Advertisement

TheBodyPRO.com Covers CROI 2015

News

Elvitegravir in Children and Adolescents

June 2015

CROI 2015 logo

Three posters at CROI 2015 showed new paediatric elvitegravir (EVG) data. The posters described preliminary safety in the 6 to 12 year old age group, and safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PK) and resistance in 12 to 18 year olds receiving EVG in fixed dose combinations (FDCs).1-3

EVG 150 mg is approved for adults as a component of the once-daily FDC containing cobicistat (COBI, C), emtricitabine (F) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), or when co-administered with a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor.

EVG has also been co-formulated with tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) in E/C/F/TAF, the FDC that is currently under regulatory review in the US and EU.

EVG 85 mg is used in combination with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or lopinavir because of increased EVG plasma concentrations due to UGT enzyme inhibition. Previous studies have confirmed use of the ritonavir or COBI-boosted adult dose in 12 to 18 year olds.4


Advertisement

Elvitegravir in Children Aged Six to Less Than 12 Years

GS-US-183-0160 is an ongoing, phase 2/3 open label, study with an age de-escalation design (oldest to youngest) evaluating the safety and PK of EVG in treatment experienced infants, children and adolescents 4 weeks to <18 years of age.

PK and preliminary safety data from 6 to <12 year olds (Cohort 2) were presented.

Sixteen participants were enrolled: median age 9 years (range 6-11); 14 had viral load <50 copies and 2 >1000 copies mL and baseline, their mean CD4 count was 811 cells/mm3.

Participants received EVG (adult or paediatric formulation) once daily added to their background regimen including either lopinavir/r or atazanavir/r. Data were available for 14 (57% male, 14% Asian, 71% black and 14% white).

Participants weighing >30 kg received the adult EVG 85 mg dose (n=6) and those weighing 17 to <30 kg received 50 mg (n=8).

The investigators compared PK parameters to exposures in adults from EVG plus boosted protease inhibitor phase 3 trials.

This comparison revealed geometric mean ratios (GMR) of 136%, 147%, and 129% vs adult exposure for AUCtau, Cmax and Ctrough respectively.

Mean EVG Ctrough was approximately 11-fold above the in vitro protein-binding adjusted IC95 (44.5 ng/mL); all participants' Ctroughs were above the IC95.

These data are consistent with the range of exposures seen in the 12 to <18 years age group.

The investigators suggested that EVG appeared to be safe and well tolerated, based on limited data in a small number of participants.


E/C/F/TAF PK in Adolescents

Treatment-naive 12 to 18 year olds (n=50), with viral load >1000 copies/mL, CD4 >100 cells/mm3 and eGFR >90 mL/min/1.73m2 received E/C/F/TAF once daily, in a phase 2/3, single arm, open label, two part trial.

Steady-state PK parameters of EVG, COBI, FTC, TAF and tenofovir (TFV) were compared to adult exposures by GMR with equivalence boundary of 70% to 143% for the 90% confidence interval. The trial evaluated adverse events, laboratory tests, and the proportion of subjects with viral load <400 and <50 copies/mL.

There were 48 participants (24 Part A/24 Part B) with a median age of 15 years (range 12-17), median weight of 52 kg, 58% female, 88% Black and 12% Asian; 21% with viral load >100,000 copies/mL, median CD4 count 452 cells/mm3, and median eGFR 158 mL/min/1.73m2.

The investigators found TAF, TFV, EVG, COBI, and FTC PK parameters in adolescents consistent with those associated with safety and efficacy in adults. TFV exposure by AUCtau was >90% lower from E/C/F/TAF than E/C/F/TDF as is seen in adult PK. All participants had EVG Ctau above the protein binding adjusted IC95 of 44.5 ng/mL.


Lack of Resistance in Adolescents on EVG-Based FDCs at 24 Week

Data from week 24 interim analyses that included 21 treatment-naive adolescents on E/C/F/TDF and 23 on E/C/F/TAF -- from two ongoing single-arm studies of these FDCs, conducted in the US, Thailand, Uganda and South Africa -- was also shown.

Most participants receiving the TDF FDC had HIV subtype C (47.6%, 10/21) or B (38.1%, 8/21) and the remainder had subtype AE (14.3%, 3/21). Most of the group receiving the TAF FDC had subtype A1 (56.5%, 13/23) and smaller proportions had subtype AE (17.4%, 4/23), B (17.4%, 4/23), D (4.3%, 1/23), or complex mixtures (4.3%, 1/23). The investigators noted that distribution of subtypes reflected geography: A1, Uganda; AE, Thailand; B, USA; C, South Africa.

The majority of adolescents receiving both FDCs had viral load <50 copies at 24 weeks: 85.7% (18/21) on E/C/F/TDF and 91.3% (21/23) on E/C/F/TAF.

Genotyping was performed at baseline in all participants at study entry to confirm sensitivity to FTC and tenofovir; screening genotyping to confirm sensitivity to EVG was only done in those receiving the TAF.

At baseline 14.3% of the participants receiving the TDF FDC had NNRTI-associated resistance mutations and 95.2% had secondary PI-associated mutations. Of those receiving the TAF FDC, 17.4% had NRTI-associated, 21.7% had secondary INSTI-associated, 8.7% had NNRTI-associated, and 100% had secondary PI-associated resistance mutations.

There was no correlation between pre-existing NNRTI, NRTI, secondary PI and secondary INSTI resistance mutations and virologic success at 24 weeks. No emergent resistance was detected in participants receiving E/C/F/TDF of E/C/F/TAF in these interim analyses.


References

Unless otherwise stated, all references to the programme and abstracts to the 22nd Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, 23-26 February 2015, Seattle.

  1. Custodio JM et al. Safety and pharmacokinetics of elvitegravir in HIV-1 infected pediatric subjects. Poster abstract 951.
  2. Kizito H et al. Week-24 data from a phase 3 clinical trial of E/C/F/TAF in HIV-infected adolescents. Poster abstract 953.
  3. Porter DP et al. Lack of emergent resistance in HIV-1-infected adolescents on elvitegravir-based STRs. Poster abstract 952.

Links to other websites are current at date of posting but not maintained.




This article was provided by HIV i-Base. It is a part of the publication HIV Treatment Bulletin. Visit HIV i-Base's website to find out more about their activities, publications and services.
 


No comments have been made.
 

Add Your Comment:
(Please note: Your name and comment will be public, and may even show up in
Internet search results. Be careful when providing personal information! Before
adding your comment, please read TheBody.com's Comment Policy.)

Your Name:


Your Location:

(ex: San Francisco, CA)

Your Comment:

Characters remaining:


Please note: Knowledge about HIV changes rapidly. Note the date of this summary's publication, and before treating patients or employing any therapies described in these materials, verify all information independently. If you are a patient, please consult a doctor or other medical professional before acting on any of the information presented in this summary. For a complete listing of our most recent conference coverage, click here.

Advertisement

The content on this page is free of advertiser influence and was produced by our editorial team. See our content and advertising policies.