Uptake and Discontinuation of Integrase Inhibitors (INSTIs) in a Large Cohort Setting.
Journal
Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)
ISSN: 1944-7884
Titre abrégé: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100892005
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 03 2020
01 03 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
11
1
2020
medline:
15
9
2020
entrez:
11
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite increased integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) use, limited large-scale, real-life data exists on INSTI uptake and discontinuation. International multicohort collaboration. RESPOND participants starting dolutegravir (DTG), elvitegravir (EVG), or raltegravir (RAL) after January 1, 2012 were included. Predictors of INSTI used were assessed using multinomial logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models describe time to and factors associated with discontinuation. Overall, 9702 persons were included; 5051 (52.1%) starting DTG, 1933 (19.9%) EVG, and 2718 (28.0%) RAL. The likelihood of starting RAL or EVG vs DTG decreased over time and was higher in Eastern and Southern Europe compared with Western Europe. At 6 months after initiation, 8.9% (95% confidence interval: 8.3% to 9.5%) had discontinued the INSTI (6.4% DTG, 7.4% EVG, and 14.0% RAL). The main reason for discontinuation was toxicity (44.2% DTG, 42.5% EVG, 17.3% RAL). Nervous system toxicity accounted for a higher proportion of toxicity discontinuations on DTG (31.8% DTG, 23.4% EVG, 6.6% RAL). Overall, treatment simplification was highest on RAL (2.7% DTG, 1.6% EVG, and 19.8% RAL). Factors associated with a higher discontinuation risk included increasing year of INSTI initiation, female gender, hepatitis C coinfection, and previous non-AIDS-defining malignancies. Individuals in Southern and Eastern Europe were less likely to discontinue. Similar results were seen for discontinuations after 6 months. Uptake of DTG vs EVG or RAL increased over time. Discontinuation within 6 months was mainly due to toxicity; nervous system toxicity was highest on DTG. Discontinuation was highest on RAL, mainly because of treatment simplification.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Despite increased integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) use, limited large-scale, real-life data exists on INSTI uptake and discontinuation.
SETTING
International multicohort collaboration.
METHODS
RESPOND participants starting dolutegravir (DTG), elvitegravir (EVG), or raltegravir (RAL) after January 1, 2012 were included. Predictors of INSTI used were assessed using multinomial logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models describe time to and factors associated with discontinuation.
RESULTS
Overall, 9702 persons were included; 5051 (52.1%) starting DTG, 1933 (19.9%) EVG, and 2718 (28.0%) RAL. The likelihood of starting RAL or EVG vs DTG decreased over time and was higher in Eastern and Southern Europe compared with Western Europe. At 6 months after initiation, 8.9% (95% confidence interval: 8.3% to 9.5%) had discontinued the INSTI (6.4% DTG, 7.4% EVG, and 14.0% RAL). The main reason for discontinuation was toxicity (44.2% DTG, 42.5% EVG, 17.3% RAL). Nervous system toxicity accounted for a higher proportion of toxicity discontinuations on DTG (31.8% DTG, 23.4% EVG, 6.6% RAL). Overall, treatment simplification was highest on RAL (2.7% DTG, 1.6% EVG, and 19.8% RAL). Factors associated with a higher discontinuation risk included increasing year of INSTI initiation, female gender, hepatitis C coinfection, and previous non-AIDS-defining malignancies. Individuals in Southern and Eastern Europe were less likely to discontinue. Similar results were seen for discontinuations after 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS
Uptake of DTG vs EVG or RAL increased over time. Discontinuation within 6 months was mainly due to toxicity; nervous system toxicity was highest on DTG. Discontinuation was highest on RAL, mainly because of treatment simplification.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31923088
doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002250
pii: 00126334-202003010-00009
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-HIV Agents
0
Integrase Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
240-250Références
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Antiretroviral Drugs Used in the Treatment of HIV Infection. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/patients/hiv-treatment/antiretroviral-drugs-used-treatment-hiv-infection. Accessed July 12, 2019.
EACS. EACS Guidelines Version 9.1. 2018. Available at: http://www.eacsociety.org/files/2018_guidelines-9.1-english.pdf. Accessed July 12, 2019.
World Health Organization. Consolidated Guidelines on the Use of Antiretroviral Drugs for Treating and Preventing HIV Infection Recommendations for a Public Health Approach. 2nd ed. World Health Organization; 2016. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/208825. Accessed July 12, 2019.
