Este artículo no tiene resumen

This study compared the bioavailability of two candidate fixed-dose combinations (FDCs: G003 and G004) of darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg with that of darunavir 800 mg and ritonavir 100 mg coadministered as single agents. Short-term safety and tolerability of the FDC formulations were also assessed. This open-label trial included 36 healthy volunteers and assessed steady-state pharmacokinetics of darunavir over 3 randomized, 10-day treatment sequences, under fed conditions. Blood samples for determination of plasma concentrations of darunavir and cobicistat or ritonavir were taken over 24 hours on day 10 and analyzed by liquid-chromatography tandem mass-spectroscopy. Darunavir AUC24h following administration of the FDCs (G003: 74,780 ng ∙ h/mL and G004: 76,490 ng ∙ h/mL) was comparable to that following darunavir/ritonavir (78,410 ng ∙ h/mL), as was Cmax (6,666 and 6,917 ng/mL versus 6,973 ng/mL, respectively). Modestly lower C0h (1,504 and 1,478 ng/mL versus 2,015 ng/mL) and Cmin (1,167 and 1,224 ng/mL versus 1,540 ng/mL) values were seen with the FDCs. Short-term tolerability of the FDCs was comparable to that of darunavir/ritonavir when administered as single agents. The most common adverse events reported were headache, gastrointestinal upset, or rash. Cobicistat is an effective pharmacoenhancer of darunavir when administered as an FDC. Short-term administration of darunavir/ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat was generally well tolerated.

OBJECTIVES:

The aim of the study was to evaluate darunavir and cobicistat pharmacokinetics in pregnant women with HIV-1 infection.

METHODS:

This phase 3b, open-label study enrolled HIV-1-infected pregnant women (18-26 weeks of gestation) receiving combination antiretroviral therapy with once-daily darunavir/cobicistat 800/150 mg. The plasma pharmacokinetics of darunavir (total and unbound) and cobicistat were assessed over 24 h during the second and third trimesters (24-28 and 34-38 weeks of gestation, respectively) and 6-12 weeks postpartum. Pharmacokinetic parameters [area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 h (AUC24 h ), maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) and minimum plasma concentration (Cmin )] were derived using noncompartmental analysis and compared using linear mixed effects modelling (pregnancy versus postpartum). Antiviral activity and safety were evaluated.

RESULTS:

Seven women were enrolled in the study; six completed it. Total darunavir exposure was lower during pregnancy than postpartum (AUC24 h , 50-56% lower; Cmax , 37-49% lower; Cmin , 89-92% lower); unbound darunavir exposure was also reduced (AUC24 h , 40-45% lower; Cmax , 32-41% lower; Cmin , 88-92% lower). Cobicistat exposure was also lower during pregnancy than postpartum (AUC24 h , 49-63% lower; Cmax , 27-50% lower; Cmin , 83% lower). At study completion, five of six (83%) women were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL). There was one virological failure (the patient was nonadherent; no emerging genotypic resistance was observed and susceptibility to antiretrovirals was maintained). No mother-to-child transmission was detected among six infants born to the six women who completed the study. Overall, darunavir/cobicistat was well tolerated in women and infants.

CONCLUSIONS:

In view of markedly reduced darunavir and cobicistat exposures during pregnancy, this combination is not recommended in HIV-1-infected pregnant women.

The triple therapy darunavir/r + tenofovir/emtricitabine is likely to become a relevant first-line treatment option in the years to come. The dual combination of boosted darunavir + raltegravir is an innovative treatment option that combines two potent new antiretroviral drugs, one of which belongs to a new drug class (integrase inhibitor). The expected efficacy profile of this combination is promising. Moreover, this combination might have a better tolerance profile and has the advantage of sparing the NRTI class.

In the context of tenofovir/emtricitabine currently being a reference backbone in first-line antiretroviral regimens, we hypothesise that, in combination with darunavir/r, raltegravir may be an alternative option if its efficacy is non-inferior to tenofovir/emtricitabine.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate in healthy volunteers how much and how fast the new suspension compared to the commercial darunavir tablet, given in combination with low-dose ritonavir, are absorbed into the body (called the relative oral bioavailability).

The purpose of the study is to compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once a day (O.D.) as a monotherapy versus a triple combination therapy containing 2 nucleosides and darunavir/ritonavir in 250 HIV-1 infected patients who have been on Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) and have plasma viral load below 50 copies/ml for at least 24 weeks.

