Frank A Post1, Yazdan Yazdanpanah2, Gabriel Schembri3, Adriano Lazzarin4, Jacques Reynes5, Franco Maggiolo6, Mingjin Yan7, Michael E Abram7, Cecilia Tran-Muchowski7, Andrew Cheng7, Martin S Rhee7. 1. a Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust , Weston Education Centre (2.53) , London , UK. 2. b Service des Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales , Hospital Bichat-Claude Bernard , Paris , France. 3. c Manchester Centre for Sexual Health , Manchester , UK. 4. d Divisione di Malattie Infettive , IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele , Milano , Italy. 5. e Departement Des Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales , CHU Gui De Chuliac , Montpellier , France. 6. f US di Terapia Antivirale, USC di Malattie Infettive , Azienda Ospedaliera Papa Giovanni XXIII , Bergamo , Italy. 7. g Departments of Biometrics, Virology, Clinical Operations, and Clinical Research , Gilead Sciences Inc. , Foster City , CA , USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:FTC/TAF was shown to be noninferior to FTC/TDF with advantages in markers of renal and bone safety. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF by third agent (boosted protease inhibitor [PI] vs. unboosted third agent). METHODS: We conducted a 48-week subgroup analysis based on third agent from a randomized, double blind study in virologically suppressed adults on a FTC/TDF-containing regimen who switched to FTC/TAF vs. continued FTC/TDF while remaining on the same third agent. RESULTS: We randomized (1:1) 663 participants to either switch toFTC/TAF (N = 333) or continue FTC/TDF (N = 330), each with baseline third agent stratifying by class of third agent in the prior treatment regimen (boosted PI 46%, unboosted third agent 54%). At week 48, significant differences in renal biomarkers and bone mineral density were observed favoring FTC/TAF over FTC/TDF (p < 0.05 for all), with similar improvements in the FTC/TAF arm in those who received boosted PI vs. unboosted third agents. At week 48, virologic success rates were similar between treatment groups for those who received a boosted PI (FTC/TAF 92%, FTC/TDF 93%) and for those who received an unboosted third agent (97% vs. 93%). CONCLUSIONS: In virologically suppressed patients switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF, high rates of virologic suppression were maintained, while renal and bone safety parameters improved, regardless of whether participants were receiving a boosted PI or an unboosted third agent. FTC/TAF offers safety advantages over FTC/TDF and can be an important option as an NRTI backbone given with a variety of third agents.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: FTC/TAF was shown to be noninferior to FTC/TDF with advantages in markers of renal and bone safety. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF by third agent (boosted protease inhibitor [PI] vs. unboosted third agent). METHODS: We conducted a 48-week subgroup analysis based on third agent from a randomized, double blind study in virologically suppressed adults on a FTC/TDF-containing regimen who switched to FTC/TAF vs. continued FTC/TDF while remaining on the same third agent. RESULTS: We randomized (1:1) 663 participants to either switch to FTC/TAF (N = 333) or continue FTC/TDF (N = 330), each with baseline third agent stratifying by class of third agent in the prior treatment regimen (boosted PI 46%, unboosted third agent 54%). At week 48, significant differences in renal biomarkers and bone mineral density were observed favoring FTC/TAF over FTC/TDF (p < 0.05 for all), with similar improvements in the FTC/TAF arm in those who received boosted PI vs. unboosted third agents. At week 48, virologic success rates were similar between treatment groups for those who received a boosted PI (FTC/TAF 92%, FTC/TDF 93%) and for those who received an unboosted third agent (97% vs. 93%). CONCLUSIONS: In virologically suppressed patients switching to FTC/TAF from FTC/TDF, high rates of virologic suppression were maintained, while renal and bone safety parameters improved, regardless of whether participants were receiving a boosted PI or an unboosted third agent. FTC/TAF offers safety advantages over FTC/TDF and can be an important option as an NRTI backbone given with a variety of third agents.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone mineral density; HIV; Randomized controlled trial; Renal safety; Tenofovir alafenamide; Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; Third ARV agents
Authors: Kedar Joshi; David Boettiger; Stephen Kerr; Takeshi Nishijima; Kinh Van Nguyen; Penh Sun Ly; Man Po Lee; Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy; Wingwai Wong; Pacharee Kantipong; Do Duy Cuong; Adeeba Kamarulzaman; Jun Yong Choi; Fujie Zhang; Romanee Chaiwarith; Oon Tek Ng; Sasisopin Kiertiburanakul; Benedict Lim Heng Sim; Tuti Parwati Merati; Evy Yunihastuti; Rossana Ditangco; Jeremy Ross; Sanjay Pujari Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Denise L Jacobson; Wendy Yu; Rohan Hazra; Sean Brummel; Mitchell E Geffner; Kunjal Patel; William Borkowsky; Jiajia Wang; Janet S Chen; Ayesha Mirza; Linda A DiMeglio Journal: Bone Date: 2020-06-30 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Kirk A Taylor; Erica Smyth; Francesca Rauzi; Maddalena Cerrone; Akif A Khawaja; Brian Gazzard; Mark Nelson; Marta Boffito; Michael Emerson Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 8.739
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: Gregory D Huhn; Joseph J Eron; Pierre-Marie Girard; Chloe Orkin; Jean-Michel Molina; Edwin DeJesus; Romana Petrovic; Donghan Luo; Erika Van Landuyt; Erkki Lathouwers; Richard E Nettles; Kimberley Brown; Eric Y Wong Journal: AIDS Res Ther Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 2.250