Boosted PIs superior to no PIs as salvage therapy in highly PI-experienced

This article is more than 21 years old. Click here for more recent articles on this topic

A small Italian study comparing boosted protease inhibitor (PI) and PI-sparing salvage regimens in the highly PI-experienced has found the former superior in preserving CD4 cell counts to 24 weeks. The results were published in the March 26th issue of the journal AIDS.

Researchers from the Clinic of Infectious Diseases in Milan recruited 40 individuals whose current HAART regimens were failing and whose HIV was resistant to all available PIs (saquinavir, indinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir, amprenavir and lopinavir) according to genotypic resistance testing. At baseline, study participants had an average of eight protease gene mutations, a CD4 count of 150 cells/mm3 (range 26-236), and a viral load of 4.88 log10 copies/ml.

Twenty-one were assigned to a boosted PI regimen and 19 to a PI-sparing regimen. All 40 also received tenofovir and thirteen (six in the PI and seven in the non-PI group) at least one additional reverse transcriptase inhibitor (RTI). These could have been nucleoside or non nucleoside RTIs -- the researchers did not specify the exact number of drugs, nor name the specific drugs their participants were taking. They only indicated broad classes of drugs.

Glossary

protease inhibitor (PI)

Family of antiretrovirals which target the protease enzyme. Includes amprenavir, indinavir, lopinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, nelfinavir, and atazanavir.

boosting agent

Booster drugs are used to ‘boost’ the effects of protease inhibitors and some other antiretrovirals. Adding a small dose of a booster drug to an antiretroviral makes the liver break down the primary drug more slowly, which means that it stays in the body for longer times or at higher levels. Without the boosting agent, the prescribed dose of the primary drug would be ineffective.

p-value

The result of a statistical test which tells us whether the results of a study are likely to be due to chance and would not be confirmed if the study was repeated. All p-values are between 0 and 1; the most reliable studies have p-values very close to 0. A p-value of 0.001 means that there is a 1 in 1000 probability that the results are due to chance and do not reflect a real difference. A p-value of 0.05 means there is a 1 in 20 probability that the results are due to chance. When a p-value is 0.05 or below, the result is considered to be ‘statistically significant’. Confidence intervals give similar information to p-values but are easier to interpret. 

capacity

In discussions of consent for medical treatment, the ability of a person to make a decision for themselves and understand its implications. Young children, people who are unconscious and some people with mental health problems may lack capacity. In the context of health services, the staff and resources that are available for patient care.

statistical significance

Statistical tests are used to judge whether the results of a study could be due to chance and would not be confirmed if the study was repeated. If result is probably not due to chance, the results are ‘statistically significant’. 

Although there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups at baseline, those in the boosted PI group had an average CD4 count of 58 cells/mm3 compared with 175 cells/mm3 in the PI-sparing group. Eight individuals in each group took a treatment interruption prior to restarting therapy; there were an average of ten NRTI mutations seen in each member the PI group compared with nine in the PI-sparing group; and fifteen members of each group had mutations associated with reduced tenofovir sensitivity, although none had the 65R mutation.

Significantly, however, only six of the 21 PI-treated individuals received at least one active RTI in the new regimen compared with 16 in the PI-sparing group (p=0.0006). Additionally, only members of the PI-sparing group interrupted their treatment prior to 24 weeks (n=4) due to toxicity. Significant differences between the groups in terms of grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities were also seen (three individuals in the boosted PI and eight in the PI-sparing group; p=0.08). No statistically significant differences were noted in the cholesterol or triglyceride levels between the groups at week 24, however.

At the end of 24 weeks, the CD4 cell count difference between the two groups was found to be statistically significant (p=0.005). Those receiving a boosted PI regimen gained an average of ten cells/mm3 (ranging from -7 to +55), whereas those receiving the PI-sparing regimen lost an average of 41 cells/mm3 (ranging from -56 to -4).

Although six of the 21 (29%) in the boosted PI group and none of the 15 (0%) in the PI-sparing group achieved less than 400 copies/ml at week 24 (p=0.03), there were no significant differences seen in viral load levels between the two groups as a whole. At week 24, the boosted PI group showed a change of -0.28 log10 copies/ml (ranging from +0.16 to -1.33), and those in the PI-sparing group showed a change of -0.18 log10 copies/ml (ranging from +0.13 to -0.47).

After adjusting for baseline CD4 cell counts and viral loads, age, number of active drugs, total number of reverse transcriptase mutations and treatment interruptions prior to study entry, multivariate analysis showed that the only independent predictor of a change in CD4 cell counts at week 24 was a boosted PI regimen (p=0.048).

Given these results, the authors suggest that a boosted PI regimen “may be worthwhile even in the presence of extensive PI resistance”, since CD4 counts appear to be preserved in the medium term. The authors suggest that the boosted PI regimen might further impair viral replicative capacity by sustaining resistance mutations associated with lower replicative capacity or selecting new ones that augment this effect. Reduced replication capacity has been shown to reduce the CD4 cell-killing effect of HIV.

They also suggest that the presence of a protease inhibitor in the regimen might spare CD4 cells from apoptosis, and that the boosted protease inhibitor might have antiviral activity even in the presence of multiple drug resistance mutations.

Further information on this website

Choosing a salvage regimen - menu

References

Gianotti N et al. Boosted protease inhibitor-including regimen versus a protease inhibitor-sparing regimen in protease inhibitor-resistant HIV-infected patients: 24-week immunological outcome. AIDS 18 (5), 821-823, 2004.