Switch to RAL-containing Regimen in Canadian Study CHEER Montreal Study EASIER SWITCHMRK SPIRAL
Explore the SWITCHMRK study comparing the switch to RAL-containing regimen versus the continuation of LPV/r in HIV patients. The study design, objectives, baseline characteristics, and patient disposition are detailed. Findings include information on lipid changes, viral load, and adverse events up to week 24.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Switch to RAL-containing regimen Canadian Study CHEER Montreal Study EASIER SWITCHMRK SPIRAL Switch ER
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Design: 2 parallel trials, SWITCHMRK 1 and 2 Randomisation* 1 : 1 Double-blind W24 Switch to RAL 400 mg bid + placebo LPV/r bid + continue other ARVs N = 350 HIV+ 18 years On LPV/r + 2 NRTIs HIV RNA < 50 c/mL (PCR) or < 75 c/mL (bDNA) > 3 months LPV/r bid + placebo RAL bid + continue other ARVs N = 352 * Randomisation was stratified on LPV/r use before entry ( 1 year vs > 1 year) Primary endpoints Mean percentage changes in fasting lipid concentrations from baseline to week 12 Proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 c/mL at week 24 Frequency of adverse events up to week 24 SWITCHMRK Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Objectives Lipids: 99% power to detect a between-treatment difference of 11%, 53% and 13% in the mean percentage change from baseline in total cholesterol, triglycerides, and non-HDL cholesterol, respectively, and 71% power to detect a between-treatment difference of 4% in the mean percentage change from baseline in LDL cholesterol Viral load: non inferiority of RAL vs LPV/r: % HIV-1 RNA < 50 c/mL at week 24 (lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference = - 12%, 90% power) Adverse events: for adverse events occurring in 20% of patients, each study had 80% power to declare with 95% confidence that the true difference between treatment groups was 12% or lower Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Baseline characteristics and patient disposition SWITCHMRK 1 SWITCHMRK 2 RAL LPV/r RAL LPV/r 177 175 176 179 Randomized, N 174 174 176 178 Treated eligible patients, N 16% 26% 22% 22% Female Region: Australia/Europa ; USA/Canada ; Latin America ; Other 67% ; 33% ; 0% ; 0% 70% ; 30% ; 0% ; 0% 11% ; 18% ; 43% ; 28% 11% ; 19% 47% ; 23% 436 479 436 426 CD4 cell count (/mm3), median 94% 93% 96% 96% Suppressed viraemia 83% 82% 82% 81% LPV/r therapy > 1 year 42% 43% 32% 31% LPV/r as first regimen History of previous virologic failure (reported by investigator) 28% 33% 36% 37% 14.1% 9.7% 5.7% 3.4% Discontinuation before W24 Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Mean* % changes in fasting lipid concentrations from baseline to W12 SWITCHMRK 1 SWITCHMRK 2 10 0 1.3% 2.9% 8.2% 4% 2.1% 0.7% 2.3% 3.6% 0.8% 0.6% -0.9% -0.6% -2.4% -2.5% -10 p = 0.7 NT** p = 0.2 -12.8% -12.4% NT** -15.2% -14.8% -20 p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 -30 RAL + ARV LPV/r + ARV -40 -41.5% -42.8% p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 Mean (mmol/L) Baseline W12 Total Non HDL-C Triglycerides* LDL-C HDL-C Total Non HDL-C 4.3 4.2 3.6 4.3 Triglycerides* LDL-C HDL-C cholesterol 5.6 5.3 4.8 5.3 cholesterol 5.6 5.5 4.7 5.5 4.3 4.1 3.6 4.1 2.1 1.8 1.3 1.9 3 2.7 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 2.4 2.5 1.4 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 2.8 2.7 * median changes for triglycerides ** not tested Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 c/mL % % SWITCHMRK 1 SWITCHMRK 2 93.8% 100 100 87.4% 90 90 80 80 88% 70 70 80.8% (95% CI) : - 6.6 (-14.4 ; 1.2) (95% CI) : - 5.8 (-12.2 ; 0.2) 60 60 50 50 0 4 8 12 24 0 4 8 12 24 Weeks Weeks RAL + ARV LPV/r + ARV RAL + ARV LPV/r + ARV 174 174 166 171 169 171 173 171 172 174 176 178 176 178 176 177 176 177 175 178 Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 c/mL at W24* RAL LPV/r Difference (95% CI) LPV/r-based therapy as the first regimen SWITCHMRK 1 Yes No SWITCHMRK 2 Yes No Combined studies Yes No Investigator report of a history of previous virologic failure (exclusion of patients with missing data) SWITCHMRK 1 Yes No 85.1% SWITCHMRK 2 Yes No 92.5% Combined studies Yes No 88.6% * Patients who did not complete the trial were regarded as failures 86.1% 77.0% 86.7% 87.9% -0.6% (-12.2 to 10.9) -10.9% (-21.6 to -0.3) 89.3% 87.4% 94.5% 93.5% -5.3% (-16.9 to 5.7) -6.1% (-14.1 to 1.4) 87.5% 82.6% 90.0% 91.0% -2.5% (-10.6 to 5.4) -8.3% (-14.8 to -2.1) 72.3% 89.7% 85.8% -17.3% (-33.0 to -2.5) -0,7% (-9.9 to 8.6) 79.7% 93.8% 93.5% -14.2% (-26.5 to -2.6) -1.0% (-8.5 to 6.3) 76.6% 91.9% 89.6% -15.3% (-24.9 to -6.2) -1.0% (-6.9 to 4.9) Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities SWITCHMRK 1 SWITCHMRK 2 RAL LPV/r RAL LPV/r Neutrophils 0.6% 0 0.6% 0.6% Haemoglobin 0 0 0 0 Platelets 1.2% 0 0 0 Fasting LDL cholesterol 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.2% Fasting total cholesterol 0 1.9% 1.7% 4.1% Fasting triglycerides 0 1.9% 1.2% 4.7% Fasting glucose 0 0 0 0 Creatinine 0 0.6% 0 0 Lipase 0% 0.6% 0 0 ASAT 1.1% 1.1% 0 0 ALAT 4% 0.6% 1.7% 1.1% Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Safety, resistance data Similar frequency of clinical and laboratory events in both groups No serious drug-related adverse event Diarrhoea of moderate to severe intensity: 3% in LPV/r group vs 0% in RAL group Discontinuation because of adverse events: 4 in LPV/r group vs 6 in RAL group 49 patients had confirmed virologic failure: 32 in the RAL group: for 27 (84%), LPV/r was not their first ARV regimen and 18 (67%) of these patients had a history of virologic failure on previous regimens 17 in the LPV/r group: for 8 (47%), LPV/r was not their first ARV regimen and 4 (50%) of these patients had a history of virologic failure on previous regimens Raltegravir-associated resistance mutations were found at failure in 8/11 assessable patients Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
SWITCHMRK Study: Switch to RAL vs continuation of LPV/r Conclusions In patients with virologic suppression on a LPV/r-containing regimen, switching from LPV/r to RAL was associated, at W24, with: Greater reductions in lipid concentrations than was continuation of LPV/r Lower rate of HIV suppression, especially in patients who had a history of virologic failure before entry. Results did not establish non inferiority of RAL to LPV/r In the post-hoc analysis, patients without previous virologic failure had similar viral suppression rates in both treatment groups (switch to RAL or continuation of LPV/r) Eron JJ, Lancet 2010;375:396-407 SWITCHMRK
