Lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy after virologic failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings

To evaluate virologic response rates of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy as second-line antiretroviral treatment (ART) among adults in resource-limited settings (RLS)

The Setpoint Study (ACTG A5217): Effect of Immediate Versus Deferred Antiretroviral Therapy on Virologic Set Point in Recently HIV-1–Infected Individuals

(See the editorial commentary by Tossonian and Conway, on pages 10–12.

No Effect of Raltegravir Intensification on Viral Replication Markers in the Blood of HIV-1–Infected Patients Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy

Controversy continues regarding the extent of ongoing viral replication in HIV-1-infected patients on effective antiretroviral therapy (ART). Adding an additional potent agent, such as raltegravir, to effective ART in patients with low-level residual viremia may reveal whether there is ongoing HIV-1 replication

Lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy after virologic failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate virologic response rates of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy as second-line antiretroviral treatment (ART) among adults in resource-limited settings (RLS). DESIGN: Open-label pilot study of LPV/r monotherapy in participants on first-line non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor 3-drug combination ART with plasma HIV-1 RNA 1000–200 000 copies/mL. METHODS: Participants were recruited from 5 sites in Africa and Asia within the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) network. All participants received LPV/r 400/100mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was remaining on LPV/r monotherapy without virologic failure (VF) at week 24. Participants with virologic failure were offered addition of emtricitabine and tenofovir (FTC/TDF) to LPV/r. RESULTS: Mutations associated with drug resistance were encountered in nearly all individuals screened for the study. One hundred and twenty-three participants were enrolled, and 122 completed 24 weeks on study. A high proportion remained on LPV/r monotherapy without VF at 24 weeks (87%). Archived samples with HIV-1 RNA levels < 400 at week 24 (n = 102) underwent ultrasensitive assay. Of these subjects, 62 had levels < 40 copies/mL and 30 had levels 40–200. Fifteen subjects experienced VF, among whom 11 had resistance assessed, and 2 had emergent protease inhibitor mutations. The presence of baseline thymidine analogue mutations and K65R predicted a lower VF rate. Thirteen subjects with VF added FTC/TDF, and 1 subject added FTC/ TDF without VF. At study week 48, 11/14 adding FTC/TDF had HIV-1 RNA levels < 400 copies/mL. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study conducted in diverse RLS, LPV/r monotherapy as second-line ART demonstrated promising activity

The Setpoint Study (ACTG A5217): Effect of Immediate Versus Deferred Antiretroviral Therapy on Virologic Set Point in Recently HIV-1–Infected Individuals

(See the editorial commentary by Tossonian and Conway, on pages 10–12.) Background. The benefits of antiretroviral therapy during early human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection remain unproved. Methods. A5217 study team randomized patients within 6 months of HIV-1 seroconversion to receive either 36 weeks of antiretrovirals (immediate treatment [IT]) or no treatment (deferred treatment [DT]). Patients were to start or restart antiretroviral therapy if they met predefined criteria. The primary end point was a composite of requiring treatment or retreatment and the log(10) HIV-1 RNA level at week 72 (both groups) and 36 (DT group). Results. At the June 2009 Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) review, 130 of 150 targeted participants had enrolled. Efficacy analysis included 79 individuals randomized ≥72 weeks previously. For the primary end point, the IT group at week 72 had a better outcome than the DT group at week 72 (P = .005) and the DT group at week 36 (P = .002). The differences were primarily due to the higher rate of progression to needing treatment in the DT group (50%) versus the IT (10%) group. The DSMB recommended stopping the study because further follow-up was unlikely to change these findings. Conclusions. Progression to meeting criteria for antiretroviral initiation in the DT group occurred more frequently than anticipated, limiting the ability to evaluate virologic set point. Antiretrovirals during early HIV-1 infection modestly delayed the need for subsequent treatment. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00090779