P M Girard1, A Antinori2, J R Arribas3, D Ripamonti4, C Bicer5, B Netzle-Sveine6, B Hadacek6, C Moecklinghoff7. 1. Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, AP-HP, INSERM UMR S 1136, Paris, France. 2. National Institute for Infectious Diseases, L. Spallanzani IRCCS, Rome, Italy. 3. Hospital University La Paz, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain. 4. University Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. 5. Biostatistics, Janssen R&D, Beerse, Belgium. 6. Janssen EMEA, Issy-les-Moulineaux, France. 7. Janssen EMEA, Neuss, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: PROTEA is a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) monotherapy as an alternative to triple therapy. METHODS: Patients fully suppressed on first-line antiretrovirals (viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL) were switched to DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily, either as monotherapy (n = 137) or with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) (n = 136). Treatment failure was HIV-1 RNA level ≥ 50 copies/mL at week 96 or discontinuation of study treatment [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm]. RESULTS:Patients were mainly male and white, with mean age 44 years. In the primary efficacy analysis, the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL by week 96 [intent to treat (ITT)] was lower in the DRV/r monotherapy arm (103 of 137 patients; 75%) than in the triple therapy arm (116 of 136 patients; 85%) [difference -10.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -19.5, -0.7%]. In the switch-included analysis, monotherapy was noninferior to triple therapy. In a post hoc analysis, for patients with nadir CD4 count ≥ 200 cells/μL, rates of HIV-1 RNA suppression were 82 of 96 patients (85%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 88 of 106 patients (83%) in the triple therapy arm. No treatment-emergent primary protease inhibitor mutations were detected in either arm. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two arms; however, one patient in the monotherapy arm was hospitalized with HIV encephalitis and elevated cerebrospinal fluid HIV-1 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, in patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at baseline, switching to DRV/r monotherapy showed lower efficacy vs. triple therapy at week 96 in the primary ITT switch-equals-failure analysis, particularly in patients with CD4 counts < 200 cells/μL.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: PROTEA is a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) monotherapy as an alternative to triple therapy. METHODS:Patients fully suppressed on first-line antiretrovirals (viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL) were switched to DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily, either as monotherapy (n = 137) or with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) (n = 136). Treatment failure was HIV-1 RNA level ≥ 50 copies/mL at week 96 or discontinuation of study treatment [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm]. RESULTS:Patients were mainly male and white, with mean age 44 years. In the primary efficacy analysis, the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL by week 96 [intent to treat (ITT)] was lower in the DRV/r monotherapy arm (103 of 137 patients; 75%) than in the triple therapy arm (116 of 136 patients; 85%) [difference -10.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -19.5, -0.7%]. In the switch-included analysis, monotherapy was noninferior to triple therapy. In a post hoc analysis, for patients with nadir CD4 count ≥ 200 cells/μL, rates of HIV-1 RNA suppression were 82 of 96 patients (85%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 88 of 106 patients (83%) in the triple therapy arm. No treatment-emergent primary protease inhibitor mutations were detected in either arm. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two arms; however, one patient in the monotherapy arm was hospitalized with HIV encephalitis and elevated cerebrospinal fluid HIV-1 RNA. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, in patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at baseline, switching to DRV/r monotherapy showed lower efficacy vs. triple therapy at week 96 in the primary ITT switch-equals-failure analysis, particularly in patients with CD4 counts < 200 cells/μL.
Authors: Emily P Hyle; Justine A Scott; Paul E Sax; Lucia R I Millham; Caitlin M Dugdale; Milton C Weinstein; Kenneth A Freedberg; Rochelle P Walensky Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Michael S Saag; Constance A Benson; Rajesh T Gandhi; Jennifer F Hoy; Raphael J Landovitz; Michael J Mugavero; Paul E Sax; Davey M Smith; Melanie A Thompson; Susan P Buchbinder; Carlos Del Rio; Joseph J Eron; Gerd Fätkenheuer; Huldrych F Günthard; Jean-Michel Molina; Donna M Jacobsen; Paul A Volberding Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Miguel A López-Ruz; Miguel A López-Zúñiga; María Carmen Gonzalvo; Antonio Sampedro; Juan Pasquau; Carmen Hidalgo; Javier Rosario; Jose Antonio Castilla Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Cassidy W Claassen; David Keckich; Chidi Nwizu; Alash'le Abimiku; Donald Salami; Michael Obiefune; Bruce L Gilliam; Anthony Amoroso Journal: J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care Date: 2019 Jan-Dec
Authors: Gordon J Lockbaum; Mina Henes; Nathaniel Talledge; Linah N Rusere; Klajdi Kosovrasti; Ellen A Nalivaika; Mohan Somasundaran; Akbar Ali; Louis M Mansky; Nese Kurt Yilmaz; Celia A Schiffer Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Magda Opsomer; Dessislava Dimitrova; Johan Verspeelt; Amy Purrington; Abdul Mehbob; Scott Chavers; Helen Pai; Simon Vanveggel; Donghan Luo; Kimberley Brown; Christiane Moecklinghoff; Richard E Nettles; Katia Boven Journal: Drugs R D Date: 2018-09
Authors: Kimberley Brown; Lisa Stewart; Jeannette M Whitcomb; Dongmei Yang; Richard E Nettles; Erkki Lathouwers Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 2.205