Efficacy and Safety of Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Asian Subjects with Human Immunodeficiency Virus 1 Infection: A Sub-Analysis of Phase 3 Clinical Trials.

The efficacy and safety of a single tablet regimen (STR) of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (E/C/F/TDF) were analyzed in Phase 3 clinical trials in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve and ART-experienced Asian subjects infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1. Studies GS-US-236-102 and GS-US-236-103 were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 144-week studies conducted in ART-naïve subjects, comparing E/C/F/TDF versus efavirenz (EFV)/F/TDF or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV+RTV) plus emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (F/TDF), respectively. Studies GS-US-236-115 and GS-US-236-121 were randomized, open-label, 96-week long conducted in ART-experienced subjects, who switched to E/C/F/TDF from ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI+RTV)+F/TDF, or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI)+F/TDF regimens. The E/C/F/TDF appeared to have sustained efficacy and safety and was well tolerated in the small number of ART-naïve and ART-experienced Asian subjects.

Long-term efficacy and safety of E/C/F/TDF vs EFV/FTC/TDF and ATV+RTV+FTC/TDF in HIV-1-infected treatment-naïve subjects ≥50 years.

INTRODUCTION: In high-income countries, ≥30% of HIV-infected patients are ≥50 years (yrs) old (UNAIDS 2013). In two phases, three clinical trials (Studies 102 and 103) elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (E/C/F/TDF; STB) had non-inferior efficacy and favourable safety vs efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (EFV/FTC/TDF; ATR) or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV+RTV)+FTC/TDF (TVD) in HIV-infected, treatment-naïve subjects at Week 144. The efficacy and safety of STB in subjects < or ≥50 yrs is described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post hoc analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in subjects < or ≥50 yrs at Week 144. RESULTS: Subjects ≥50 yrs in Study 102: STB: 14% (49/348), ATR: 16% (56/352); in Study 103: STB: 14% (48/353), ATV+RTV+TVD: 14% (48/355). Efficacy, safety and tolerability by age and study endpoint are shown in Table 1. Regardless of age, STB had robust efficacy at Week 144 with similar virologic outcomes vs ATR or ATV+RTV+TVD. Discontinuations (DC) due to AE on STB were similar to the comparators, most occurred by Week 48. Median changes in eGFR on STB were similar by age; DC with renal PRT was rare [STB: 4 (0.6%); ATV: 3 (0.8%); ATR: 0], 2 and 1 in ≥50 yrs old strata, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: STB compared to ATR or ATV+RTV+TVD, is an efficacious, well-tolerated and safe regimen for HIV-1-infected, treatment-naïve subjects

Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients with HIV-1 RNA ≤100,000 copies/mL: week 96 pooled ECHO/THRIVE subanalysis.

The once daily, single-tablet regimen (STR) combining rilpivirine (RPV), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) provides a simplified treatment option for antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve patients with baseline HIV-1 RNA (BLVL) of ≤100,000 copies/mL. The aim of this analysis is to compare long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of RPV+FTC/TDF vs. efavirenz (EFV)+FTC/TDF as individual components in subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL. Week 96 efficacy and safety data from subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL, who received daily RPV 25 mg or EFV 600 mg with FTC/TDF in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, registrational trials ECHO and THRIVE, were analyzed. Virologic response was evaluated by intent-to-treat, time to loss of virological response (ITT-TLOVR), and Snapshot algorithms. Through Week 96, RPV+FTC/TDF demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to EFV+FTC/TDF (84% vs. 81%, respectively; ITT-TLOVR) in 543 subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL, and overall rates of virologic failure (VF) were 5.9% vs. 2.4%, respectively. Resistance development was lower in Year 2 than Year 1. Subjects in both arms with suboptimal adherence (≤95%) had lower virologic responses (63% vs. 62%, respectively). Treatment with RPV+FTC/TDF was associated with significantly fewer treatment-related adverse events (AEs), grade 2-4 AEs, neurological and psychiatric AEs (including dizziness and abnormal dreams/nightmares), and rash. Additionally, grade 2-4 treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities and grade 1-3 lipid abnormalities were significantly less common with RPV+FTC/TDF than EFV+FTC/TDF. RPV+FTC/TDF demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to EFV+FTC/TDF in ART-naïve subjects with BLVL ≤100,000 copies/mL and was associated with a higher rate of VF but a more favorable safety and tolerability profile through Week 96.