Development of HIV-1 drug resistance through 144 weeks in antiretroviral-naïve subjects on emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, and efavirenz compared with lamivudine/zidovudine and efavirenz in study GS-01-934.

Study 934 was an open-label, randomized Phase III study of emtricitabine + tenofovir DF + efavirenz (FTC + TDF + EFV) compared with lamivudine + zidovudine + efavirenz (3TC + ZDV + EFV) in antiretroviral therapy-naïve HIV-1 infected subjects. Baseline genotyping revealed the presence of primary nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance (NNRTI-R) in 22 of 509 enrolled patients (4.3%, 11 subjects in each group). The 487 subjects without baseline NNRTI-R formed the primary efficacy population (modified intent-to-treat population). Through 144 weeks, 50 of 487 modified intent-to-treat subjects (FTC + TDF + EFV, n = 19; 3TC + ZDV + EFV, n = 31) were analyzed for resistance development after virologic failure. NNRTI-R, primarily the K103N mutation, was the most common form of resistance that developed in both groups. No subject on FTC + TDF + EFV developed the K65R mutation. Significantly fewer subjects on FTC + TDF + EFV compared with 3TC + ZDV + EFV developed the M184V/I mutation (two versus 10, respectively, P = 0.021). Thymidine analog mutations developed in two subjects on 3TC + ZDV + EFV. Subjects with baseline NRTI genotypic resistance (TAMs, n = 13) or non-B HIV-1 subtypes (n = 28) showed no evidence of reduced treatment responses in either group. Nine of 22 patients with baseline NNRTI-R experienced virologic failure (FTC + TDF + EFV, n = 4; 3TC + ZDV + EFV, n = 5); seven of nine developed M184V/I and/or additional NNRTI-R, but none developed K65R. Baseline NNRTI-R was significantly associated with virologic failure in both groups (P < 0.001).

Effect of ritonavir-boosted tipranavir or darunavir on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of elvitegravir.

OBJECTIVE: Elvitegravir (EVG) is in phase 3 development in combination with ritonavir (RTV)-boosted protease inhibitors in treatment-experienced, HIV-infected patients. Two studies evaluated pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions among EVG and RTV-boosted tipranavir (TPV/r) or darunavir (DRV/r). METHODS: Healthy volunteers received EVG/r alone (study 1: 200/100 mg once daily; study 2: 125/100 mg once daily), TPV/r (500/200 mg twice daily) or DRV/r (600/100 mg twice daily) alone, and EVG (200 or 125 mg as applicable) added to TPV/r (500/200 mg twice daily) or DRV/r (600/100 mg twice daily) in a randomized crossover design, with assessment of steady-state PK for EVG, TPV, DRV, and RTV. Safety was assessed by clinical monitoring. Studies were powered to conclude lack of an interaction if the 90% confidence interval for the geometric mean ratios of the AUCtau and Cmax for EVG, TPV, and DRV were within predefined no-effect boundaries. Trough concentrations were also assessed. RESULTS: No subjects discontinued for adverse events during treatment with EVG/r alone. On coadministration, AUCtau and Cmax of EVG and TPV and EVG and DRV were within prespecified no-effect boundaries versus treatment alone; trough concentrations were also not substantially altered. CONCLUSIONS: The PK of EVG and TPV or DRV were not altered after coadministration of EVG with TPV/r or DRV/r. EVG PK was similar with varied RTV doses of 100 mg once daily, 100 mg twice daily, or 200 mg twice daily. EVG can be added to TPV/r or DRV/r regimens without dose adjustment.