The F4/AS01B HIV-1 Vaccine Candidate Is Safe and Immunogenic, But Does Not Show Viral Efficacy in Antiretroviral Therapy-Naive, HIV-1-Infected Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The impact of the investigational human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) F4/AS01(B) vaccine on HIV-1 viral load (VL) was evaluated in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive HIV-1 infected adults.This phase IIb, observer-blind study (NCT01218113), included ART-naive HIV-1 infected adults aged 18 to 55 years. Participants were randomized to receive 2 (F4/AS01(B)_2 group, N=64) or 3 (F4/AS01(B)_3 group, N=62) doses of F4/AS01(B) or placebo (control group, N=64) at weeks 0, 4, and 28. Efficacy (HIV-1 VL, CD4(+) T-cell count, ART initiation, and HIV-related clinical events), safety, and immunogenicity (antibody and T-cell responses) were evaluated during 48 weeks.At week 48, based on a mixed model, no statistically significant difference in HIV-1 VL change from baseline was demonstrated between F4/AS01(B)_2 and control group (0.073 log(10)copies/mL [97.5% confidence interval (CI): -0.088; 0.235]), or F4/AS01(B)_3 and control group (-0.096 log(10)copies/mL [97.5% CI: -0.257; 0.065]). No differences between groups were observed in HIV-1 VL change, CD4(+) T-cell count, ART initiation, or HIV-related clinical events at intermediate timepoints. Among F4/AS01(B) recipients, the most frequent solicited symptoms were pain at injection site (252/300 doses), fatigue (137/300 doses), myalgia (105/300 doses), and headache (90/300 doses). Twelve serious adverse events were reported in 6 participants; 1 was considered vaccine-related (F4/AS01(B)_2 group: angioedema). F4/AS01(B) induced polyfunctional F4-specific CD4(+) T-cells, but had no significant impact on F4-specific CD8(+) T-cell and anti-F4 antibody levels.F4/AS01(B) had a clinically acceptable safety profile, induced F4-specific CD4(+) T-cell responses, but did not reduce HIV-1 VL, impact CD4(+) T-cells count, delay ART initiation, or prevent HIV-1 related clinical events

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.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

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

The F4/AS01B HIV-1 Vaccine Candidate Is Safe and Immunogenic, But Does Not Show Viral Efficacy in Antiretroviral Therapy-Naive, HIV-1-Infected Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The impact of the investigational human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) F4/AS01(B) vaccine on HIV-1 viral load (VL) was evaluated in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive HIV-1 infected adults.This phase IIb, observer-blind study (NCT01218113), included ART-naive HIV-1 infected adults aged 18 to 55 years. Participants were randomized to receive 2 (F4/AS01(B)_2 group, N=64) or 3 (F4/AS01(B)_3 group, N=62) doses of F4/AS01(B) or placebo (control group, N=64) at weeks 0, 4, and 28. Efficacy (HIV-1 VL, CD4(+) T-cell count, ART initiation, and HIV-related clinical events), safety, and immunogenicity (antibody and T-cell responses) were evaluated during 48 weeks.At week 48, based on a mixed model, no statistically significant difference in HIV-1 VL change from baseline was demonstrated between F4/AS01(B)_2 and control group (0.073 log(10)copies/mL [97.5% confidence interval (CI): -0.088; 0.235]), or F4/AS01(B)_3 and control group (-0.096 log(10)copies/mL [97.5% CI: -0.257; 0.065]). No differences between groups were observed in HIV-1 VL change, CD4(+) T-cell count, ART initiation, or HIV-related clinical events at intermediate timepoints. Among F4/AS01(B) recipients, the most frequent solicited symptoms were pain at injection site (252/300 doses), fatigue (137/300 doses), myalgia (105/300 doses), and headache (90/300 doses). Twelve serious adverse events were reported in 6 participants; 1 was considered vaccine-related (F4/AS01(B)_2 group: angioedema). F4/AS01(B) induced polyfunctional F4-specific CD4(+) T-cells, but had no significant impact on F4-specific CD8(+) T-cell and anti-F4 antibody levels.F4/AS01(B) had a clinically acceptable safety profile, induced F4-specific CD4(+) T-cell responses, but did not reduce HIV-1 VL, impact CD4(+) T-cells count, delay ART initiation, or prevent HIV-1 related clinical events

Week 96 efficacy and safety results of the phase 3, randomized EMERALD trial to evaluate switching from boosted-protease inhibitors plus emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimens to the once daily, single-tablet regimen of darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) in treatment-experienced, virologically-suppressed adults living with HIV-1

International audienceDarunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg was investigated through 96 weeks in EMERALD (NCT02269917).Virologically-suppressed, HIV-1-positive treatment-experienced adults (previous non-darunavir virologic failure [VF] allowed) were randomized (2:1) to D/C/F/TAF or boosted protease inhibitor (PI) plus emtricitabine/tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (F/TDF) over 48 weeks. At week 52 participants in the boosted PI arm were offered switch to D/C/F/TAF (late-switch, 44 weeks D/C/F/TAF exposure). All participants were followed on D/C/F/TAF until week 96. Efficacy endpoints were percentage cumulative protocol-defined virologic rebound (PDVR; confirmed viral load [VL] ≥50 copies/mL) and VL < 50 copies/mL (virologic suppression) and ≥50 copies/mL (VF) (FDA-snapshot analysis).Of 1141 randomized patients, 1080 continued in the extension phase. Few patients had PDVR (D/C/F/TAF: 3.1%, 24/763 cumulative through week 96; late-switch: 2.3%, 8/352 week 52–96). Week 96 virologic suppression was 90.7% (692/763) (D/C/F/TAF) and 93.8% (330/352) (late-switch). VF was 1.2% and 1.7%, respectively. No darunavir, primary PI, tenofovir or emtricitabine resistance-associated mutations were observed post-baseline. No patients discontinued for efficacy-related reasons. Few discontinued due to adverse events (2% D/C/F/TAF arm). Improved renal and bone parameters were maintained in the D/C/F/TAF arm and observed in the late-switch arm, with small increases in total cholesterol/high-density-lipoprotein-cholesterol ratio. A study limitation was the lack of a control arm in the week 96 analysis.Through 96 weeks, D/C/F/TAF resulted in low PDVR rates, high virologic suppression rates, very few VFs, and no resistance development. Late-switch results were consistent with D/C/F/TAF week 48 results. EMERALD week 96 results confirm the efficacy, high genetic barrier to resistance and safety benefits of D/C/F/TAF