Application of Exposure-Response Analyses to Establish the Pharmacodynamic Similarity of a Once-Daily Regimen to an Approved Twice-Daily Dosing Regimen for the Treatment of HCV Infection.

The triple direct-acting antiviral (3-DAA) regimen (two co-formulated tablets of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir once daily and one tablet of dasabuvir twice daily) for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection has been reformulated for once-daily administration containing all three active DAAs (3QD regimen). Two bioequivalence studies compared the 3-DAA and 3QD regimens. In study 1, fed, single-, and multiple-dose crossover comparisons revealed exposures for drug components that were slightly outside the bioequivalence criteria, i.e., 21 to 29% lower dasabuvir C trough, paritaprevir C max, and ritonavir C max. In study 2, fed and fasted single-dose crossover comparisons demonstrated a large impact of food on exposures, confirming the product's labeling requirement for administration only with food, and revealed a lack of bioequivalence under fasting conditions. Exposure-response analyses using efficacy data from phase 2/3 studies of the 3-DAA regimen demonstrated that the lower dasabuvir C trough for the 3QD regimen (under fed condition) would have minimal impact on sustained virologic response at week 12 post-treatment (SVR12). Thus, the pharmacodynamic similarity between the regimens was established and the analyses provided the basis for regulatory approval of the 3QD regimen to treat patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection.

Population pharmacokinetics of paritaprevir, ombitasvir, dasabuvir, ritonavir and ribavirin in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: analysis of six phase III trials.

AIM: The aim of the current study was to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of a triple direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimen (3D) (ombitasvir, paritaprevir-ritonavir and dasabuvir) and adjunctive ribavirin, and estimate covariate effects in a broad spectrum of subjects with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic data from six phase III studies and one phase II study in subjects receiving the currently approved doses of the 3D ± ribavirin regimen for treating HCV genotype 1 infection for 12 weeks or 24 weeks were characterized using separate population pharmacokinetic models, built using each component of the regimen from nonlinear mixed-effects methodology in NONMEM 7.3. In the models, demographic and clinical covariates were tested. Models were assessed via goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive checks and bootstrap evaluations. RESULTS: The population pharmacokinetic models for each component of the 3D ± ribavirin regimen (DAAs and ritonavir, n = 2348) and ribavirin (n = 1841) adequately described their respective plasma concentration-time data. Model parameter estimates were precise and robust, and all models showed good predictive ability. Significant covariate effects associated with apparent clearance and volume of distribution included age, body weight, gender, cirrhosis, HCV subtype, opioid or antidiabetic agent use, and creatinine clearance. CONCLUSION: The population pharmacokinetics of the 3D ± ribavirin regimen components in HCV-infected patients were characterized using phase II and III HCV clinical trial data. Although several statistically significant covariates were identified, their effects were modest and not clinically meaningful to necessitate dose adjustments for any component of the 3D regimen.

Effect of co-medications on paritaprevir, ritonavir, ombitasvir, dasabuvir and ribavirin pharmacokinetics: analysis of data from seven Phase II/III trials.

BACKGROUND: The three drug direct-acting antiviral regimen (3D regimen) of ombitasvir, paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir, with and without ribavirin, was evaluated in one Phase II trial and six Phase III trials in over 2,300 HCV genotype-1-infected patients. Patients continued taking their protocol-permitted co-medications while receiving the 3D ± ribavirin regimen. The effects of the co-medications on exposures of the 3D regimen and ribavirin were examined. METHODS: Population pharmacokinetic model-predicted steady-state area under the curve (AUC24,ss) values were evaluated in the presence/absence of the co-medications. Interactions resulting in a greater than 50% reduction or 100% increase in an AUC24,ss value were examined as covariates for an effect on apparent clearance (CL/F). RESULTS: More than 1,200 co-medications belonging to 15 drug classes and/or 19 enzyme and transporter inhibitor and/or inducer categories were used concomitantly with the 3D regimen in the trials. Approximately 1,500 patients (65%) in Phase III trials received two or more co-medications from multiple drug classes or categories. No co-medication class/category decreased or increased ombitasvir, dasabuvir, ritonavir or ribavirin AUC24,ss by more than half or twofold, respectively. Opioids, antipsychotics, anti-epileptics, antidiabetics and non-ethinyl estradiol-containing hormone replacement therapies appeared to have an effect (AUC24,ss ratio ≤0.5 or ≥2.0) on paritaprevir exposures. However, when these classes were included in the paritaprevir population pharmacokinetic model, only opioids and antidiabetics had a statistically significant effect on CL/F, but with no clinically meaningful increase in exposures (≤55%). CONCLUSIONS: No dose adjustment is necessary for the 3D ± ribavirin regimen when used with the co-medications included in this analysis as there were no clinically meaningful effects on exposures of the DAAs.

