Tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine versus abacavir plus lamivudine for treatment of virologically suppressed HIV-1-infected adults: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Abacavir and tenofovir alafenamide offer reduced bone toxicity compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. We aimed to compare safety and efficacy of tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine with that of abacavir plus lamivudine. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial, HIV-1-positive adults (≥18 years) were screened at 79 sites in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Eligible participants were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) and on a stable three-drug regimen containing abacavir plus lamivudine. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4) to switch to fixed-dose tablets of tenofovir alafenamide (10 mg or 25 mg) plus emtricitabine (200 mg) or remain on abacavir (600 mg) plus lamivudine (300 mg), with matching placebo, while continuing to take the third drug. Randomisation was stratified by the third drug (boosted protease inhibitor vs other drug) at screening. Investigators, participants, and study staff giving treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to treatment group. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 48 (assessed by snapshot algorithm), with a 10% non-inferiority margin. We analysed the primary endpoint in participants enrolled before May 23, 2016 (when target sample size was reached), and we analysed safety in all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of study drug (including patients enrolled after these dates). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02469246. FINDINGS: Study enrolment began on June 29, 2015, and the cutoff enrolment date for the week 48 primary endpoint analysis was May 23, 2016. 501 participants were randomly assigned and treated. At week 48, virological suppression was maintained in 227 (90%) of 253 participants receiving tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine compared with 230 (93%) of 248 receiving abacavir plus lamivudine (difference -3·0%, 95% CI -8·2 to 2·0), showing non-inferiority. Few participants discontinued treatment because of adverse events: 12 (4%) of 280 participants in the tenofovir alafenimide plus emtricitabine group and nine (3%) of 276 in the abacavir plus lamivudine group. Three participants had serious, treatment-related adverse events: one each with renal colic and neutropenia in the tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine group, and one myocardial infarction in the abacavir plus lamivudine group. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Tenofovir alafenamide, in combination with emtricitabine and various third drugs, maintained high efficacy with a renal and bone safety profile similar to that of abacavir. In virologically suppressed patients, a regimen containing tenofovir alafenamide could be an alternative to those containing abacavir, without concern for new onset of renal or bone toxicities or hyperlipidaemia. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences Inc.

Brief Report: Long-Term (96-Week) Efficacy and Safety After Switching From Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate to Tenofovir Alafenamide in HIV-Infected, Virologically Suppressed Adults.

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, 663 HIV-infected, virologically suppressed adults were randomized to switch to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF; n = 333) vs. remain on tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF; n = 330), each coformulated with emtricitabine (FTC), while continuing their third agent (boosted protease inhibitor or unboosted third agent). At week 96, 88.6% on FTC/TAF and 89.1% on FTC/TDF had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter [adjusted difference -0.5% (95% confidence interval: -5.3 to 4.4%)]. Proteinuria, albuminuria, proximal renal tubular function, and bone mineral density improved after switching to TAF- from TDF-containing regimens. These longer-term data support FTC/TAF as a safe, well-tolerated, and durable nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone.

Efficacy and safety of emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (FTC/TAF) vs. emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) as a backbone for treatment of HIV-1 infection in virologically suppressed adults: subgroup analysis by third agent of a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: FTC/TAF was shown to be noninferior to FTC/TDF with advantages in markers of renal and bone safety. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF by third agent (boosted protease inhibitor [PI] vs. unboosted third agent). METHODS: We conducted a 48-week subgroup analysis based on third agent from a randomized, double blind study in virologically suppressed adults on a FTC/TDF-containing regimen who switched to FTC/TAF vs. continued FTC/TDF while remaining on the same third agent. RESULTS: We randomized (1:1) 663 participants to either switch to FTC/TAF (N = 333) or continue FTC/TDF (N = 330), each with baseline third agent stratifying by class of third agent in the prior treatment regimen (boosted PI 46%, unboosted third agent 54%). At week 48, significant differences in renal biomarkers and bone mineral density were observed favoring FTC/TAF over FTC/TDF (p < 0.05 for all), with similar improvements in the FTC/TAF arm in those who received boosted PI vs. unboosted third agents. At week 48, virologic success rates were similar between treatment groups for those who received a boosted PI (FTC/TAF 92%, FTC/TDF 93%) and for those who received an unboosted third agent (97% vs. 93%). CONCLUSIONS: In virologically suppressed patients switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF, high rates of virologic suppression were maintained, while renal and bone safety parameters improved, regardless of whether participants were receiving a boosted PI or an unboosted third agent. FTC/TAF offers safety advantages over FTC/TDF and can be an important option as an NRTI backbone given with a variety of third agents.

A Randomized, Open-Label Trial to Evaluate Switching to Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Plus Darunavir in Treatment-Experienced HIV-1-Infected Adults.

