Switching from efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide coformulated with rilpivirine and emtricitabine in virally suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir alafenamide is a prodrug that reduces tenofovir plasma concentrations by 90% compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, thereby decreasing bone and renal risks. The coformulation of rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide has recently been approved, and we aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to this regimen compared with remaining on coformulated efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial, HIV-1-infected adults were enrolled at 120 hospitals and outpatient clinics in eight countries in North America and Europe. Participants were virally suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) on efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for at least 6 months before enrolment and had creatinine clearance of at least 50 mL/min. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a single-tablet regimen of rilpivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) or to continue a single-tablet regimen of efavirenz (600 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg), with matching placebo. Investigators, participants, study staff, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 (assessed by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm), with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 8%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02345226. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2015, and Aug 27, 2015, 875 participants were randomly assigned and treated (438 with rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide and 437 with efavirenz, emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate). Viral suppression at week 48 was maintained in 394 (90%) of 438 participants assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide regimen and 402 (92%) of 437 assigned to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimen (difference -2·0%, 95·001% CI -5·9 to 1·8), demonstrating non-inferiority. 56 (13%) of 438 in participants in the rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group experienced treatment-related adverse events compared with 45 (10%) of 437 in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. INTERPRETATION: Switching to rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was non-inferior in maintaining viral suppression and was well tolerated at 48 weeks. These findings support guidelines recommending tenofovir alafenamide-based regimens, including coformulation with rilpivirine and emtricitabine, as initial and ongoing treatment for HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Cerebral volumes, neuronal integrity and brain inflammation measured by MRI in patients receiving PI monotherapy or triple therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Penetration of protease inhibitors (PI) in the central nervous system (CNS) is limited. Therefore, there are concerns about the capacity of PI monotherapy (MT) to control HIV in CNS and preserve brain integrity. METHODS: Exploratory case-control study designed to compare neuronal integrity and brain inflammation in HIV-suppressed patients (>2 years) with and without neurocognitive impairment (NI), treated with MT or triple therapy (TT), 3-Tesla cerebral magnetic resonance image (MRI) and spectroscopy (MRS) were used to evaluate neuronal integrity (volume of cerebral structures and MRS levels of N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA)) and brain inflammation (MRS levels of myo-inositol (MI) and choline (CHO)). MRS biomarkers were measured in 4 voxels located in basal ganglia, frontal (2) and parietal lobes. A comprehensive battery of tests (14 tests - 7 domains) was used to diagnose neurocognitive impairment (1). RESULTS: We included 18 neurocognitively impaired patients (MT: 10, TT: 8) and 21 without NI (MT: 9; TT: 12, Table 1). Subset of patients with NI: cerebral volumes and MRS biomarkers were mostly similar between MT and TT with exception of the right cingulate nucleolus volume (MT: 8854±1851 vs TT: 10482±1107 mm(3); p<0.04), CHO levels in basal ganglia (MT: 0.44±0.05 vs TT: 0.37±0.03 MMOL/L; p<0.01) and the NAA levels in parietal lobe (MT: 1.49±0.12 vs 1.70±0.13 MMOL/L; p<0.01). Subset of patients without NI: cerebral volumes and MRS biomarkers were mostly similar between MT and TT with exception of MI levels in frontal lobe (MT: 1.20±0.36 vs 0.81±0.25 MMOL/L; p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find significant differences in cerebral volumes or MRS biomarkers in most areas of the brain. However, we found higher levels of inflammation and neuronal damage in some brain areas of patients who received MT. This observation has to be taken into caution while we could not adjust our results by potential confounders. Further investigation is needed to confirm these preliminary results.

CNS safety at 48-week of switching to ATV/r plus 3TC or two nucleos(t)ides in HIV-suppressed patients on stable ART: the SALT neurocognitive sub-study.

INTRODUCTION: Due to their low CNS penetrance, there are concerns about the capacity of non-conventional PI-based ART (monotherapy and dual therapies) to preserve neurocognitive performance (NP). METHODS: We evaluated the NP change of aviremic participants of the SALT clinical trial (1) switching therapy to dual therapy (DT: ATV/r+3TC) or triple therapy (TT: ATV/r+2NRTI) who agreed to perform an NP assessment (NPZ-5) at baseline and W48. Neurocognitive impairment and NP were assessed using AAN-2007 criteria (2) and global deficit scores (GDS) (3). Neurocognitive change (GDS change: W48 - baseline) and the effect of DT on NP evolution crude and adjusted by significant confounders were determined using ANCOVA. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were included (Table 1). They had shorter times because HIV diagnosis, ART initiation and HIV-suppression and their virologic outcome at W48 by snapshot was higher (79.1% vs 72.7%; p=0.04) compared to the 128 patients not included in the sub-study. By AAN-2007 criteria, 51 patients in each ART group (68% vs 63%) were neurocognitively impaired at baseline (p=0.61). Forty-seven patients were not reassessed at W48: 30 lost of follow-up (16 DT-14 TT) and 17 had non-evaluable data (6 DT-11 TT). Patients retested were more likely to be men (78.9% vs 61.4%) and had neurological cofounders (9.6% vs 0%) than patients non-retested. At W48, 3 out of 16 (5.7%) patients on DT and 6 out of 21 (10.5%) on TT who were non-impaired at baseline became impaired (p=0.49) while 10 out of 37 (18.9%) on DT and 7 out of 36 (12.3%) on TT who were neurocognitively impaired at baseline became non-impaired (p=0.44). Mean GDS changes (95% CI) were: Overall -0.2 (-0.3 to -0.04): DT -0.26 (-0.4 to -0.07) and TT -0.08 (-0.2 to 0.07). NP was similar between DT and TT (0.15). This absence of differences was also observed in all cognitive tests. Effect of DT: -0.16 [-0.38 to 0.06]) (r(2)=0.16) on NP evolution was similar to TT (reference), even after adjusting (DT: -0.11 [-0.33 to 0.1], TT: reference) by significant confounders (geographical origin, previous ATV use and CD4 cell count) (r(2)=0.25). CONCLUSIONS: NP stability was observed after 48 weeks of follow up in the majority of patients whether DT or TT was used to maintain HIV-suppression. Incidence rates of NP impairment or NP impairment recovery were also similar between DT and TT.