Dolutegravir Monotherapy as Maintenance Strategy: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data From Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Dolutegravir monotherapy (DTG-m) results in virological failure (VF) in some people with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH). We sought to identify the independent factors associated with the risk of VF and to explore the effect size heterogeneity between subgroups of PWH enrolled in DTG-m trials. Methods: We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating DTG-m versus combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) among PWH virologically controlled for at least 6 months on cART. We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis of VF risk factors and quantified their explained heterogeneity in random-effect models. Definition of VF was a confirmed plasma human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) >50 copies/mL by week 48. Results: Among 416 PWH from 4 RCTs, DTG-m significantly increased the risk of VF (16 of 227 [7%] versus 0 of 189 for cART; risk difference 7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1%-2%; P = .02; I2 = 51%). Among 272 participants exposed to DTG-m, VF were more likely in participants with the following: first cART initiated ≥90 days from HIV acute infection (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 5.16; 95% 95% CI, 1.60-16.65), CD4 T cells nadir <350/mm3 (aHR, 12.10; 95% CI, 3.92-37.40), HIV RNA signal at baseline (aHR, 4.84; 95% CI, 3.68-6.38), and HIV-deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) copy number at baseline ≥2.7 log/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells (aHR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.99-7.30). Among these independent risk factors, the largest effect size heterogeneity was found between HIV DNA subgroups (I2 = 80.2%; P for interaction = .02). Conclusions: Our study supports the importance of a large viral reservoir size for explaining DTG-m simplification strategy failure. Further studies are needed to link size and genetic diversity of the HIV-1 reservoir.

Forgiveness of Dolutegravir-Based Triple Therapy Compared With Older Antiretroviral Regimens: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort of Adherence Patterns and HIV-RNA Replication.

BACKGROUND: For many people with HIV (PWH), taking antiretroviral therapy (ARV) every day is difficult. METHODS: Average adherence (Av-Adh) and log-transformed treatment interruption (TI) to ARV were prospectively measured over 6 months using electronic drug monitoring (EDM) in several cohorts of PWH. Multivariate linear regression models including baseline confounders explored the influence of EDM-defined adherence (R 2) on 6-month log10 HIV-RNA. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to compare the risk of HIV-RNA detection (VR) within subgroups stratified by lower (≤95%) and higher (>95%) Av-Adh. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-nine PWH were analyzed with different ARVs: dolutegravir (n = 102), raltegravir (n = 90), boosted PI (bPI; n = 107), and NNRTI (n = 100). In the dolutegravir group, the influence of adherence pattern measures on R 2 for HIV-RNA levels was marginal (+2%). Av-Adh, TI, and Av-Adh × TI increased the R 2 for HIV-RNA levels by 54% and 40% in the raltegravir and bPI treatment groups, respectively. TI increased the R 2 for HIV-RNA levels by 36% in the NNRTI treatment group. Compared with the dolutegravir-based regimen, the risk of VR was significantly increased for raltegravir (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 45.6; 95% CI, 4.5-462.1; P = .001), NNRTIs (aOR, 24.8; 95% CI, 2.7-228.4; P = .005), and bPIs (aOR, 28.3; 95% CI, 3.4-239.4; P = .002) in PWH with Av-Adh ≤95%. Among PWH with >95% Av-Adh, there were no significant differences in the risk of VR among the different ARVs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the concept that dolutegravir in combination with 2 other active ARVs achieves greater virological suppression than older ARVs, including raltegravir, NNRTI, and bPI, among PWH with lower adherence.