| Literature DB >> 35054243 |
Alessandro Lazzaro1, Elio Gentilini Cacciola1, Cristian Borrazzo1, Giuseppe Pietro Innocenti1, Eugenio Nelson Cavallari1, Ivano Mezzaroma2, Mario Falciano1, Caterina Fimiani1, Claudio Maria Mastroianni1, Giancarlo Ceccarelli1, Gabriella d'Ettorre1.
Abstract
Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (BIC/FTC/TAF) is a recommended once-daily single tablet regimen for the treatment of people living with HIV-1 (PLWH). We aimed to assess efficacy, safety and tolerability of BIC/FTC/TAF among PLWH, with a specific focus on people older than 55 years. Thus, we recruited an observational retrospective real-life cohort including all PLWH who underwent a therapeutic switch to BIC/FTC/TAF, independently from the provenience treatment regimen. After 48 weeks of follow-up, 147 PLWH were included and 93 were older than 55 years. PLWH with HIV-RNA < 37 copies/mL increased from 140 to 146 (p < 0.033). Among the overall population, we observed an increase in CD4+ T cells count by 30.1% (p-value < 0.001), in CD8+ T cells count by 7.1% (p-value = 0.004) and in CD4+/CD8+ ratio by 21.5% (p-value < 0.001). Lipidic profile was characterized by decreasing total cholesterol/HDL ratio by 8% (p-value < 0.001) and LDL by 6.8% (p-value = 0.007). Total body weight increased by 1.8% (p-value = 0.014) and BMI by 4.2% (p-value < 0.001), even remaining within the healthy range. Hepatic and renal profile were not altered by the switch, nor were adverse events and/or discontinuations events detected. In conclusion, BIC/FTC/TAF is effective, safe and well tolerated in real life and among PLWH older than 55.Entities:
Keywords: BIC/FTC/TAF; HAART; HIV-1; antiretroviral; bictegravir; efficacy; real-life; safety; switch
Year: 2021 PMID: 35054243 PMCID: PMC8774414 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12010076
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4418
Demographics of overall and over 55 years old population.
| Over 55 Years | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| m or # | IQR or % | m or # | IQR or % | |
| 57 | 49–61 | 60 | 57–64 | |
| 104 | 70.7% | 69 | 74.2% | |
| 98 | 66.7% | 59 | 63.4% | |
| 16 | 10–22 | 19 | 13–25 | |
| 37 | 37–48 | 37 | 37–48 | |
| 46 | 31.3% | 34 | 36.6% | |
| 12 | 8.2% | 8 | 8.6% | |
| 16 | 10.9% | 13 | 14% | |
|
| ||||
| >=1 | 87 | 59.2% | 64 | 68.8% |
| How many | 1 | 0–1 | 1 | 0–2 |
| Osteopenia | 35 | 23.8% | 24 | 25.8% |
| Ostoporosis | 25 | 17% | 22 | 23.7% |
| Type 2 Diabetes | 12 | 8.2% | 10 | 10.8% |
| Hypertension | 31 | 21.1% | 23 | 24.7% |
| Cardiovascular disease | 12 | 8.2% | 11 | 11.8% |
| 39 | 20–50 | 39 | 19–50 | |
|
| ||||
| >=1 | 57 | 38.8% | 43 | 46.2% |
| >=2 | 32 | 21.8% | 28 | 30.% |
|
| ||||
| INSTI | 23 | 15.6% | 16 | 17.2% |
| NNRTI | 20 | 13.6% | 10 | 10.8% |
| PI | 97 | 66% | 63 | 67.7% |
| PI + INSTI | 7 | 4.8% | 4 | 4.3% |
| TDF-based backbone | 94 | 63.9% | 62 | 66.7% |
| TAF-based backbone | 33 | 22.4% | 19 | 20.4% |
| ABC-based backcone | 5 | 3.4% | 2 | 2.2% |
| Dual therapy | 11 | 7.5% | 8 | 8.6% |
|
| ||||
| Adherence | 3 | 2% | 3 | 3.2% |
| Adverse events | 1 | 0.7% | 1 | 1.1% |
| Pro-active | 14 | 9.5% | 6 | 6.5% |
| Simplification | 95 | 64.6% | 62 | 66.7% |
| Toxicity | 34 | 23.1% | 21 | 22.6% |
m: median; #: absolute count; IQR: interquartile range; %: percentage; cp: copies.
