Skip to main content
Journal of the International AIDS Society logoLink to Journal of the International AIDS Society
. 2010 Nov 8;13(Suppl 4):P210. doi: 10.1186/1758-2652-13-S4-P210

Efficacy and safety of TMC278 in treatment-naïve, HIV-1-infected patients with HBV/HCV co-infection enrolled in the phase III ECHO and THRIVE trials

M Nelson 1,, G Amaya 2, N Clumeck 3, C Arns Da Cunha 4, D Jayaweera 5, P Junod 6, L Taisheng 7, P Tebas 8, M Stevens 9, A Buelens 9, S Vanveggel 9, K Boven 10
PMCID: PMC3112995

Introduction

TMC278 had a high virologic response rate, non-inferior to EFV, in two Phase III double-blind trials ECHO (TMC278-C209, NCT00540449) and THRIVE (TMC278-C215, NCT00543725) in treatment-naïve HIV-infected adult patients. As the use of NNRTIs, particularly nevirapine, has been associated with hepatic-related adverse events (AEs), especially in HIV/hepatitis B (HBV) and/or hepatitis C (HCV) co-infected patients, a subgroup analysis of these events was performed on the pooled Week 48 Phase III data.

Methods

Patients (N=1368) with alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/ aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≤ 5x upper limit of normal received TMC278 25mg qd or EFV 600mg qd, plus TDF/FTC (ECHO) or TDF/FTC, AZT/3TC or ABC/3TC (THRIVE). HIV/HBV and/or HCV co-infection status was determined at baseline in 1335 patients by HBV surface antigen, HCV antibody and RNA testing.

Results

At baseline, 112/1335 patients (8.4%) had evidence of HIV/HBV and/or HCV co-infection (randomised to TMC278, n=49: 7.3%; EFV, n=63: 9.5%). Table 1 summarises the outcomes.

Table 1.

HIV/HBV and/or HCV co-infected patients HIV mono-infected patients
TMC278 25mg qd EFV 600mg qd TMC278 25mg qd EFV 600mg qd

Efficacy (Week 48 outcomes)* N=49 N=63 N=621 N=602

% (95% CI) with viral load <50 copies/mL, ITT-TLOVR 73.5 (60.7-86.3) 79.4 (69.1-89.6) 85.0 (82.2-87.8) 82.6 (79.5-85.6)

Mean CD4 count (95% CI) N=48 N=63 N=621 N=602

Baseline, cells/mm3 230 (198-263) 246 (216-276) 262 (251-273) 274 (262-285)

Change from baseline, NC=F, cells/mm3 +137 (100-175) +192 (147-238) +197 (186-209) +173 (161-185)

Change from baseline, NC=F, % +6.6 (5.0-8.3) +7.7 (6.4-9.0) +8.6 (8.1-9.0) +8.4 (7.9-8.8)

Safety, §

Treatment-emergent hepatic AEs of interest, n (%) N=54 N=66 N=632 N=616

Any hepatic AE 15 (27.8) 17 (25.8) 23 (3.6) 28 (4.5)

Hepatobiliary disorders¶ 3 (5.6) 7 (10.6) 6 (0.9) 9 (1.5)

HBV or HCV reported as an AE 3 (5.6) 5 (7.6) - -

Hepatic laboratory abnormalities reported as an AE 9 (16.7) 8 (12.1) 19 (3.0) 21 (3.4)

Grade 3 to 4 hepatic laboratory abnormalities, n (%) N=54 N=66 N=631 N=604

ALT increased 9 (16.7) 11 (16.7) 1 (0.2) 12 (2.0)

AST increased 7 (13.0) 5 (7.6) 7 (1.1) 14 (2.3)

Hyperbilirubinaemia 0 0 4 (0.6) 1 (0.2)

ITT-TLOVR = intent-to-treat-time-to-loss of virologic response; CI=confidence interval; *Patients included in efficacy analysis were those with baseline HBV/HCV assessments; †NC=F = non completer = failure: missing values after discontinuation imputed with change = 0; Last observation carried forward otherwise; ‡Safety analyses performed using all available data, including beyond Week 48; §Patients who seroconverted for HBV/HCV during the study were included in the subgroup of HIV/HBV and/or HCV co-infected patients; ¶Selection of preferred terms from System Organ Class as defined by MedDRA. Compared with HIV mono-infected patients, co-infected patients had more hepatic AEs (clinical and laboratory) and lower virologic responses, which were similar across treatment groups. Hepatic AEs rarely led to treatment discontinuation (TMC278: n=3 vs. EFV: n=9 patients). There were no fatal hepatic AEs.

Compared with HIV mono-infected patients, co-infected patients had more hepatic AEs (clinical and laboratory) and lower virologic responses, which were similar across treatment groups. Hepatic AEs rarely led to treatment discontinuation (TMC278: n=3 vs. EFV: n=9 patients). There were no fatal hepatic AEs.

Conclusions

Overall, both TMC278 and EFV were well tolerated with no hepatic safety differences observed. Hepatic AEs were more common in co-infected than in HIV mono-infected patients (27% vs. 4%, respectively), but there were no differences between the two treatment groups. Virologic responses were similar for TMC278 and EFV within the co-infected and HIV mono-infected groups, and lower in co-infected than in HIV mono-infected patients.


Articles from Journal of the International AIDS Society are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES