Pharmacokinetics and short-term efficacy of a double-boosted protease inhibitor regimen in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults.

OBJECTIVES: To study the pharmacokinetics and short-term efficacy of low and standard dose lopinavir/ritonavir and saquinavir combinations in Thai, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected, treatment-naive patients. METHODS: In this open-label, 24-week, prospective study, 48 treatment-naive patients were randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg+saquinavir 1000 mg twice daily (arm A), lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg+saquinavir 600 mg twice daily (arm B), lopinavir/ritonavir 266/66 mg+saquinavir 1000 mg twice daily (arm C), or lopinavir/ritonavir 266/66 mg+saquinavir 600 mg twice daily (arm D). A 12 h. pharmacokinetic profile in all patients was performed. Plasma concentrations of saquinavir and lopinavir were determined using an HPLC technique. HIV-1 RNA was measured over 24 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-three subjects were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis. The total exposure differed significantly for the different arms. Median values for lopinavir area under the curve at 0-12 h were 128.2, 119.2, 66.1 and 68.5 mg.h/L for arms A-D, respectively. For saquinavir, the median values were 36.9, 19.2, 25.3 and 12.4 mg.h/L for arms A-D, respectively. The proportion of patients having a viral load below 50 copies/mL at week 24 was 39% for arm A, 63% for arm B, 55.0% for arm C, and 69% for arm D. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetic parameters for the different treatment arms were adequate. However, the proportion of subjects with an undectable viral load at week 24 was lower than anticipated.

Ketoconazole is inferior to ritonavir as an alternative booster for saquinavir in a once daily regimen in Thai HIV-1 infected patients.

OBJECTIVE: To improve the pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors, boosting with low-dose ritonavir is performed. However, toxicity, storage conditions and high costs of antiretroviral treatment may necessitate interruption of ritonavir. Ketoconazole was investigated as a potential booster of once-daily (o.d.) saquinavir. METHODS: In a single-group, two-period design, 25 virologically and immunologically stable patients on saquinavir/ritonavir 2000/100 mg o.d. were switched to saquinavir/ketoconazole 2000/400 mg o.d. for 2 weeks. Two steady-state pharmacokinetic curves were recorded at both periods. RESULTS: Fourteen females and 11 male patients were included. Median age was 34 years [interquartile range (IQR), 32-42 years], body weight 54 kg (IQR, 47-59 kg) and body mass index 21 kg/m (19-23 kg/m). The mean saquinavir area under the curve (AUC) during boosting with ritonavir was 57.93 +/- 27.96 mg/h/l, maximum observed concentration (Cmax) was 7.50 +/- 3.45 mg/l and concentration at 24 h (Cmin) was 0.35 +/- 0.30 mg/l. When ketoconazole was used, the saquinavir AUC, Cmax, and Cmin were 12.00 +/- 6.97 mg/h/l, 2.43 +/- 1.35 mg/l and 0.03 +/- 0.04 mg/l, respectively. CONCLUSION: Boosting with ketoconazole resulted in 80% lower exposure to saquinavir. Although saquinavir AUC might still be adequate for treatment, concentrations at 24 h reached levels below the recommended trough concentrations of 0.1 mg/l, which may result in selection of resistant HIV-1 viral strains. Therefore, boosting of saquinavir by ketoconazole is not recommended.

Relationships between drug exposure, changes in metabolic parameters and body fat in HIV-infected patients switched to a nucleoside sparing regimen.

BACKGROUND: The pathogenesis of metabolic disturbances in treated HIV infection is incompletely understood. METHODS: Relationships between fasted metabolic parameters, body composition, and drug plasma concentrations were investigated in 59 patients who switched from failed nucleoside analogue treatment to ritonavir-boosted indinavir and efavirenz therapy. Metabolic parameters, peripheral fat, visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and drug plasma concentrations were measured prospectively. RESULTS: Ritonavir exposure was found to be negatively correlated with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) changes, with a 2.4% decrease in HDL-c for each unit increase in ritonavir concentration ratio. Significant associations between indinavir or efavirenz concentrations and metabolic disturbances were not observed. Total cholesterol (TC) correlated positively with high body mass index (BMI) and negatively with baseline limb fat mass: each unit increase in BMI and each kilogram reduction in baseline limb fat corresponded with a TC increase of 2.4% and 4.1%, respectively. Baseline triglyceride levels were lower in those patients with relatively greater limb fat mass: each kilogram reduction of total limb fat mass was associated with a 15.7% increase in triglyceride concentration. Changes in VAT were positively correlated with TC: for every unit TC increase a 0.3% VAT increase was observed (over 48 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced limb fat mass at the start of the study treatment, increases in VAT mass, and higher plasma concentrations of ritonavir on study treatment were each--to varying degrees--associated with various metabolic disturbances.

