Long‐term effectiveness of recommended boosted protease inhibitor‐based antiretroviral therapy in Europe

Objectives

The aim of the study was to evaluate the long‐term response to antiretroviral treatment (ART) based on atazanavir/ritonavir (ATZ/r)‐, darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r)‐, and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)‐containing regimens.

Methods

Data were analysed for 5678 EuroSIDA‐enrolled patients starting a DRV/r‐, ATZ/r‐ or LPV/r‐containing regimen between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2013. Separate analyses were performed for the following subgroups of patients: (1) ART‐naïve subjects (8%) at ritonavir‐boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) initiation; (2) ART‐experienced individuals (44%) initiating the new PI/r with a viral load (VL) ≤500 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL; and (3) ART‐experienced patients (48%) initiating the new PI/r with a VL >500 copies/mL. Virological failure (VF) was defined as two consecutive VL measurements >200 copies/mL ≥24 weeks after PI/r initiation. Kaplan–Meier and multivariable Cox models were used to compare risks of failure by PI/r‐based regimen. The main analysis was performed with intention‐to‐treat (ITT) ignoring treatment switches.

Results

The time to VF favoured DRV/r over ATZ/r, and both were superior to LPV/r (log‐rank test; P < 0.02) in all analyses. Nevertheless, the risk of VF in ART‐naïve patients was similar regardless of the PI/r initiated after controlling for potential confounders. The risk of VF in both treatment‐experienced groups was lower for DRV/r than for ATZ/r, which, in turn, was lower than for LPV/r‐based ART.

Conclusions

Although confounding by indication and calendar year cannot be completely ruled out, in ART‐experienced subjects the long‐term effectiveness of DRV/r‐containing regimens appears to be greater than that of ATZ/r and LPV/r.

     

Deferasirox treatment of iron-overloaded chelation-naïve and prechelated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes in medical practice: results from the observational studies eXtend and eXjange

EXtend and eXjange were prospective, 1‐yr, non‐interventional, observational, multicentre studies that investigated deferasirox, a once‐daily oral iron chelator, in iron‐overloaded chelation‐naïve and prechelated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), respectively, treated in the daily‐routine setting of office‐based physicians. No inclusion or exclusion criteria or additional monitoring procedures were applied. Deferasirox was administered as recommended in the European Summary of Product Characteristics. Haematological parameters and adverse events (AEs) were collected at two‐monthly intervals. Data from 123 chelation‐naïve patients with MDS (mean age 70.4 yrs) with median baseline serum ferritin level of 2679 (range 184–16 500) ng/mL, and 44 prechelated patients with MDS (mean age 69.6 yrs) with median baseline serum ferritin level of 2442 (range 521–8565) ng/mL, were assessed. The mean prescribed daily dose of deferasirox at the first visit was 15.7 and 18.7 mg/kg/d, respectively. Treatment with deferasirox produced a significant reduction in median serum ferritin levels in chelation‐naïve patients with MDS from 2679 to 2000 ng/mL (P = 0.0002) and a pronounced decrease in prechelated patients with MDS from 2442 to 2077 ng/mL (P = 0.06). The most common drug‐related AEs were gastrointestinal, increased serum creatinine levels and rash. These studies demonstrate that deferasirox used in physicians’ medical practices is effective in managing iron burden in transfusion‐dependent patients with MDS.     

Lipid profiles for nevirapine vs. atazanavir/ritonavir, both combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine over 48 weeks, in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients (the ARTEN study)

Objectives

Dyslipidaemic effects of antiretrovirals (ARVs) may contribute to increased cardiovascular risk (CR) in HIV‐1‐infected patients. The ARTEN (atazanavir/ritonavir on a background of tenofovir and emtricitabine vs. nevirapine on the same background, in naïve HIV‐1‐infected patients) study compared prospectively ritonavir‐boosted atazanavir (ATZ/r) 300 mg/100 mg once daily (qd) with immediate release nevirapine (NVP) 200 mg twice daily or 400 mg qd, each combined with fixed‐dose tenofovir 300 mg/emtricitabine 200 mg qd in 569 ARV‐naïve HIV‐1‐infected patients. Lipid profiles and CR from baseline to week 48 are reported.

