| Literature DB >> 28424561 |
Kathleen E Squires1, Benjamin Young2,3, Lizette Santiago4, Robin H Dretler5, Sharon L Walmsley6, Henry H Zhao7, Gary E Pakes8, Lisa L Ross8, Mark S Shaefer8.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The 144-week results of the open-label, multicenter Atazanavir/Ritonavir Induction with Epzicom Study (ARIES) were stratified by gender to compare treatment responses.Entities:
Keywords: ARIES; HIV-infected; gender; virologic efficacy
Year: 2017 PMID: 28424561 PMCID: PMC5344433 DOI: 10.2147/HIV.S108756
Source DB: PubMed Journal: HIV AIDS (Auckl) ISSN: 1179-1373
Demographic characteristics of the extension phase population, study disposition, and treatment adherence stratified by gender
| Parameter | Female subjects
| Male subjects
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABC/3TC + | ABC/3TC + | Total | ABC/3TC + | ABC/3TC + | Total | |
| Mean age, years (range) | 40 (25–60) | 40 (20–66) | 40 (20–66) | 37 (19–72) | 40 (21–67) | 39 (18–72) |
| Race | ||||||
| White, n (%) | 11 (38) | 6 (24) | 17 (31) | 111 (69) | 108 (70) | 219 (70) |
| Black, n (%) | 18 (62) | 17 (68) | 35 (65) | 40 (25) | 40 (26) | 80 (25) |
| Other, n (%) | 0 | 2 (8) | 2 (4) | 9 (6) | 7 (5) | 16 (5) |
| Ethnicity | ||||||
| Hispanic, n (%) | 6 (21) | 5 (20) | 11 (20) | 29 (18) | 20 (13) | 49 (16) |
| CDC class C, n (%) | 6 (21) | 3 (12) | 9 (17) | 26 (16) | 12 (8) | 38 (12) |
| Hepatitis C, n (%) | 2 (7) | 0 | 2 (4) | 7 (4) | 11 (7) | 18 (6) |
| HIV-1 RNA | ||||||
| Median, copies/mL | 39,811 | 100,000 | 79,433 | 125,893 | 125,893 | 125,893 |
| <100,000 copies/mL, n (%) | 19 (66) | 13 (52) | 32 (59) | 66 (41) | 66 (43) | 132 (42) |
| ≥100,000 copies/mL, n (%) | 10 (34) | 12 (48) | 22 (41) | 94 (59) | 89 (57) | 183 (58) |
| CD4+ cell count | ||||||
| Median, cells/mm3 | 190 | 194 | 192 | 193 | 205 | 200 |
| <50, n (%) | 5 (17) | 4 (16) | 9 (17) | 27 (17) | 14 (9) | 41 (13) |
| 50 to <200, n (%) | 10 (34) | 10 (40) | 20 (37) | 56 (35) | 60 (39) | 116 (37) |
| ≥200, n (%) | 14 (48) | 11 (44) | 25 (46) | 77 (48) | 81 (52) | 158 (50) |
| Fasting lipids, median, mg/dL | ||||||
| Total cholesterol | 154 | 167 | – | 151 | 149.5 | – |
| LDL cholesterol | 88.5 | 103 | – | 88 | 83 | – |
| HDL cholesterol | 42 | 42 | – | 36 | 38 | – |
| Triglycerides | 123 | 124 | – | 130 | 123 | – |
| Completed 144 weeks, n (%) | 24 (83) | 20 (80) | 44 (81) | 136 (85) | 134 (86) | 270 (86) |
| Prematurely withdrawn, n (%) | 5 (17) | 5 (20) | 10 (19) | 24 (15) | 21 (14) | 45 (14) |
| Investigator-defined primary reason for withdrawal | ||||||
| N | 5 | 5 | 10 | 24 | 21 | 45 |
| Adverse event | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Insufficient viral load response | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Protocol violation | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Protocol-defined VF | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| Lost to follow-up | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| Subject decision | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 7 |
| Noncompliance | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Other | 3 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 13 |
| ABC/3TC | 97.4 | 96.2 | – | 97.6 | 97.4 | – |
| ATV | 100 | 98.3 | – | 100 | 98 | – |
| Ritonavir | 98.4 | 96.8 | – | 99.2 | 96.3 | – |
Notes:
An investigator could attribute factors other than protocol-defined VF as the primary reason for withdrawal.
