Switch to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide from dolutegravir-based therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 96 weeks of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) treatment in participants switching from dolutegravir (DTG)-based therapy. DESIGN: Studies 1489 (NCT02607930) and 1490 (NCT02607956) were phase 3 randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, first-line therapy trials in people with HIV-1. After 144 weeks of DTG-based or B/F/TAF treatment, participants could enter a 96-week open-label extension (OLE) of B/F/TAF. METHODS: A pooled analysis evaluated viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml) and changes in CD4 + cell count at OLE Weeks 48 and 96, treatment-emergent resistance, safety, and tolerability after switch from a DTG-based regimen to B/F/TAF. Outcomes by prior treatment were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared by two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: At OLE Week 96, participants who switched to B/F/TAF ( N  = 519) maintained high levels of virologic suppression (99.5 and 99.1% in those switching from DTG/abacavir/lamivudine and DTG+F/TAF, respectively) and CD4 + cell count, with no treatment-emergent resistance to B/F/TAF. Twenty-one participants experienced drug-related adverse events after switching, with diarrhea, weight gain, and headache occurring most commonly. There were no cases of proximal renal tubulopathy, drug-related Grade 4 adverse events, or serious adverse events. Two participants discontinued B/F/TAF due to treatment-related adverse events. Participants who switched from DTG/abacavir/lamivudine experienced statistically significant greater weight gain than those who switched from DTG+F/TAF; however, median weight change from the blinded phase baseline to OLE Week 96 was numerically similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This medium-term analysis demonstrates the safety and efficacy of switching to B/F/TAF from a DTG-containing regimen in people with HIV-1.

Co-formulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The single-tablet regimen consisting of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is recommended for treatment of HIV-1 infection on the basis of data from 48 weeks of treatment. Here, we examine the longer-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with dolutegravir plus co-formulated emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide at week 96. METHODS: This ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial was done at 126 outpatient centres in ten countries. We enrolled treatment-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 infection who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 mL/min and sensitivity to emtricitabine and tenofovir. People with chronic hepatitis B or C infection, or both, and those who had used antivirals previously for prophylaxis were allowed. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive treatment with either co-formulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the bictegravir group) or dolutegravir 50 mg with co-formulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg (the dolutegravir group), each with matching placebo, once daily for 144 weeks. Treatment allocation was masked to all participants and investigators. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. We previously reported the primary endpoint. Here, we report the week 96 secondary outcome of proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 96 by US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607956. FINDINGS: Between Nov 13, 2015, and July 14, 2016, we screened 742 individuals, of whom 657 were enrolled. 327 participants were assigned to the bictegravir group and 330 to the dolutegravir group. Of these, 320 in the bictegravir group and 325 in the dolutegravir group received at least one dose of study drug. At week 96, HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL was achieved by 269 (84%) of 320 participants in the bictegravir group and 281 (86%) of 325 in the dolutegravir group (difference -2·3%, 95% CI -7·9 to 3·2), demonstrating non-inferiority of the bictegravir regimen compared with the dolutegravir regimen. Both treatments continued to be well tolerated through 96 weeks; 283 (88%) of 320 participants in the bictegravir group and 288 (89%) of 325 in the dolutegravir group had any adverse event and 55 (17%), and 33 (10%) had any serious adverse event. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (57 [18%] of 320 in the bictegravir group vs 51 [16%] of 325 in the dolutegravir group) and headache (51 [16%] of 320 vs 48 [15%] of 325). Deaths were reported for three (1%) individuals in each group (one cardiac arrest, one gastric adenocarcinoma, and one hypertensive heart disease and congestive cardiac failure in the bictegravir group and one unknown causes, one pulmonary embolism, and one lymphoma in the dolutegravir group); none were considered to be treatment related. Adverse events led to discontinuation in six (2%) participants in the bictegravir group and five (2%) in the dolutegravir group; one of these events in the bictegravir group versus four in the dolutegravir group occurred between weeks 48 and 96. Study drug-related adverse events were reported for 64 (20%) participants in the bictegravir group and 92 (28%) in the dolutegravir group. INTERPRETATION: These week 96 data support bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a safe, well tolerated, and durable treatment for people living with chronic HIV. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences, Inc.