Drug-Drug Interaction of Omeprazole With the HCV Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents Paritaprevir/Ritonavir and Ombitasvir With and Without Dasabuvir.

Paritaprevir (administered with low-dose ritonavir), ombitasvir, and dasabuvir are direct-acting antiviral agents administered as combination regimens for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Drug-drug interactions between 2D (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir) or 3D (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir) regimens and omeprazole, a CYP2C19 substrate and acid-reducing agent, were evaluated in 24 healthy volunteers. Subjects received omeprazole (40 mg once daily) on day 1 and days 20-24 and the 2D or 3D regimen (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir 25/150/100 mg once daily ± dasabuvir 250 mg twice daily) on days 6-24. Compared with omeprazole alone, coadministration with the 2D or 3D regimen decreased omeprazole geometric mean Cmax and AUCt values by 40% to 50%. Ombitasvir, dasabuvir, and ritonavir mean exposures showed <10% change, and paritaprevir mean exposures showed <20% change when the 2D or 3D regimen was administered with omeprazole compared with administration without omeprazole. Although no a priori dose adjustment is needed, a higher omeprazole dose should be considered if clinically indicated when coadministered with the 2D or 3D regimen. No dose adjustment is required for the 2D or 3D regimen when administered with omeprazole, other acid-reducing agents, or CYP2C19 inhibitors.

Drug-Drug Interactions Between the Anti-Hepatitis C Virus 3D Regimen of Ombitasvir, Paritaprevir/Ritonavir, and Dasabuvir and Eight Commonly Used Medications in Healthy Volunteers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The three direct-acting antiviral regimen of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir (3D regimen) is approved for treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection. Drug-drug interaction (DDI) studies of the 3D regimen and commonly used medications were conducted in healthy volunteers to provide information on coadministering these medications with or without dose adjustments. METHODS: Three phase I studies evaluated DDIs between the 3D regimen (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir 25/150/100 mg once daily + dasabuvir 250 mg twice daily) and hydrocodone bitartrate/acetaminophen (5/300 mg), metformin hydrochloride (500 mg), diazepam (2 mg), cyclobenzaprine hydrochloride (5 mg), carisoprodol (250 mg), or sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (SMZ/TMP) (800/160 mg twice daily), all administered orally. DDI magnitude was determined using geometric mean ratios and 90 % confidence intervals for the maximum plasma concentration (C max) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC). RESULTS: Changes in exposures (C max and AUC geometric mean ratios) of acetaminophen, metformin, sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and diazepam were ≤25 % upon coadministration with the 3D regimen. The C max and AUC of nordiazepam, an active metabolite of diazepam, increased by 10 % and decreased by 44 %, respectively. Exposures of cyclobenzaprine and carisoprodol decreased by ≤40 and ≤46 %, respectively, whereas exposures of hydrocodone increased up to 90 %. Ombitasvir, paritaprevir, ritonavir, and dasabuvir exposures changed by ≤25 %, except for a 37 % decrease in paritaprevir C max with metformin and a 33 % increase in dasabuvir AUC with SMZ/TMP. CONCLUSIONS: Acetaminophen, metformin, sulfamethoxazole, and trimethoprim can be coadministered with the 3D regimen without dose adjustment. Higher doses may be needed for diazepam, cyclobenzaprine, and carisoprodol based on clinical monitoring. A 50 % lower dose and/or clinical monitoring should be considered for hydrocodone. No dose adjustment is necessary for the 3D regimen.

