OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) and tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) in treatment-naïve Japanese patients with HIV-1 infection. METHODS: A 96-week multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel group pilot study was conducted. The endpoints were times to virologic failure, safety event and regimen modification. RESULTS:109 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated (54 patients receivedABC/3TC and 55 patients received TDF/FTC). All randomized subjects were analyzed. The time to virologic failure was not significantly different between the two arms by 96 weeks (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 0.72-6.13; p=0.178). Both regimens showed favorable viral efficacy, as in the intention-to-treat population, 72.2% (ABC/3TC) and 78.2% (TDF/FTC) of the patients had an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/mL at 96 weeks. The time to the first grade 3 or 4 adverse event and the time to the first regimen modification were not significantly different between the two arms (adverse event: HR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.25-1.75, p=0.407) (regimen modification: HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.33-3.19, p=0.964). Both regimens were also well-tolerated, as only 11.1% (ABC/3TC) and 10.9% (TDF/FTC) of the patients discontinued the allocated regimen by 96 weeks. Clinically suspected abacavir-associated hypersensitivity reactions occurred in only one (1.9%) patient in the ABC/3TC arm. CONCLUSION: Although insufficiently powered to show non-inferiority of viral efficacy of ABC/3TC relative to TDF/FTC, this pilot trial suggested that ABC/3TC with ATV/r is a safe and efficacious initial regimen for HLA-B*5701-negative patients, such as the Japanese population.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) and tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) in treatment-naïve Japanese patients with HIV-1 infection. METHODS: A 96-week multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel group pilot study was conducted. The endpoints were times to virologic failure, safety event and regimen modification. RESULTS: 109 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated (54 patients received ABC/3TC and 55 patients received TDF/FTC). All randomized subjects were analyzed. The time to virologic failure was not significantly different between the two arms by 96 weeks (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 0.72-6.13; p=0.178). Both regimens showed favorable viral efficacy, as in the intention-to-treat population, 72.2% (ABC/3TC) and 78.2% (TDF/FTC) of the patients had an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/mL at 96 weeks. The time to the first grade 3 or 4 adverse event and the time to the first regimen modification were not significantly different between the two arms (adverse event: HR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.25-1.75, p=0.407) (regimen modification: HR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.33-3.19, p=0.964). Both regimens were also well-tolerated, as only 11.1% (ABC/3TC) and 10.9% (TDF/FTC) of the patients discontinued the allocated regimen by 96 weeks. Clinically suspected abacavir-associated hypersensitivity reactions occurred in only one (1.9%) patient in the ABC/3TC arm. CONCLUSION: Although insufficiently powered to show non-inferiority of viral efficacy of ABC/3TC relative to TDF/FTC, this pilot trial suggested that ABC/3TC with ATV/r is a safe and efficacious initial regimen for HLA-B*5701-negative patients, such as the Japanese population.
Authors: Philip M Grant; Camlin Tierney; Chakra Budhathoki; Eric S Daar; Paul E Sax; Ann C Collier; Margaret A Fischl; Andrew R Zolopa; Maya Balamane; David Katzenstein Journal: HIV Clin Trials Date: 2013 Nov-Dec
Authors: Nathan Ford; Zara Shubber; Andrew Hill; Marco Vitoria; Meg Doherty; Edward J Mills; Andy Gray Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 3.240