Regis Kreitchmann1, Alice Stek2, Brookie M Best3, Edmund Capparelli3, JiaJia Wang4, David Shapiro4, Nahida Chakhtoura5, Mark Mirochnick6, Ahizechukwu C Eke7. 1. Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericordia de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, Brazil. Electronic address: regis.kr@terra.com.br. 2. University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, United States. 3. University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States. 4. Harvard T.H Chan School of Public Health, Center for Biostatistics in AIDS Research, Boston, MA, United States. 5. Maternal and Pediatric Infectious Diseases Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Bethesda, MD, United States. 6. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States. 7. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Long-acting reversible contraceptives are effective contraceptives for women with HIV, but there are limited data on etonogestrel implant and antiretroviral therapy pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. We evaluated etonogestrel/antiretroviral therapy drug-drug interactions, and the effects of etonogestrel on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and efavirenz pharmacokinetics. STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled postpartum women using etonogestrel implants and receiving ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, or efavirenz-based regimens between 2012 and 2015. Etonogestrel implants were inserted 2 to 12 weeks postpartum. We performed pharmacokinetic sampling pre-etonogestrel insertion and 6 to 7 weeks postinsertion. We measured antiretroviral concentrations pre and postetonogestrel insertion, and compared etonogestrel concentrations between antiretroviral regimens. We considered a minimum serum etonogestrel concentration of 90 pg/mL adequate for ovulation suppression. RESULTS: We collected pharmacokinetic data for 74 postpartum women, 22 on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, 26 on ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and 26 on efavirenz. The median serum concentrations of etonogestrel when co-administered were highest with etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir (604 pg/mL) and etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir (428 pg/mL), and lowest with etonogestrel/efavirenz (125 pg/mL); p < 0.001. Minimum concentration (Cmin) of ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were lower after etonogestrel implant insertion, but overall exposure, predose concentrations, clearance, and half-lives were unchanged. We found no significant change in efavirenz exposure after etonogestrel insertion. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike efavirenz, ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were not associated with significant decreases in etonogestrel concentrations. Efavirenz was associated with a significant decrease in etonogestrel concentrations. IMPLICATIONS: The findings demonstrate no interactions between etonogestrel and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir or ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, but confirm the decreased efficacy of etonogestrel with efavirenz-based antiretrovirals. This information should be used to counsel women with HIV who desire long-acting reversible contraceptives.
OBJECTIVES: Long-acting reversible contraceptives are effective contraceptives for women with HIV, but there are limited data on etonogestrel implant and antiretroviral therapy pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. We evaluated etonogestrel/antiretroviral therapy drug-drug interactions, and the effects of etonogestrel on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and efavirenz pharmacokinetics. STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled postpartum women using etonogestrel implants and receiving ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, or efavirenz-based regimens between 2012 and 2015. Etonogestrel implants were inserted 2 to 12 weeks postpartum. We performed pharmacokinetic sampling pre-etonogestrel insertion and 6 to 7 weeks postinsertion. We measured antiretroviral concentrations pre and postetonogestrel insertion, and compared etonogestrel concentrations between antiretroviral regimens. We considered a minimum serum etonogestrel concentration of 90 pg/mL adequate for ovulation suppression. RESULTS: We collected pharmacokinetic data for 74 postpartum women, 22 on ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, 26 on ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir, and 26 on efavirenz. The median serum concentrations of etonogestrel when co-administered were highest with etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir (604 pg/mL) and etonogestrel/ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir (428 pg/mL), and lowest with etonogestrel/efavirenz (125 pg/mL); p < 0.001. Minimum concentration (Cmin) of ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were lower after etonogestrel implant insertion, but overall exposure, predose concentrations, clearance, and half-lives were unchanged. We found no significant change in efavirenz exposure after etonogestrel insertion. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike efavirenz, ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir were not associated with significant decreases in etonogestrel concentrations. Efavirenz was associated with a significant decrease in etonogestrel concentrations. IMPLICATIONS: The findings demonstrate no interactions between etonogestrel and ritonavir-boosted-lopinavir or ritonavir-boosted-atazanavir, but confirm the decreased efficacy of etonogestrel with efavirenz-based antiretrovirals. This information should be used to counsel women with HIV who desire long-acting reversible contraceptives.
Authors: Rena C Patel; Randy M Stalter; Katherine K Thomas; Bani Tamraz; Steven W Blue; David W Erikson; Christina J Kim; Edward J Kelly; Kavita Nanda; Athena P Kourtis; Jairam R Lingappa; Nelly Mugo; Jared M Baeten; Kimberly K Scarsi Journal: AIDS Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Kimberly K Scarsi; Yoninah S Cramer; Susan L Rosenkranz; Francesca Aweeka; Baiba Berzins; Robert W Coombs; Kristine Coughlin; Laura E Moran; Carmen D Zorrilla; Victor Akelo; Mariam Aziz; Ruth K Friedman; David Gingrich; Shobha Swaminathan; Catherine Godfrey; Susan E Cohn Journal: Lancet HIV Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 12.767
Authors: Rena C Patel; Maricianah Onono; Monica Gandhi; Cinthia Blat; Jill Hagey; Starley B Shade; Eric Vittinghoff; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Sara J Newmann; Craig R Cohen Journal: Lancet HIV Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 12.767