Drug Interactions with the Direct-Acting Antiviral Combination of Ombitasvir and Paritaprevir-Ritonavir.

The two direct-acting antiviral (2D) regimen of ombitasvir and paritaprevir (administered with low-dose ritonavir) is being developed for treatment of genotype subtype 1b and genotypes 2 and 4 chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Drug-drug interactions were evaluated in healthy volunteers to develop dosing recommendations for HCV-infected subjects. Mechanism-based interactions were evaluated for ketoconazole, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, digoxin, warfarin, and omeprazole. Interactions were also evaluated for duloxetine, escitalopram, methadone, and buprenorphine-naloxone. Ratios of geometric means with 90% confidence intervals for the maximum plasma concentration and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve were estimated to assess the magnitude of the interactions. For most medications, coadministration with the 2D regimen resulted in a <50% change in exposures. Ketoconazole, digoxin, pravastatin, and rosuvastatin exposures increased by up to 105%, 58%, 76%, and 161%, respectively, and omeprazole exposures decreased by approximately 50%. Clinically meaningful changes in ombitasvir, paritaprevir, or ritonavir exposures were not observed. In summary, all 11 medications evaluated can be coadministered with the 2D regimen, with most medications requiring no dose adjustment. Ketoconazole, digoxin, pravastatin, and rosuvastatin require lower doses, and omeprazole may require a higher dose. No dose adjustment is required for the 2D regimen.

Drug-Drug Interactions between Sofosbuvir and Ombitasvir-Paritaprevir-Ritonavir with or without Dasabuvir.

The combination of ombitasvir (an NS5A inhibitor), paritaprevir (an NS3/4A inhibitor) coadministered with ritonavir (r), and dasabuvir (an NS5B nonnucleoside polymerase inhibitor), referred to as the 3D regimen, and the combination of ombitasvir-paritaprevir-r, referred to as the 2D regimen, have demonstrated high efficacy with and without ribavirin in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected subjects. These regimens have potential for coadministration with sofosbuvir (nucleoside NS5B inhibitor) in the treatment of HCV. This phase 1, drug-drug interaction, open-label, multiple-dose study enrolled 32 healthy subjects to receive the 3D or 2D regimen in combination with sofosbuvir. Doses of study drugs were as follows: ombitasvir-paritaprevir-r, 25/150/100 mg daily (QD); dasabuvir, 250 mg twice daily (BID); and sofosbuvir, 400 mg QD. Blood samples were collected on study days 7, 14, and 21 for evaluating drug interaction at steady state. The effect of the 3D and 2D regimens on the pharmacokinetics of sofosbuvir and its circulating metabolite GS-331007 and vice versa was assessed by a repeated-measures analysis. Exposures of the 3D and 2D regimens were similar (≤20% change) during coadministration with sofosbuvir and during administration alone. Sofosbuvir exposures were 61% to 112% higher with the 3D regimen and 64% to 93% higher with the 2D regimen than with sofosbuvir alone. GS-331007 total exposures were 27% and 32% higher with the 3D and 2D regimens, respectively, than with sofosbuvir alone. Increases in sofosbuvir and GS-331007 exposures likely resulted from breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) and/or P glycoprotein (P-gp) transporter inhibition by paritaprevir and ritonavir. No subjects discontinued the study due to study drug-related adverse events. No dose adjustment is recommended for 3D, 2D, or sofosbuvir in clinical trials exploring the safety and efficacy of the combination. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02356562 and NCT02292719.).

Population Pharmacokinetics of Paritaprevir, Ombitasvir, Dasabuvir, Ritonavir, and Ribavirin in Patients with Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 1 Infection: Combined Analysis from 9 Phase 1b/2 Studies.

Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) are established as the standard of care for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. One of the newest additions to the HCV arsenal is an oral three-DAA combination therapy (i.e., the 3D regimen) that does not require concomitant use of pegylated interferon. The clinical development program for the 3D regimen has yielded a robust dataset that is inclusive of various dosing schemes and a diverse patient population. Using data from nine phase 1b/2a/2b studies that enrolled patients with HCV genotype 1 infection, population pharmacokinetic models were developed for each component of the 3D regimen (ombitasvir, paritaprevir, ritonavir, and dasabuvir) and for ribavirin, an adjunctive therapy used to enhance therapeutic efficacy in some populations. Formulation effects, accumulation, relative bioavailability, and interactions between DAAs were assessed during model development, and demographic and clinical covariates were identified and evaluated for their effects on drug exposures. Proposed models were assessed via goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive checks, and bootstrap evaluations. Population pharmacokinetic models adequately described their respective plasma concentration-time data with precise and reliable model parameter estimates and with good predictive performance. Covariates, including age, sex, body weight, cytochrome P450 2C8 inhibitor use, non-Hispanic ethnicity, and creatinine clearance, were associated with apparent clearance and/or apparent volume parameters; however, the magnitude of effect on drug exposure was modest and not considered to be clinically significant. No patient-related or clinical parameters were identified that would necessitate dose adjustment of the 3D regimen in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of co-administered paritaprevir plus ritonavir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir in hepatic impairment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Paritaprevir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir are direct-acting antivirals for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The aim of this study was to characterize the effects of mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of these drugs. METHODS: HCV-negative subjects with normal hepatic function (n=7) or mild (Child-Pugh A, n=6), moderate (Child-Pugh B, n=6), or severe (Child-Pugh C, n=5) hepatic impairment received a single-dose of the combination of paritaprevir plus ritonavir (paritaprevir/r, 200/100 mg), ombitasvir (25 mg), and dasabuvir (400 mg). Plasma samples were collected through 144 hours after administration for pharmacokinetic assessments. RESULTS: Paritaprevir, ombitasvir, dasabuvir, and ritonavir exposures (maximal plasma concentration, C(max), and area under the concentration-time curve, AUC) were minimally affected in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Differences in exposures between healthy controls and subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment were less than 35%, except for 62% higher paritaprevir AUC in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment. Paritaprevir and dasabuvir AUC were significantly higher in subjects with severe hepatic impairment (950% and 325%, respectively). However, ombitasvir AUC was 54% lower and ritonavir AUC was comparable. Adverse events included eye stye, insomnia, and pain from an infiltrated intravenous line. CONCLUSIONS: The changes observed in paritaprevir, ritonavir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir exposures in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment do not necessitate dose adjustment. Subjects with severe hepatic impairment had substantially higher paritaprevir and dasabuvir exposures.

Drug-drug interaction profile of the all-oral anti-hepatitis C virus regimen of paritaprevir/ritonavir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Paritaprevir (administered with ritonavir, PTV/r), ombitasvir (OBV), and dasabuvir (DSV) are direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Thirteen studies were conducted to characterize drug-drug interactions for the 3D regimen of OBV, PTV/r, and DSV and various medications in healthy volunteers to inform dosing recommendations in HCV-infected patients. METHODS: Mechanism-based drug-drug interactions were evaluated for gemfibrozil, ketoconazole, carbamazepine, warfarin, omeprazole, digoxin, pravastatin, and rosuvastatin. Drug-drug interactions with medications commonly used in HCV-infected patients were evaluated for amlodipine, furosemide, alprazolam, zolpidem, duloxetine, escitalopram, methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone, and oral contraceptives. Ratios of geometric means with 90% confidence intervals for maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) were used to determine the magnitude of interaction. RESULTS: Coadministration with the 3D regimen of OBV, PTV/r, and DSV resulted in a <2-fold change in mean Cmax and AUC for most medications and the DAAs, indicating minimal to modest interactions. Carbamazepine decreased PTV, ritonavir, and DSV exposures substantially, while gemfibrozil increased DSV exposures substantially. Although coadministration with ethinyl estradiol-containing contraceptives resulted in elevated alanine aminotransferase levels, coadministration with a progestin-only contraceptive did not. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of medications can be coadministered with the 3D regimen of OBV, PTV/r, and DSV without dose adjustment, or with clinical monitoring or dose adjustment. Although no dose adjustment is necessary for the 3D regimen when coadministered with 17 of the 20 medications, coadministration with gemfibrozil, carbamazepine, or ethinyl estradiol-containing contraceptives is contraindicated.

