Subclinical cardiovascular disease in patients starting contemporary protease inhibitors.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess changes in and factors associated with anatomical [carotid artery intima-media thickness (CIMT)] and functional (arterial stiffness) markers of subclinical cardiovascular disease progression in antiretroviral-naïve patients starting triple combination antiretroviral therapy containing contemporary protease inhibitors. METHODS: This was a planned substudy of the ATADAR (Metabolic Effects of Atazanavir/Ritonavir Versus Darunavir/Ritonavir in Combination With Tenofovir/Emtricitabine in naïve HIV-1 Infected Patients) clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01274780). ATADAR is a multicentre, randomized, open-label clinical trial comparing the effects of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir and darunavir, both with tenofovir/emtricitabine, in antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected patients. Common CIMT and aortic augmentation index (AIx@75) were measured at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up. Antiretroviral treatment, traditional cardiovascular risk factors and HIV-related factors were assessed as potential predictors of CIMT and Aix@75 changes using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in this pilot study. While CIMT significantly increased in the pooled population [median (interquartile range (IQR)) 68 (-13, 128) µm; P = 0.0511], AIx@75 did not [median (IQR) 1 (-6, 5)%; P = 0.8964]. Patients on darunavir showed a trend to faster CIMT progression than those on atazanavir [median change (IQR) 117 (-2, 143) vs. -6 (-58, 89) µm, respectively; P = 0.0917]. However, after adjustment in the multivariate analysis, a higher baseline Framingham score was the only factor associated with CIMT progression (coefficient 16.02; 95% confidence interval -1.04, 33.08; P = 0.064). AIx@75 change was not associated with any baseline factor. CONCLUSIONS: CIMT was a more sensitive marker of subclinical vascular disease progression than arterial stiffness in antiretroviral-naïve patients starting antiretroviral therapy with contemporary protease inhibitors. Classical risk factors but not antiretroviral therapy were associated with faster CIMT progression.

Farmacocinética, perfil de seguridad e interacciones de los regímenes basados en Sofosbuvir / Pharmacokinetic, safety profile and DDI interactions of Sofosbuvir based regimens

Sofosbuvir (SOF) es un profármaco nucleotídico que se metaboliza ampliamente. El metabolito activo se forma en los hepatocitos y no se encuentra en el plasma. El principal metabolito (>90 %), GS-331007, es inactivo. SOF se elimina principalmente a través de los riñones (la mayoría, 80%, como GS-331007). SOF y GS-331007 no son sustratos ni inhibidores de UGT1A1 ni de las enzimas CYP3A4, CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 y CYP2D6. Los ensayos clínicos fase III y diferentes cohortes de vida real publicadas hasta la fecha sugieren que los regímenes de tratamiento basados en SOF para los pacientes infectados por el VHC con o sin cirrosis son efectivos y seguros. La tasa de abandono a la terapia por efectos adversos es ínfima (<1%). Los efectos secundarios más frecuentemente recogidos en los ensayos clínicos son la fatiga, la cefalea y las náuseas. SOF es substrato del transportador de fármacos glicoproteína P (P-gp) y de la proteína de resistencia al cáncer de mama (BCRP), aunque GS-331007 no lo es. La administración conjunta de SOF con fármacos que sean potentes inductores de la P-gp está contraindicada debido al potencial descenso de las concentraciones plasmáticas de SOF por disminución de la absorción intestinal. No se recomienda la administración conjunta de SOF con fármacos inductores moderados de la P-gp. Debido a las vías metabólicas comentadas, las interacciones farmacológicas de SOF son escasas, y son pocos los fármacos que están contraindicados conjuntamente

Sofosbuvir (SOF) is a nucleotide prodrug that is extensively metabolized. The active metabolite is produced in hepatocytes and is not found in plasma. The main metabolite (> 90%), GS-331007, is inactive. SOF is eliminated primarily through the kidneys (most, 80%, such as GS-331007). SOF and GS-331007 are neither substrates nor inhibitors of UGT1A1 nor of the enzymes CYP3A4, CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 and CYP2D6. Phase III clinical trials and different real-life cohorts published to date suggest that SOF-based treatment regimens are effective and safe in HCV-infected patients with or without cirrhosis. The rate of withdrawal of therapy due to adverse effects is negligible (<1%). The most frequently reported side effects in clinical trials are fatigue, headache and nausea. SOF is a substrate of the drug transporter P glycoprotein (P-gp) and of the breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), although GS-331007 is not. Co-administration of SOF with drugs that are potent inducers of P-gp is contraindicated due to the potential decrease in SOF plasma concentrations due to decreased intestinal absorption. Co-administration of SOF with moderate inducers of P-gp is also not recommended. Due to the metabolic pathways discussed, the pharmacological interactions of SOF are very scarce, and few concomitant drugs are contraindicated