Methods

Changes from baseline to week 48 in fasting plasma levels of total cholesterol (TC), high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐c), low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐c), TC:HDL‐c ratio, apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and total triglycerides (TG) were determined. The Framingham algorithm was used to estimate CR. Analysis was by intention‐to‐treat (ITT) with last observation carried forward (LOCF) for missing data.

Results

At week 48, NVP treatment resulted in significantly greater mean increases from baseline in TC (24.4 vs. 19.6 mg/dL; P=0.038), HDL‐c (9.7 vs. 3.9 mg/dL; P<0.0001), LDL‐c (15.0 vs. 10.4 mg/dL; P=0.011) and ApoA1 (0.18 vs. 0.08 g/L; P<0.0001) but not ApoB (0.02 vs. 0.02 g/L) compared with ATZ/r treatment. ATZ/r use was associated with higher mean TG increases (27.80 vs. 0.02 mg/dL; P=0.0001). Significantly greater mean decreases in TC:HDL‐c and ApoB/ApoA ratios were observed with NVP vs. ATZ/r (P=0.0001 and P=0.008, respectively). Framingham CR scores were low and comparable between the arms, with only a slight mean increase from baseline to week 48 of 0.70 for NVP and 0.80 for ATZ/r [difference ?0.069; 95% confidence interval (CI) ?0.61 to 0.46; P=0.80].

Conclusions

In ARV‐naïve patients with low CR at the outset, NVP showed a potentially less atherogenic lipid profile compared with ATZ/r.

     

Robust improvements in fasting and prandial measures of beta-cell function with vildagliptin in drug-naïve patients: analysis of pooled vildagliptin monotherapy database

Aim: To assess the effects of 24‐week treatment with vildagliptin on measures of β‐cell function in a broad spectrum of drug‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Methods: Data from all double‐blind, multicentre, randomized, placebo‐ or active‐controlled trials conducted in drug‐naïve patients with T2DM were pooled from all patients receiving monotherapy with vildagliptin (100 mg daily: 50 mg twice daily or 100 mg once daily, n = 1855) or placebo (n = 347). Fasting measures of β‐cell function [homeostasis model assessment of β‐cell function (HOMA‐B) and proinsulin : insulin ratio] were assessed in the overall pooled monotherapy population. Standard meal tests were performed at baseline and week 24 in a subset of patients, and effects of vildagliptin (100 mg daily, n = 227) on dynamic (meal test–derived) measures of β‐cell function [insulin secretion rate relative to glucose (ISR/G) and insulinogenic indices] were assessed relative to baseline and vs. placebo (n = 29). Results: In the overall population, vildagliptin significantly increased HOMA‐B both relative to baseline [adjusted mean change (AMΔ) = 10.3 ± 1.5] and vs. placebo (between‐treatment difference in AMΔ = 11.5 ± 4.5, p = 0.01) and significantly decreased the proinsulin : insulin ratio relative to baseline (AMΔ = ?0.05 ± 0.01) and vs. placebo (between‐treatment difference in AMΔ = ?0.09 ± 0.02, p < 0.001). Relative to baseline, vildagliptin monotherapy significantly increased all meal test–derived parameters, and ISR/G (between‐treatment difference in AMΔ = 9.8 ± 2.8 pmol/min/m²/mM, p < 0.001) and the insulinogenic index_{0–peak glucose} (between‐treatment difference in AMΔ = 0.24 ± 0.05 pmol/mmol, p = 0.045) were significantly increased vs. placebo. Conclusions: Vildagliptin monotherapy consistently produced robust improvements in both fasting and meal test–derived measures of β‐cell function across a broad spectrum of drug‐naïve patients with T2DM. All Phase III trials described (NCT 00099905, NCT 00099866, NCT 00099918, NCT 00101673, NCT 00101803 and NCT 00120536) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.     

Pharmacokinetics of saquinavir hard-gel/ritonavir and atazanavir when combined once daily in HIV Type 1-infected individuals administered different atazanavir doses

