Premium
The Protease Inhibitor Transfer Study (PROTRA 1): abacavir and efavirenz in combination as a substitute for a protease inhibitor in heavily pretreated HIV‐1‐infected patients with undetectable plasma viral load
Author(s) -
Bickel M,
Rickerts V,
Stephan C,
Jacobi V,
Rottmann C,
Dauer B,
Carlebach A,
Thalhammer A,
Miller V,
Staszweski S
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
hiv medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.53
H-Index - 79
eISSN - 1468-1293
pISSN - 1464-2662
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-1293.2005.00286.x
Subject(s) - medicine , efavirenz , viral load , abacavir , protease inhibitor (pharmacology) , gastroenterology , nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor , pharmacology , virology , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , antiretroviral therapy
Objectives The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of abacavir (ABC) and efavirenz (EFV) instead of a protease inhibitor (PI) in HIV‐1‐infected subjects treated with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and one PI with undetectable viral loads (<50 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL). To be eligible for inclusion, patients had to have a history of viral load <400 copies/mL for at least 3 months and had to be naïve to treatment with nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and ABC, but multiple pretreatment and treatment failure were allowed. Design An open‐label, single‐centre pilot study of duration 48 weeks was conducted. ABC was added to the original treatment with two NRTIs and one PI at baseline, and at week 6 the PI was replaced by EFV. At each study visit, CD4 cell count, viral load [measured by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)] and clinical chemistry were measured. Fasting blood samples were taken at baseline and at weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 to measure levels of cholesterol [high‐density lipoprotein (HDL)/low‐density lipoprotein (LDL)], triglycerides, insulin and C‐peptide. Additionally, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed. A bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) and a single slice abdominal and mid‐thigh computed tomography (CT) scan were carried out to assess changes in body composition. Results Thirty patients were included in the study. Three patients experienced ABC‐hypersensitivity and one patient demonstrated virological failure caused by nonadherence. At week 48, all remaining patients had viral loads <50 copies/mL with stable CD4 counts. The fasting metabolic parameters and abdominal fat distribution remained unchanged. Conclusions In heavily pretreated patients, ABC and EFV in combination provide an effective, simplified and well‐tolerated alternative to PI treatment.