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine plus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir or cobicistat-boosted elvitegravir as a single-tablet regimen for HIV post-exposure prophylaxis.

Objectives: To assess HIV-1 post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) non-completion at day 28, comparing ritonavir-boosted lopinavir versus cobicistat-boosted elvitegravir as a single-tablet regimen (STR), using tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine with both of these therapies. Methods: A prospective, open, randomized clinical trial was performed. Individuals attending the emergency room due to potential sexual exposure to HIV and who met criteria for PEP were randomized 1:3 into two groups receiving either 400/100 mg of lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 38) or 150/150 mg of elvitegravir/cobicistat (n = 119), with both groups also receiving 245/200 mg of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. Five follow-up visits were scheduled at days 1, 10, 28, 90 and 180. The primary endpoint was PEP non-completion at day 28. Secondary endpoints were adherence, adverse effects and rate of seroconversions. Clinical trials.gov number: NCT08431173. Results: Median age was 32 years and 95% were males. PEP non-completion at day 28 was 36% (n = 57), with a trend to be higher in the lopinavir/ritonavir arm [lopinavir/ritonavir 47% (n = 18) versus elvitegravir/cobicistat 33% (n = 39), P = 0.10]. We performed a modified ITT analysis including only those patients who attended on day 1. PEP non-completion in this subgroup was higher in the lopinavir/ritonavir arm than in the elvitegravir/cobicistat arm (33% versus 15%, respectively, P = 0.04). Poor adherence was significantly higher in the lopinavir/ritonavir arm versus the elvitegravir/cobicistat arm (47% versus 9%, respectively, P < 0.0001). Adverse events were reported by 73 patients (59%), and were significantly more common in the lopinavir/ritonavir arm (90% versus 49%, P = 0.0001). A seroconversion was observed in the elvitegravir/cobicistat arm in a patient with multiple exposures before and after PEP. Conclusions: A higher PEP non-completion, poor adherence and adverse events were observed in patients allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir arm, suggesting that STR elvitegravir/cobicistat is a well-tolerated antiretroviral for PEP.

Boceprevir plus pegylated interferon/ribavirin to re-treat hepatitis C virus genotype 1 in HIV-HCV co-infected patients: final results of the Spanish BOC HIV-HCV Study.

INTRODUCTION: Boceprevir (BOC) was one of the first oral inhibitors of hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3 protease to be developed. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of BOC+pegylated interferon-α2a/ribavirin (PEG-IFN/RBV) in the retreatment of HIV-HCV co-infected patients with HCV genotype 1. METHODS: This was a phase III prospective trial. HIV-HCV (genotype 1) co-infected patients from 16 hospitals in Spain were included. These patients received 4 weeks of PEG-IFN/RBV (lead-in), followed by response-guided therapy with PEG-IFN/RBV plus BOC (a fixed 44 weeks was indicated in the case of cirrhosis). The primary endpoint was the sustained virological response (SVR) rate at 24 weeks post-treatment. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. RESULTS: From June 2013 to April 2014, 102 patients were enrolled, 98 of whom received at least one treatment dose. Seventy-three percent were male, 34% were cirrhotic, 23% had IL28b CC, 65% had genotype 1a, and 41% were previous null responders. The overall SVR rate was 67%. Previous null-responders and cirrhotic patients had lower SVR rates (57% and 51%, respectively). Seventy-six patients (78%) completed the therapy scheme; the most common reasons for discontinuation were lack of response at week 12 (12 patients) and adverse events (six patients). CONCLUSIONS: Response-guided therapy with BOC in combination with PEG-IFN/RBV led to an overall SVR rate of 67%, but an SVR rate of only 51% in patients with cirrhosis. The therapy was generally well tolerated. Although the current standards of care do not include BOC+PEG-IFN/RBV, the authors believe that this combination can be beneficial in situations where new HCV direct antiviral agent interferon-free therapies are not available yet.