The pharmacokinetics and short-term safety of atazanavir 150 and 200 mg, when coadministered with saquinavir/ritonavir 1600/100 mg once daily, were evaluated. On day 1, atazanavir 150 mg once daily, was added to saquinavir/ritonavir regimens and sampling was performed to evaluate saquinavir, ritonavir, and atazanavir pharmacokinetics (day 11). Atazanavir was increased to 200 mg and pharmacokinetic assessment repeated (day 30). Geometric mean ratios (GMR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to compare saquinavir, ritonavir, and atazanavir pharmacokinetic parameters in the present study and for 14 of the subjects treated with saquinavir/ritonavir 1600/100 mg once daily without and with atazanavir 300 mg who participated in a previous trial. Geometric mean (GM) saquinavir AUC0-24, Ctrough, and Cmax were 30,589 and 32,312 ng . h/ml, 166 and 182 ng/ml, and 4267 and 4261 ng/ml when coadministered with atazanavir 150 and 200 mg (n = 18). On days 11 and 30, saquinavir and atazanavir Ctrough remained >100 ng/ml in 13/18, 14/18, 18/18, and 17/18 patients. Among the above mentioned 14 subjects, significant increases in saquinavir Ctrough (87%, 92%, 99%), Cmax (40%, 55%, 44%), and AUC0-24 (51%, 60%, 63%) were observed with atazanavir 300, 150, and 200 mg. Ritonavir AUC0-24 and Cmax were significantly increased with the addition of atazanavir 300 mg only. Atazanavir enhances saquinavir and ritonavir by a mechanism that requires elucidation. While saquinavir enhancement was apparently independent of atazanavir dose, atazanavir 300 mg produced an increase in ritonavir Cmax, which is not observed with lower atazanavir doses. Atazanavir-related hyperbilirubinemia was dose dependent. However, higher saquinavir and atazanavir exposure may be required to suppress HIV-resistant strain replication.     

Long‐term (96‐week) follow‐up of antiretroviral‐naïve HIV‐infected patients treated with first‐line lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy in the MONARK trial*

Background

The toxicities, cost and complexity of triple combinations warrant the search for other treatment options, such as boosted protease inhibitor (PI) monotherapy. MONotherapy AntiRetroviral Kaletra (MONARK) is the first randomized trial comparing lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy to triple combination therapy with zidovudine/lamivudine and lopinavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral‐naïve patients.

Methods

A total of 136 antiretroviral‐naïve patients, with a CD4 cell count above 100 cells/μL and a plasma HIV RNA below 100 000 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL, were randomized and dosed with either lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy (n=83) or lopinavir/ritonavir+zidovudine/lamivudine (n=53). We focus here on patients in the lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy arm followed to week 96. The intent‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis initially involved all patients randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy (n=83), and then focused on patients who had an HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48 (n=56).

Results

At week 96, 39 of 83 patients (47%) had HIV RNA <50 copies/mL, five of 83 had HIV RNA between 50 and 400 copies/mL, and three of 83 had HIV RNA >400 copies/mL. Focusing on the 56 patients with an HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at week 48, 38 of 56 patients (68%) had a sustained HIV RNA <50 copies/mL to week 96. To week 96, a total of 28 patients (34%) had discontinued the study treatment. In addition, the allocated treatment was changed for seven patients. PI‐associated resistance mutations were evident in five of 83 patients in the monotherapy arm from baseline to week 96.

Conclusion

By ITT analysis, 39 of the 83 patients initially randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy had HIV RNA <50 copies/mL at week 96. The occurrence in some patients of low‐level viraemia (50–500 copies/mL) may increase the risk of drug resistance. First‐line lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy cannot be systematically recommended.     

Randomized comparison of metabolic and renal effects of saquinavir/r or atazanavir/r plus tenofovir/emtricitabine in treatment-naïve HIV-1-infected patients

Objectives

The aim of the study was to compare the effects on lipids, body composition and renal function of once‐daily ritonavir‐boosted saquinavir (SQV/r) or atazanavir (ATV/r) in combination with tenofovir/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) over 48 weeks.

Methods

An investigator‐initiated, randomized, open‐label, multinational trial comparing SQV/r 2000/100 mg and ATV/r 300/100 mg once daily, both in combination with TDF/FTC, in 123 treatment‐naïve HIV‐1‐infected adults was carried out. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate noninferiority of SQV/r compared with ATV/r with respect to the change in fasting cholesterol after 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures were changes in metabolic abnormalities, body composition, renal function, and virological and immunological efficacy over 48 weeks. Patients who had used at least one dose of trial drug were included in the analysis.