Background: We explored a treatment simplification strategy to darunavir/ritonavir 900/100 mg once dally guided by the darunavir virtual Inhibitory quotient (vlQ) in patients receiving salvage therapy with darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg twice daily. Methods: Open-label, randomized pilot study in HIV-infected patients on darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg twice dally (viral load <50 copies/ml; darunavir vlQ >2). Thirty patients were randomized to darunavir/ritonavir 900/100 mg once daily (once-daily group, n=15) or 600/100 mg twice dally (twice-daily group, n=15). Viral load, blood chemistry, and darunavir and ritonavir trough plasma concentrations (C trough) were determined up to 48 weeks. If the darunavir vlQ fell to <1.5, the dosage was switched to 600/100 mg twice daily. The primary end point was the percentage of 48-week treatment failure. Results: Patients had taken a mean 11.6 (SD ±3.9) antiretroviral regimens before darunavir/ritonavir administration. The proportion of patients without 48-week treatment failure was 86.7% In both groups. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) darunavir Ctrough decreased from 3.09 mg/l (IQR 2.43-3.93) at baseline to 1.60 mg/l (IQR 1.25-2.04) at week 48 (P=0.001) in the once-daily group. Three once-daily group patients switched to darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg twice dally. Fewer patients had triglyceride levels >200 mg/dl at week 48 in the once-daily group (20.0%) than in the twice-daily group (20.0% versus 57.1%; P=0.046). Conclusions: Treatment simplification to darunavir/ritonavir 900/100 mg once dally guided by the darunavir vlQ in treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients receiving darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg twice-daily seems to be safe enough to be tested in adequately powered clinical trials.

The effects of darunavir-ritonavir at 600 and 100 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) alone, 200 mg of etravirine b.i.d. alone, or 600 and 100 mg of darunavir-ritonavir b.i.d. with 200 mg etravirine b.i.d. at steady state on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc, and vice versa, in healthy volunteers were investigated in two phase I, randomized, two-period crossover studies. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with darunavir-ritonavir increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC12) for maraviroc 4.05-fold relative to 150 mg of maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine decreased the maraviroc AUC12 by 53% relative to 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir increased the maraviroc AUC12 3.10-fold relative to 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Maraviroc did not significantly affect the pharmacokinetics of etravirine, darunavir, or ritonavir. Short-term coadministration of maraviroc with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or both was generally well tolerated, with no safety issues reported in either trial. Maraviroc can be coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir. Maraviroc should be dosed at 600 mg b.i.d. with etravirine in the absence of a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) (i.e., a boosted protease inhibitor) or at 150 mg b.i.d. when coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir with or without etravirine.

Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c) monotherapy as an antiretroviral treatment simplification strategy in HIV-infected patients already on suppressive darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) monotherapy in routine clinical practice. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study including all adult patients switched from DRV/r monotherapy to DRV/c monotherapy while HIV-1 RNA was <50 copies/mL and who had at least one follow-up visit. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients remaining free of treatment failure (TF), defined as discontinuation of monotherapy for any reason, including loss of follow-up. Virological failure (VF) was defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL or any change in the regimen after a single determination with HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies/mL. Changes in renal function parameters and lipid profile were also evaluated. Factors associated with VF were analyzed using Cox regression. In this study, 173 subjects were included. The median (interquartile range) time of follow-up was 58 (50-67) weeks. Overall, 90% of patients remained free of TF during follow-up. Ten (6%) patients discontinued DRV/c monotherapy for nonvirological reasons and eight (5%) developed VF. No DRV-related mutations were identified in patients with VF. A decrease in triglyceride levels (p = .006) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = .005) were observed during follow-up. The presence of blips and CD4+ nadir <100 cells/mm3 were predictors of VF. In conclusion, switching to DRV/c monotherapy seems to be safe and effective in routine clinical practice in HIV-infected patients undergoing suppressive DRV/r monotherapy.

This is a switch study to assess the non-inferiority (in terms of efficacy and safety) of darunavir (boosted with ritonavir, DRV/r 400mg/100mg daily) when compared with lopinavir (boosted with ritonavir, LPV/r total dose 800mg/200mg daily), in combination with a nucleoside backbone, administered as a second line therapy in HIV positive individuals.