A randomized comparative 96-week trial of boosted atazanavir versus continued boosted protease inhibitor in HIV-1 patients with abdominal adiposity.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal adiposity in HIV-1 patients initiating antiretroviral therapy may be part of a restoration-to-health phenomenon. Lipoatrophy is associated with long-term thymidine analogue therapy. Individual protease inhibitors (PIs) differ in their effects on lipids and insulin resistance. METHODS: A randomized open-label multicentre 96-week trial compared changes in fat distribution in patients with suppressed HIV-1 RNA and abdominal adiposity, who either continued on their current twice-daily ritonavir-boosted PI (PI/r) or switched to once-daily boosted atazanavir (ATV/r). Treatment with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors was unchanged. Body composition was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and abdominal computerized tomography (CT) scanning. RESULTS: In total, 201 patients were randomized; 131 switched to ATV/r. Viral suppression (<50 copies/ml) was similarly maintained (93% ATV/r versus 89% PI/r). Mean changes from baseline in trunk-to-limb fat ratio were similar; difference estimates 0.03 (95% CI -0.06, 0.12; P=0.48 at week 48) and 0.02 (95% CI -0.10, 0.14; P=0.73 at week 96). More patients in the PI/r arm had a decrease of ≥20% in limb fat from baseline at week 96. Significantly greater reductions in proatherogenic lipids occurred following switch to ATV/r. Both treatment regimens were generally well-tolerated; the incidence of grade 3-4 treatment-related clinical adverse events was 34% among ATV/r recipients versus 4% of PI/r-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to ATV/r had no demonstrable benefit on abdominal adiposity. Maintenance of efficacy, less limb fat loss and marked reduction in proatherogenic lipids was observed with ATV/r compared with continuing a PI/r regimen.

A randomized, controlled trial of initial anti-retroviral therapy with abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine twice-daily compared to atazanavir once-daily with lamivudine/zidovudine twice-daily in HIV-infected patients over 48 weeks (ESS100327, the ACTION Study).

BACKGROUND: Traditional first line regimens containing a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor may not be suitable for a subset of antiretroviral-naïve patients such as those with certain co-morbidities, women of child-bearing potential, and intolerability to components of standard first line therapy. This study was conducted to determine if alternate treatment options may meet the needs of both general and special patient populations. The ACTION study was a randomized, open-label, multicenter, 48-week trial that compared the safety and efficacy of a triple nucleoside regimen versus a protease inhibitor plus a dual nucleoside regimen in HIV-1 treatment-naïve subjects. RESULTS: 279 HIV-infected subjects with HIV-1 RNA (VL) >5000 but < 200,000 copies/mL (c/mL) and CD4+ count >/= 100 cells/mm3 were randomized (1:1) to receive abacavir sulfate/lamivudine/zidovudine (ABC/3TC/ZDV) twice-daily or atazanavir (ATV) once-daily plus lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/ZDV) twice-daily. Protocol-defined virologic failure was based on multiple failure criteria.Non-inferiority of ABC/3TC/ZDV to ATV+3TC/ZDV was established with 62% vs. 59% of subjects achieving a VL < 50 c/mL at week 48, [ITT(E), M/S = F, 95% CI: -5.9, 10.4]. Similar results were observed in the 230 (82%) subjects with baseline VL<100,000 c/mL (ABC/3TC/ZDV vs. ATV+3TC/ZDV), 66% vs. 59%; 95% CI: -5.6, 19.5. However, ABC/3TC/ZDV did not meet the non-inferiority criterion compared to ATV+3TC/ZDV in the 48 subjects with baseline VL >/= 100,000 c/mL, 39% vs. 60%; 95% CI: -49.2, 7.4, respectively. Protocol-defined virologic failure was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: ABC/3TC/ZDV demonstrated comparable virologic efficacy to ATV+3TC/ZDV in this population over 48 weeks. In those with a baseline VL >/= 100,000 c/mL, subjects in the ATV+3TC/ZDV showed better virologic efficacy. Both regimens offer benefits in select therapy-naïve subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [Clinical Trials Identifier, NCT00082394].

Efficacy of epoetin alfa administered every 2 weeks to maintain hemoglobin and quality of life in anemic HIV-infected patients.

Anemia, a common hematological abnormality in HIV, contributes to decreased quality of life (QOL). This study assessed once-every-2-week epoetin alfa on maintaining QOL and hemoglobin (Hb) in anemic HIV-infected patients in a 24-week, open-label, multicenter study. HIV-infected patients (Hb < or =12 g/dl) received epoetin alfa 40,000 units subcutaneously once weekly, until reaching Hb > or =13 g/dl. Patients then entered a maintenance phase (MP), in which epoetin alfa was administered every other week or at longer intervals. The trial objectives were to determine if QOL, as measured by the Medical Outcomes Study-HIV (MOS-HIV) general health perceptions (GHP) domain and Hb, was maintained. Safety was also assessed. A total of 292 patients were enrolled (72% on HAART). Mean baseline laboratory values were Hb = 10.8 g/dl, CD4(+) count = 280 cells/microl, and HIV RNA = 51,867 copies/ml. In all, 81% of patients reached Hb > or =13 g/dl and 92% reached Hb > or =12 g/dl. QOL was maintained from the beginning (GHP = 44.2 points) to the end of MP (GHP = 43.4 points) with every other week or longer dosing. Mean Hb at the beginning of MP was 13.4 +/- 0.5 g/dl and was 12.8 +/- 1.4 g/dl at study end. Epoetin alfa was well tolerated; adverse events were consistent with those reported in previous studies of epoetin alfa in HIV-infected patients. Although the clinical approach tested in this study is not consistent with current prescribing recommendations, the results confirm the efficacy of prolonged dosing intervals (every 2-4 weeks) in maintaining optimal Hb levels and QOL in anemic HIV-infected patients.