Results

Data for 118 patients were analysed (57 patients on SQV/r and 61 on ATV/r). At week 24, changes in lipids were modest, without increases in triglycerides, including a significant rise in high‐density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and a nonsignificant decrease in the total:HDL cholesterol ratio in both arms with no significant difference between arms. Lipid changes at week 48 were similar to the changes observed up to week 24, with no significant change in the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index. Adipose tissue increased regardless of the regimen, particularly in the peripheral compartment and to a lesser extent in the central abdominal compartment, with an increase in adipose tissue reaching statistical significance in the ATV/r arm. A slight decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was observed in both arms during the first 24 weeks, with no progression thereafter. The immunological and virological responses were similar over the 48 weeks.

Conclusions

Combined with TDF/FTC, both SQV/r 2000/100 mg and ATV/r 300/100 mg had comparable modest effects on lipids, had little effect on glucose metabolism, conserved adipose tissue, and similarly reduced eGFR. The virological efficacy was similar.     

Safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir‐based direct‐acting antiviral regimens for hepatitis C virus genotype 6 in Southwest China: Real‐world experience of a retrospective study

Optional treatments for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 6 infection have not been extensively studied. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir (SOF)‐based direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs) for HCV GT6. We performed a retrospective study at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University in Southwest China from January 2016 to May 2017. Our study screened 130 treatment‐naïve patients with chronic HCV GT6 and without liver cirrhosis. A total of 60 HCV GT6 patients were ultimately enrolled. All patients received SOF‐based DAAs therapy, including SOF 400 mg plus daclatasvir (DCV) 60 mg daily or SOF 400 mg plus velpatasvir (VEL) 100 mg daily for 12 weeks. The sustained virological response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) was 100% (60/60) in treatment‐naïve patients with HCV GT6, including 100% (37/37) of patients receiving SOF plus DCV therapy and 100% (23/23) of patients receiving SOF plus VEL therapy. Measurements of liver stiffness were significantly decreased in patients at week 12 (P = 0.014) and week 24 (P < 0.001) of DAAs treatment compared to baseline values. The serum biomarker aspartate aminotransferase‐to‐platelet ratio index (APRI) and fibrosis‐4 score were also significantly reduced at week 12 and week 24 compared to before treatment (both P < 0.001). SOF‐based therapy was well‐tolerated, and no serious adverse events were reported. In conclusion, SOF plus DCV and SOF plus VEL were safe and achieved a high SVR12 rate for treatment‐naïve patients with HCV GT6 without liver cirrhosis.     

Metabolic Effects of Darunavir/Ritonavir Versus Atazanavir/Ritonavir in Treatment-Naive, HIV Type 1-Infected Subjects over 48 Weeks

Abstract We assessed metabolic changes for darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) once daily (qd) versus atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) qd with fixed-dose tenofovir/emtricitabine. This was a phase 4, multicenter, open-label, randomized exploratory study. Treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected adults received DRV/r 800/100?mg qd or ATV/r 300/100?mg qd, both with emtricitabine/tenofovir 200/300?mg qd. Primary end point: change in triglyceride levels from baseline to week 12. Secondary end points: week 12 and week 48 changes in lipid parameters, insulin sensitivity, inflammatory/coagulation/bacterial translocation biomarkers, viral load, CD4(+) cell count, and week 48 changes in adipose tissue distribution and subjects' perceptions of body changes. In the DRV/r arm, 32/34 and 29/34 subjects completed weeks 12 and 48, respectively; in the ATV/r arm, 30/31 and 25/31 subjects completed weeks 12 and 48, respectively. Small changes in lipid parameters from baseline to weeks 12 and 48 were observed in both arms. Differences were noted between arms in mean changes in total cholesterol (DRV/r, 20.3?mg/dl; ATV/r, 4.6?mg/dl) and apolipoprotein A1 (DRV/r, 10.7?mg/dl; ATV/r, -0.7?mg/dl) at week 12. At week 48, no clinically relevant differences between arms were noted for changes in any lipid parameter, fasting glucose, or insulin sensitivity. Biomarkers generally decreased and efficacy parameters improved in both arms over 48 weeks. Changes in adipose tissue were small and comparable between arms. Subjects' perceptions of body changes generally improved in both study arms. This first pilot comparison in HIV-1-infected subjects suggests that DRV/r has a metabolic profile similar to ATV/r over 48 weeks of treatment. Further randomized studies are warranted.     

