Pozniak Anton, Opravil Milos, Beatty George, Hill Andrew, de Béthune Marie-Pierre, Lefebvre Eric
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK.
AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2008 Oct;24(10):1275-80. doi: 10.1089/aid.2007.0275.
Data from two Phase IIb trials, POWER 1 and 2 (TMC114-C213 and C202), were pooled to examine the effect of baseline viral susceptibility on response to control protease inhibitors [CPI(s)] compared with response to darunavir (TMC114) given with low-dose ritonavir (darunavir/r) in treatment-experienced HIV patients. POWER 1 and 2 were randomized, controlled Phase IIb trials with a similar design. Patients with one or more primary PI mutations and HIV-1 RNA >1000 copies/ml were randomized to receive an optimized background regimen plus darunavir/r or CPI(s). POWER 1 and 2 week 24 efficacy (intent-to-treat using time-to-loss of virologic response algorithm) data were pooled and analyzed according to baseline subgroups of susceptibility to the CPI regimen, fold-change (FC) in EC(50) to darunavir, and number of darunavir resistance-associated mutations (RAMs). In total, 131 patients received darunavir/r 600/100 mg twice daily; 124 received CPI(s) [lopinavir/r, 20%; saquinavir/r, 19%; (fos)-amprenavir/r, 24%; atazanavir/r, 11%; and 23% used dual-boosted CPI(s)]. At baseline, 72% of patients were resistant (defined as FC) to their investigator-selected CPIs. At week 24, darunavir/r 600/100 mg twice daily provided greater efficacy benefits over CPI(s), even when the virus was predicted to be fully susceptible to the CPI. The response to darunavir decreased when FC to darunavir at baseline was >40 or when three or more darunavir RAMs (in addition to other PI mutations) were present at baseline. Darunavir/r 600/100 mg twice daily showed efficacy benefits over CPI use regardless of viral susceptibility at baseline, FC to darunavir or boosting type in a population of treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients.
来自两项IIb期试验POWER 1和2(TMC114-C213和C202)的数据进行了汇总,以研究基线病毒易感性对接受对照蛋白酶抑制剂[CPI(s)]治疗反应的影响,并与在接受过治疗的HIV患者中给予低剂量利托那韦的达芦那韦(TMC114)的治疗反应进行比较。POWER 1和2是设计相似的随机对照IIb期试验。有一个或多个主要蛋白酶抑制剂突变且HIV-1 RNA>1000拷贝/毫升的患者被随机分配接受优化的背景治疗方案加达芦那韦/利托那韦或CPI(s)。汇总并分析了POWER 1和2第24周的疗效(使用病毒学反应丧失时间算法进行意向性治疗)数据,这些数据根据对CPI治疗方案的易感性基线亚组、对达芦那韦的EC(50)倍比变化(FC)以及达芦那韦耐药相关突变(RAM)的数量进行分析。共有131名患者接受每日两次600/100毫克的达芦那韦/利托那韦;124名患者接受CPI(s)治疗[洛匹那韦/利托那韦,20%;沙奎那韦/利托那韦,19%;(福)安普那韦/利托那韦,24%;阿扎那韦/利托那韦,11%;23%使用双重增强的CPI(s)]。在基线时,72%的患者对研究者选择的CPI耐药(定义为FC)。在第24周时,即使预计病毒对CPI完全敏感,每日两次600/100毫克的达芦那韦/利托那韦也比CPI(s)提供更大的疗效益处。当基线时对达芦那韦的FC>40或基线时存在三个或更多达芦那韦RAM(除其他蛋白酶抑制剂突变外)时,对达芦那韦的反应会降低。在接受过治疗的HIV感染患者群体中,无论基线时的病毒易感性、对达芦那韦的FC或增强类型如何,每日两次600/100毫克的达芦那韦/利托那韦均显示出优于使用CPI的疗效益处。