Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Efficacy and Safety of Darunavir/ritonavir versus Lopinavir/ritonavir in ARV Treatment-Naïve HIV-1-Infected Patients at Week 48: ARTEMIS (TMC114-C211)

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Efficacy and Safety of Darunavir/ritonavir versus Lopinavir/ritonavir in ARV Treatment-Naïve HIV-1-Infected Patients at Week 48: ARTEMIS (TMC114-C211)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Efficacy and Safety of Darunavir/ritonavir versus Lopinavir/ritonavir in ARV Treatment-Naïve HIV-1-Infected Patients at Week 48: ARTEMIS (TMC114-C211) DeJesus E, Ortiz R, Khanlou H, Voronin E, Van Lunzen J, Andrade-Villanueva J, Fourie J, De Meyer S, Haley M, Lefebvre E, Vanden Abeele C, Spinosa-Guzman S

2 ARTEMIS: Phase III study design
DRV/r 800/100mg qd + TDF 300 mg and FTC 200 mg (N=343) 689 ARV-naïve patients VL>5,000; no CD4 entry LPV/r 400/100mg bid or 800/200mg qd + TDF 300 mg and FTC 200 mg (N=346) LPV dosing LPV formulation qd = % Capsule only = % bid = % Tablet only = % bid/qd = 7% Capsule/tablet switch = 83% Dosing was based on regulatory approval; switch was made according to local regulatory approval and drug availability

3 ARTEMIS: Study objectives
Primary end point Proportion of patients with an HIV RNA <50 copies/ml at Week 48 Primary objective demonstrate non-inferiority of DRV/r qd vs LPV/r based on that primary end point Secondary objectives evaluate long-term safety, tolerability and durability of virologic responses compare immunologic responses conduct pharmacokinetic evaluations

4 ARTEMIS: Baseline characteristics
DRV/r qd (N=343) LPV/r qd or bid (N=346) Baseline demographics Female, N (%) Mean (±SD) age (yrs) Caucasian/Black/Hispanic, % 104 (30) 36 (9) 40/23/23 105 (30) 35 (9) 44/21/22 Baseline disease characteristics Median HIV-1 RNA (cpm) (range) Median CD4 (cells/mm3 [range]) HBV/HCV co-infected, n (%) 70,800 (835–5,580,000) 228 (4–750) 43 (13) 62,100 (667–4,580,000) 218 (2–714) 48 (14) Stratification factors at screening CD4 count <200 cells/mm3 Plasma HIV-1 RNA ≥100,000 cpm 40% 36% 41% 36%

5 ARTEMIS: Patient disposition
Incidence (%) DRV/r qd (N=343) LPV/r qd or bid (N=346) Discontinuation 41 (12%) 56 (16%) AE* 12 (3%) 24 (7%) 3 (<1%) 5 (1%) Pregnancy 2 (<1%) Non-compliance Other 4 (1%) Withdrawal of consent 6 (2%) Virologic failure 10 (3%) 14 (4%) Lost to follow-up *Four deaths (1 in DRV/r group; 3 in LPV/r group) Table includes all data up to the point when the last patient reached week 48 Mean exposure was 56 weeks (range 0–83 weeks)

6 ARTEMIS: Viral load <50 copies/mL to Week 48 (ITT-TLOVR)
100 DRV/r qd (N=343) LPV/r qd or bid (N=346) 90 84% 80 78% 70 60 Patients with VL <50 copies/mL (% [±SE]) 50 40 Estimated difference in response vs LPV/r for non-inferiority: PP = 5.6% (95% CI –0.1;11.3) p<0.001 Estimated difference in response vs LPV/r for non-inferiority: PP = 5.6% (95% CI –0.1;11.3) p<0.001 Estimated difference in response vs LPV/r for superiority: ITT = 5.5% (95% CI –0.3;11.2) p=0.062 30 20 10 2 4 8 12 16 24 36 48 Time (weeks)