Examination of noninferiority, safety, and tolerability of lopinavir/ritonavir and raltegravir compared with lopinavir/ritonavir and tenofovir/ emtricitabine in antiretroviral-naïve subjects: the progress study, 48-week results.

PURPOSE: Current antiretroviral regimens recommended for treatment-naïve patients include 2 nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a new NRTI-sparing regimen may provide an alternative for persons for whom traditional regimens may not be the best option. METHODS: PROGRESS is a 96-week, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial comparing the efficacy and safety of a boosted protease inhibitor (PI) and an integrase inhibitor (lopi-navir/ritonavir [LPV/r] + raltegravir [RAL]) to a boosted PI and 2 NRTIs (LPV/r + tenofovir/ emtricitabine [TDF/FTC]) in antiretroviral (ARV)-naïve HIV-1-infected adults. RESULTS: A total of 206 subjects were randomized to receive LPV/r + RAL (n=101) or LPV/r + TDF/FTC (n=105) and analyzed for ARV efficacy using the US Food and Drug Administration time to loss of virologic response (FDA-TLOVR) algorithm. The percentage of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA <40 copies/mL at week 48 was 83.2% in the LPV/r + RAL group and 84.8% in the LPV/r + TDF/FTC group (P = .850; difference -1.6%; exact 95% CI, -12.0% to 8.8%). As the lower limit of the exact 95% CI for the difference between regimens was at or above the protocol-defined threshold of -20% (as well as the more stringent threshold of -12%), LPV/r + RAL was noninferior to LPV/r + TDF/FTC. The occurrence of treatment-related, moderate/severe adverse events was similar between treatment groups through 48 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The HIV treatment regimen of LPV/r + RAL resulted in noninferior efficacy and comparable safety and tolerability compared with a traditional NRTI-containing regimen through 48 weeks of treatment. These results support further evaluation of the LPV/r + RAL regimen.

Similar safety and efficacy of once- and twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir tablets in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected subjects at 48 weeks.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and antiviral activity of once (QD) or twice (BID) daily lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in combination with investigator-selected nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in treatment-experienced subjects. METHODS: Subjects failing treatment with HIV-1 RNA > 1000 copies per milliliter received LPV/r tablets 800/200 mg QD (n = 300) or 400/100 mg BID (n = 299) with investigator-chosen nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Efficacy was determined by the intent-to-treat time to loss of virologic response (ITT-TLOVR) algorithm. Safety, tolerability, adherence, impact of baseline protease mutations on virologic response, and emergence of resistance on therapy were assessed. RESULTS: Demographics were comparable across groups. By intent-to-treat time to loss of virologic response, 166 QD subjects (55.3%) and 155 BID subjects (51.8%) were responders at week 48 (P = 0.413), with similar mean increases in CD4 T-cell count. QD subjects demonstrated better adherence than BID subjects. The occurrence of treatment-related moderate/severe adverse events was comparable for all events except nausea, which was reported more frequently among BID-treated subjects. Emergence of new protease resistance mutations on treatment was similarly infrequent in both groups. CONCLUSION: LPV/r dosed QD resulted in increased treatment adherence and was as efficacious as BID LPV/r while providing similar safety, tolerability, and limited resistance evolution.

"White coat compliance" limits the reliability of therapeutic drug monitoring in HIV-1-infected patients.

