Interindividual variability of once-daily ritonavir boosted saquinavir pharmacokinetics in Thai and UK patients

OBJECTIVES: Differential exposure to saquinavir/ritonavir may lead to therapy failure. The objective was to identify factors that influence variability of saquinavir/ritonavir plasma concentrations. METHODS: Saquinavir/ritonavir data, dosed as 1600/100 mg once daily, from three separate pharmacokinetic studies, in 45 patients from Thailand and the UK, were pooled. Pharmacokinetic parameters were based on non-compartmental analysis. Univariate analysis was performed with saquinavir as the dependent variable, and ritonavir area under the curve (AUC), gender, body weight, body mass index (BMI) and study site as independent variables. Variables with a P value <0.10 were included in a multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Higher saquinavir AUCs, maximum concentrations (Cmax) and minimum concentrations (Cmin) were seen in Thai patients than in UK patients. Univariate analysis showed associations between body weight, gender, study site and ritonavir AUC and saquinavir AUC (P < 0.05), whereas BMI (P = 0.13) did not. In the multivariate analysis, ritonavir AUC (P = 0.0001) and study site (P = 0.0021) were significantly related to saquinavir AUC (R2 = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: The ritonavir AUC and study site appeared to be related to exposure of saquinavir. Study site should be viewed as the total of country- and study-specific differences--such as differences in lifestyle, environment, genetic background and dietary composition--between the analysed studies.     

Exploratory study comparing the metabolic toxicities of a lopinavir/ritonavir plus saquinavir dual protease inhibitor regimen versus a lopinavir/ritonavir plus zidovudine/lamivudine nucleoside regimen

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety, efficacy and metabolic toxicity of lopinavir/ritonavir + saquinavir or zidovudine/lamivudine and evaluate the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir + saquinavir. METHODS: HIV-1-infected, antiretroviral-naive subjects were randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg) twice daily + saquinavir (800 mg) or zidovudine/lamivudine (150/300 mg) in a Phase II, 48 week study. Subjects receiving lopinavir/ritonavir + zidovudine/lamivudine initiated escalating doses of saquinavir (400, 600 and 800 mg) weekly for 3 weeks. RESULTS: By intent-to-treat (non-completer = failure) analysis, 10/16 (63%) lopinavir/ritonavir + saquinavir-treated and 7/14 (50%) lopinavir/ritonavir + zidovudine/lamivudine-treated subjects achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (P=0.713) at week 48. Safety, tolerability, metabolic changes and truncal fat increases were similar between groups. Small decreases in the lower extremity fat in the zidovudine/lamivudine group (-6%) and a statistically significant increase in the lower extremity fat in the saquinavir group (+19%) were observed. Lopinavir/ritonavir co-administered with saquinavir 600 or 800 mg twice daily produced saquinavir concentrations similar to those previously reported for saquinavir/ritonavir 1000/100 mg twice daily. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment regimens had similar efficacy and tolerability. Metabolic parameters suggested lipoatrophy in the zidovudine/lamivudine treatment group. Saquinavir 600 and 800 mg twice daily produced concentrations similar to those previously reported for saquinavir/ritonavir 1000/100 mg twice daily.     

Safety and pharmacokinetics of once-daily regimens of soft-gel capsule saquinavir plus minidose ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus-negative adults