Efavirenz levels and 24-week efficacy in HIV-infected patients with tuberculosis receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy and rifampicin.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant use of efavirenz and rifampicin is common for treatment of HIV and tuberculosis. Plasma efavirenz levels can be reduced by rifampicin, but the appropriate daily dosage of efavirenz is unclear. METHODS: HIV-infected patients with active tuberculosis, receiving rifampicin > 1 month, were randomized to receive stavudine and lamivudine plus efavirenz 600 or 800 mg daily. Plasma efavirenz levels were measured (at 12 h after dosing and on day 14) by high-performance liquid chromatography. Plasma HIV RNA was assessed at 16 and 24 weeks after antiretroviral therapy. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable in the 84 patients (two groups of 42). Median plasma efavirenz levels were 3.02 mg/l (range, 0.07-12.21) in the 600 mg group and 3.39 mg/l (range, 1.03-21.31) in the 800 mg group (P = 0.632). Plasma efavirenz levels were < 1 mg/l in 3 of 38 (7.9%) patients in the 600 mg group and in none of the 800 mg group (P = 0.274). Approximately 40 and 45% of patients had efavirenz levels > 4 mg/l, respectively. There was no significant difference in time to HIV RNA < 50 copies/ml (P = 0.848). CONCLUSIONS: Median plasma efavirenz levels were comparable among both groups. Efavirenz 600 mg/day should be sufficient for most Thai HIV-infected patients receiving rifampicin with body weight approximately 50 kg. These results may not be applicable to other ethic populations who have higher body weights. However, the study of long-term virological and immunological outcomes is needed and under further investigation.

Nevirapine plasma concentrations and concomitant use of rifampin in patients coinfected with HIV-1 and tuberculosis.

OBJECTIVES: In countries with high numbers of HIV/tuberculosis coinfection nevirapine and rifampin are used extensively. However, limited data are available about whether or not nevirapine and rifampin can be safely coadministered without the plasma concentration of nevirapine falling below therapeutic levels. METHODS: Blood samples for determination of nevirapine plasma concentrations were collected from patients using nevirapine 200 mg twice daily with or without concomitant rifampin. Bivariate and multivariate linear regression models were used to investigate factors possibly related to nevirapine concentrations. RESULTS: We received 74 blood samples from patients using nevirapine plus rifampin, and collected blood samples from an equal number of controls using nevirapine only. Groups were similar for age, gender, weight, height and body mass index (BMI). In the rifampin group the mean nevirapine concentration was 5.47 +/- 2.66 mg/l, whereas in the control group the mean nevirapine concentration was 8.72 +/- 3.98 mg/l. In the rifampin group seven nevirapine trough concentrations were low (< 3.1 mg/l), while in the control group two patients had low nevirapine trough concentrations (P = 0.164). In the multivariate linear regression analysis, corrected for time after drug intake, the use of rifampin was significantly (P < 0.001) associated with lower nevirapine plasma concentrations, whereas higher BMI reached borderline significance (P = 0.065). CONCLUSION: Although nevirapine plasma concentrations were 3.3 mg/l lower when co-administered with rifampin, still more than 86% of these patients had nevirapine plasma concentrations > 3.1 mg/l. Our results suggest that from a pharmacological point of view the majority of Thai coinfected patients, who have low BMIs, reach nevirapine plasma concentrations that are adequate for treatment of HIV. However this can only be undertaken if nevirapine plasma concentration monitoring is available and can be closely followed.