Antiviral Efficacy and Genotypic Resistance Patterns of Combination Therapy with Stavudine/Tenofovir in Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Experienced Patients
Free accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2006
Antiviral Efficacy and Genotypic Resistance Patterns of Combination Therapy with Stavudine/Tenofovir in Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Experienced Patients
To evaluate antiviral efficacy of stavudine/tenofovir (d4T/TDF) backbone combination in late-line antiretroviral therapy, and to assess clinical and virological determinants of treatment success.
Design
Multicentric retrospective analysis on patients starting d4T/TDF after highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) failure.
Methods
The primary endpoint was the change in plasma HIV-1 RNA from the baseline (time of d4T/TDF initiation) to 6 months of therapy; secondary endpoint was the risk of virological failure.
Results
Among 172 patients included, a mean change in HIV-1 RNA of -1.69 (+1.23) and -1.53 (+1.43) log10 cp/ml was observed respectively at weeks 24 and 48 after starting d4T/TDF combination. Any single type-1 thymidine analogue mutation (TAM; M41L, L210W, T215Y) had a negative effort on the change in HIV RNA at 6 months, whereas among type-2 TAMs (D67N, K70R, K219Q), only D67N showed a trend for a negative effect. Presence of M184V mutation was related with a greater reduction in HIV RNA during d4T/TDF exposure. The risk of virological failure at 6 months after d4T/TDF starting was 22%. Type-1 TAMs were associated with a greater risk of failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]=1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19–2.29). Conversely, M184V showed a protective effect. In 17 genotypic tests available at failure, no K65R mutation was detected, whereas a trend for an increasing prevalence of d4T-associated mutations was found.
Conclusions
Combining TDF with a thymidine analogue as d4T may be effective as component of antiretroviral rescue regimens in HIV-infected patients with previous exposure to nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Previous selection of type-1 TAMs induces a detrimental effect over virological response.
SchooleyR.T., RuaneP., MyersR.A.Study 902 Team. Tenofovir DF in antiretroviral-experienced patients: results from a 48-week, randomised, double-blind study.AIDS2002; 16: 1257–1263.
GallantJ.E., StaszewskiS., PozniakA.L.Efficacy and safety of tenofovir DF vs stavudine in combination therapy in antiretroviral-naive patients: a 3-year randomized trial.JAMA2004; 292: 191–201.
5.
GallantJ.E., RodriguezA.E., WeinbergW.Early no-response to tenofovir DF (TDF) + abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC) in a randomised trial compared to efavirenz (EFV) + ABC and 3TC: ESS30009 unplanned interim analysis.43rdInterscience Conference on Microbial Agents and Chemotherapy. 14–17 September 2003, Chicago, IL, USA. Abstract H-1722a.
6.
JemsekJ., HutchersonP., HarperE.Poor virologic responses and early emergence of resistance in treatment naive, HIV-infected patients receiving a once daily triple nucleoside regimen of didanosine, lamivudine, and tenofovir DF.11th Conference on Retrovirus and Opportunistic Infections. 8–11 February 2004, San Francisco, CA, USA. Abstract 51.
7.
HoogewerfM., RegezR.M., SchoutenW.E., WeigelH.M., FrissenP.H., BrinkmanK.Change to abacavir-lamivudine-tenofovir combination treatment in patients with HIV-1 who had complete virological suppression.Lancet2003; 362: 1979–1980.
8.
NegredoE., MoltoJ., BurgerD.Unexpected CD4 cell count decline in patients receiving didanosine and tenofovir-based regimens despite undetectable viral load.AIDS2004; 18: 459–463.
9.
Perez-EliasM.J., MorenoS., GutierrezC.High virological failure rate in HIV patients after switching to a regimen with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus tenofovir.AIDS2005; 19: 695–698.
10.
WirdenM., MarcelinA.G., TubianaR.Virologic outcome after switching from a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor to tenofovir in patients with undetectable HIV-1 RNA plasma level.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2004; 36: 876–887.
11.
NegredoE., MoltoJ., Munoz-MorenoJ.A.Safety and efficacy of once-daily didanosine, tenofovir and nevirapine as a simplification antiretroviral approach.Antivir Ther2004; 9: 335–342.
12.
DomingoP., LabargaP., PalaciosR.Improvement of dyslipidemia in patients switching from stavudine to tenofovir: preliminary results.AIDS2004; 18: 1475–1478.
13.
ParikhU., KoontzD., Sluis–cremerN.K65R: a multinucleoside resistance mutation of increasing prevalence exhibits bi-directional phenotypic antagonism with TAM.11th Conference on Retrovirus and Opportunistic Infections. 8–11 February 2004. San Francisco, CA, USA. Abstract 54.
14.
MaussS., MilinkovicA., HoffmannC.Low rate of treatment failure on antiretroviral therapy with tenofovir, lamivudine and zidovudine.AIDS2005; 19: 101–102.
15.
ReyD., KrebsM., PartisaniM.Early virologic response at 1-month and 8-month medain follow-up of a new triple NUC combination (zidovudine, lamivudine, and tenofovir) in 36 antiretroviral-naïve, HIV-1-infected patients.12thConference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. 22–25 February 2005, Boston, MS; USA. Abstract 599.
16.
