Long‐term efficacy and safety of E/C/F/TDF vs EFV/FTC/TDF and ATV+RTV+FTC/TDF in HIV‐1‐infected treatment‐naïve subjects ≥50 years

Introduction: In high‐income countries, ≥30% of HIV‐infected patients are ≥50 years (yrs) old (UNAIDS 2013). In two phases, three clinical trials (Studies 102 and 103) elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (E/C/F/TDF; STB) had non‐inferior efficacy and favourable safety vs efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (EFV/FTC/TDF; ATR) or ritonavir‐boosted atazanavir (ATV+RTV)+FTC/TDF (TVD) in HIV‐infected, treatment‐naïve subjects at Week 144. The efficacy and safety of STB in subjects < or ≥50 yrs is described. Materials and Methods: Post hoc analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in subjects < or ≥50 yrs at Week 144. Results: Subjects ≥50 yrs in Study 102: STB: 14% (49/348), ATR: 16% (56/352); in Study 103: STB: 14% (48/353), ATV+RTV+TVD: 14% (48/355). Efficacy, safety and tolerability by age and study endpoint are shown in Table 1. Regardless of age, STB had robust efficacy at Week 144 with similar virologic outcomes vs ATR or ATV+RTV+TVD. Discontinuations (DC) due to AE on STB were similar to the comparators, most occurred by Week 48. Median changes in eGFR on STB were similar by age; DC with renal PRT was rare [STB: 4 (0.6%); ATV: 3 (0.8%); ATR: 0], 2 and 1 in ≥50 yrs old strata, respectively. Conclusions: STB compared to ATR or ATV+RTV+TVD, is an efficacious, well‐tolerated and safe regimen for HIV‐1‐infected, treatment‐naïve subjects
Table 1: Efficacy, safety and tolerability by age n (%) Week 48 Week 48≥50 Week 96 Week 96≥50 Week 144 Week 144≥50 STB versus ATR Virologic success (VS) 263 (88); [...]