PURPOSE: To analyze the extent of improved adherence preceding a clinic visit ("white coat compliance") in a clinical trial and its potential impact on the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). METHOD: In this randomized, open-label trial, 190 antiretroviral-naïve, HIV-1-infected subjects received lopinavir/ritonavir capsules, once or twice daily, with tenofovir DF and emtricitabine (both once daily) for 96 weeks. Lopinavir/ritonavir compliance was assessed using MEMS. RESULTS: 178 subjects (107 once daily, 71 twice daily) had plasma samples collected for lopinavir concentration resulting in 768 visits with pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment. The results were not used to provide feedback or recommend dose changes. For 239 (31%) of these visits, drug intake was perfect 1-3 days before PK sampling, whereas compliance during the remainder of the inter-PK visit period was < or = 95%. This phenomenon was noted in 66% of subjects, more frequently among twice-daily than once-daily subjects (85% vs. 54%; p < .0001), and may have led to determination of "therapeutic" drug levels despite overall adherence < or = 95%. The opposite phenomenon (>95% compliance reported during the inter-PK visit period, yet a dose missed the day before PK sampling) was observed for 1% of PK visits and clustered in 5% of subjects. CONCLUSIONS: In a substantial portion of visits and a majority of subjects, a white coat compliance pattern was observed. Drug concentration results obtained at these visits could deliver unreliable estimates of long-term drug exposure.

Effects of acid-reducing agents on the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir.

A total of 71 HIV-negative healthy adults were randomized to 1 of 6 regimens to receive lopinavir/ritonavir tablets 400/100 mg twice daily (bid) or 800/200 mg once daily (qd) or atazanavir 300 mg + ritonavir 100 mg qd from study days 1 to 15 with a moderate-fat meal. One hour before breakfast, either omeprazole 40 mg qd was administered on study days 11 through 15, or a single dose of ranitidine 150 mg was administered on study day 11. Lopinavir, atazanavir, and ritonavir pharmacokinetics were determined on study days 10, 11, and 15 and compared using point estimates and 90% confidence intervals (CIs). The point estimates for lopinavir Cmax and AUCtau were in the range of 0.92 to 1.08, with 90% CI contained within the range of 0.80 to 1.25 after coadministration of omeprazole or ranitidine. The point estimates for atazanavir Cmax and AUCtau were decreased by 48% to 62% with the upper bound of the 90% CI

A lopinavir/ritonavir-based once-daily regimen results in better compliance and is non-inferior to a twice-daily regimen through 96 weeks.

We assessed the safety and efficacy and evaluated the adherence to lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) dosed QD or BID in antiretroviral-naive, HIV-1-infected subjects through 96 weeks of treatment. A randomized, open-label, multicenter comparative study was conducted. A total of 190 antiretroviral-naive subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA above 1000 copies/ml and any CD4(+) T cell count were enrolled. Subjects were randomized (3:2) to LPV/r 800/200 mg QD (n = 115) or 400/100 mg BID (n = 75). Subjects received TDF 300 mg and FTC 200 mg QD. Adherence to LPV/r through 96 weeks was measured using MEMS((R)) monitors. Median baseline VL and CD4(+) T cell count were 4.8 log(10) copies/ml and 216 cells/mm(3), respectively. Prior to week 96, 37% (QD) and 39% (BID) of subjects discontinued, primarily due either to adverse events (17% QD, 9% BID) or to loss to follow-up or nonadherence (12% QD, 17% BID). The proportion of subjects with VL <50 copies/ml [57% QD, 53% BID; p = 0.582 (ITT NC = F)], change in CD4 count (244 cells/mm(3) QD, 264 cells/mm(3) BID; p = 0.513), and evolution of resistance did not differ between groups through 96 weeks. Diarrhea (17% QD, 5% BID, p = 0.014) was the most common moderate or severe, study drug-related adverse event. Adherence to LPV/r was higher for the QD group than the BID group and declined over time in both groups. Time to loss of virologic response was significantly associated with adherence to LPV/r in both groups. LPV/r QD resulted in virologic response similar to LPV/r BID through 96 weeks in antiretroviral-naive subjects. Adherence was significantly higher in the QD group.

Decreased adherence to antiretroviral therapy observed prior to transient human immunodeficiency virus type 1 viremia.