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.

Randomized trial of asunaprevir plus peginterferon alfa and ribavirin for previously untreated genotype 1 or 4 chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Asunaprevir is a selective HCV NS3 protease inhibitor, active against genotypes 1, 4, 5, and 6 in vitro. We evaluated asunaprevir plus peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin (PegIFNα/RBV) for genotype 1 and 4 chronic HCV. METHODS: In this phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, treatment-naive adults with genotype 1 (n=213) or 4 (n=25) were randomly assigned (3:1) to asunaprevir 200mg or placebo twice daily plus PegIFNα/RBV. Asunaprevir recipients, achieving protocol-defined response (HCV-RNA below quantification limit at week 4 and undetectable at week 10), were rerandomized at week 12 to continue asunaprevir-based triple therapy or receive placebo plus PegIFNα/RBV for weeks 13-24. Patients without protocol-defined response (PDR) and placebo recipients continued PegIFNα/RBV through week 48. Co-primary end points were undetectable HCV-RNA at week 4 and 12 (eRVR) and 24 weeks posttreatment (SVR24). RESULTS: Most patients were male (64.3%), white (83.6%), and had non-CC IL28B genotypes (71.3%). Among genotype 1 patients, eRVR rates (asunaprevir vs. placebo) were 67% (80% CI 62, 72) vs. 6% (80% CI 2, 10); corresponding SVR24 rates were 64% (80% CI 59, 68) vs. 44% (80% CI 36, 53). SVR24 among genotype 4 patients was 89% (asunaprevir) vs. 43% (placebo). Rates of rash and haematologic adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Five asunaprevir-treated patients had grade 4 alanine aminotransferase elevations that resolved following discontinuation (n=4) or with continued dosing (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of asunaprevir to PegIFNα/RBV in treatment-naive genotype 1- or 4-infected patients improves response rates and is well tolerated, with aminotransferase elevations that were manageable with appropriate monitoring. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01030432.

Randomized study of asunaprevir plus pegylated interferon-α and ribavirin for previously untreated genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Asunaprevir is a selective NS3 protease inhibitor with in vitro activity against HCV genotypes 1 and 4. METHODS: In this Phase IIa double-blind study, treatment-naive HCV genotype-1-infected patients in the United States and France were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to placebo or asunaprevir 200 mg twice daily, 600 mg twice daily or 600 mg once daily in combination with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN)-α2a and ribavirin for 48 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was undetectable HCV RNA at weeks 4 and 12 (extended rapid virological response [eRVR]). Other end points included safety and undetectable HCV RNA at 24 weeks post-treatment (24-week sustained virological response [SVR24]). RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were randomized and treated. eRVR was achieved by 75% (9/12), 75% (9/12) and 92% (11/12) of patients in the asunaprevir 200 mg twice-daily, 600 mg twice-daily and 600 mg once-daily groups, respectively, versus 0% (0/11) in the placebo group. Corresponding SVR24 rates were 83% (10/12), 83% (10/12) and 92% (11/12) in the asunaprevir groups and 46% (5/11) in the placebo group. There was no virological breakthrough in any asunaprevir group. Following the 12-week analysis, the 600 mg doses were reduced to 200 mg twice daily because of a greater frequency of transaminase elevations at the 600 mg dose. The most common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were consistent with those reported for PEG-IFN and ribavirin. CONCLUSIONS: Asunaprevir plus PEG-IFN and ribavirin achieved higher response rates than placebo plus PEG-IFN and ribavirin, with a tolerable adverse event profile at the 200 mg twice-daily dose. This dose is being evaluated in the Phase IIb and Phase III studies.