BACKGROUND: HIV-infected, treatment-experienced adults with a history of prior resistance and regimen failure can be virologically suppressed but may require multitablet regimens associated with lower adherence and potential resistance development. METHODS: We enrolled HIV-infected, virologically suppressed adults with 2-class to 3-class drug resistance and at least 2 prior regimen failures into this phase 3, open-label, randomized study. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter at week 24 [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm]. RESULTS: For 135 participants [elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/TAF) plus darunavir (DRV), n = 89; baseline regimen, n = 46], most of whom were taking a median of 5 tablets/d, simplification to E/C/F/TAF plus DRV was noninferior to continuation of baseline regimens at week 24 (plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per milliliter: 96.6% vs. 91.3%, difference 5.3%, 95.001% CI: -3.4% to 17.4%). E/C/F/TAF plus DRV met prespecified criteria for noninferiority and superiority at week 48 for the same outcome. E/C/F/TAF plus DRV was well tolerated and had an improved renal safety profile compared with baseline regimens, with statistically significant differences between groups in quantitative total proteinuria and markers of proximal tubular proteinuria. Compared with baseline regimens, participants who switched to E/C/F/TAF plus DRV reported higher mean treatment satisfaction scale total scores and fewer days with missed doses. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that regimen simplification from a 5-tablet regimen to the 2-tablet, once-daily combination of E/C/F/TAF plus DRV has durable maintenance of virologic suppression and improvements in specific markers of renal safety. Such a strategy may lead to greater adherence and improved quality of life.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate given as fixed-dose combinations containing emtricitabine as backbones for treatment of HIV-1 infection in virologically suppressed adults: a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is a standard-of-care nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone. However, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is associated with renal and bone toxic effects; the novel prodrug tenofovir alafenamide achieves 90% lower plasma tenofovir concentrations. We aimed to further assess safety and efficacy of fixed-dose combination emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide in patients switched from emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this controlled, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 study, we recruited virologically suppressed (HIV RNA <50 copies per mL) patients with HIV aged 18 years and older receiving regimens containing fixed-dose combination emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumartate from 78 sites in North America and Europe. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch to fixed-dose 200 mg emtricitabine with 10 mg or 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide or to continue 200 mg emtricitabine with 200 mg or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, while remaining on the same third agent for 96 weeks. Randomisation was done by a computer-generated allocation sequence and was stratified by the third agent (boosted protease inhibitor vs other agent). Investigators, patients, and study staff giving treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to treatment group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 as defined by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%. The primary efficacy endpoint was analysed with the per-protocol analysis set, whereas the safety analysis included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02121795. FINDINGS: We recruited patients between May 6, 2011, and Sept 11, 2014; 780 were screened and 668 were randomly assigned to receive either tenofovir alafenamide (n=333) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=330). Through week 48, virological success (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) was maintained in 314 (94%) of patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with 307 (93%) in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (difference 1·3%, 95% CI -2·5 to 5·1), showing non-inferiority of tenofovir alafenamide to tenofovir disproxil fumarate. Seven patients in the tenofovir alafenamide (2%) and three (1%) in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group discontinued due to adverse events. There were no cases of proximal renal tubulopathy in either group. INTERPRETATION: In patients switching from emtricitabine with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide, high rates of virological suppression were maintained. With its safety advantages, fixed-dose emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide has the potential to become an important NRTI backbone. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Tenofovir Alafenamide Versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in the First Protease Inhibitor-Based Single-Tablet Regimen for Initial HIV-1 Therapy: A Randomized Phase 2 Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the novel tenofovir prodrug, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), as part of the first protease inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen (STR) for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. METHODS: Antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 70 mL/min were randomized 2:1 to receive the darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) STR (TAF: N = 103) or darunavir + cobicistat + emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF: N = 50) once daily with matched placebos for 48 weeks. RESULTS: At week 24, viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL) rates were similar (TAF 74.8% vs. TDF 74.0%). At week 48, rates were TAF 76.7% vs. TDF 84.0%; the difference was driven by higher rate of discontinuations in TAF (6.8%) vs. TDF (2%). Among those with virologic failure, none developed resistance. Most adverse events were of mild/moderate severity. The mean change in serum creatinine from baseline at week 48 was 0.06 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.04 to 0.08) for TAF vs. 0.09 mg/dL (95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.14) for TDF (P = 0.053). The % change in retinol binding protein/Cr ratio was +9 (TAF) vs. +54 (TDF), P = 0.003; the % change in urine ß-2 microglobulin/Cr ratio was -42.0 (TAF) vs. +2.3 (TDF), P = 0.002. The % change in hip bone mineral density (BMD) was -0.84 (TAF) vs. -3.82 (TDF), P < 0.001 and in spine BMD was -1.57 (TAF) vs. -3.62 (TDF), P = 0.003. There were no fractures in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The TAF arm had significantly improved renal and bone safety parameters: less proteinuria and less change in hip and spine BMD, consistent with results from a similarly designed study of the elvitegravir/C/F/TAF STR. This D/C/F/TAF STR offers a promising option for initial HIV treatment, with the high barrier to resistance of darunavir, and the potential for improved long-term renal and bone safety with TAF.

Vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) in generalized anxiety disorder: results of an 8-week, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Vortioxetine is a multimodal antidepressant, with anxiolytic properties observed in preclinical studies. The goal of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine 5mg vs placebo in adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Adults with a primary diagnosis of GAD (HAM-A total score ≥20 and MADRS score ≤16) received vortioxetine 5mg or placebo for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was reduction in HAM-A total scores from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment compared with placebo. Key secondary measurements were HAD anxiety subscore, CGI-I, SDS total score, HAM-A response rates, HAM-A total score for subjects whose baseline HAM-A total score was ≥25, and SF-36 social functioning subscore. HAM-A remission rates were also measured. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed throughout the study. In total, 301 subjects (mean age, 45.2 years; 31% male) were randomized (1:1) to receive vortioxetine 5mg (n=150) or placebo (n=151). After 8 weeks of treatment, there was a statistically significant difference in reduction from baseline in HAM-A total score for the vortioxetine group (-14.30) compared with placebo recipients (-10.49) (P<0.001). Statistically significant differences were observed for all key secondary outcomes favoring vortioxetine treatment (vs placebo), using a mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) analysis. Active treatment resulted in a significantly higher rate of remission. Vortioxetine was well tolerated. The most common treatment-related AEs were nausea, headache, dizziness, and dry mouth. In sum, vortioxetine was safe and effective in treating adults with GAD in this multinational population.

Vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) 5 mg in generalized anxiety disorder: results of an 8-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in the United States.

The goal of the current clinical study, conducted in the United States (US), was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine 5mg vs placebo in adults with a primary diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; HAM-A total score ≥20 and MADRS score ≤16). Subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive vortioxetine 5mg (n=152) or placebo (n=152) for 8 weeks. Efficacy was assessed using change from baseline in HAM-A total scores after 8 weeks of treatment compared with placebo, using mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM) analyses. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed throughout the study. A total of 304 subjects were randomized (mean age, 41.2 years). After 8 weeks of treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in the reduction in HAM-A total score from baseline between the Vortioxetine (n=145) and placebo (n=145) groups. There were no statistically significant differences in any key secondary efficacy outcome between vortioxetine and placebo. Factors potentially contributing to the differences between the results of this study and those of one of identical design conducted outside the US are discussed. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were nausea, headache, dizziness, and dry mouth. Nausea was more frequently reported in the vortioxetine group (25% vs 4.6% for the placebo group). Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity. In conclusion, in this trial, vortioxetine did not improve symptoms of GAD (compared with placebo) over 8 weeks of treatment. Vortioxetine was well tolerated in this study.

Determining the number of clusters using the weighted gap statistic.

Estimating the number of clusters in a data set is a crucial step in cluster analysis. In this article, motivated by the gap method (Tibshirani, Walther, and Hastie, 2001, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B63, 411-423), we propose the weighted gap and the difference of difference-weighted (DD-weighted) gap methods for estimating the number of clusters in data using the weighted within-clusters sum of errors: a measure of the within-clusters homogeneity. In addition, we propose a "multilayer" clustering approach, which is shown to be more accurate than the original gap method, particularly in detecting the nested cluster structure of the data. The methods are applicable when the input data contain continuous measurements and can be used with any clustering method. Simulation studies and real data are investigated and compared among these proposed methods as well as with the original gap method.

Valproic acid-induced fetal malformations are reduced by maternal immune stimulation with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor or interferon-gamma.

Valproic acid, a drug commonly used to treat seizures and other psychiatric disorders, causes neural tube defects (NTDs) in exposed fetuses at a rate 20 times higher than in the general population. Failure of the neural tube to close during development results in exencephaly or anencephaly, as well as spina bifida. In mice, nonspecific activation of the maternal immune system can reduce fetal abnormalities caused by diverse etiologies, including diabetes-induced NTDs. We hypothesized that nonspecific activation of the maternal immune system with interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) could reduce valproic acid (VA)-induced defects as well. Female CD-1 mice were given immune stimulant prebreeding: either IFN-gamma or GM-CSF. Approximately half of the control and immune-stimulated pregnant females were then exposed to 500 mg/kg VA on the morning of gestational day 8. The incidence of developmental defects was determined on gestational day 17 from at least eight litters in each of the following treatment groups: control, VA only, IFN-gamma only, IFN-gamma+VA, GM-CSF only, and GM-CSF+VA. The incidence of NTDs was 18% in fetuses exposed to VA alone, compared to 3.7% and 2.9% in fetuses exposed to IFN-gamma+VA, or GM-CSF+VA respectively. Ocular defects were also significantly reduced from 28.0% in VA exposed groups to 9.8% in IFN-gamma+VA and 12.5% in GM-CSF+VA groups. The mechanisms by which maternal immune stimulation prevents birth defects remain unclear, but may involve maternal or fetal production of cytokines or growth factors which protect the fetus from the dysregulatory effects of teratogens.