De JesusE., ElionR., CohenC.Week 24 analysis of once-daily (QD) Trizivir (TZV) and Tenofovir DF (TDF) in antiretroviral naïve subjects (COLO40263).44thInterscience Conference on Microbial Agents and Chemotherapy. 30 October-2 November 2004, Washington, DC, USA. Abstract H-564.
17.
RodriguezA.E., Hill-ZabalaC.E., SloanL.A.Abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine (TZV) + tenofovir (TDF) in subjects with early virologic failure on an initial regimen of zidovudine (ZDV) or stavudine (d4T) + lamivudine (3TC) and a protease inhibitor (PI) or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) (ESS30005, ZIP).44thInterscience Conference on Microbial Agents and Chemotherapy. 30 October-2 November 2004, Washington, DC, USA. Abstract H-563.
18.
KhanlouH., GuyerB., FarthingC.Efficacy of tenofovir as intensification of zidovudine/lamivudine/abacavir fixed-dose combination in the treatment of HIV-positive patients.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2005; 38: 627–628.
19.
JohnsonV.A., Brun-VezinetF., ClotetB.Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: 2005.Top HIV Med2005; 13: 51–57.
20.
WainbergM.A., TurnerD.Resistance issues with new nucleoside/nucleotide backbone options.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2004; 37: S36–43.
21.
MasquelierB., TamaletC., MontesB.Genotypic determinants of the virological response to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-experienced patients.Antivir Ther2004; 9: 315–323.
22.
MillerM.D., MargotN., LuB.Genotypic and phenotypic predictors of the magnitude of response to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate treatment in antiretroviral-experienced patients.J Infect Dis2004; 189: 837–846.
23.
BarriosA., de MendozaC., Martin-CarboneroL.Role of baseline human immunodeficiency virus genotype as a predictor of viral response to tenofovir in heavily pretreated patients.J Clin Microbiol2003; 41: 4421–4423.
24.
BocketL., YazdanpanahY., AjanaF.Thymidine analogue mutations in antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 patients on triple therapy including either zidovudine or stavudine.J Antimicrob Chemother2004; 53: 89–94.
25.
DescampsD., FlandreP., JolyV.Effect of zidovudine resistance mutations on virologic response to treatment with zidovudine or stavudine, each in combination with lamivudine and indinavir.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2002; 31: 464–471.
26.
LarderB.A., KempS.D., HarriganP.R.Potential mechanism for sustained antiretroviral efficacy of AZT-3TC combination therapy.Science1995; 269: 696–699.
27.
WainbergM.A., MillerM.D., QuanY.In vitro selection and characterization of HIV-1 with reduced susceptibility to PMPA.Antivir Ther1999; 4: 87–94.
28.
WolfK., WalterH., BeerenwinkelN.Tenofovir resistance and resensitization.Antimicrob Agents Chemother2003; 47: 3478–3484.
29.
HarriganP.R., MillerM.D., McKennaP., BrummeZ.L., LarderB.A.Phenotypic susceptibilities to tenofovir in a large panel of clinically derived human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates.Antimicrob Agents Chemother2002; 46: 1067–1072.
30.
WhiteK.L., MargotN.A., WrinT., PetropoulosC.J., MillerM.D., NaegerL.K.Molecular mechanisms of resistance to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 with reverse transcriptase mutations K65R and K65R+M184V and their effects on enzyme function and viral replication capacity.Antimicrob Agents Chemother2002; 46: 3437–3446.
31.
DevalJ., WhiteK.L., MillerM.D.Drug resistance and viral fitness at the molecular level: the case of tenofovir.XII International HIV Drug Resistance Workshop: Basic principles and Clinical Implications. 10–14 June 2003, Los Cabos, Mexico. Abstract 34.
32.
MargotN.A., IsaacsonE., McGowanI., ChengA.K., SchooleyR.T., MillerM.D.Genotypic and phenotypic analyses of HIV-1 in antiretroviral-experienced patients treated with tenofovir DF.AIDS2002; 16: 1227–1235.
33.
LandmanR., PeytavinG., DescampsD.Low genetic barrier to resistance is a possible cause of early virologic failures in once-daily regimen of abacavir, lamivudine, and tenofovir: The Tonus Study.11th Conference on Retrovirus and Opportunistic Infections. 8–11 February 2004, San Francisco, CA, USA. Abstract 52.
34.
KaulS., BassiK., DamieB.Stavudine extended-release formulation (d4T XR) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF): lack of a pharmacokinetic (PK) drug interaction.11th Conference on Retrovirus and Opportunistic Infections. 8–11 February 2004, San Francisco, CA, USA. Abstract 602.
35.
BarriosA., RendonA., NegredoE.Paradoxical CD4+ T-cell decline in HIV-infected patients with complete virus suppression taking tenofovir and didanosine.AIDS2005; 19: 569–575.
36.
KakudaT.N., AndersonP.L., BeckerS.L.CD4 cell decline with didanosine and tenofovir and failure of triple nucleoside/nucleotide regimens may be related.AIDS2004; 18: 2442–2444.
37.
KarrerU., LedergerberB., WeberR.No Evidence for Poor Immunologic Response in Patients Treated with a Combination of Tenofovir and Didanosine at 250 mg Daily.12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. 22–25 February 2005, Boston, MS, USA. Abstract 588.
