Search

Background Advances in HIV-1 therapeutics have led to the development of a range of daily oral treatment regimens, which share similar high efficacy rates. Consequently, more emphasis is being placed upon the individual’s experience of treatment and impact on quality of life. The first long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy for HIV-1 (long-acting cabotegravir + rilpivirine [CAB + RPV LA]) may address challenges associated with oral treatment for HIV-1, such as stigma, pill burden/fatigue, drug–food interactions, and adherence. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected in an HIV-1 clinical trial (ATLAS-2M; NCT03299049) comparing participants’ experience with two dosing regimens (every 4 weeks [Q4W] vs. every 8 weeks [Q8W]) of CAB + RPV LA are presented herein. Methods PRO endpoints evaluated through 48 weeks of therapy included treatment satisfaction (HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire [HIVTSQ]), treatment acceptance (“General Acceptance” domain of the Chronic Treatment Acceptance [ACCEPT®] questionnaire), acceptability of injections (Perception of Injection [PIN] questionnaire), treatment preference (questionnaire), and reasons for switching to/continuing long-acting therapy (exploratory endpoint; questionnaire). Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive CAB + RPV LA Q8W or Q4W. Results were stratified by prior CAB + RPV exposure in either preplanned or post hoc analyses. Results Overall, 1045 participants were randomized to the Q8W (n = 522) and Q4W (n = 523) regimens; 37% (n = 391/1045) had previously received CAB + RPV in ATLAS. For participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure, large increases from baseline were reported in treatment satisfaction in both long-acting arms (HIVTSQ status version), with Q8W dosing statistically significantly favored at Weeks 24 (p = 0.036) and 48 (p = 0.004). Additionally, improvements from baseline were also observed in the “General Acceptance” domain of the ACCEPT questionnaire in both long-acting arms for participants without prior CAB + RPV exposure; however, no statistically significant difference was observed between arms at either timepoint (Week 24, p = 0.379; Week 48, p = 0.525). Significant improvements (p, Plain Language Summary Developments in HIV-1 treatment have resulted in effective daily oral medications. However, life-long pill taking can come with several challenges. These include having a daily reminder of living with HIV-1. Treatment satisfaction is important to consider when evaluating a new medicine. This is because it can affect people’s quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate people’s experiences with the first long-acting injectable medicine for HIV-1. The medicine is called cabotegravir + rilpivirine long-acting (CAB + RPV LA). Over approximately 1 year, this study measured people’s satisfaction and experiences while receiving injections of CAB + RPV LA. Injections were given either every 4 weeks or every 8 weeks. The study included people who had never had CAB + RPV LA, as well as people who were already receiving CAB + RPV LA. For people new to CAB + RPV LA, their satisfaction increased compared with their previous medication. They also had improvements in their experiences of injection site reactions throughout the study. For people who were already receiving CAB + RPV LA, their high satisfaction with this treatment and tolerability of injection site reactions were maintained over time. Overall, improvements were similar between people receiving injections every 4 weeks and people receiving injections every 8 weeks. People with experience of both injection schedules tended to prefer to receive injections every 8 weeks. These results show that CAB + RPV LA can provide quality-of-life improvements for people who have HIV-1. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-021-00524-0.

The phase 3 ATLAS and FLAIR studies demonstrated that maintenance with Long-Acting (LA) intramuscular cabotegravir and rilpivirine is non-inferior in efficacy to current antiretroviral (CAR) oral therapy. Both studies utilized Patient-Reported Outcome instruments to measure treatment satisfaction (HIVTSQ) and acceptance (ACCEPT general domain), health status (SF-12), injection tolerability/acceptance (PIN), and treatment preference. In pooled analyses, LA-treated patients (n = 591) demonstrated greater mean improvements from baseline than the CAR group (n = 591) in treatment satisfaction (Week 44, + 3.9 vs. +0.5 HIVTSQs-points; p

The Patient Medication Adherence Questionnaire Version 1.0 (PMAQ-V1.0) is a patient-reported adherence instrument to assess medication-taking behaviors and identify barriers to adherence with antiretroviral therapy. To assess the correlation between adherence and virologic outcome, the PMAQ-V1.0 was administered to 194 antiretroviral-experienced adults with HIV infection enrolled in a 16-week evaluation of protease inhibitor-containing regimens featuring a lamivudine/zidovudine combination tablet. At baseline, plasma HIV-1 RNA levels were less than 10,000 copies/mL and CD4(+)-cell counts were equal to or greater than 300 x 10(6)/L; patients had been receiving a conventional regimen of lamivudine + zidovudine (separately) plus a protease inhibitor for at least 10 weeks immediately prior to the study. Forty-eight percent of patients who reported missing at least one dose of a nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) during the study had detectable plasma HIV-1 RNA, compared with 26% of patients who reported no missed doses (P = .002). Patients who missed at least one dose of an NRTI or protease inhibitor were 2.5 times more likely to have quantifiable HIV-1 RNA than those who reported no missed doses. Patients who reported fewer barriers and more motivators to adherence had better virologic outcomes (P = .001). Several dimensions of the PMAQ-V1.0 did not function as well as hypothesized. In this study, self-reported adherence derived from the PMAQ-V1.0 predicted virologic outcomes, but further refinement of the dimensions appears warranted.

Background Traditional first line regimens containing a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor may not be suitable for a subset of antiretroviral-naïve patients such as those with certain co-morbidities, women of child-bearing potential, and intolerability to components of standard first line therapy. This study was conducted to determine if alternate treatment options may meet the needs of both general and special patient populations. The ACTION study was a randomized, open-label, multicenter, 48-week trial that compared the safety and efficacy of a triple nucleoside regimen versus a protease inhibitor plus a dual nucleoside regimen in HIV-1 treatment-naïve subjects. Results 279 HIV-infected subjects with HIV-1 RNA (VL) >5000 but < 200,000 copies/mL (c/mL) and CD4+ count ≥ 100 cells/mm3 were randomized (1:1) to receive abacavir sulfate/lamivudine/zidovudine (ABC/3TC/ZDV) twice-daily or atazanavir (ATV) once-daily plus lamivudine/zidovudine (3TC/ZDV) twice-daily. Protocol-defined virologic failure was based on multiple failure criteria. Non-inferiority of ABC/3TC/ZDV to ATV+3TC/ZDV was established with 62% vs. 59% of subjects achieving a VL < 50 c/mL at week 48, [ITT(E), M/S = F, 95% CI: -5.9, 10.4]. Similar results were observed in the 230 (82%) subjects with baseline VL Conclusion ABC/3TC/ZDV demonstrated comparable virologic efficacy to ATV+3TC/ZDV in this population over 48 weeks. In those with a baseline VL ≥ 100,000 c/mL, subjects in the ATV+3TC/ZDV showed better virologic efficacy. Both regimens offer benefits in select therapy-naïve subjects. Trial Registration [Clinical Trials Identifier, NCT00082394].