir, ritonavir, tenofovir and emtricitabine models, respectively (11% female, 83% Caucasian). No significant effect of patient demographics or SNPs was observed for darunavir or tenofovir apparent oral clearance (CL/F); coadministration of raltegravir did not influence darunavir or ritonavir CL/F. Ritonavir CL/F decreased by 23% in NR1I2 63396C>T carriers and emtricitabine CL/F was linearly associated with creatinine clearance (P<0.001). No significant relationship was demonstrated between darunavir AUC0-24 or C24 and time to virological failure [HR (95% CI): 2.28 (0.53-9.80), P=0.269; and 1.82 (0.61-5.41), P=0.279, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Darunavir concentrations were unaltered in the presence of raltegravir and not associated with virological failure. Polymorphisms investigated had little impact on study-drug pharmacokinetics. Darunavir/ritonavir + raltegravir may be an appropriate option for patients experiencing NRTI-associated toxicity.