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) protease inhibitors have dramatically improved treatment options for HIV infection, but frequent dosing may impact adherence to highly active antiretroviral treatment regimens (HAART). Previous studies demonstrated that combined therapy with ritonavir and saquinavir allows a decrease in frequency of saquinavir dosing to twice daily. In this study, we evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of combining once-daily doses of the soft-gel capsule (SGC) formulation of saquinavir (saquinavir-SGC) and minidose ritonavir. Forty-four healthy HIV-negative volunteers were randomized into groups receiving once-daily doses of saquinavir-SGC (1,200 to 1,800 mg) plus ritonavir (100 to 200 mg) or a control group receiving only saquinavir-SGC (1,200 mg) three times daily. Saquinavir-SGC alone and saquinavir-SGC-ritonavir combinations were generally well tolerated, and there were no safety concerns. Addition of ritonavir (100 mg) to saquinavir-SGC (1,200 to 1,800 mg/day) increased the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) for saquinavir severalfold, and the intersubject peak concentration in plasma and AUC variability were reduced compared to those achieved with saquinavir-SGC alone (3,600 mg/day), while trough saquinavir levels (24 h post-dose) were substantially higher than the 90% inhibitory concentration calculated from HIV-1 clinical isolates. Neither increasing the saquinavir-SGC dose to higher than 1,600 mg nor increasing ritonavir from 100 to 200 mg appeared to further enhance the AUC. These results suggest that an all once-daily HAART regimen, utilizing saquinavir-SGC plus a more tolerable low dose of ritonavir, may be feasible. Studies of once-daily saquinavir-SGC (1,600 mg) in combination with ritonavir (100 mg) in HIV-infected patients are underway.     

Pharmacokinetics and safety of saquinavir/ritonavir and omeprazole in HIV-infected subjects

We investigated the pharmacokinetics and safety of saquinavir/ritonavir when administered with omeprazole simultaneously and 2 h apart to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) subjects. Saquinavir/ritonavir 12-h pharmacokinetics was assessed with and without omeprazole 40 mg. Subjects were randomized to group A (saquinavir/ritonavir and omeprazole simultaneously/2 h apart) or group B (saquinavir/ritonavir and omeprazole 2 h apart/simultaneously). Saquinavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetics was assessed on days 1, 8, and 22. Within-subject changes were evaluated by geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence interval (CI). Twelve subjects completed the study. GM (90% CI) for saquinavir area under the curve (AUC)(0-12) (ng h/ml), trough concentration (C(trough)) (ng/ml), and maximum concentration (C(max)) (ng/ml) were 14,698 (13,242-20,636), 433 (368-758), 2,513 (2,243-3,329) without omeprazole; 22,646 (18,536-131,861), 750 (619-1,280), 3,890 (3,223-5,133) with omeprazole simultaneously; and 24,549 (20,884-38,894), 851 (720-1,782), 4,141 (3,554-5,992) with omeprazole 2 h earlier. Simultaneous administration of omeprazole significantly increased saquinavir AUC(0-12), C(trough), and C(max) by 54, 73, and 55%, whereas staggered administration by 67, 97, and 65%. No grade 3/4 toxicity or lab abnormalities were observed. In the presence of omeprazole, saquinavir plasma exposure is significantly increased in HIV-infected subjects whether administered simultaneously or 2 h apart.     

Pharmacokinetics of once-daily saquinavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected subjects: comparison with the standard twice-daily regimen

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the steady-state pharmacokinetics and safety of two once-daily saquinavir/ritonavir (SQV/RTV) regimens, 1600/100 and 2000/100 mg, in HIV-positive patients. METHODS: Eighteen HIV-infected adults treated with the standard twice-daily SQV/RTV 1000/100 mg regimen were enrolled in this open-label, two-phase, crossover pharmacokinetic study. The steady-state pharmacokinetics of SQV administered with 100 mg RTV were investigated following once-daily doses of 1600 mg or 2000 mg or a twice-daily dose of 1000 mg. Plasma drug concentrations were determined by high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental model. RESULTS: Compared with SQV 1000 mg twice daily, the Cmax of SQV following a 1600 mg and 2000 mg dose increased in a dose-proportional manner [geometric mean (95% CI) 1915 (1656-2850) ng/ml for 1000 mg, 2782 (2249-4330) ng/ml for 1600 mg and 4179 (3429-6105) ng/ml for 2000 mg doses, respectively]. SQV Ctrough values were 539 (453-1011), 106 (76-223) and 231 (75-822) ng/ml, respectively. A SQV Ctrough value greater than 100 ng/ml was achieved in all subjects on the twice-daily regimen, in 9/18 (50%) subjects on the 1600/100 mg once-daily regimen, and in 14/17 (82%) subjects on the 2000/100 mg once-daily regimen. The once-daily regimens were well tolerated, with mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal symptoms being the only events reported by a small number of patients. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of once-daily SQV/RTV 2000/100 mg in HIV-infected subjects. Our findings suggest that this regimen may be an alternative to twice-daily 1000/100 mg doses and should be further evaluated in efficacy studies. The data indicate that most patients (14/17) on once-daily 2000/100 mg achieve trough concentrations above target values (determined for HIV wild-type) for efficacy of SQV with the use of just 100 mg RTV/day and with good tolerability.     

Pharmacokinetic interaction between rifampicin and the once-daily combination of saquinavir and low-dose ritonavir in HIV-infected patients with tuberculosis

OBJECTIVES: To assess plasma steady-state pharmacokinetics (PK) of rifampicin, isoniazid, saquinavir and ritonavir in HIV and tuberculosis (TB) co-infected patients, and investigate potential interactions between TB drugs and protease inhibitors (PIs). METHODS: Open-label, single-arm, sequential PK study including 22 patients with HIV infection and TB. During the first 2 months, patients received rifampicin, isoniazid and pyrazinamide, with or without ethambutol (first PK study, n = 22). Then patients stopped pyrazinamide and ethambutol and started once-daily antiretroviral therapy (ART) with didanosine, lamivudine, ritonavir (200 mg) and saquinavir (1600 mg) (second PK study, n = 18). Patients stopped all TB drugs after 9 months continuing the same ART (third PK study, n = 15). Differences between TB drug parameters in the first and second PK studies, and between PI parameters in the second and third PK studies were used to assess interactions. RESULTS: Rifampicin and isoniazid pharmacokinetics did not change substantially with saquinavir and ritonavir. A significant 39.5%, 34.9% and 48.7% reduction in median saquinavir AUC(0-24), C(max) and C(trough), respectively, was seen with rifampicin and isoniazid. Ritonavir AUC(0-24), C(max) and C(trough) decreased 42.5%, 49.6% and 64.3%, respectively, with rifampicin and isoniazid. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant interaction between saquinavir, ritonavir and rifampicin, with reduction in median plasma concentrations of saquinavir and ritonavir. Saquinavir should be given with caution in patients receiving rifampicin. Twice-daily dosing or higher saquinavir doses in once-daily administration should be tested to obtain more appropriate plasma levels.     

Efficacy and safety of indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily plus two nucleoside analogues in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients with CD4+ T-cell counts <200 cells/mm3: 96-week outcomes

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg plus stavudine and lamivudine twice daily in antiretroviral-therapy-naive Thai HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, non-randomized single arm study. Antiretroviral-naive patients (n=80) with CD4+ cell count < 200 x 10(6)/l were started on stavudine and lamivudine plus indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg twice daily. CD4+ cell count and HIV RNA were determined at week 0, 12, 24, 48 and 96. HIV RNA was measured to a level of 50 copies/ml by RT-PCR assay. Primary analysis was statistically performed as intent to treat. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with plasma HIV RNA below 50 copies/ml at week 96. RESULT: Eighty antiretroviral-therapy-naive patients with median CD4+ cell count 19 x 10(6)/l (range: 2 - 197 x 10(6)/l) and median baseline plasma HIV RNA of 174,000 copies/ml (range 16,800-750,000 copies/ml) were enrolled. In the intent-to-treat analysis at week 96, the proportion of patients with HIV RNA of <50 copies/ml was 68.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 68.3-69.3), whereas it was 88.7% (95% CI: 88.1-89.3) in the on-treatment analysis at week 96. The regimen was well tolerated. Hyperglycaemia, hypercholesterolaemia and hypertriglyceridaemia were found in 8.3, 33.3 and 37.0% of the patients, respectively. Treatment was stopped in 18 patients; two from intolerance, two switched therapy, four as a result of serious adverse event-related death, and ten were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that indinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg plus stavudine and lamivudine twice daily, the least expensive boosted protease inhibitor, appears to be effective and safe up to 96 weeks despite high baseline viraemia and low CD4+ cell count in antiretroviral-naive patients.