January 25, 2001; Updated
|Susa Coffey, MD|
| 6. ||Podzamczer
Early virological failure with a combination of tenofovir, didanosine and efavirenz. Antivir Ther. 2005 10(1):171-7
[PubMed ID: 15751775]
OBJECTIVE: To describe the occurrence of a high early virological failure (VF) rate and development of resistance mutations in antiretroviral-naive patients receiving tenofovir, didanosine and efavirenz. METHODS: HIV-infected antiretroviral-naive patients with viral load > or =30 000 copies/ml were enrolled in a pilot randomized trial of tenofovir/didanosine (250 mg)/ efavirenz with (arm A) or without (arm B) lopinavir/r for the first 12 weeks. As six cases of early VF (a drop of <2 log at month 3, or a rebound of >1 log from the nadir) were detected (five in arm B and one in arm A who had previously stopped lopinavir/r) an unplanned interim analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 29 out of 36 enrolled patients completed at least 3 months of follow-up and were included in the interim analysis. An intent-to-treat analysis showed treatment failure in 7/15 (46.7%) patients in arm B (five VF, one lost, one switched) versus 2/14 (14.3%) in arm A (one lost, one switched) (P=0.109). The patient in arm A who interrupted lopinavir/r at day 3 and continued with tenofovir/didanosine/efavirenz later developed VF. At baseline, 6/6 VF patients had VL >100000 copies/ml and an advanced stage of disease (CD4 <200 plus CDC stage C or B3) versus 0/8 non-VF patients taking the triple drug regimen (P<0.001). At failure, G190S/E alone or associated with K103N and K101R mutations was detected in five patients, and K103N/L1001/V108l in the sixth patient. Additionally, L74V/I and K65R were detected in four and two patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A high early virological failure rate and the occurrence of resistance mutations were detected in a group of antiretroviral-naive patients treated with tenofovir/didanosine/efavirenz.
| 7. ||Maitland
Early virologic failure in HIV-1 infected subjects on didanosine/tenofovir/efavirenz: 12-week results from a randomized trial. AIDS. 2005 Jul;19(11):1183-8
[PubMed ID: 15990571]
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of two once-daily antiretroviral regimens containing lamivudine (3TC) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), each administered with didanosine (ddI) and efavirenz (EFV) as initial therapy to HIV-1-infected subjects. METHODS: Single centre, randomized (1: 1), open-label study in antiretroviral-naive, HIV-infected adults. Subjects commenced either 3TC/ddI/EFV (3TC group) or TDF/ddI/EFV (TDF group). Safety, Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMScap) and plasma EFV concentration monitoring was performed over the study period. Comparisons between groups were assessed using chi test and linear regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between EFV concentrations and virological response. RESULTS: Seventy-seven subjects were enrolled prior to recruitment being suspended, 36 to the 3TC group and 41 to the TDF group. Intention-to-treat analysis in which last observation carried forward (LOCF) found the mean viral log10 load [95% confidence interval (CI)] at weeks 4 and 12 to be 2.67 (2.47-2.87) and 1.83 (1.74-1.92) for the 3TC group and 2.75 (2.45-3.05) and 2.28 (1.96-2.6) for the TDF group (P = 0.013). Emergence of resistance occurred in five of 41 (12.2%) subjects in the TDF group up to week 12 compared with none of 36 in the 3TC group, (P < 0.05); these five subjects shared similar baseline characteristics (CD4+ cell counts < 200 x 10 cells/l and HIV-1 RNA > 100,000 copies/ml). Despite MEMScap monitoring showing > 99% adherence in all subjects, among the five failures, three had low EFV concentrations. CONCLUSION: TDF/ddI/EFV as initial therapy appears to have diminished efficacy in subjects with CD4 < 200 x 10 cells/l and viral load > 100,000 copies/ml. Treatment failure with resistance was not attributable to baseline resistance, efavirenz exposure or poor adherence.