Comparison of INSTI – Phase 2

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
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.
Advertisements

Comparison of NRTI combinations  ZDV/3TC vs TDF + FTC –Study 934  ABC/3TC vs TDF/FTC –HEAT Study –ACTG A5202 Study –ASSERT Study  Comparison of TAF.
Comparison of RTV vs Cobi  GS-US Gallant JE. JID 2013;208:32-9 GS-US  Design  Objective –Non inferiority of COBI compared with RTV.
Phase 2 of new ARVs  Fostemsavir, prodrug of temsavir (attachment inhibitor) –AI Study  TAF (TFV prodrug) –Study –Study  Doravirine.
Comparison of INSTI vs PI  FLAMINGO  GS  ACTG A5257  WAVES.
Comparison of INSTI vs EFV  STARTMRK  GS-US  SINGLE.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI  QDMRK  SPRING-2. Eron JJ, Lancet Infect Dis 2011;11: QDMRK  Design  Objective –Non inferiority of RAL QD: % HIV.
Comparison of INSTI vs PI  FLAMINGO  GS  ACTG A5257  WAVES.
NRTI-sparing  SPARTAN  PROGRESS  NEAT001/ANRS 143  MODERN.
Comparison of INSTI vs PI  FLAMINGO  GS  ACTG A5257.
ARV-trial.com RUBY-II Study: ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir for HCV genotype 1a or 4 with severe renal impairment Design Open label W12.
Switch from TDF to TAF GS-US Study GS-US Study
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Design Randomisation 1 : 1 Double-blind W8 W12
Switch to INSTI + NNRTI Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
ARV-trial.com Switch to RPV/FTC/TAF Studies 1216 and
PHOTON-2 Study: SOF + RBV in HCV-HIV co-infection
Comparison of INSTI vs PI
Switch to PI/r + 3TC vs PI/r monotherapy
ARV-trial.com Switch to ATV/r + 3TC ATLAS-M Study.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
ARV-trial.com Switch to D/C/F/TAF EMERALD Study 1.
AL study: AL ODV + SMV in naïve patients, phase II
Creatinine clearance ≥ 50 ml/min No HBV or HIV co-infection
Switch to DTG + RPV Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
Switch from TDF to TAF GS-US Study GS-US Study
Switch ABC/3TC to TAF/FTC
Switch to DTG + 3TC ASPIRE Study.
ARV-trial.com Switch to E/C/F/TAF GS-US Study 1.
Switch from TDF to TAF GS-US Study GS-US Study
Switch to BIC/FTC/TAF GS-US GS-US GS-US
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
Switch to BIC/FTC/TAF GS-US GS-US GS-US
Comparison of NRTI combinations
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
LDV/SOF ± RBV in genotype 3 or 6 – Phase 2
Switch to D/C/F/TAF EMERALD Study.
Switch to BIC/FTC/TAF GS-US GS-US GS-US
Comparison of NNRTI vs PI/r
Comparison of NRTI combinations
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Comparison of NRTI combinations
Comparison of INSTI vs EFV
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
ARV-trial.com Switch to DRV/r + RPV PROBE Study 1.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
Comparison of NNRTI vs PI/r
Comparison of NRTI combinations
Switch to RAL-containing regimen
Switch to BIC/FTC/TAF GS-US GS-US GS-US
Switch to INSTI + NNRTI Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to DTG + RPV Switch to DTG + RPV SWORD Study
Comparison of INSTI vs PI
Switch to ATV/r monotherapy
Comparison of NRTI combinations
NRTI-sparing SPARTAN PROGRESS RADAR NEAT001/ANRS 143 A VEMAN
Switch to LPV/r monotherapy
ARV-trial.com Switch to DTG/ABC/3TC STRIIVING NEAT
Comparison of PI vs PI ATV vs ATV/r BMS 089
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
DTG + 3TC vs DTG + TDF/FTC GEMINI.
Comparison of INSTI vs INSTI
Comparison of NNRTI vs NNRTI
Presentation transcript:

Comparison of INSTI – Phase 2 ARV-trial.com Comparison of INSTI – Phase 2 BIC Phase 2 Study

BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF ARV-trial.com BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF Design Randomisation 2:1 Double-blind W24 W48 > 18 years ARV-naïve HIV RNA > 1 000 c/mL CD4 ≥ 200/mm3 HBs Ag and HCV Ab negative N = 65 BIC + FTC/TAF + DTG placebo DTG + FTC/TAF + BIC placebo N = 33 BIC: 75 mg QD DTG: 50 mg QD Objective % HIV RNA < 50 c/mL at W24 BIC Phase 2 Sax PE. Lancet HIV 2017; 4:e154-e160

BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF ARV-trial.com BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF Baseline characteristics and patient disposition BIC + FTC/TAF N = 65 DTG + FTC/TAF N = 33 Median age, years 30 36 Female, % 2 9 Race : white, % 58 55 HIV RNA (log10 c/mL), median 4.41 4.48 HIV RNA > 100 000 c/mL, % 15 21 CD4 cell count (/mm3), median 441 455 CD4 < 200 per mm3, % 5 Median eGFR (Cockroft-Gault), mL/min 130 122 Premature discontinuation, N Adverse event Lost to follow-up Non-compliance 1 BIC Phase 2 Sax PE. Lancet HIV 2017; 4:e154-e160

BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF ARV-trial.com BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF 58 HIV RNA < 50 c/mL (ITT, snapshot) W24 (primary endpoint) 97 2 91 6 3 20 40 60 80 100 Virologic response non-response No data % W48 Difference (95% CI) = 6.4% (- 6.0 to 18.8) 97 3 94 6 20 40 60 80 100 Virologic response failure No data % Difference (95% CI) = 2.9% (- 8.5 to 14.2) DTG + FTC/TAF (N = 33) BIC + FTC/TAF (N = 65) CD4 increase at W48 (mean) BIC: + 258/mm3 vs DTG: + 192/mm3 BIC Phase 2 Sax PE. Lancet HIV 2017; 4:e154-e160

BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF ARV-trial.com BIC Phase 2 Study: BIC + FTC/TAF vs DTG + FTC/TAF 62 Adverse events, % BIC + FTC/TAF N = 65 DTG + FTC/TAF N = 33 Adverse event ≥ 5% in either group Diarrhea Nausea Headache Upper respiratory tract infection Fatigue Arthralgia Chlamydial infection Back pain Furuncle Flatulence Gastroenteritis Costochondritis Hemorrhoids Pruritis 12 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 5 2 2 0 12 12 3 0 6 6 3 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 Grade 2-4 laboratory abnormalities ≥ 8% in either group Creatine kinase AST Hyperglycemia LDL-cholesterol 13 9 8 6 9 3 13 9 1 patient in the BIC + FTC/TAF group with a past history of urticaria and atopic dermatitis discontinued study drug after W24 due to urticaria BIC Phase 2 Sax PE. Lancet HIV 2017; 4:e154-e160