Switch to ATV/r + RAL  HARNESS Study. ATV/r 300/100 mg qd + TDF/FTC N = 37 N = 72 ATV/r 300/100 mg qd + RAL 400 mg bid  Design Randomisation 2: 1 Open-label.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Switch to ATV + r-containing regimen - SWAN - SLOAT.
Advertisements

Comparison of INSTI vs PI  FLAMINGO  GS  ACTG A5257.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI  QDMRK  SPRING-2. Raffi F. Lancet 2013;381:  Design  Objective –Non inferiority of DTG at W48: % HIV RNA < 50 c/mL.
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV/r vs DRV/rATADAR. ATV/r 300/100 mg + TDF/FTC qd N = 91 N = 89 DRV/r 800/100 mg + TDF/FTC qd  Design Randomisation 1: 1 Open-label.
Comparison of NNRTI vs PI/r  EFV vs LPV/r vs EFV + LPV/r –A5142 –Mexican Study  NVP vs ATV/r –ARTEN  EFV vs ATV/r –A5202.
Switch to TDF/FTC/RPV - SPIRIT Study. SPIRIT study: switch PI/r + 2 NRTI to TDF/FTC/RPV STR  Design TDF/FTC/RPV STR 24 weeks 48 weeks Primary Endpoint.
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089  LPV/r mono vs LPV/r + ZDV/3TC MONARK  LPV/r QD vs BID M M A5073  LPV/r + 3TC vs LPV/r + 2.
Switch to TDF/FTC/RPV  SPIRIT Study. SPIRIT study: Switch PI/r + 2 NRTI to TDF/FTC/RPV TDF/FTC/RPV STR 24 weeks 48 weeks Primary Endpoint Secondary Endpoint.
Phase 2 of new ARVs  Fostemsavir, prodrug of temsavir (attachment inhibitor) –AI Study  TAF (TFV prodrug) –Study –Study  Doravirine.
Switch to ATV/r + 3TC  SALT Study. ATV/r 300/100 mg qd + 2 NRTI (investigator-selected) N = 143 ATV/r 300/100 mg + 3TC 300 mg qd  Design Randomisation*
Switch to ATV/r-containing regimen  ATAZIP. Mallolas J, JAIDS 2009;51:29-36 ATAZIP ATAZIP Study: Switch LPV/r to ATV/r  Design  Endpoints –Primary:
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089  LPV/r mono vs LPV/r + ZDV/3TCMONARK  LPV/r QD vs BIDM M A5073  LPV/r + 3TC vs LPV/r + 2 NRTIGARDEL.
Switch to ATV/r monotherapy  ATARITMO  Swedish Study  ACTG A5201  OREY  MODAt Study.
Switch to ATV-containing regimen  ARIES Study  INDUMA Study  ASSURE Study.
Switch to DRV/r monotherapy  MONOI  MONET  PROTEA  DRV600.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI  QDMRK  SPRING-2. Eron JJ, Lancet Infect Dis 2011;11: QDMRK  Design  Objective –Non inferiority of RAL QD: % HIV.
Switch to DRV/r monotherapy  MONOI  MONET  PROTEA  DRV600.
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy  Pilot LPV/r  M  LPV/r Mono  KalMo  OK  OK04  KALESOLO  MOST  HIV-NAT 077.
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy  Pilot LPV/r  M  LPV/r Mono  KalMo  OK  OK04  KALESOLO  MOST  HIV-NAT 077.
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089  LPV/r mono vs LPV/r + ZDV/3TCMONARK  LPV/r QD vs BIDM M A5073  LPV/r + 3TC vs LPV/r + 2 NRTIGARDEL.
Comparison of INSTI vs PI  FLAMINGO  GS  ACTG A5257  WAVES.
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089  LPV/r mono vs LPV/r + ZDV/3TCMONARK  LPV/r QD vs BIDM M A5073  LPV/r + 3TC vs LPV/r + 2 NRTIGARDEL.
Switch PI/R to ETR  Etraswitch. Etraswitch Study: Switch PI/r to ETR Continuation of current PI/R + 2 NRTI N = 21 N = 22 ETR 400 mg QD* + 2 NRTI  Design.
NRTI-sparing  SPARTAN  PROGRESS  NEAT001/ANRS 143  MODERN.
Switch to RAL-containing regimen  Canadian Study  CHEER  Montreal Study  EASIER  SWITCHMRK  SPIRAL  Switch ER.
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI  ENCORE  EFV vs RPV –ECHO-THRIVE –STAR  EFV vs ETR –SENSE.
Comparison of PI vs PI  ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089  LPV/r mono vs LPV/r + ZDV/3TCMONARK  LPV/r QD vs BIDM M A5073  LPV/r + 3TC vs LPV/r + 2 NRTIGARDEL.
NRTI-sparing  SPARTAN  PROGRESS  NEAT001/ANRS 143  MODERN.
Switch to ATV/r monotherapy  ATARITMO  Swedish Study  ACTG A5201  OREY  MODAt Study.
NRTI-sparing  SPARTAN  PROGRESS  RADAR  NEAT001/ANRS 143  A  VEMAN  MODERN.
Switch to low dose ATV/r  LASA Study.  Design  Endpoints –Primary: proportion of patients with HIV RNA < 200 c/mL at W48 (ITT-E) ; non-inferiority.
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to PI/r + 3TC vs PI/r monotherapy
ARV-trial.com Switch to ATV/r + 3TC ATLAS-M Study.
ARV-trial.com Switch to D/C/F/TAF EMERALD Study 1.
Switch to DTG + RPV Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
ARV-trial.com Switch to LPV/r + RAL KITE Study 1.
ARV-trial.com Switch to MVC MARCH Study 1.
Switch to DTG + 3TC ASPIRE Study.
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to DTG-containing regimen
Switch to E/C/F/TAF + DRV
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
Switch to DRV/r monotherapy
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Switch ABC/3TC to TDF/FTC
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
Switch to ATV- or ATV/r-containing regimen
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Switch to RAL-containing regimen
ARV-trial.com Switch to DRV/r + RPV PROBE Study 1.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
Comparison of NNRTI vs PI/r
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
Switch to DTG-containing regimen
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to DTG + RPV Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
Switch to ATV/r monotherapy
Switch to ATV/r monotherapy
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
ARV-trial.com Switch to ATV/r + RAL HARNESS Study 1.
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Presentation transcript:

