Week 96 efficacy and safety results of the phase 3, randomized EMERALD trial to evaluate switching from boosted-protease inhibitors plus emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate regimens to the once daily, single-tablet regimen of darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) in treatment-experienced, virologically-suppressed adults living with HIV-1

Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg was investigated through 96 weeks in EMERALD (NCT02269917). Virologically-suppressed, HIV-1-positive treatment-experienced adults (previous non-darunavir virologic failure [VF] allowed) were randomized (2:1) to D/C/F/TAF or boosted protease inhibitor (PI) plus emtricitabine/tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (F/TDF) over 48 weeks. At week 52 participants in the boosted PI arm were offered switch to D/C/F/TAF (late-switch, 44 weeks D/C/F/TAF exposure). All participants were followed on D/C/F/TAF until week 96. Efficacy endpoints were percentage cumulative protocol-defined virologic rebound (PDVR; confirmed viral load [VL] >= 50 copies/mL) and VL = 50 copies/mL (VF) (FDA-snapshot analysis). Of 1141 randomized patients, 1080 continued in the extension phase. Few patients had PDVR (D/C/F/TAF: 3.1%, 24/763 cumulative through week 96; late-switch: 2.3%, 8/352 week 52-96). Week 96 virologic suppression was 90.7% (692/763) (D/C/F/TAF) and 93.8% (330/352) (late-switch). VF was 1.2% and 1.7%, respectively. No darunavir, primary PI, tenofovir or emtricitabine resistance-associated mutations were observed post-baseline. No patients discontinued for efficacy-related reasons. Few discontinued due to adverse events (2% D/C/F/TAF arm). Improved renal and bone parameters were maintained in the D/C/F/TAF arm and observed in the late-switch arm, with small increases in total cholesterol/high-density-lipoprotein-cholesterol ratio. A study limitation was the lack of a control arm in the week 96 analysis. Through 96 weeks, D/C/F/TAF resulted in low PDVR rates, high virologic suppression rates, very few VFs, and no resistance development. Late-switch results were consistent with D/C/F/TAF week 48 results. EMERALD week 96 results confirm the efficacy, high genetic barrier to resistance and safety benefits of D/C/F/TAF

Week 48 resistance analyses of the once-daily, single-tablet regimen darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) in adults living with HIV-1 from the Phase III Randomized AMBER and EMERALD Trials

Darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg is being investigated in two Phase III trials, AMBER (NCT02431247; treatment-naive adults) and EMERALD (NCT02269917; treatment-experienced, virologically suppressed adults). Week 48 AMBER and EMERALD resistance analyses are presented. Postbaseline samples for genotyping/phenotyping were analyzed from protocol-defined virologic failures (PDVFs) with viral load (VL) >= 400 copies/mL at failure/later time points. Post hoc analyses were deep sequencing in AMBER, and HIV-1 proviral DNA from baseline samples (VL = 3 thymidine analog-associated mutations (24% not fully susceptible to tenofovir) detected at screening. All achieved VL <50 copies/mL at week 48 or prior discontinuation. D/C/F/TAF has a high genetic barrier to resistance; no darunavir, primary PI, or tenofovir RAMs were observed through 48 weeks in AMBER and EMERALD. Only one postbaseline M184I/V RAM was observed in HIV-1 of an AMBER participant. In EMERALD, baseline archived RAMs to darunavir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir in participants with prior VF did not preclude virologic response

2509. Pooled Resistance Analyses of Darunavir (DRV) Once Daily (QD) Regimens and Formulations Across 10 Clinical Studies of Treatment-Naïve (TN) and Treatment-Experienced (TE) Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-1 Infection