Peginterferon alpha-2a (40 KD) plus ribavirin for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in Japanese patients

Background: The efficacy and safety of peginterferon alpha‐2a (40 KD) (peg‐IFNα‐2a) plus ribavirin has not been reported for Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C. The aim of this study was to evaluate this combination in treatment‐naïve patients and in non‐responders or relapsers to interferon monotherapy. Methods: Overall, 201 treatment‐naïve patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype‐1b were randomly assigned to 180 µg peg‐IFNα‐2a once‐weekly plus ribavirin 600–1000 mg/day or peg‐IFNα‐2a plus placebo for 48 weeks. Additionally, peg‐IFNα‐2a plus ribavirin was administered for 48 weeks to 100 non‐responders or relapsers (85% genotype‐1) to previous interferon monotherapy. Results: A sustained virological response (SVR) was attained among significantly more treatment‐naïve patients receiving combination therapy than monotherapy (61% vs 26%, P < 0.001). For patients with high baseline HCV RNA, the SVR rate was 59% with peg‐IFNα‐2a plus ribavirin versus 24% with peg‐IFNα‐2a monotherapy. Among non‐responders or relapsers to previous interferon monotherapy, 54% attained an SVR. Adverse events were generally mild, and discontinuations rates due to adverse events or laboratory abnormalities were low. Conclusion: In Japanese patients, peg‐IFNα‐2a plus ribavirin provided significant improvement in SVR rates compared with peg‐IFNα‐2a alone in treatment‐naïve patients, and was effective as re‐treatment for non‐responders or relapsers to previous treatment with interferon monotherapy.     

Comparison between clevudine and entecavir treatment for antiviral‐naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B

Background and Aims: There has been no study comparing the clinical efficacy of clevudine and entecavir in antiviral‐naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: A total of 128 antiviral‐naïve CHB patients were included to receive clevudine 30 mg (n=55) or entecavir 0.5 mg (n=73) once daily for a mean follow‐up period of 18.4 months. Results: Thirty‐three (60.0%) in the clevudine group and 40 (54.8%) in the entecavir group were HBeAg positive (P>0.05). At 6 months from the baseline, the mean decreases in HBV‐DNA were 4.86 and 4.72 log₁₀ copies/ml in the clevudine and entecavir groups respectively (P>0.05). The proportion of patients with undetectable serum HBV‐DNA (<300 copies/ml) at 6 months was 65.5 and 74.0% in the clevudine and entecavir groups respectively (P>0.05). The proportion of patients with normal alanine aminotransferase levels at 6 months was 74.5 and 84.9% in the clevudine and entecavir groups respectively. During the mean follow‐up of 18.4 months, genotypic resistance was noted in three patients (5.5%) in the clevudine group and no cases in the entecavir group. Eight patients (14.6%) in the clevudine group experienced symptoms, signs and laboratory abnormalities relevant to clevudine‐induced myopathy. Conclusions: Clevudine and entecavir treatment effectively suppresses HBV replication in most antiviral‐naïve patients with CHB. During a mean follow‐up of 18.9 months, a small proportion (5.5%) of patients in the clevudine group developed genotypic resistance. However, a substantial proportion (14.6%) of patients in the clevudine group had an adverse effect of clevudine‐induced myopathy.     

Effects of vildagliptin on postprandial markers of bone resorption and calcium homeostasis in recently diagnosed, well-controlled type 2 diabetes patients

Background: Bone metabolism is a dynamic process that is influenced by food ingestion. Endogenous incretins have been shown to be important regulators of bone turnover. The aim of the present study was to assess whether a dipeptidylpeptidase (DPP)‐4 inhibitor affects markers of bone resorption and calcium homeostasis. Methods: The present study was a single‐center, double blind, randomized clinical trail. Fifty‐nine drug‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) were randomized to either 1 year treatment with the DPP‐4 inhibitor vildagliptin (100 mg, once daily; n = 29) or placebo (n = 30). Patients received a standardized breakfast after measurement of serum concentrations of cross‐linked C‐terminal telopeptide (s‐CTx), a bone resorption marker influenced by food intake, before and after 50 weeks treatment. Results: Vildagliptin did not change postprandial s‐CTx concentrations compared with pretreatment levels (between‐group ratio 1.15 ± 0.17; P = 0.320). Fasting serum alkaline phosphatase, calcium, and phosphate were also unaffected y 1 year treatment with vildagliptin. Conclusions: Treatment with vildagliptin for 1 year was not associated with changes in markers of bone resorption and calcium homeostasis in drug‐naïve patients with T2D and mild hyperglycemia.     

