TBR-652, a dual antagonist or
blocker of both the CCR5 and CCR2 cell surface receptors, shows potent activity
against HIV and also dampens inflammation, participants heard at the Eighteenth
International AIDS Conference this week in Vienna.
HIV can use two different surface
co-receptors
– CCR5 and CXCR4
– along with the CD4 receptor to enter T-cells.
CCR5 blockers interfere with this process by preventing HIV from attaching to
cells. Unlike the sole approved CCR5 antagonist maraviroc (Celsentri), however, TBR-652 also disrupts attachment to CCR2.
As David Martin from Tobira Pharmaceuticals explained
at the conference, CCR2 plays a role in inflammation by binding to monocyte
chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1), a chemical messenger that summons monocytes
and macrophages, types of immune system white blood cells. CCR2 has been
studied in relation to a variety of inflammatory diseases including
atherosclerosis and metabolic syndrome, and blockade of this receptor appears
safe to date.
A growing body of evidence indicates that low-level
persistent HIV infection
– even in people on suppressive antiretroviral therapy
– can trigger ongoing immune activation and chronic inflammation that
contribute to a range of non-AIDS health problems including cardiovascular
disease, neurocognitive impairment and non-AIDS-defining cancers. Eventually
persistent cell activation can result in immunosenescence, or premature aging
and depletion of the immune system.
Researchers designed a Phase 2 study to test multiple
doses of TBR-652 monotherapy, given orally once daily for ten days. A total of
54 participants with confirmed CCR5-tropic HIV were randomly assigned to five
groups receiving TBR-652 doses of 25, 50, 75, 100 or 150mg per day; the 100mg
group used a slightly different formulation. Two participants in each cohort
received placebo.
Most participants were men, the mean age was about 40
years, the median HIV viral load was approximately 30,000 copies/ml and CD4
count averaged 400 to 500 cells/mm3. All were treatment-experienced
but had never taken other CCR5 antagonists and had been off antiretroviral
therapy for at least six weeks.
As reported at the 2010 Conference on Retroviruses and
Opportunistic Infections in February,
TBR-652 potently inhibited HIV, reducing viral load by as much as 1.8 log in
the 75mg group at the end of ten days. TBR-652 had a long half-life of 30 to 40
hours and Martin said "plenty of drug" remained at completion of
dosing.
TBR-652 appeared safe and well tolerated, with no
severe side-effects or significant laboratory abnormalities
in any dose group. In fact, participants receiving the 75mg dose
– the one that
produced the largest viral load drop
–
reported no adverse events of any severity. One individual dropped out early
but not due to drug-related reasons.
In the AIDS 2010 report, the researchers focused on
the anti-inflammatory effects of TBR-652. At days 1 and 10 they measured plasma
levels of MCP-1, the inflammation biomarker high-sensitivity C-reactive protein
(hsCRP), and the pro-inflammatory cytokine interleukin 6 (IL-6).
MCP-1 levels rose in proportion to drug concentration
in the blood, demonstrating that TBR-652 blocked CCR2 binding as expected. The
average hsCRP level fell, but Martin said this was mainly attributable to a
single participant with acute inflammation who had a high baseline level but
subsequently showed a dramatic drop. IL-6 was undetectable in all participants,
suggesting that the lower limit of the test was likely too low.
Based on these results, the researchers
concluded that TBR‑652 is a
potent dual CCR5/CCR2 antagonist that was generally safe and well-tolerated
warranting further study in larger trials of longer duration.
Tobira expects
to start a Phase 2b trial of TBR-652 in early 2011, which Martin said would
look at additional inflammation and cardiovascular risk biomarkers, cell surface markers of activation and
apoptosis (cell death) and clinical effects of blocking
CCR2 including cardiovascular events and metabolic changes.
During a discussion following the presentation, some
participants expressed concern about the potential for TBR-652 to interfere
with immune response in ways that increase the risk of infections, as suggested
in some prior human and animal studies of CCR2 interference.
Martin acknowledged that there is potential for
greater risk
– especially with exposure to high levels of an infectious agent
– but emphasised that no increase in infection rates has been observed so far
in human trials of TBR-625.
"I think the jury is out as to whether it will
mean anything clinically," he said.