Influence of Sex/Gender and Race on Responses to Raltegravir Combined With Tenofovir-Emtricitabine in Treatment-Naive Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Infected Patients: Pooled Analyses of the STARTMRK and QDMRK Studies.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women and blacks merits particular scrutiny because these groups have been underrepresented in clinical trials. METHODS: To document the effects of raltegravir across sex and racial lines, we conducted a pooled subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of raltegravir 400 mg BID plus tenofovir-emtricitabine by sex (women vs men) and self-identified race (black vs non-black) using phase 3 studies in treatment-naive patients. RESULTS: Study participants included 42 black women, 102 non-black women, 48 black men, and 477 non-black men. Clade B infections were less common in women (43.8%) than men (84.6%) and in blacks (45.6%) than non-blacks (80.5%). Baseline CD4 counts were ≤200 cells/µL in 52.2% of blacks and 31.6% of non-blacks. Black men had the largest proportion of patients with baseline CD4 counts/µL and the highest nontreatment-related discontinuation rate among the 4 sex-by-race subgroups. Human immunodeficiency virus-ribonucleic acid levels/mL were achieved at week 48 in 92.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.1-98.5) of black women, 93.6% (95% CI, 86.6-97.6) of non-black women, 82.9% (95% CI, 67.9-92.8) of black men, and 91.4% (95% CI, 88.4-93.8) of non-black men. Serious clinical adverse events were reported in 9.0% of women versus 8.8% of men and in 11.1% of blacks versus 8.5% of non-blacks. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of patients with previously untreated HIV-1 infection receiving raltegravir plus tenofovir-emtricitabine, generally comparable results were achieved across sex and racial subgroups. However, black men had a lower response rate than either black women or non-black men, partially attributable to lower baseline CD4 counts and higher discontinuation rates

Ertapenem Once a Day Versus Piperacillin–Tazobactam Every 6 Hours for Treatment of Acute Pelvic Infections: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Objective: To compare ertapenem therapy with piperacillin–tazobactam therapy for the management of acute pelvic infections. Methods: In a multicenter, double-blind study, 412 women with acute pelvic infection were assigned to one of two strata, namely obstetric/postpartum infection or gynecologic/postoperative infection, and were then randomized to ertapenem, 1 g once a day, or piperacillin–tazobactam, 3.375 g every 6 hours, both administered intravenously. Results: In total, 163 patients in the ertapenem group and 153 patients in the piperacillin–tazobactam group were clinically evaluable. The median duration of therapy was 4.0 days in both treatment groups. The most common single pathogen was Escherichia coli . At the primary efficacy endpoint 2–4 weeks post therapy, 93.9% of patients who received ertapenem and 91.5% of those who received piperacillin–tazobactam were cured (95% confidence interval for the difference, adjusting for strata, –4% to 8.8%), indicating that cure rates for both treatment groups were equivalent. Cure rates for both treatment groups were also similar when compared by stratum and severity of infection. The frequency and severity of drug-related adverse events were generally similar in both groups. Conclusions: In this study, ertapenem was as effective as piperacillin–tazobactam for the treatment of acute pelvic infection, was generally well tolerated, and had an overall safety profile similar to that of piperacillin–tazobactam

Association between first-year virological response to raltegravir and long-term outcomes in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection

Background: We explored the relationship between virological response in the first year of treatment and long-term outcomes in the BENCHMRK studies. Methods: Patients failing antiretroviral treatment with 3-class resistant HIV-1 received double-blinded raltegravir (or placebo) with optimized background therapy (OBT) until week 156, followed by open-label raltegravir with OBT up to week 240. In this exploratory analysis of patients randomized to raltegravir, virological response over weeks 16-48 was categorized as continuous suppression (CS; viral RNA [vRNA] always 50 copies/ml at least once), or not suppressed (NS; vRNA >400 copies/ml at least once). The association between these first-year vRNA response categories and baseline factors was analysed with univariate and multivariate models. Virological and immunological outcomes for years 2-5 were assessed by first-year vRNA response category (observed failure approach). Results: Baseline vRNA, baseline CD4(+) T-cell count and rapid viral decay (vRNA <50 copies/ml between weeks 2-12) correlated with first-year vRNA response (P<0.001); only rapid viral decay remained significant by multiple regression. Virological response rates were similar in the LLV and CS groups and lowest in the NS group. CD4(+) T-cell count increased through week 240 in the CS and LLV groups. Time to loss of virological response (confirmed vRNA ≥400 copies/ml) through week 240 did not support as strong a difference between the LLV and CS groups (log-rank P=0.11) as previously reported through weeks 156 and 192 (P<0.05). Conclusions: Treatment-experienced patients on a raltegravir-based regimen with early LLV may have long-term virological and immunological benefit when their therapy is maintained

Forty-eight-week efficacy and safety and early CNS tolerability of doravirine (MK-1439), a novel NNRTI, with TDF/FTC in ART-naive HIV-positive patients