Reasons included sponsor termination of site (three in each group); pregnancy (three in ATV group); subject moved (one per group); physician decision (one in ATV/r group); sponsor request (one per group); unknown (one in ATV group); and subject could not return from Cuba (one in ATV/r group).
Abbreviations: ABC/3TC, abacavir/lamivudine; ATV, atazanavir; ATV/r, atazanavir/ritonavir; CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; VF, virologic failure.
Figure 1Response through 144 weeks in female and male subjects in terms of (A) proportion achieving HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (intent-to-treat extension population, TLOVR analysis) and (B) median CD4+ cell count elevation (observed analysis).
Note: No significant difference (P>0.05) was observed between genders by Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test stratified by treatment group, and no significant difference (P>0.05) was observed between genders by Fisher’s exact test within treatment group.
Abbreviations: ATV, atazanavir; ATV/r, atazanavir/ritonavir; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; TLOVR, time to loss of virologic response.
Treatment-related grade 2–4 AEs stratified by gender
| Parameter | ABC/3TC + ATV | ABC/3TC +ATV/r | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female subjects | Male subjects | Female subjects | Male subjects | |
| Any treatment-related grade 2–4 AE from BL to week 144 | 12 (41) | 49 (31) | 9 (36) | 66 (43) |
| Any treatment-related grade 2–4 AE from week 36 to week 144 | 4 (14) | 21 (13) | 6 (24) | 36 (23) |
| Blood bilirubin increased | 3 (10) | 16 (10) | 3 (12) | 21 (14) |
| Hyperbilirubinemia | 3 (10) | 11 (7) | 3 (12) | 16 (10) |
| Nausea | 0 | 6 (4) | 2 (8) | 4 (3) |
| Diarrhea | 1 (3) | 10 (6) | 0 | 7 (5) |
| Ocular icterus | 0 | 0 | 2 (8) | 0 |
Notes:
No significant difference between genders by Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test stratified by treatment.
No significant difference between genders by Fisher’s exact test within treatment group.
Abbreviations: ABC/3TC, abacavir/lamivudine; AE, adverse event; ATV, atazanavir; ATV/r, atazanavir/ritonavir; BL, baseline.
List of institutional review boards/independent ethics committee at each study site that approved the protocol
| 1. Ethica Clinical Research Inc. |
| 2. MUHC Biomedical D (BMD) |
| 3. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre Research Ethics Board 4. University Health Network Research Ethics Board |
| 1. Copernicus Group IRB (Most sites used this centralized IRB) |
| 2. Institutional Review Board, Henry Ford Health System, Henry Ford Hospital |
| 3. University of South Florida Institutional Review Board |
| 4. East Carolina University, University Medical Center Institutional Review Board |
| 5. The University of Toledo Department for Human Research Protections Biomedical Institutional Review Board |
| 6. Whitman-Walker Clinic, Inc. Institutional Review Board |
| 7. Western Institutional Review Board |
| 8. University of Kentucky Office of Research Integrity |
| 9. Human Subjects Research Committee Hennipen County Medical Center |
| 10. University of Southern California Health Sciences Campus Institutional Review Board |
| 11. Georgetown University Institutional Review Board |
| 12. St. Joseph’s Hospital Institutional Review Board |
| 13. Chesapeake Research Review, Inc. |
| 14. The University of Texas Medical Branch Office of Research Subject Protections Institutional Review Board |
| 15. Loyola University Medical Center Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects |
| 16. Washington University in St. Louis H University of Chicago |
| 17. University of Chicago Institutional Review Board |
| 18. Research Subjects Protection Program Institutional Review Board |
| 19. University of Southern California School of Medicine LAC+USC Medical Center Institutional Review Board |
| 20. Partners Human Research Office |
| 21. Saint Michael’s Medical Center Research Committee |
| 22. New York Medical College Office of Research Administration Committee for Protection of Human Subjects |
| 23. Thomas Jefferson University Office of Human Research Division of Human Subjects Protection Institutional Review Board |
| 24. The Miriam Hospital Clinical Research Institutional Review Board |
| 25. AIDS Research Consortium of Atlanta, Inc. Institutional Review Board |
| 26. Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research/Southeast |
Abbreviation: IRB, institutional review board.