Efficacy and safety of monotherapy of sitagliptin compared with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of monotherapy with sitagliptin and metformin in treatment‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: In a double‐blind study, 1050 treatment‐naïve patients (i.e. not taking an antihyperglycaemic agent for ≥16 weeks prior to study entry) with type 2 diabetes and an HbA_1c 6.5–9% were randomized (1:1) to treatment with once‐daily sitagliptin 100 mg (N = 528) or twice‐daily metformin 1000 mg (N = 522) for 24 weeks. Metformin was up‐titrated from 500 to 2000 mg per day (or maximum tolerated daily dose ≥1000 mg) over a period of 5 weeks. The primary analysis used a per‐protocol (PP) approach to assess whether sitagliptin was non‐inferior to metformin based on HbA_1c change from baseline at week 24. Non‐inferiority was to be declared if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the between‐group difference in this endpoint was <0.40%. Results: From a mean baseline HbA_1c of 7.2% in the PP population, HbA_1c change from baseline was ?0.43% with sitagliptin (n = 455) and ?0.57% with metformin (n = 439). The between‐group difference (95% CI) was 0.14% (0.06, 0.21), thus confirming non‐inferiority. Baseline HbA_1c influenced treatment response, with larger reductions in HbA_1c observed in patients with baseline HbA_1c≥8% in the sitagliptin (–1.13%; n = 74) and metformin (–1.24%; n = 73) groups. The proportions of patients at week 24 with HbA_1c values at the goals of <7 or <6.5% were 69 and 34% with sitagliptin and 76 and 39% with metformin, respectively. Fasting plasma glucose changes from baseline were ?11.5 mg/dL (–0.6 mmol/l) and ?19.4 mg/dl (–1.1 mmol/l) with sitagliptin and metformin, respectively (difference in LS mean change from baseline [95% CI] = 8.0 mg /dl [4.5,11.4]). Both treatments led to similar improvements from baseline in measures of homeostasis model assessment‐β cell function (HOMA‐β) and insulin resistance (HOMA‐IR). The incidence of hypoglycaemia was 1.7% with sitagliptin and 3.3% with metformin (p = 0.116). The incidence of gastrointestinal‐related adverse experiences was substantially lower with sitagliptin (11.6%) compared with metformin (20.7%) (difference in incidence [95% CI] = ?9.1% [?13.6,?4.7]), primarily because of significantly decreased incidences of diarrhoea (3.6 vs. 10.9%; p < 0.001) and nausea (1.1 vs. 3.1%; p = 0.032). Body weight was reduced from baseline with both sitagliptin (LS mean change [95% CI] = ?0.6 kg [?0.9,?0.4]) and metformin (–1.9 kg [–2.2, ?1.7]) (p < 0.001 for sitagliptin vs. metformin). Conclusions: In this 24‐week monotherapy study, sitagliptin was non‐inferior to metformin in improving HbA_1c in treatment‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. Although both treatments were generally well tolerated, a lower incidence of gastrointestinal‐related adverse experiences was observed with sitagliptin.     

Antiviral activity and safety of aplaviroc,a CCR5 antagonist,in combination with lopinavir/ritonavir in HIV‐infected,therapy‐naïve patients: results of the EPIC study (CCR100136)*

Background

This phase IIb study explored the antiviral activity and safety of the investigational CC chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) antagonist aplaviroc (APL) in antiretroviral‐naïve patients harbouring R5‐ or R5X4‐tropic virus.

Methods

A total of 191 patients were randomized 2:2:2:1 to one of three APL dosing regimens or to lamivudine (3TC)/zidovudine (ZDV) twice daily (bid), each in combination with lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 400 mg/100 mg bid. Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed.

Results

This study was terminated prematurely because of APL‐associated idiosyncratic hepatotoxicity. A total of 141 patients initiated treatment early enough to have been able to complete 12 weeks on treatment [modified intent‐to‐treat (M‐ITT) population]; of these, 133 completed the 12‐week treatment phase. The proportion of subjects in the M‐ITT population with HIV‐1 RNA <400 copies/mL at week 12 was 50, 48, 54 and 75% in the APL 200 mg bid, APL 400 mg bid, APL 800 mg once a day (qd) and 3TC/ZDV arms, respectively. Similar responses were seen in the few subjects harbouring R5X4‐tropic virus (n=17). Common clinical adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea, nausea, fatigue and headache. APL demonstrated nonlinear pharmacokinetics with high interpatient variability.