7 ARTEMIS: Confirmed response by baseline VL or CD4 at Week 48 (ITT-TLOVR)
LPV/r qd or bid DRV/r qd 100 87 67 71 77 <50 >200 20 40 60 80 100 84 50–200 Baseline CD4 cell count (cells/mm3) Patients with VL <50 copies/mL (%) N = †p<0.05 vs LPV/r 86 85 n=194 n=191 n=28 79† 80 67 60 Patients with VL <50 copies/mL (%) 40 20 <100,000 ≥100,000 Baseline viral load (copies/mL) N = †Chi square analysis

8 ARTEMIS: Responses by LPV/r dosing schedule
100 343 DRV/r qd 84 *27 patients receiving LPV/r bid and qd during the study were excluded from this analysis 267 LPV/r* bid 81 52 LPV/r* qd 71 78 80 60 Patients with VL <50 copies/mL (%) 40 20 LPV/r N = 346

9 Median change in CD4 cell count from baseline (cells/mm3)
ARTEMIS: Median change in absolute CD4 cell count to Week 48 (ITT-NC=F) 150 141 cells/mm3 137 cells/mm3 120 LPV/r qd or bid (N=346) DRV/r qd (N=343) 90 Median change in CD4 cell count from baseline (cells/mm3) 60 30 2 4 8 12 16 24 36 48 Time (weeks)

10 ARTEMIS: Virologic failure (VF) and emergence of mutations
DRV/r qd LPV/r qd or bid (N=343) (N=346) VF (> 50 cpm) 34 (10%) 49 (14%) VF (> 400 cpm) 11 (3%) 18 (5%) 10 18 Paired baseline and VF genotype available IAS-USA PI RAMS 1* IAS-USA NRTI mutations 1† 2† †184V *A71T, V77I VF by TLOVR *IAS-USA mutations, Fall 2006; Johnson et al. Topics in HIV Medicine. 2006; 14:

11 ARTEMIS: Grade 2–4 adverse events
Gr 2–4 AEs† ≥2% incidence, n (%) DRV/r qd LPV/r qd or bid (N=343) (N=346) GI (all AEs) 23 (7) 47 (14) Diarrhea 14 (4) 34 (10) Nausea 6 (2) 10 (3) Rash (all types) 9 (3) 4 (1) p<0.01 p<0.05 †At least possibly related to study drug, excluding laboratory-related events No renal SAEs and no treatment discontinuations due to renal AEs

12 ARTEMIS: Grade 2–4 laboratory abnormalities
≥2% incidence, n (%) DRV/r qd (N=343) LPV/r qd or bid (N=346) Alanine aminotransferase Aspartate aminotransferase Hyperglycemia Pancreatic amylase Pancreatic lipase Total cholesterol Low-density lipoprotein Triglycerides 29 (8) 32 (9) 22 (6) 23 (7) 6 (2) 44 (13) 10 (3) 35 (10) 31 (9) 23 (7) 17 (5) 6 (2) 78 (23) 36 (11) 38 (11) Worst Grade DRV/rtv N = 343 LPV/rtv N = 346 Creatinine Grade 1 12 (3.5) 9 (2.6) Grade (0.3) Grade 3 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) Grade 4 0 No significant changes in calculated creatinine clearance between baseline and Week 48 visits

13 ARTEMIS: Mean fasting lipid levels over time
ng/mL mM Mean triglycerides Total cholesterol/HDL ratio 300 250 200 150 100 3.5 5.5 DRV/r qd (n=343) LPV/r qd or bid (n=346) DRV/r qd (n=343) LPV/r qd or bid (n=346) 2.9 5.0 4.5 Mean total cholesterol/HDL ratio (± SE) 2.3 Mean triglyceride concentration ( ± SE) 4.0 1.7 3.5 1.1 3.0 Time (weeks) DRV/r n= LPV/r n= = NCEP cut-off

14 ARTEMIS: DRV plasma concentrations for DRV/r 800mg/100mg
10,000 36 Population PK study (median, IQR, range; N=335) Ctrough 1,000 DRV plasma conc (ng/mL) 100 EC50 = 55 ng/mL for wild-type virus (adjusted for protein binding) 10 Time post-dose (hours) PK substudy – week 4 data (mean ± SD; N=9)

