{"title":"hiv -1感染儿童洛匹那韦/利托那韦每日1次vs每日2次","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/QAD.0000000000000862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective:To evaluate whether once daily (q.d.) lopinavir/ritonavir is noninferior to twice daily (b.i.d.) dosing in children. Design:International, multicentre, phase II/III, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (KONCERT/PENTA18/ANRS150). Setting:Clinical centres participating in the PENTA, HIV-NAT and PHPT networks. Participants:Children/adolescents with HIV-1 RNA viral load less than 50 copies/ml for at least 24 weeks on lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy. Intervention:Children were randomized to continue lopinavir/ritonavir b.i.d. or change to q.d. Main outcome measure:Confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml by 48 weeks (12% noninferiority margin). Results:One hundred seventy-three children were randomized in the KONCERT trial (86 q.d., 87 b.i.d.); 46% men, median (IQR) age 11 (9–14) years, CD4% 33 (27–38)%. By week 48, 97 and 98% of time was spent on q.d. and b.i.d., respectively (one q.d. child lost at week 4). Twelve q.d. vs. seven b.i.d. children had confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml within 48 weeks; estimated difference in percentage with viral load rebound 6% [90% CI (–2, 14)]. Numbers of children with grade 3/4 adverse events (11 vs. 7) or major resistance mutations (3 vs. 2) were similar, q.d. vs. b.i.d. (both P > 0.3). Among 26 children in an intrasubject lopinavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetic substudy, lower daily exposure (AUC0–24 161 h.mg/l vs. 224 h.mg/l) and lower Clast (1.03 mg/l vs. 5.69 mg/l) were observed with q.d. vs. b.i.d. dosing. Conclusion:Noninferiority for viral load suppression on q.d. vs. b.i.d. lopinavir/ritonavir was not demonstrated. Although results, therefore, do not support routine use of q.d. lopinavir/ritonavir, lack of safety concerns or resistance suggest that q.d. dosing remains an option in selected, adherent children, with close viral load monitoring.","PeriodicalId":355297,"journal":{"name":"AIDS (London, England)","volume":"413 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Once vs. twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected children\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/QAD.0000000000000862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective:To evaluate whether once daily (q.d.) lopinavir/ritonavir is noninferior to twice daily (b.i.d.) dosing in children. Design:International, multicentre, phase II/III, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (KONCERT/PENTA18/ANRS150). Setting:Clinical centres participating in the PENTA, HIV-NAT and PHPT networks. Participants:Children/adolescents with HIV-1 RNA viral load less than 50 copies/ml for at least 24 weeks on lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy. Intervention:Children were randomized to continue lopinavir/ritonavir b.i.d. or change to q.d. Main outcome measure:Confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml by 48 weeks (12% noninferiority margin). Results:One hundred seventy-three children were randomized in the KONCERT trial (86 q.d., 87 b.i.d.); 46% men, median (IQR) age 11 (9–14) years, CD4% 33 (27–38)%. By week 48, 97 and 98% of time was spent on q.d. and b.i.d., respectively (one q.d. child lost at week 4). Twelve q.d. vs. seven b.i.d. children had confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml within 48 weeks; estimated difference in percentage with viral load rebound 6% [90% CI (–2, 14)]. Numbers of children with grade 3/4 adverse events (11 vs. 7) or major resistance mutations (3 vs. 2) were similar, q.d. vs. b.i.d. (both P > 