Unboosted atazanavir-based therapy maintains control of HIV type-1 replication as effectively as a ritonavir-boosted regimen

Background Triple combination therapy based on a ritonavir (RTV)-boosted protease inhibitor plus two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) has improved outcomes in HIV type-1 (HIV-1)-infected patients. For patients unable to tolerate these regimens, alternative therapeutic approaches are needed. Methods We report a comparative, open-label study in treatment-naive patients who underwent initial induction treatment with a triple combination including RTV-boosted atazanavir (ATV; 300/100 mg once daily). Patients who achieved an HIV-1 viral load <50 copies/ml after the induction period were then randomized in the maintenance phase either to continue on current treatment or to switch to unboosted ATV 400 mg once daily (plus two NRTIs unchanged). Results A total of 252 patients entered the induction phase, of whom 172 were eligible for randomization in the maintenance phase (ATV/RTV n=85 and ATV n=87). The unboosted ATV regimen demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to the ATV/RTV regimen with 78% and 75% of patients, respectively, maintaining virological suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml) up to week 48 after randomization (difference estimate 2.9, 95% confidence interval -9.8–15.5). Time to virological failure and change from the end of the induction phase in mean CD4+ T-cell counts were also similar between the treatment arms. Although both regimens were well-tolerated, unboosted ATV was associated with fewer adverse events, fewer total bilirubin abnormalities and an improved lipid profile compared with ATV/RTV. Conclusions An HIV-1 combined treatment regimen based on unboosted ATV is a feasible treatment option for patients with established virological control who are unable to tolerate triple combination therapy including ATV/RTV.

[1]  B. Clotet,et al.  Long-term efficacy and safety of Raltegravir combined with optimized background therapy in treatment-experienced patients with drug-resistant HIV infection: week 96 results of the BENCHMRK 1 and 2 Phase III trials. , 2010, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[2]  V. Soriano,et al.  New therapeutic strategies for raltegravir. , 2010, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[3]  P. Reiss,et al.  Abacavir and cardiovascular risk , 2010, Current opinion in infectious diseases.

[4]  F. Raffi,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of an NRTI-Sparing Dual Regimen of Raltegravir and Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitor in a Triple Antiretroviral Class-Experienced Population , 2009, HIV clinical trials.

[5]  S. Weise,et al.  Effects of switching from lopinavir/ritonavir to atazanavir/ritonavir on muscle glucose uptake and visceral fat in HIV-infected patients , 2009, AIDS.

[6]  P. Reiss,et al.  Zidovudine/Lamivudine for HIV-1 Infection Contributes to Limb Fat Loss , 2009, PloS one.

[7]  D. Podzamczer,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Switching From Boosted Lopinavir to Boosted Atazanavir in Patients With Virological Suppression Receiving a LPV/r-Containing HAART: The ATAZIP Study , 2009, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[8]  J. Lundgren Use of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and risk of myocardial infarction in HIV-infected patients , 2008, AIDS.

[9]  J. Molina,et al.  Once-daily atazanavir/ritonavir versus twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir, each in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine, for management of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients: 48 week efficacy and safety results of the CASTLE study , 2008, The Lancet.

[10]  Amalio Telenti,et al.  Antiretroviral Treatment of Adult HIV Infection2010 Recommendations of the International AIDS Society–USA Panel , 2010 .

[11]  Peter Reiss,et al.  Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2008 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel. , 2008, JAMA.

[12]  M. King,et al.  A 96-week comparison of lopinavir-ritonavir combination therapy followed by lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy versus efavirenz combination therapy. , 2008, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[13]  J. Hammond,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Atazanavir, With or Without Ritonavir, as Part of Once-Daily Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Regimens in Antiretroviral-Naive Patients , 2008, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[14]  V. Soriano,et al.  Efficacy and safety of replacing lopinavir with atazanavir in HIV-infected patients with undetectable plasma viraemia: final results of the SLOAT trial. , 2007, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[15]  C. Leen,et al.  Efficacy and safety of atazanavir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy in patients with virologic suppression switched from a stable, boosted or unboosted protease inhibitor treatment regimen: the SWAN Study (AI424-097) 48-week results. , 2007, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[16]  I. Williams,et al.  A Virological Benefit from an Induction/Maintenance Strategy: The Forte Trial , 2007, Antiviral therapy.

[17]  D. Podzamczer,et al.  A Once-Daily Lopinavir/Ritonavir-Based Regimen Provides Noninferior Antiviral Activity Compared With a Twice-Daily Regimen , 2006, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[18]  M. Johnson,et al.  96-week comparison of once-daily atazanavir/ritonavir and twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir in patients with multiple virologic failures , 2006, AIDS.

[19]  Joel E Gallant,et al.  Tenofovir DF, emtricitabine, and efavirenz vs. zidovudine, lamivudine, and efavirenz for HIV. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Switching to Atazanavir Improves Metabolic Disorders in Antiretroviral-Experienced Patients With Severe Hyperlipidemia , 2005, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[21]  Urso FORTE. Urso HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION , 2007 .

[22]  S. Grundy,et al.  National Cholesterol Education Program Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program ( NCEP ) Expert Panel on Detection , Evaluation , and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults ( Adult Treatment Panel III ) Final Report , 2022 .