Abstract Background DRV has demonstrated high efficacy and barrier to resistance development across diverse populations, from TN to heavily TE patients. We evaluated resistance data from 10 clinical studies of different DRV 800 mg QD–based antiretroviral regimens and formulations. Methods The analysis included patients from 10 phase 2/3 studies (48–192 weeks in duration) of ritonavir- and cobicistat-boosted DRV 800 mg QD–based regimens in TN and virologically failing or suppressed TE patients with HIV-1 (table). Three were phase 3 studies of the DRV/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg single-tablet regimen (STR). Post-baseline resistance was evaluated in patients experiencing protocol-defined virologic failure (PDVF); definitions and criteria for resistance testing varied slightly among studies. Resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were based on respective International Antiviral Society–USA mutation lists over time. Results Of the 3,635 patients evaluated, 250 met PDVF criteria and 205 had post-baseline genotypes/phenotypes. Overall, 4 (0.1%) patients developed (or had identified [switch studies]) ≥1 DRV and/or primary protease inhibitor (PI) RAM (table), and only 1 (&lt; 0.1%, ODIN) patient lost DRV phenotypic susceptibility; this TE patient had prior VF with lopinavir. Among those who used a nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone (mostly emtricitabine [FTC] + tenofovir [TFV]), 12 (0.4%) patients had ≥1 NRTI RAM, including 10 with M184I/V associated with FTC resistance. No TFV RAMs were observed. Among patients receiving D/C/F/TAF (n = 1,949), none had post-baseline DRV, primary PI, or TFV RAMs; only 2 (0.1%) patients developed an FTC RAM. Conclusion Across a large, diverse population using DRV 800 mg QD–based regimens and formulations, resistance development remains rare; 0.1% of patients had ≥1 DRV and/or primary PI RAM post-baseline. Among 3 trials of the D/C/F/TAF STR, no patients developed a DRV or primary PI RAM. After &gt; 10 years of investigating DRV 800 mg QD–based regimens in clinical trials, loss of phenotypic susceptibility to DRV has never been observed in TN or TE virologically suppressed patients and was only once observed in a TE patient with prior VF on multiple antiretrovirals, including a PI. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures. </jats:sec

Pooled resistance analyses of darunavir once-daily regimens and formulations across 10 clinical studies of treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection

Background The efficacy and high barrier to resistance of darunavir have been demonstrated across diverse populations with HIV-1 infection. Objective To evaluate post-baseline resistance among patients in studies of once-daily (QD) darunavir-based regimens and formulations. Methods The analysis included treatment-naïve and virologically failing or suppressed patients from 10 phase 2/3 studies (48–192 weeks in duration) of boosted darunavir 800 mg QD-based regimens. Three were phase 3 studies of the QD darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg single-tablet regimen. Post-baseline resistance was evaluated upon protocol-defined virologic failure (PDVF). Resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were identified using International Antiviral Society-USA mutation lists. Phenotypic analyses varied across studies. Results Overall, 250 of 3635 patients in the analysis met PDVF criteria; 205 had post-baseline genotypes/phenotypes. In total, four (0.1%) patients developed (or had identified) ≥1 darunavir and/or primary protease inhibitor (PI) RAM; only one (10 years, loss of phenotypic susceptibility to darunavir was only observed once in a PI-experienced patient and has never been observed in treatment-naïve patients, treatment-experienced PI-naïve patients, or treatment-experienced virologically suppressed patients

Virological Analysis of Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Darunavir/Ritonavir in the Odin Trial of Treatment-Experienced Patients

Background The aim of this analysis was to characterize viral resistance in the Phase III, randomized ODIN trial, which demonstrated non-inferiority of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg to DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily, each combined with an optimized background regimen in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) at screening. Methods Virological failure (VF) was defined as never achieving or losing confirmed virological suppression after week 12, with patients being classed as ‘never suppressed’ (never achieved HIV-1 RNA&lt;50 copies/ml) or ‘rebounders’ (achieved two consecutive HIV-1 RNA&lt;50 copies/ml but then ≥50 copies/ml). Phenotypes and genotypes of plasma HIV-1 viruses, using population-based sequencing and Antivirogram®, were determined at screening/baseline and on samples from VFs with HIV-1 RNA≥50 copies/ml. Results Mean baseline HIV-1 RNA was 4.16 log10 copies/ ml and 53.9% of patients were protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced at enrolment. VF rate was similar in both arms. A similar proportion of virologically failing patients in both arms developed PI RAMs (11.7% versus 9.5%, respectively) or nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor RAMs (6.7% versus 7.1%). One patient with VF (once-daily arm) developed four primary PI mutations, three of which were also DRV RAMs. This patient was also the only VF to lose susceptibility to DRV. Loss of susceptibility to other PIs (once daily 3.4%; twice daily 0%) and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (once daily 13.6%; twice daily 9.8%) in VF patients was infrequent and comparable between treatment arms. Conclusions These analyses showed once-daily DRV/r 800/100 mg was associated with similar rates of VF and emergence of resistance as DRV/r 600/100 mg twice daily in treatment-experienced patients with no DRV RAMs. </jats:sec