15 ARTEMIS: Conclusions The use of once-daily DRV/r 800/100mg + TDF/FTC in treatment-naïve patients: resulted in excellent virologic and immunologic responses provided suitable exposure in all patients was well tolerated, with a favorable safety profile In comparison to the LPV/r arm* in treatment-naïve patients: For efficacy, DRV/r 800/100mg qd was non-inferior in the overall population, and superior in patients with high VL DRV/r had lower incidence of common GI toxicities and triglyceride elevations *LPV/r arm included: LPV/r 400/100mg bid or 800/200mg qd, capsule and tablet formulations

16 ARTEMIS: Acknowledgments
The patients and their families for their participation and support during the study TMC114-C211 study team and the investigators and co-investigators: Argentina: Waldo Belloso, Liiana Calanni, Lidia Cassetti, Luisa De Wouters, Marcelo Losso Australia: Mark Bloch, David Cooper, Dominic Dwyer, Robert Finlayson, Julian Gold, Mark Kelly, Cassy Workman Austria: Armin Rieger and Norbert Vetter Belgium: Nathan Clumeck, Jean-Christophe Goffard, Beatrjs Van der Gucht, Eric Van Wijngaerden Canada: Joss Dewet, Don Kilby, Patrice Junod, Chris Tsoukas, Sharon Walmsley Chile: Juan Ballesteros, Rebeca Northland Costa Rica: Gisela Herrera, Iris Perez Denmark: Jan Gerstoft, Lars Mathiesen, Henrik Nielsen France: Micelle Bentata, Laurent Cotte, Pierre Dellamonica, Pierre-Marie Girard, Christine Katlama, Thierry Prazuck, Dominique Salmon, Patrick Yeni Germany: Keikawus Arasteh, Gerd Fätkenheuer, Frank-Detlef Goebel, Thomas Harrer, Hans Jaeger, Joerg-Andres Rump, Dieter Schuster, Albrecht Stoehr, Jan Van Lunzen Greece: George Chrysos Guatemala: Eduardo Arathoon, Carlos Mejia-Villatoro Italy: Adriano Lazzarin, Anna Maria Orani Malaysia: Christopher Lee Mexico: Jaime Andrade-Villanueva, Gustavo Reyes-Teran, Juan Sierra-Madero, Angelina Villasis-Keever Panama: Amalio Rodriguez, Nestor Sosa Puerto Rico: Javier Morales Ramirez, Carmen Zorrilla-Maldonado Russia: Natalia Dushkina, Oleg Kozyrev, Valeriy Kulagin, Alexander Pronin, Vladimir Rafalsky, Oleg Romanenko, Elena Vinogradova, Evgeniy Voronin, Alexey Yakovlev Singapore: Lian Lim Poh South Africa: Ezio Baraldi, Jan Fourie, Prudence Ive, Lerato Mohapi, Jennifer Pitt Spain: Buenaventura Clotet, Pere Domingo Switzerland: Milos Opravil Taiwan: Jen-Hsien Wang, Su Pen Yang Thailand: Ploenchan Chetchotisakd, Winai Ratanasuwan, Kiat Ruxrungtham, Khuanchai Supparatpinyo United Kingdom: Martin Fisher, Mark Nelson, Chloe Orkin, Jonathan Weber United States: Ben Barnett, Alfred Burnside, Thomas Campbell, Philippe Chiliade, Amy Colson, Edwin DeJesus, Richard Elion, Walford Fessel, Lucia Flamm, Dushyantha Jayaweera, Peter Kadlecik, Homayoon Khanlou, Lucia Martinez, David McDonough, Anthony Mills, Karam Mounzer, Robert Myers, Jeffrey Nadler, Brian Onbirbak, Roberto Ortiz, Kristen Patterson, Daniel Pearce, Gerald Pierone, Jayashree Ravishankar, Afsoon Roberts, Barry Rodwick, Stefan Schneider, Michael Sension, Paul Skolnik, Aimee Wilkin, Michael Wohlfeiler, Bienvenido Yangco Supported by Tibotec


Download ppt "Efficacy and Safety of Darunavir/ritonavir versus Lopinavir/ritonavir in ARV Treatment-Naïve HIV-1-Infected Patients at Week 48: ARTEMIS (TMC114-C211)"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google