Switch to ATV/r + RAL  HARNESS Study

ATV/r 300/100 mg qd + TDF/FTC N = 37 N = 72 ATV/r 300/100 mg qd + RAL 400 mg bid  Design Randomisation 2: 1 Open-label  Objective –Primary Endpoint : proportion with treatment success at W24 No power calculation Descriptive analysis HARNESS Van Lunzen J. IAC 2014, Melbourne, Abs. LBPE19 Adults Stable 2 NRTI + 3 rd drug regimen No previous treatment failure HIV RNA 3 months Switch for safety and/or tolerability issues No resistance to study medications HBs Ag negative W24W48 HARNESS Study: switch to ATV/r + RAL

Baseline characteristics and disposition ATV/r + TDF/FTC N = 37 ATV/r + RAL N = 72 Female17%19% Baseline CD4/mm 3, mean Discontinuation at W24, N Adverse event Discontinuation W24-W48, N Adverse event  Criteria for treatment discontinuation – Virologic rebound 2 consecutive HIV RNA > 40 c/mL before or at W24 Last on-treatment HIV RNA > 40 c/mL followed by discontinuation – Discontinuation 2 consecutive HIV RNA > 1000 c/mL ≥ 2 weeks apart and without underlying cause HARNESS HARNESS Study: switch to ATV/r + RAL Van Lunzen J. IAC 2014, Melbourne, Abs. LBPE19

HIV RNA < 40 c/mL (ITT) ATV/r + RALATV/r + TDF/FTC Confirmed virologic rebound, N Efficacy and Safety results ATV/r + TDF/FTCATV/r + RAL N29 Tested isolates05 PI resistance 1* L10V, G16Q, L33F, P39Q, M46L, G48V, Q58E, I62V, L63I/T, I64L, A71V, I72V, V77I, V82A, T91S, I93L INI resistance 2* F21Y Y143C + N155H * 1 patient with both PI and INSTI mutations HARNESS HARNESS Study: switch to ATV/r + RAL Van Lunzen J. IAC 2014, Melbourne, Abs. LBPE % W24 (primary endpoint) W

ATV/r + TDF/FTC N = 37 ATV/r + RAL N = 72 Grade 3-4 AEs513 Grade 2 drug-related AEs Grade 3-4 total bilirubin Renal toxicity61 Safety at W48, N HARNESS Van Lunzen J. IAC 2014, Melbourne, Abs. LBPE19 HARNESS Study: switch to ATV/r + RAL

 Conclusion – In virologically suppressed patients on a triple-drug antiretroviral regimen, switching to ATV/r + RAL was well tolerated but resulted in a higher incidence of virologic rebound than in the ATV/r + TDF/FTC group at Week 24 and Week 48 – IDMC recommended stopping the trial because of virologic rebound and resistance in the ATV/r + RAL arm HARNESS HARNESS Study: switch to ATV/r + RAL Van Lunzen J. IAC 2014, Melbourne, Abs. LBPE19