Virological Characterization of Patients Failing Darunavir/Ritonavir or Lopinavir/Ritonavir Treatment in the Artemis Study: 96-Week Analysis

Background In the Phase III ARTEMIS Trial, treatment-naive patients received once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) 800/100 mg ( n=343) or lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 800/200 mg (total daily dose; n=346) plus fixed-dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. The primary outcome measure was non-inferiority of DRV/r versus LPV/r (HIV type-1 [HIV-1] RNA&lt;50 copies/ml). Here, a detailed 96-week resistance analysis is presented. Methods Virological failures (VFs) were defined as patients who had lost (rebounders) or who had never achieved (never suppressed) HIV-1 RNA&lt;50 copies/ml after week 12. Genotypic and phenotypic determinations were performed on plasma samples with HIV-1 RNA≥50 copies/ml. The end point was defined as the last on-treatment visit with available genotype and/or phenotype. Results The VF rate was significantly lower in DRV/r (12%, n=40) versus LPV/r patients (17%, n=59; P=0.0437). Among DRV/r patients, 24 rebounded and 16 were never suppressed, whereas among LPV/r patients, 33 rebounded and 26 were never suppressed. Transient HIV-1 RNA increases (≥50 copies/ml) occurred in 50% ( n=12) DRV/r and 48% ( n=16) LPV/r rebounders; these viral levels returned to undetectable by end point without any changes to the study regimen. No major (primary) protease inhibitor (PI) resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) developed in VFs with an available genotype at baseline and end point, and almost all developing minor PI RAMs were polymorphic. At end point, all VFs with available phenotypes at baseline and end point remained susceptible to all PIs, including study PIs. Conclusions The VF rate was lower with DRV/r than LPV/r. The findings of this resistance analysis confirmed the lack of development of major PI RAMs and the preservation of phenotypic susceptibility to all PIs in patients with VF. </jats:sec

Week 48 Resistance Analyses of the Once-Daily, Single-Tablet Regimen Darunavir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) in Adults Living with HIV-1 from the Phase III Randomized AMBER and EMERALD Trials

International audienceDarunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) 800/150/200/10 mg is being investigated in two Phase III trials, AMBER (NCT02431247; treatment-naive adults) and EMERALD (NCT02269917; treatmentexperienced, virologically suppressed adults). Week 48 AMBER and EMERALD resistance analyses are presented. Postbaseline samples for genotyping/phenotyping were analyzed from protocol-defined virologic failures (PDVFs) with viral load (VL) ‡400 copies/mL at failure/later time points. Post hoc analyses were deep sequencing in AMBER, and HIV-1 proviral DNA from baseline samples (VL <50 copies/mL) in EMERALD. Through week 48 across both studies, no darunavir, primary PI, or tenofovir resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were observed in HIV-1 viruses of 1,125 participants receiving D/C/F/TAF or 629 receiving boosted darunavir plus emtricitabine/ tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate. In AMBER, the nucleos(t)ide analog reverse transcriptase inhibitor (N(t)RTI) RAM M184I/V was identified in HIV-1 of one participant during D/C/F/TAF treatment. M184V was detected pretreatment as a minority variant (9%). In EMERALD, in participants with prior VF and genoarchive data (N = 140; 98 D/C/F/TAF and 42 control), 4% had viruses with darunavir RAMs, 38% with emtricitabine RAMs, mainly at position 184 (41% not fully susceptible to emtricitabine), 4% with tenofovir RAMs, and 21% ‡ 3 thymidine analogassociated mutations (24% not fully susceptible to tenofovir) detected at screening. All achieved VL <50 copies/mL at week 48 or prior discontinuation. D/C/F/TAF has a high genetic barrier to resistance; no darunavir, primary PI, or tenofovir RAMs were observed through 48 weeks in AMBER and EMERALD. Only one postbaseline M184I/V RAM was observed in HIV-1 of an AMBER participant. In EMERALD, baseline archived RAMs to darunavir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir in participants with prior VF did not preclude virologic response