BACKGROUND: APV102002 was an open-label study comparing a dual-boosted HIV-1 protease inhibitor (PI) [fosamprenavir/lopinavir/ritonavir (FPV/LPV/RTV; 1400 mg/533 mg/133 mg twice daily)] and a high dose of FPV/RTV 1400 mg/100 mg twice daily (HD-FPV/RTV) versus the standard FPV/RTV 700 mg/100 mg twice-daily (STD-FPV/RTV) regimen for 24 weeks. METHODS:Adult patients with prior failure to two or more PI-based regimens and on a failing PI regimen were randomized to STD-FPV/RTV (n = 24), HD-FPV/RTV (n = 25) or FPV/LPV/RTV (n = 25). The primary aim was to test week 24 superiority of HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV over STD-FPV/RTV as measured by plasma HIV-1 RNA average area under the curve minus baseline (AAUCMB). RESULTS: There was no difference in the week 24 AAUCMB between the regimens. The proportion of patients with <50 copies/mL of plasma HIV RNA was 21%, 24% and 20%, respectively, by time to loss of virological response (TLOVR) analysis. High baseline drug resistance provided some explanation for the low efficacy. A lower baseline background drug resistance and higher fosamprenavir genotypic inhibitory quotient led to better antiviral responses. The plasma amprenavir trough concentartion (C(tau)) was 49% higher in the HD-FPV/RTV arm than in the STD-FPV/RTV arm and similar in the FPV/LPV/RTV and STD-FPV/RTV arms. The plasma lopinavir C(tau) was similar to historical data with standard LPV/RTV 400 mg/100 mg twice daily. All regimens were relatively well tolerated, although diarrhoea was more frequent in the HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV arms, and hypertriglyceridaemia and increased total cholesterol were more common in the FPV/LPV/RTV arm. CONCLUSIONS: While the strategies of higher dose FPV/RTV and dual FPV/LPV/RTV were relevant at the time of study initiation, new therapies for antiretroviral-experienced patients make such strategies of limited interest. In addition, this study failed to demonstrate antiviral superiority of the HD-FPV/RTV or FPV/LPV/RTV regimen over the STD-FPV/RTV twice-daily regimen in highly treatment-experienced patients.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: APV102002 was an open-label study comparing a dual-boosted HIV-1 protease inhibitor (PI) [fosamprenavir/lopinavir/ritonavir (FPV/LPV/RTV; 1400 mg/533 mg/133 mg twice daily)] and a high dose of FPV/RTV 1400 mg/100 mg twice daily (HD-FPV/RTV) versus the standard FPV/RTV 700 mg/100 mg twice-daily (STD-FPV/RTV) regimen for 24 weeks. METHODS: Adult patients with prior failure to two or more PI-based regimens and on a failing PI regimen were randomized to STD-FPV/RTV (n = 24), HD-FPV/RTV (n = 25) or FPV/LPV/RTV (n = 25). The primary aim was to test week 24 superiority of HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV over STD-FPV/RTV as measured by plasma HIV-1 RNA average area under the curve minus baseline (AAUCMB). RESULTS: There was no difference in the week 24 AAUCMB between the regimens. The proportion of patients with <50 copies/mL of plasma HIV RNA was 21%, 24% and 20%, respectively, by time to loss of virological response (TLOVR) analysis. High baseline drug resistance provided some explanation for the low efficacy. A lower baseline background drug resistance and higher fosamprenavir genotypic inhibitory quotient led to better antiviral responses. The plasma amprenavir trough concentartion (C(tau)) was 49% higher in the HD-FPV/RTV arm than in the STD-FPV/RTV arm and similar in the FPV/LPV/RTV and STD-FPV/RTV arms. The plasma lopinavir C(tau) was similar to historical data with standard LPV/RTV 400 mg/100 mg twice daily. All regimens were relatively well tolerated, although diarrhoea was more frequent in the HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV arms, and hypertriglyceridaemia and increased total cholesterol were more common in the FPV/LPV/RTV arm. CONCLUSIONS: While the strategies of higher dose FPV/RTV and dual FPV/LPV/RTV were relevant at the time of study initiation, new therapies for antiretroviral-experienced patients make such strategies of limited interest. In addition, this study failed to demonstrate antiviral superiority of the HD-FPV/RTV or FPV/LPV/RTV regimen over the STD-FPV/RTV twice-daily regimen in highly treatment-experienced patients.
Authors: Monika Schöller-Gyüre; Thomas N Kakuda; Araz Raoof; Goedele De Smedt; Richard M W Hoetelmans Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2009 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Lisa L Ross; Mark F Cotton; Haseena Cassim; Eugeny Voronin; Naomi Givens; Jorg Sievers; Katharine Y Cheng Journal: Open AIDS J Date: 2015-05-15