Raltegravir in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV infection

Raltegravir, an inhibitor of the HIV-1 integrase enzyme, is the first available agent in a new class of antiretroviral drugs. Raltegravir has been studied extensively in clinical trials, and has been well tolerated and highly effective in both treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Resistance to raltegravir is unusual given its recent availability, but resistance with identified viral mutation pathways in the integrase gene in patients receiving the drug does occur

Methyl 2-[2-(benzyl­oxycarbonyl­amino)­propan-2-yl]-5-hy­droxy-6-meth­oxy­pyrimidine-4-carboxyl­ate

In the title compound, C18H21N3O6, a pyrimidine derivative, the dihedral angle between the benzene and pyrimidine rings is 52.26 (12)°. The carboxyl­ate unit is twisted with respect to the pyrimidine ring, making a dihedral angle of 12.33 (7)°. In the crystal, mol­ecules are linked by a pair of O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds, forming an inversion dimer. The dimers are stacked into columns along the b axis through weak C—H⋯O inter­actions

Methyl 2-(2-{[(benz­yloxy)carbon­yl]amino}­propan-2-yl)-5-hy­droxy-6-oxo-1,6-dihydro­pyrimidine-4-carboxyl­ate

In the title compound, C17H19N3O6, the dihedral angle between the two aromatic rings is 45.9 (1)°. The crystal structure is stabilized through inter­molecular N—H⋯O hydrogen bonds and intra­molecular O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds are also present

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Indinavir, Zidovudine, and Lamivudine in Adults with Advanced Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection and Prior Antiretroviral Therapy

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine was conducted in 320 adults with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, ⩽50 CD4 cells/mm3, and extensive prior zidovudine therapy. Patients received indinavir, 800 mg every 8 h; zidovudine, 200 mg every 8 h, and lamivudine, 150 mg twice daily; or all 3 drugs for 24 weeks. In an intention-to-treat analysis, proportions of patients with HIV-1 RNA <500 and <50 copies/mL, respectively, at week 24 were 56% and 45% in the indinavir-zido-vudine-lamivudine group, 3% and 2% in the indinavir group, and 0% in the zidovudinelamivudine group. Observed mean CD4 cell increases were 95, 78, and 6 cells/mm3 in the three-, one-, and two-drug arms, respectively. Regimens were generally well tolerated. Patients with advanced HIV-1 infection benefit from triple therapy with indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine, although the proportion with optimal response appeared to be lower in patients with low CD4 cell count

Clinical use of HIV integrase inhibitors : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Optimal regimen choice of antiretroviral therapy is essential to achieve long-term clinical success. Integrase inhibitors have swiftly been adopted as part of current antiretroviral regimens. The purpose of this study was to review the evidence for integrase inhibitor use in clinical settings. Methods: MEDLINE and Web-of-Science were screened from April 2006 until November 2012, as were hand-searched scientific meeting proceedings. Multiple reviewers independently screened 1323 citations in duplicate to identify randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials and cohort studies on integrase inhibitor use in clinical practice. Independent, duplicate data extraction and quality assessment were conducted. Results: 48 unique studies were included on the use of integrase inhibitors in antiretroviral therapy-naive patients and treatment-experienced patients with either virological failure or switching to integrase inhibitors while virologically suppressed. On the selected studies with comparable outcome measures and indication (n = 16), a meta-analysis was performed based on modified intention-to-treat (mITT), on-treatment (OT) and as-treated (AT) virological outcome data. In therapy-naive patients, favorable odds ratios (OR) for integrase inhibitor-based regimens were observed, (mITT OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86). However, integrase inhibitors combined with protease inhibitors only did not result in a significant better virological outcome. Evidence further supported integrase inhibitor use following virological failure (mITT OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11-0.66), but switching to integrase inhibitors from a high genetic barrier drug during successful treatment was not supported (mITT OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.89-2.31). Integrase inhibitor-based regimens result in similar immunological responses compared to other regimens. A low genetic barrier to drug-resistance development was observed for raltegravir and elvitegravir, but not for dolutegravir. Conclusion: In first-line therapy, integrase inhibitors are superior to other regimens. Integrase inhibitor use after virological failure is supported as well by the meta-analysis. Careful use is however warranted when replacing a high genetic barrier drug in treatment-experienced patients switching successful treatment

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

Long-Term Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Indinavir-Based Therapy in Protease Inhibitor—Naive Adults with Advanced HIV Infection

A double-blind, randomized study of zidovudine-experienced, PI- and lamivudine-naive adults with baseline CD4 cell counts of ⩽50 cells/mm3 had demonstrated that the HIV suppression achieved with zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir therapy was superior to that achieved with dual-nucleoside or indinavir-only regimens after 24 weeks of therapy. In a 192-week extension of the study, 371 participants received open-label indinavir with or without other antiretroviral drugs. One hundred and eight subjects were originally randomized to receive triple therapy. After 216 weeks, the proportion of subjects with HIV RNA levels of <500 copies/mL were 34%, according to a general estimating equation analysis, 92%, according to an observed data analysis, and 24%, according to an intention-to-treat analysis counting noncompleters as failures; the proportions of subjects with HIV RNA levels of <50 copies/mL were 31%, 85%, and 22%, respectively. Hyperbilirubinemia (experienced by 31% of subjects), nausea (17%), abdominal pain (14%), and nephrolithiasis (13%) were the most common drug-related adverse events during the extensio

HIV-1 integrase polymorphisms are associated with prior antiretroviral drug exposure

In a recent summary of integrase sequences, primary integrase inhibitor mutations were rare. In a review of integrase inhibitor-naïve Australian HIV-1 sequences, primary mutations were not identified, although the accessory mutation G140S was detected. A link with previous antiretroviral therapy, intra-subtype B divergence across the integrase gene and transmission of integrase polymorphisms were also noted. Based on these findings, we would recommend ongoing surveillance of integrase mutations, and integrase region sequencing for patients prior to commencement of integrase inhibitors

Raltegravir Cerebrospinal Fluid Concentrations in HIV-1 Infection

Raltegravir is an HIV-1 integrase inhibitor currently used in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients resistant to other drug classes. In order to assess its central nervous system penetration, we measured raltegravir concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma in subjects receiving antiretroviral treatment regimens containing this drug.Raltegravir concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry in 25 paired CSF and plasma samples from 16 HIV-1-infected individuals. The lower limit of quantitation was 2.0 ng/ml for CSF and 10 ng/ml for plasma.Twenty-four of the 25 CSF samples had detectable raltegravir concentrations with a median raltegravir concentration of 18.4 ng/ml (range, <2.0-126.0). The median plasma raltegravir concentration was 448 ng/ml (range, 37-5180). CSF raltegravir concentrations correlated with CSF:plasma albumin ratios and CSF albumin concentrations.Approximately 50% of the CSF specimens exceeded the IC(95) levels reported to inhibit HIV-1 strains without resistance to integrase inhibitors. In addition to contributing to control of systemic HIV-1 infection, raltegravir achieves local inhibitory concentrations in CSF in most, but not all, patients. Blood-brain and blood-CSF barriers likely restrict drug entry, while enhanced permeability of these barriers enhances drug entry