Improvement of BMD after Switching from Lopinavir/R Plus Two Nucleos(T)ide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors to Lopinavir/R Plus Lamivudine: OLE-LIP Substudy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 48-week changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and body fat distribution between patients continuing lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs and those switching to lopinavir/ritonavir and lamivudine. METHODS: Substudy of a randomized, open-label, multicenter OLE study was carried out. Adult HIV-infected patients with <50 copies/mL for ≥6 months were randomized (1:1) to continue lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs or switching to lopinavir/ritonavir and lamivudine. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was performed at baseline and after 48 weeks to measure bone composition and body fat distribution in both the groups. RESULTS: Forty-one patients (dual-therapy, n = 23; triple-therapy, n = 18) of 239, who received at least one dose of study medication, completed the study: median age, 42 years, 71% male, 73% Caucasian. At week 48, total BMD increased by 1.04% (95% CI, 0.06 to 2.01%) among patients switching to dual-therapy, whereas no significant changes occurred in patients maintaining triple-therapy. Dual-therapy and older age were independently associated with total BMD increase. Among patients discontinuing tenofovir-DF, a significant increase was seen in total BMD (1.43; 95% CI, -0.04 to 2.91) and total hip (1.33%; 95% CI, 0.44 to 2.22%). A non-statistically significant decrease in femoral and spinal BMD was observed in patients who discontinued abacavir and in those continuing triple-therapy. Regarding fat distribution, no significant changes were seen in both the treatment groups. DISCUSSION: BMD increased following switching to lopinavir/ritonavir plus lamivudine in HIV-infected patients on suppressive triple-therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs including tenofovir-DF.

Differences between HIV-infected and uninfected adults in the contributions of smoking, diabetes and hypertension to acute coronary syndrome: two parallel case-control studies.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the separate contributions of smoking, diabetes and hypertension to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in HIV-infected adults relative to uninfected adults. METHODS: Two parallel case-control studies were carried out. In the first study, HIV-positive adults diagnosed with ACS between 1997 and 2009 (HIV+/ACS) were matched for age, gender and known duration of HIV infection with HIV-positive adults without ACS (HIV+/noACS), each individual in the HIV+/ACS group being matched with three individuals in the HIV+/noACS group. In the second study, each individual in the HIV+/ACS group in the first study was matched for age, gender and calendar date of ACS diagnosis with three HIV-negative individuals diagnosed with ACS between 1997 and 2009 (HIV-/ACS). Each individual in the HIV-/ACS group was then matched for age and gender with an HIV-negative adult without ACS (HIV-/noACS). After matching, the ratio of numbers of individuals in the HIV+/ACS, HIV+/noACS, HIV-/ACS and HIV-/noACS groups was therefore 1 : 3 : 3 : 3, respectively. We performed logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors for ACS in each case-control study and calculated population attributable risks (PARs) for smoking, diabetes and hypertension in HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals. RESULTS: There were 57 subjects in the HIV+/ACS group, 173 in the HIV+/noACS group, 168 in the HIV-/ACS group, and 171 in the HIV-/noACS group. Independent risk factors for ACS were smoking [odds ratio (OR) 4.091; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.086-8.438; P < 0.0001] and a family history of cardiovascular disease (OR 7.676; 95% CI 1.976-32.168; P = 0.0003) in HIV-positive subjects, and smoking (OR 4.310; 95% CI 2.425-7.853; P < 0.0001), diabetes (OR 5.778; 95% CI 2.393-15.422; P = 0.0002) and hypertension (OR 6.589; 95% CI 3.554-12.700; P < 0.0001) in HIV-negative subjects. PARs for smoking, diabetes and hypertension were 54.35 and 30.58, 6.57 and 17.24, and 9.07 and 38.81% in HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The contribution of smoking to ACS in HIV-positive adults was generally greater than the contributions of diabetes and hypertension, and was almost twice as high as that in HIV-negative adults. Development of effective smoking cessation strategies should be prioritized to prevent cardiovascular disease in HIV-positive adults.