INTRODUCTION: Doravirine (DOR) is an investigational NNRTI (aka MK-1439) that retains activity against common NNRTI-resistant mutants. We have previously reported the Part 1 results from a two-part, randomized, double-blind, Phase IIb study in ART-naïve HIV-1-positive patients (1). At doses of 25, 50, 100 and 200 mg qd, DOR plus open-label tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) demonstrated potent antiretroviral activity comparable to EFV 600 mg qhs plus TDF/FTC and was generally well tolerated at week 24. DOR 100 mg was selected for use in patients continuing in Part 1 and those newly enrolled in Part 2. METHODS: Patients receiving DOR 25, 50 or 200 mg in Part 1 were switched to 100 mg after dose selection. In Part 2, 132 additional patients were randomized 1:1 to DOR 100 mg qd or EFV 600 mg qhs (each with TDF/FTC). We present week 48 efficacy and safety results for all patients in Part 1, and early (week 8) CNS tolerability only for patients randomized to DOR 100 mg or to EFV in Parts 1 and 2 combined. The primary safety endpoint is the % of patients with pre-specified CNS events (all causality) by week 8 for DOR 100 mg qd vs EFV (Parts 1 + 2 combined). RESULTS: Part 1 week 48 efficacy and safety results are shown below. CONCLUSIONS: In ART-naïve, HIV-1-positive patients also receiving TDF/FTC, DOR 100 mg qd demonstrated potent antiretroviral activity and immunological effect at week 48 and was generally safe and well tolerated. Patients who received DOR 100 mg qd had significantly fewer treatment-emergent CNS AEs by week 8 than those who received EFV

Efficacy and safety of raltegravir for treatment of HIV for 5 years in the BENCHMRK studies: Final results of two randomised, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Two randomised, placebo-controlled trials-BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2-investigated the efficacy and safety of raltegravir, an HIV-1 integrase strand-transfer inhibitor. We report final results of BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2 combined at 3 years (the end of the double-blind phase) and 5 years (the end of the study). METHODS: Integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with HIV resistant to three classes of drug and who were failing antiretroviral therapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to raltegravir 400 mg twice daily or placebo, both with optimised background treatment. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until week 156, after which all patients were offered open-label raltegravir until week 240. The primary endpoint was previously assessed at 16 weeks. We assessed long-term efficacy with endpoints of the proportion of patients with an HIV viral load of less than 50 copies per mL and less than 400 copies per mL, and mean change in CD4 cell count, at weeks 156 and 240. FINDINGS: 1012 patients were screened for inclusion. 462 were treated with raltegravir and 237 with placebo. At week 156, 51% in the raltegravir group versus 22% in the placebo group (non-completer classed as failure) had viral loads of less than 50 copies per mL, and 54% versus 23% had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL. Mean CD4 cell count increase (analysed by an observed failure approach) was 164 cells per μL versus 63 cells per μL. After week 156, 251 patients (54%) from the raltegravir group and 47 (20%) from the placebo group entered the open-label raltergravir phase; 221 (47%) versus 44 (19%) completed the entire study. At week 240, viral load was less than 50 copies per mL in 193 (42%) of all patients initially assigned to raltegravir and less than 400 copies per mL in 210 (45%); mean CD4 cell count increased by 183 cells per μL. Virological failure occurred in 166 raltegravir recipients (36%) during the double-blind phase and in 17 of all patients (6%) during the open-label phase. The most common drug-related adverse events at 5 years in both groups were nausea, headache, and diarrhoea, and occurred in similar proportions in each group. Laboratory test results were similar in both treatment groups and showed little change after year 2. INTERPRETATION: Raltegravir has a favourable long-term efficacy and safety profile in integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with triple-class resistant HIV in whom antiretroviral therapy is failing. Raltegravir is an alternative for treatment-experienced patients, particularly those with few treatment options

Antiretroviral resistance after first-line antiretroviral therapy failure in diverse HIV-1 subtypes in the SECOND-LINE study

