A triple combination
containing the new integrase inhibitor bictegravir proved just as effective as
a dolutegravir-based combination in suppressing viral load over 96 weeks, but
people taking bictegravir experienced significantly fewer adverse events
related to treatment, Professor Hans-Jürgen
Stellbrink of the University of Hamburg reported at the International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection (HIV Glasgow) on Tuesday.
Bictegravir
is a new integrase inhibitor. It received regulatory approval in the European
Union in July 2018 as part of a co-formulated, single-pill product called Biktarvy, combined with emtricitabine
and tenofovir alafenamide. Biktarvy
is also approved in the United States.
The GS-1490
study presented at HIV Glasgow compared Biktarvy
to a regimen of dolutegravir, tenofovir alafenamide and emtricitabine in previously untreated people. Participants
in this blinded study received matching placebos so that everyone took the same
number of pills.
The study recruited 645 participants in Europe and North America. People were
eligible to join the study if they had normal-to-mildly impaired kidney
function (eGFR > 30ml/min) and no previous history of antiretroviral
treatment. People with hepatitis B or hepatitis C co-infection were eligible to
join the study.
A primary endpoint
analysis of the study was presented at the 9th International AIDS Society Conference
on HIV Science (IAS 2017) in Paris in July 2017, showing no difference
between the two regimens in rates of virological suppression after 48 weeks of
treatment.
This week, Hans-Jürgen
Stellbrink presented results of the secondary endpoint analysis of the study,
rates of virological suppression at 96 weeks and adverse events.
Six hundred and
fifty-seven participants were randomised and 645 began treatment in the study.
Approximately one-third of study participants were black, a quarter were
Hispanic or Latino and the remainder were white. The median baseline viral load
was 4.43 log10 copies/ml in the bictegravir group and 4.45 log10
copies/ml in the dolutegravir group. The study population had relatively high
baseline CD4 counts (a median of 440 cells/mm3), reflecting the trend
towards earlier diagnosis.
The intent-to-treat
analysis, covering everyone randomised to participate in the study, showed that
after 96 weeks, 84.1% of those receiving Biktarvy
and 86.5% of those receiving dolutegravir-based treatment had a viral load
below < 50 copies/ml, a non-significant difference.
The per-protocol
analysis, covering everyone who commenced treatment, showed that 100% of those
receiving Biktarvy and 98.2% of those
receiving dolutegravir-based treatment had a viral load below 50 copies/ml, a
statistically significant difference (p = 0.03).
Five people taking
dolutegravir-based treatment had detectable viral loads at week 96 but none had
evidence of resistance to study drugs. Fourteen people in the bictegravir arm
and seven in the dolutegravir arm discontinued treatment with a detectable
viral load; in seven cases because they had no post-baseline visit, or because they
did not wish to continue in the study, or due to pregnancy.
Participants randomised
to dolutegravir had a significantly larger mean CD4 cell increase (+281
cells/mm3 vs 237 cells/mm3, p = 0.008), but Prof. Stellbrink noted that there was
no significant difference in the absolute CD4 count at week 96 (733 cells/mm3
in the dolutegravir arm and 693 cells/mm3 in the bictegravir arm),
nor in the change in CD4 cell percentage between the study arms.
Treatment-related
adverse events were significantly more common in people receiving
dolutegravir-based treatment than in the Biktarvy
group (28 vs 20%, p = 0.02) but there was no difference in the rate of
discontinuation due to adverse events (2%). The most common adverse events were
nausea, diarrhoea and headache. No significant differences in the frequency of
laboratory test abnormalities was observed.