BACKGROUND: To identify potential causes and clinical implications of transient increases in plasma viral load (hereafter, "blips"). METHODS: M99-056 and M02-418 were prospective, randomized trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) capsules administered twice per day or once per day to subjects infected with human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1). Plasma viral load was measured every 4 weeks (from baseline through week 24, excluding week 12 and week 20 in M02-418), every 8 weeks (from week 24 through week 48), and every 12 weeks (from week 48 through week 96). Blips were defined by 1 plasma viral load measurement of between 50-1000 copies/mL, immediately preceded and immediately followed by a measurement of <50 copies/mL. A medication event monitoring system was used to record the date and time subjects administered a dose of LPV/r. RESULTS: Of 228 subject enrolled, event monitor data were available for 223 (98%) subjects (92 of whom received twice-daily LPV/r therapy, and 131 of whom received once-daily therapy). Viral load blips (median plasma viral load, 82 copies/mL [range, 51-858 copies/mL]) were identified in 60 (27%) of the subjects (21 in the LPV/r twice-daily group and 39 in the LPV/r once-daily group). Neither the baseline plasma viral load nor the CD4(+) T cell count were associated with blips. During the week prior to a blip, the mean number of days that the subject administered the prescribed number of doses was lower than the number during a matched period for the same subject during which a blip did not occur (5.55 vs. 6.22 days; P = .007). Blips were not associated with virologic failure or the development of drug resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Blips were associated with decreased adherence, but not with virologic failure or development of drug resistance in these studies of LPV/r. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00043966 .

A once-daily lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimen provides noninferior antiviral activity compared with a twice-daily regimen.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and noninferiority and to explore the efficacy of administration of once-daily versus twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected subjects. DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, multicenter, comparative study. METHODS: One hundred ninety antiretroviral-naive subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA level >1000 copies/mL and any CD4 cell count were randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir at a dose of 800/200 mg administered once daily (n = 115) or lopinavir/ritonavir at a dose of 400/100 mg administered twice daily (n = 75). Subjects also received tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) at a dose of 300 mg and emtricitabine (FTC) at a dose of 200 mg administered once daily. RESULTS: The median baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA level and CD4 count were 4.8 log10 copies/mL and 216 cells/mm, respectively. Before week 48, 20% (once daily) and 29% (twice daily) subjects discontinued. Virologic responses of the subjects through 48 weeks were comparable; 70% (once daily) and 64% (twice daily) achieved an HIV-1 RNA level <50 copies/mL by intent-to-treat, noncompleter = failure analysis. No subject demonstrated LPV or TDF resistance, but 3 subjects (2 in the once-daily group, 1 in the twice-daily group) demonstrated FTC resistance. Mean increases in CD4 count were similar. Diarrhea (16% in the once-daily group, 5% in the twice-daily group; P = 0.036) was the most common moderate or severe study drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Through 48 weeks, a once-daily regimen of lopinavir/ritonavir + TDF + FTC appears to have similar virologic and immunologic responses in antiretroviral-naive subjects as the same regimen with lopinavir/ritonavir administered twice daily. Both regimens were relatively well tolerated, and no LPV or TDF resistance was observed.

Substitution with lopinavir/ritonavir improves patient-reported outcomes including quality of life in patients who were intolerant to their antiretroviral therapy.

PURPOSE: Adverse effects are important determinants of quality of life (QOL) during highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). The PLATO study investigated the association between changes in patient-reported outcomes including QOL and substitution with lopinavir/ritonavir in patients experiencing side effects (SEs). METHOD: HIV-1-infected participants (N = 849) with undetectable viral load experiencing Grade-2 SEs of the protease inhibitor (PI) or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) component of their HAART regimen were randomized to immediate (baseline) or deferred (week 4) substitution with lopinavir/ritonavir soft-gel capsules 400/100 mg bid. The primary endpoint was change in the total score from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) Symptoms Distress Module (ASDM), supplemented with two items for nephrolithiasis. Secondary endpoints included Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-HIV scores and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scores. RESULTS: Immediate substitution resulted in improved ASDM total score at week 4 compared with deferred substitution (p <.001) and significant improvements in all MOS-HIV domains, while significant improvement was observed in CES-D scores at week 8. Primary SEs resolved at week 8 in 65% of participants in the immediate substitution group. Suppression of HIV-1 was maintained. Treatment was well-tolerated and associated with elevations in cholesterol and triglycerides. CONCLUSION: Substitution with LPV/r improved patient-reported outcomes including QOL in patients experiencing Grade-2 SEs, while maintaining viral suppression.