Steigbigel RT, Cooper DA, Kumar PN, et al. Raltegravir with optimized background therapy for resistant HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:339–354.
Eron JJ, Cooper DA, Steigbigel RT, et al. Efficacy and safety of raltegravir for treatment of HIV for 5 years in the BENCHMRK studies: final results of two randomised, placebo-controlled trials. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13:587–596.
Sax PE, DeJesus E, Mills A, et al. Co-formulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus co-formulated efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, analysis of results after 48 weeks. Lancet. 2012;379:2439–2448.
DeJesus E, Rockstroh JK, Henry K, et al. Co-formulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus ritonavir-boosted atazanavir plus co-formulated emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomised, double-. Lancet. 2012;379:2429–2438.
Raffi F, Rachlis A, Stellbrink HJ, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection: 48 week results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SPRING-2 study. Lancet. 2013;381:735–743.
Cahn P, Pozniak AL, Mingrone H, et al. Dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-experienced, integrase-inhibitor-naive adults with HIV: week 48 results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SAILING study. Lancet. 2013;382:700–708.
Walmsley SL, Antela A, Clumeck N, et al. Dolutegravir plus abacavir–lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1807–1818.
Eron JJ, Clotet B, Durant J, et al. Safety and efficacy of dolutegravir in treatment-experienced subjects with raltegravir-resistant HIV type 1 infection: 24-week results of the VIKING Study. J Infect Dis. 2013;207:740–748.
Sax PE, Pozniak A, Montes ML, et al. Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection (GS-US-380–1490): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiori. Lancet. 2017;390:2073–2082.
Gallant J, Lazzarin A, Mills A, et al. Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for initial treatment of phase 3, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2017;390:2063–2072.
Peñafiel J, de Lazzari E, Padilla M, et al. Tolerability of integrase inhibitors in a real-life setting. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:1752–1759.
Arribas JR, Pialoux G, Gathe J, et al. Simplification to coformulated elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir versus continuation of ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor with emtricitabine and tenofovir in adults with virologically suppressed HIV (STRATEGY-PI): 48 week results o. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:581–589.
Capetti A, Rizzardini G. Cobicistat: a new opportunity in the treatment of HIV disease? Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2014;15:1289–1298.
Lennox JL, DeJesus E, Lazzarin A, et al. Safety and efficacy of raltegravir-based versus efavirenz-based combination therapy in treatment-naive patients with HIV-1 infection: a multicentre, double-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;374:796–806.
Nguyen A, Calmy A, Delhumeau C, et al. A randomized cross-over study to compare raltegravir and efavirenz (SWITCH-ER study). AIDS. 2011;25:1481–1487.
Rockstroh JK, Dejesus E, Lennox JL, et al. Durable efficacy and safety of raltegravir versus efavirenz when combined with tenofovir/emtricitabine in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients: final 5-year results from STARTMRK. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;63:77–85.
Zolopa A, Sax PE, DeJesus E, et al. A randomized double-blind comparison of coformulated elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: analysis of week 96 results. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;63:96–100.
Martinez E, Larrousse M, Llibre JM, et al. Substitution of raltegravir for ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors in HIV-infected patients: the SPIRAL study. AIDS. 2010;24:1697–1707.
Clotet B, Feinberg J, van Lunzen J, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir versus darunavir plus ritonavir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection (FLAMINGO): 48 week results from the randomised open-label phase 3b study. Lancet. 2014;383:2222–2231.
Gatell JM, Assoumou L, Moyle G, et al. Switching from a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor to a dolutegravir-based regimen for maintenance of HIV viral suppression in patients with high cardiovascular risk. AIDS. 2017;31:2503–2514.
Orrell C, Hagins DP, Belonosova E, et al. Fixed-dose combination dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine versus ritonavir-boosted atazanavir plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine in previously untreated women with HIV-1 infection (ARIA): week 48 results from a randomised, open-label. Lancet HIV. 2017;4:e536–e546.
Elzi L, Erb S, Furrer H, et al. Adverse events of raltegravir and dolutegravir. AIDS. 2017;31:1853–1858.
Lepik KJ, Yip B, Ulloa AC, et al. Adverse drug reactions to integrase strand transfer inhibitors. AIDS. 2018;32:903–912.