0.3). Among 26 children in an intrasubject lopinavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetic substudy, lower daily exposure (AUC0–24 161 h.mg/l vs. 224 h.mg/l) and lower Clast (1.03 mg/l vs. 5.69 mg/l) were observed with q.d. vs. b.i.d. dosing. Conclusion:Noninferiority for viral load suppression on q.d. vs. b.i.d. lopinavir/ritonavir was not demonstrated. Although results, therefore, do not support routine use of q.d. lopinavir/ritonavir, lack of safety concerns or resistance suggest that q.d. dosing remains an option in selected, adherent children, with close viral load monitoring.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIDS (London, England)\",\"volume\":\"413 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIDS (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000000862\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIDS (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000000862","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15
摘要
目的:评价儿童每日一次(q.d)洛匹那韦/利托那韦是否优于每日两次(b.i.d)给药。设计:国际、多中心、II/III期、随机、开放标签、非劣效性试验(KONCERT/PENTA18/ANRS150)。环境:参与PENTA、HIV-NAT和PHPT网络的临床中心。参与者:接受含洛匹那韦/利托那韦抗逆转录病毒治疗至少24周的HIV-1 RNA病毒载量低于50拷贝/ml的儿童/青少年。干预:儿童随机接受继续洛匹那韦/利托那韦单剂量治疗或改为单剂量治疗。主要结局指标:48周后确认病毒载量≥50拷贝/毫升(12%非劣效性)。结果:在KONCERT试验中,有173名儿童被随机分配(86名儿童每日服用,87名儿童每日服用);46%男性,中位(IQR)年龄11(9-14)岁,CD4% 33(27-38)%。到第48周,97%和98%的时间分别花在qqd和b.i d上(第4周有1例qqd患儿死亡)。12例qqd患儿与7例b.i d患儿在48周内确认病毒载量≥50拷贝/ml;病毒载量反弹的百分比估计差异为6% [90% CI(- 2,14)]。发生3/4级不良事件(11人vs. 7人)或主要耐药突变(3人vs. 2人)的儿童数量相似,q.d. vs. b.i.d. (P均为0.0.3)。在一项受试者内洛匹那韦/利托那韦药代动力学亚研究中,26名儿童观察到,定量给药比常规给药更低的日暴露量(AUC0-24 161 h.mg/l vs. 224 h.mg/l)和更低的Clast (1.03 mg/l vs. 5.69 mg/l)。结论:并没有证明洛匹那韦/利托那韦qqd与bdd抑制病毒载量的非劣效性。因此,尽管结果不支持常规使用洛匹那韦/利托那韦,但缺乏安全性或耐药性表明,在密切监测病毒载量的情况下,在选定的依从性儿童中,q.d.剂量仍然是一种选择。
Once vs. twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected children
Objective:To evaluate whether once daily (q.d.) lopinavir/ritonavir is noninferior to twice daily (b.i.d.) dosing in children. Design:International, multicentre, phase II/III, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (KONCERT/PENTA18/ANRS150). Setting:Clinical centres participating in the PENTA, HIV-NAT and PHPT networks. Participants:Children/adolescents with HIV-1 RNA viral load less than 50 copies/ml for at least 24 weeks on lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy. Intervention:Children were randomized to continue lopinavir/ritonavir b.i.d. or change to q.d. Main outcome measure:Confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml by 48 weeks (12% noninferiority margin). Results:One hundred seventy-three children were randomized in the KONCERT trial (86 q.d., 87 b.i.d.); 46% men, median (IQR) age 11 (9–14) years, CD4% 33 (27–38)%. By week 48, 97 and 98% of time was spent on q.d. and b.i.d., respectively (one q.d. child lost at week 4). Twelve q.d. vs. seven b.i.d. children had confirmed viral load ≥50 copies/ml within 48 weeks; estimated difference in percentage with viral load rebound 6% [90% CI (–2, 14)]. Numbers of children with grade 3/4 adverse events (11 vs. 7) or major resistance mutations (3 vs. 2) were similar, q.d. vs. b.i.d. (both P > 0.3). Among 26 children in an intrasubject lopinavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetic substudy, lower daily exposure (AUC0–24 161 h.mg/l vs. 224 h.mg/l) and lower Clast (1.03 mg/l vs. 5.69 mg/l) were observed with q.d. vs. b.i.d. dosing. Conclusion:Noninferiority for viral load suppression on q.d. vs. b.i.d. lopinavir/ritonavir was not demonstrated. Although results, therefore, do not support routine use of q.d. lopinavir/ritonavir, lack of safety concerns or resistance suggest that q.d. dosing remains an option in selected, adherent children, with close viral load monitoring.