SOLO: 48-week efficacy and safety comparison of once-daily fosamprenavir /ritonavir versus twice-daily nelfinavir in naive HIV-1-infected patients

Objective: To compare the magnitude and durability of the antiviral response to fosamprenavir (FPV) plus ritonavir (RTV) once-daily (FPV/r QD) with nelfinavir twice-daily (NFV BID), each administered with abacavir and lamivudine twice-daily. Methods: An international, phase III, randomized, open-label study in antiretroviral therapy-naive, HIV-infected adults. Results: Patients with advanced HIV disease received FPV/r QD (n = 322) or NFV BID (n = 327). At week 48, 69% of patients in the FPV/r QD group and 68% in the NFV BID group had plasma HIV-1 RNA (vRNA) < 400 copies/ml, whereas 55% of patients in the FPV/r QD group and 53% in the NFV BID group had vRNA < 50 copies/ml (intent to treat, rebound/discontinuation = failure). More patients in the NFV BID group (17%) experienced virological failure than in the FPV/r QD group (7%). Efficacy of FPV/r QD was maintained in patients with CD4+ cell counts < 50 × 106 cells/l or vRNA ⩾ 100 000 copies/ml at entry. At week 48, median CD4+ cell counts were increased to 203 × 106 cells/l (FPV/r QD group) and 207 × 106 cells/l (NFV BID group). Both regimens were generally well tolerated. Diarrhea was more common on NFV BID than on FPV/r QD (16 versus 9%; P = 0.008). Fasting lipid profile results were generally favorable in both treatment arms. FPV/r QD maintained plasma amprenavir (APV) trough concentrations above the mean phenotypic drug-susceptibility (IC50) for wild-type virus for APV. Conclusion: As a first choice protease inhibitor with a low daily pill burden, FPV/r QD was well tolerated and provided potent, durable antiviral suppression.

[1]  B. Sadler,et al.  Pharmacokinetics and safety of amprenavir and ritonavir following multiple-dose, co-administration to healthy volunteers , 2001, AIDS.

[2]  Victor De Gruttola,et al.  Comparison of sequential three-drug regimens as initial therapy for HIV-1 infection. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  R D Moore,et al.  Association of initial CD4 cell count and viral load with response to highly active antiretroviral therapy. , 2000, JAMA.

[4]  J. Schapiro,et al.  Importance of protease inhibitor plasma levels in HIV-infected patients treated with genotypic-guided therapy: pharmacological data from the Viradapt Study , 2000, AIDS.

[5]  G. Gray,et al.  The NEAT Study: A 48-Week Open-Label Study to Compare the Antiviral Efficacy and Safety of GW433908 Versus Nelfinavir in Antiretroviral Therapy–Naive HIV-1-Infected Patients , 2004, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[6]  Christos J. Petropoulos,et al.  A Novel Phenotypic Drug Susceptibility Assay for Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 , 2000, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[7]  O. Naderer,et al.  Hypersensitivity reactions during therapy with the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor abacavir. , 2001, Clinical therapeutics.

[8]  G. Beall,et al.  Lopinavir-ritonavir versus nelfinavir for the initial treatment of HIV infection. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  俊郎 黒木,et al.  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) ホームページの活用法 , 2002 .

[10]  L. Bekker,et al.  Antiretroviral therapy in a community clinic--early lessons from a pilot project. , 2003, South African medical journal = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir geneeskunde.

[11]  D. Ho,et al.  Ordered accumulation of mutations in HIV protease confers resistance to ritonavir , 1996, Nature Medicine.

[12]  C. Hendrix,et al.  Pharmacokinetics and safety of GW433908 and ritonavir, with and without efavirenz, in healthy volunteers , 2004, AIDS.

[13]  H. Stellbrink,et al.  Six-Week Randomized Controlled Trial To Compare the Tolerabilities, Pharmacokinetics, and Antiviral Activities of GW433908 and Amprenavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1-Infected Patients , 2004, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[14]  Michael S Saag,et al.  Antiretroviral treatment for adult HIV infection in 2002: updated recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA Panel. , 2002, JAMA.

[15]  B. Sadler,et al.  Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulations of Interaction of Amprenavir and Ritonavir , 2002, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[16]  J. Mckenney,et al.  Executive Summary of The 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). , 2001, JAMA.

[17]  R Weber,et al.  HIV viral load response to antiretroviral therapy according to the baseline CD4 cell count and viral load. , 2001, JAMA.

[18]  K. Squires,et al.  Results of a Phase 2 Clinical Trial at 48 Weeks (AI424-007): A Dose-Ranging, Safety, and Efficacy Comparative Trial of Atazanavir at Three Doses in Combination with Didanosine and Stavudine in Antiretroviral-Naive Subjects , 2003, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[19]  D. Roter,et al.  Patient adherence to HIV medication regimens: a review of published and abstract reports. , 2002, Patient education and counseling.

[20]  Jonathan AC Sterne,et al.  Prognosis of HIV-1-infected patients starting highly active antiretroviral therapy: a collaborative analysis of prospective studies , 2002, The Lancet.