Laut K, Shepherd L, Radoi R, et al. Persistent disparities in antiretroviral treatment (ART) coverage and virological suppression across Europe, 2004 to 2015. Euro Surveill. 2018;23:1–12.
Reekie J, Reiss P, Ledergerber B, et al. A comparison of the long-term durability of nevirapine, efavirenz and lopinavir in routine clinical practice in Europe: a EuroSIDA study. HIV Med. 2011;12:259–268.
Blonk MI, Colbers APH, Hidalgo-Tenorio C, et al. Raltegravir in HIV-1–Infected pregnant women: pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61:809–816.
Saag MS, Benson CA, Gandhi RT, et al. Antiretroviral drugs for treatment and prevention of HIV infection in adults: 2018 recommendations of the international antiviral society-USA panel. JAMA. 2018;320:379–396.
British HIV Association. British HIV Association Guidelines for the Treatment of HIV-1-Positive Adults With Antiretroviral Therapy 2015. Available at: https://www.bhiva.org/file/RVYKzFwyxpgiI/treatment-guidelines-2016-interim-update.pdf. Accessed May 12, 2019.
The D: A:D Study Group. Use of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and risk of myocardial infarction in HIV-infected patients enrolled in the D: A:D study: a multi-cohort collaboration. Lancet. 2008;371:1417–1426.
Lepik KJ, Nohpal A, Yip B, et al. Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with Integrase Stand Transfer Inhibitors (INSTI) in Clinical Practice: Post-Marketing Experience with Raltegravir, Elvitegravir-Cobicistat and Dolutegravir. Toronto, Canada: IAS; 2015. Poster Abstract: Abstract TUPEB 256.
Viswanathan P, Baro E, Soon G, et al. Neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with integrase strand transfer inhibitors: center for drug evaluation and research. Food Drug Adm. Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), Seattle WA, 2017. Poster Abstract: Abstract 372.
Teppler H, Brown DD, Leavitt RY, et al. Long-term safety from the raltegravir clinical development program. Curr HIV Res. 2011;9:40–53.
Manzardo C, Gatell J. Stribild (elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate): a new paradigm for HIV-1 treatment. AIDS Rev. 2014;16:35–42.
Gokengin D, Oprea C, Begovac J, et al. HIV care in Central and Eastern Europe: how close are we to the target? Int J Infect Dis. 2018;2018:121–130.
Hoffmann C, Welz T, Sabranski M, et al. Higher rates of neuropsychiatric adverse events leading to dolutegravir discontinuation in women and older patients. HIV Med. 2017;18:56–63.
Llibre JM, Montoliu A, Miró JM, et al. Discontinuation of dolutegravir, elvitegravir/cobicistat and raltegravir because of toxicity in a prospective cohort. HIV Med. 2019;20:237–247.
Ofotokun I, Chuck SK, Hitti JE. Antiretroviral pharmacokinetic profile: a review of sex differences. Gend Med. 2007;4:106–119.
De Boer MGJ, Van Den Berk GEL, Van Holten N, et al. Intolerance of dolutegravir-containing combination antiretroviral therapy regimens in real-life clinical practice. AIDS. 2016;30:2831–2834.
Yombi JC. Dolutegravir neuropsychiatric adverse events: specific drug effect or class effect. AIDS Rev. 2018;20:13–25.
Menard A, Montagnac C, Solas C, et al. Neuropsychiatric adverse effects on dolutegravir: an emerging concern in Europe. AIDS. 2017;31:20–22.
Dube B, Benton T, Cruess D, et al. Neuropsychiatric manifestations of HIV infection and AIDS. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2005;30:237–246.
Todd SEJ, Rafferty P, Walker E, et al. Early clinical experience of dolutegravir in an HIV cohort in a larger teaching hospital. Int J STD AIDS. 2017;28:1074–1081.
Bonfanti P, Madeddu G, Gulminetti R. Discontinuation of treatment and adverse events in an Italian cohort of patients on dolutegravir. AIDS. 2017;31:455–457.
Yombi JC, Pozniak A, Boffito M, et al. Antiretrovirals and the kidney in current clinical practice: renal pharmacokinetics, alterations of renal function and renal toxicity. AIDS. 2014;28:621–632.
Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH, et al. A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med. 2013;150:604.