Longitudinal analysis showing immunologic and metabolic profile changes from baseline to week 48. eGFR-CKD-EPI: glomerular filtrate rate estimated by CKD-EPI formula; IQR: Interquartile range.
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 584 | 454–746 | 767 | 590–1033 | 184 | 73–286 | 30.1 | 12.2–56.2 |
| |
| 750 | 580–1002 | 850 | 651–1032 | 60 | −50–150 | 7.1 | −6.8–25.7 |
| |
|
| 0.7 | 0.6–0.83 | 0.9 | 0.8–1 | 0.15 | 0.04–0.3 | 21.5 | 5.3–43.9 |
|
| 190 | 168–212 | 178 | 155–202 | −14 | −24–3 | −6.9 | −13.2–1.5 |
| |
| 108 | 88–133 | 100 | 84–131 | −7 | −17–7 | −6.8 | −15.6–8 |
| |
| 49 | 41–60 | 50 | 44–62 | 2 | −5–8 | 4.4 | −8.9–20.2 |
| |
|
| 3.77 | 3.12–4.71 | 3.40 | 2.91–4.19 | −0.29 | −0.92–0.19 | −8 | −22.7–6 |
|
| 21 | 17–24 | 20 | 16–23 | 0 | −4–2 | −2.2 | −18.2–14.3 | 0.129 | |
| 21 | 16–26 | 20 | 16–25 | −1 | −4–2 | −5 | −18.8–12.5 | 0.143 | |
| 77 | 69–83 | 79 | 71–85 | 1 | 0–3 | 1.8 | 0–3.9 |
| |
|
| 22 | 20–24 | 22 | 21–24 | 1 | 0–1.3 | 4.2 | 0–7 |
|
| 0.93 | 0.84–1.04 | 1 | 0.84–1.12 | 0.01 | −0.01–0.08 | 0.8 | −0.9–7.8 |
| |
| 86 | 76–96 | 86 | 72–95 | 0 | −5–5 | 0 | −5.6–5.8 | 0.784 | |
| 95 | 95–99 | 99 | 99–99 | 4 | 0–4 | 4.2 | 0–4.2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 585 | 462–728 | 762 | 589–956 | 176 | 52–264 | 28.3 | 9.1–51.9 |
| |
| 750 | 595–1000 | 850 | 677–1000 | 56 | −54–140 | 7.9 | −6.3–24.3 |
| |
|
| 0.7 | 0.6–0.82 | 0.9 | 0.8–1 | 0.14 | 0.01–0.3 | 22.2 | 1.1–46 |
|
| 191 | 169–214 | 180 | 156–203 | −14 | −24–0 | −6.9 | −13–0 |
| |
| 110 | 88–134 | 103 | 84–134 | −7 | −17.5–7.5 | −6.7 | −15.5–7.1 |
| |
| 46 | 40–57 | 50 | 43–61 | 3 | −5–8 | 6.8 | −9.1–22.4 |
| |
|
| 3.85 | 3.37–4.74 | 3.48 | 2.93–4.24 | −0.38 | −1.01–0.17 | −8.6 | −24.8–5.5 |
|
| 21 | 18–24 | 20 | 17–23 | −1 | −4–2 | −5.8 | −18.4–14.5 | 0.149 | |
| 21 | 16–25 | 20 | 16–25 | −1 | −4–2 | −5.9 | −16–9.5 | 0.139 | |
| 77 | 69–86 | 78 | 71–88 | 1 | 0–3 | 1.9 | 0–3.5 | 0.063 | |
|
| 22 | 21–24 | 22 | 21–23.25 | 0 | 0–1 | 0 | 0–5.6 |
|
| 0.9 | 0.81–1.01 | 0.99 | 0.82–1.11 | 0 | −0.02–0.08 | 0 | −2–8.2 | 0.073 | |
| 83 | 74–91 | 82 | 72–91 | 0 | −5–4 | 0 | −6.3–4.9 | 0.737 | |
| 95 | 95−99 | 99 | 99–99 | 4 | 0–4 | 4.2 | 0–4.2 |
| |
Figure 1Immunovirological changes (%) from baseline: Plot report differences in immunovirological profile comparing baseline with week 48 in (a) overall patients and (b) >55 years old population. Ranked mean relative difference for each marker. Vertical bars indicate the IQR. The same axis value ranges were used in each case for ease of comparison.