Conclusions

While target plasma concentrations of APL were achieved, the antiviral activity of APL+LPV/r did not appear to be comparable to that of 3TC/ZDV+LPV/r.     

Week 96 efficacy, virology and safety of darunavir/r versus lopinavir/r in treatment-experienced patients in TITAN

Long-term potent activity of antiretrovirals is essential for HIV-1-infected, treatment-experienced patients. TITAN (TMC114/r In Treatment-experienced pAtients Naive to lopinavir) compared Week-96 efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r). Treatment-experienced, LPV-naive, HIV-1-infected patients were randomised to DRV/r 600/100 mg bid or LPV/r 400/100 mg bid plus optimised background regimen (≥ 2 NRTIs/NNRTIs). 595 patients were enrolled (mean baseline HIV-1 RNA: 4.30 log10 copies/mL; median CD4 count: 232 cells/mm3). At Week 96, more DRV/r than LPV/r patients achieved HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL (66.8% versus 58.9% [intent-to-treat (ITT)/time-to-loss of virological response (TLOVR)], estimated difference 8.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7-16.7), demonstrating the primary endpoint of non-inferiority of DRV/r (p < 0.001); the difference in response was statistically significant (p = 0.034). For the secondary efficacy parameter (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL) at Week 96, response to DRV/r was 60.4% versus 55.2% for LPV/r (ITT-TLOVR), estimated difference 5.8%, 95% CI: -2.3-13.9. Virological failure (VF; HIV-1 RNA > 400 copies/mL) with DRV/r (13.8%) was nearly half that with LPV/r (25.6%). Discontinuations due to adverse events were 8.1% for both DRV/r and LPV/r. Treatment-related grade 2-4 diarrhoea was 8.1% (DRV/r) versus 15.2% (LPV/r). Increases in triglycerides and total cholesterol were less pronounced with DRV/r. At 96 weeks, noninferiority (HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/mL) of DRV/r over LPV/r was maintained; the difference in response was statistically significant. VF rate and treatment-related grade 2-4 diarrhoea were lower with DRV/r versus LPV/r.     

Efficacy and safety of 6 or 8 weeks of simeprevir,daclatasvir, sofosbuvir for HCV genotype 1 infection

The phase 2, open‐label ACCORDION (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02349048) study investigated the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of a 6‐ or 8‐week regimen of simeprevir, daclatasvir and sofosbuvir in treatment‐naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 1 infection and either early‐stage fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis. Patients were assigned to treatment groups according to their fibrosis stage. Early‐stage fibrosis: simeprevir 150 mg, daclatasvir 60 mg, sofosbuvir 400 mg once daily for 6 weeks; compensated cirrhosis: same regimen for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of simeprevir, daclatasvir and sofosbuvir were investigated. Sixty‐eight patients were treated (6‐week group: n = 59; 8‐week group: n = 9). SVR12 was achieved by 86.4% (51/59) of patients with early‐stage fibrosis and by 100% (9/9) of patients with cirrhosis. The main reason for not achieving SVR12 in the 6‐week group was viral relapse (11.9%; 7/59). One patient had on‐treatment failure due to an early withdrawal (lost to follow‐up due to incarceration). One patient with SVR12 in the 6‐week group had a late viral relapse at post‐treatment week 24. No clinically significant drug‐drug interactions were observed. Adverse events were reported in 63.2% of patients (43/68) and were mainly grade 1/2. None of these led to treatment discontinuation. The 3 direct‐acting antiviral regimens of simeprevir, daclatasvir and sofosbuvir were safe and well tolerated in treatment‐naïve, HCV GT1‐infected patients with early‐stage fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis.     