We investigate mutations and correlates according to HIV-1 subtype after virological failure (VF) of standard first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) (non-nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor [NNRTI] +2 nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor [N(t)RTI]). SECOND-LINE study participants were assessed at baseline for HIV-1 subtype, demographics, HIV-1 history, ART exposure, viral load (VL), CD4(+) count, and genotypic ART resistance. We used backward stepwise multivariate regression (MVR) to assess associations between baseline variables and presence of ≥3 N(t)RTI mutations, ≥1 NNRTI mutation, ≥3 thymidine analog-N(t)RTI [ta-N(t)RTI] mutations (TAMs), the K65/K70 mutation, and predicted etravirine (ETV)/rilpivirine (RPV) activity. The inclusion p-value for MVR was p  .05. Of 541 participants, 491 (91%) had successfully characterized baseline viral isolates. Subtype distribution: B (n = 123, 25%), C (n = 202, 41%), CRF01_AE (n = 109, 22%), G (n = 25, 5%), and CRF02_AG (n = 27, 5%). Baseline CD4(+) 200-394 cells/mm(3) were associated with <3 N(t)RTI mutations (OR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.29-0.77; p = .003), absence of the K65/K70 mutation (OR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.26-0.73; p = .002), and higher ETV sensitivity (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.35-0.78; p = .002). Recent tenofovir (TDF) use was associated with K65/K70 mutations (OR = 8.91; 95% CI 5.00-15.85; p < .001). Subtype CRF01_AE was associated with ≥3 N(t)RTI mutations (OR = 2.34; 95% CI 1.31-4.17; p = .004) and higher RPV resistance (OR = 2.13; 95% CI 1.30-3.49; p = .003), and subtype C was associated with <3 TAMs (OR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.21-0.99; p = .015). Subtypes CRF01_AE (OR = 2.46; 95% CI 1.26-4.78; p = .008) and G (OR = 4.77; 95% CI 1.44-15.76; p = .01) were associated with K65/K70 mutations. Higher VL at confirmed first-line VF was associated with ≥3 N(t)RTI mutations (OR = 1.39; 95% CI 1.07-1.78; p = .013) and ≥3 TAMs (OR = 1.62; 95% CI 1.15-2.29; p = .006). The associations of first-line resistance mutations across the HIV-1 subtypes in this study are consistent with knowledge derived from subtype B, with some exceptions. Patterns of resistance after failure of a first-line ta-N(t)RTI regimen support using TDF in N(t)RTI-containing second-line regimens, or using N(t)RTI-sparing regimens.Edward P. Lam, Cecilia L. Moore, Eduardo Gotuzzo, Chidi Nwizu, Adeeba Kamarulzaman, Ploenchan Chetchotisakd, Jean van Wyk, Hedy Teppler, Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy, Jean-Michel Molina, Sean Emery, David A. Cooper, and Mark A. Boyd, for the SECOND-LINE study grou

Raltegravir with Optimized Background Therapy for Resistant HIV-1 Infection

Background: Raltegravir (MK-0518) is an inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) integrase active against HIV-1 susceptible or resistant to older antiretroviral drugs. Methods: We conducted two identical trials in different geographic regions to evaluate the safety and efficacy of raltegravir, as compared with placebo, in combination with optimized background therapy, in patients infected with HIV-1 that has triple-class drug resistance in whom antiretroviral therapy had failed. Patients were randomly assigned to raltegravir or placebo in a 2:1 ratio. Results: In the combined studies, 699 of 703 randomized patients (462 and 237 in the raltegravir and placebo groups, respectively) received the study drug. Seventeen of the 699 patients (2.4%) discontinued the study before week 16. Discontinuation was related to the study treatment in 13 of these 17 patients: 7 of the 462 raltegravir recipients (1.5%) and 6 of the 237 placebo recipients (2.5%). The results of the two studies were consistent. At week 16, counting noncompletion as treatment failure, 355 of 458 raltegravir recipients (77.5%) had HIV-1 RNA levels below 400 copies per milliliter, as compared with 99 of 236 placebo recipients (41.9%, P<0.001). Suppression of HIV-1 RNA to a level below 50 copies per milliliter was achieved at week 16 in 61.8% of the raltegravir recipients, as compared with 34.7% of placebo recipients, and at week 48 in 62.1% as compared with 32.9% (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Without adjustment for the length of follow-up, cancers were detected in 3.5% of raltegravir recipients and in 1.7% of placebo recipients. The overall frequencies of drug-related adverse events were similar in the raltegravir and placebo groups. Conclusions: In HIV-infected patients with limited treatment options, raltegravir plus optimized background therapy provided better viral suppression than optimized background therapy alone for at least 48 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00293267 and NCT00293254.

Subgroup and Resistance Analyses of Raltegravir for Resistant HIV-1 Infection

Background: We evaluated the efficacy of raltegravir and the development of viral resistance in two identical trials involving patients who were infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) with triple-class drug resistance and in whom antiretroviral therapy had failed. Methods: We conducted subgroup analyses of the data from week 48 in both studies according to baseline prognostic factors. Genotyping of the integrase gene was performed in raltegravir recipients who had virologic failure. Results: Virologic responses to raltegravir were consistently superior to responses to placebo, regardless of the baseline values of HIV-1 RNA level; CD4 cell count; genotypic or phenotypic sensitivity score; use or nonuse of darunavir, enfuvirtide, or both in optimized background therapy; or demographic characteristics. Among patients in the two studies combined who were using both enfuvirtide and darunavir for the first time, HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter were achieved in 89% of raltegravir recipients and 68% of placebo recipients. HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter were achieved in 69% and 80% of the raltegravir recipients and in 47% and 57% of the placebo recipients using either darunavir or enfuvirtide for the first time, respectively. At 48 weeks, 105 of the 462 raltegravir recipients (23%) had virologic failure. Genotyping was performed in 94 raltegravir recipients with virologic failure. Integrase mutations known to be associated with phenotypic resistance to raltegravir arose during treatment in 64 patients (68%). Forty-eight of these 64 patients (75%) had two or more resistance-associated mutations. Conclusions: When combined with an optimized background regimen in both studies, a consistently favorable treatment effect of raltegravir over placebo was shown in clinically relevant subgroups of patients, including those with baseline characteristics that typically predict a poor response to antiretroviral therapy: a high HIV-1 RNA level, low CD4 cell count, and low genotypic or phenotypic sensitivity score. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00293267 and NCT00293254.