Experimental transmission of avian-like swine H1N1 influenza virus between immunologically naïve and vaccinated pigs

Please cite this paper as: Lloyd et al. (2011) Experimental transmission of avian‐like swine H1N1 influenza virus between immunologically naïve and vaccinated pigs. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 5(5), 357–364. Background Infection of pigs with swine influenza has been studied experimentally and in the field; however, little information is available on the natural transmission of this virus in pigs. Two studies in an experimental transmission model are presented here, one in immunologically naïve and one in a combination of vaccinated and naïve pigs. Objectives To investigate the transmission of a recent ‘avian‐like’ swine H1N1 influenza virus in naive piglets, to assess the antibody response to a commercially available vaccine and to determine the efficiency of transmission in pigs after vaccination. Methods Transmission chains were initiated by intranasal challenge of two immunologically naïve pigs. Animals were monitored daily for clinical signs and virus shedding. Pairs of pigs were sequentially co‐housed, and once virus was detected in recipients, prior donors were removed. In the vaccination study, piglets were vaccinated and circulating antibody levels were monitored by haemagglutination inhibition assay. To study transmission in vaccinates, a pair of infected immunologically naïve animals was co‐housed with vaccinated recipient pigs and further pairs of vaccinates were added sequentially as above. The chain was completed by the addition of naive pigs. Results and conclusions Transmission of the H1N1 virus was achieved through a chain of six pairs of naïve piglets and through four pairs of vaccinated animals. Transmission occurred with minimal clinical signs and, in vaccinates, at antibody levels higher than previously reported to protect against infection.     

Efficacy and safety of entecavir treatment in a heterogeneous CHB population from a ‘real‐world’ clinical practice setting in China

Chronic hepatitis B infection is an important cause of liver‐related mortality in China. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of entecavir in a heterogeneous patient population from a ‘real‐world’ clinical practice setting in China. This prospective, observational cohort provides 48‐week data on 2600 patients from 50 sites in China who received entecavir (0.5 or 1.0 mg) and were assessed for virologic, serologic and biochemical responses. Patients were nucleos(t)ide‐naïve or ‐experienced and had compensated or decompensated liver function. At Week 48, 1545/2424 (64%) patients with compensated liver disease and 30/44 (68%) patients with decompensated liver disease achieved HBV DNA <50 IU/mL. Greater proportions of nucleos(t)ide‐naïve than nucleos(t)ide‐experienced (69% vs 53%), and adefovir‐experienced than lamivudine/telbivudine‐experienced (62% vs 52%) patients achieved this endpoint. Most patients with HBV DNA <50 IU/mL also achieved HBV DNA <12 IU/L (60%, 45% and 61% of nucleos(t)ide‐naïve, nucleos(t)ide‐experienced and decompensated patients, respectively). In patients with compensated liver disease, ALT values normalized in 1532/1792 patients (85%), and HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion were observed in 17% and 15% of treatment‐naïve and 15% and 11% of treatment‐experienced patients. Entecavir was generally well tolerated. Adverse event rates were comparable between treatment‐naïve and treatment‐experienced patients with compensated liver disease, but were higher in decompensated than in compensated patients, consistent with previous reports in these patients with more advanced disease. Four patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. In a ‘real‐world’ setting, entecavir was efficacious and well tolerated throughout 48 weeks in a heterogeneous Chinese CHB population.     

The blunted loop diuretic response in acute heart failure is driven by reduced tubular responsiveness rather than insufficient tubular delivery. The role of furosemide urine excretion on diuretic and natriuretic response in acute heart failure

Aims

Diuretic response in heart failure is blunted when compared to healthy individuals, but the pathophysiology underlying this phenomenon is unclear. We aimed to investigate whether the diuretic resistance mechanism is related to insufficient furosemide tubular delivery or low tubular responsiveness.

Methods and results

We conducted a prospective, observational study of 50 patients with acute heart failure patients divided into two groups based on previous furosemide use (furosemide naïve: n = 28 [56%] and chronic furosemide users: n = 22 [44%]). Each patient received a protocol-derived, standardized furosemide dose based on body weight. We measured diuretic response and urine furosemide concentrations. The furosemide naïve group had significantly higher urine volumes and natriuresis when compared to chronic users at all timepoints (all p < 0.05). Urine furosemide delivery was similar in furosemide naïve versus chronic users after accounting for differences in estimated glomerular filtration rate (28.02 [21.03–35.89] vs. 29.70 [18.19–34.71] mg, p = 0.87). However, the tubular response to delivered diuretic was dramatically higher in naïve versus chronic users, that is the urine volume per 1 μg/ml of urine furosemide at 2 h was 148.6 ± 136.1 versus 50.6 ± 56.1 ml (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Patients naïve to furosemide have significantly better diuresis and natriuresis when compared to chronic furosemide users. The blunted diuretic response in patients with chronic loop diuretic exposure is driven by decreased tubular responsiveness rather than insufficient furosemide tubular delivery.