PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Haubrich

Publications and source records attributed to R Haubrich.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

A phase II trial of dual protease inhibitor therapy: amprenavir in combination with indinavir, nelfinavir, or saquinavir.

This study evaluated dual protease inhibitor (PI) regimens containing amprenavir (APV) in PI-naive, HIV-1-infected patients over 48 weeks. Patients were randomized to 800-mg APV combined with 800-mg indinavir (IDV), 750-mg nelfinavir (NFV), or 800-mg saquinavir-soft gel capsule (SGV-SGC), all three times daily without nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, or APV given alone for 3 weeks and then with 150-mg lamivudine (3TC) and 300-mg zidovudine (ZDV), twice daily. Dual PI therapy demonstrated substantial antiviral activity and was generally safe and well tolerated. Eight patients had virologic failure; 5 were receiving dual PI therapy and 3 were in the APV/3TC/ZDV arm. The protease I50V mutation characteristic of APV resistance was not observed, although other key PI mutations were selected in 4 patients failing therapy, 2 of whom had PI resistance at baseline.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Sequencing of protease inhibitor therapy: insights from an analysis of HIV phenotypic resistance in patients failing protease inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the pattern of HIV-1 susceptibility to protease inhibitors in patients failing an initial protease inhibitor-containing regimen. DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis of antiretroviral susceptibility. SETTING: HIV clinics in six metropolitan areas. PATIENTS: Eighty-eight HIV-infected adults with HIV RNA > 400 copies/ml after > or = 6 months of antiretroviral therapy, including the use of one protease inhibitor for > or = 3 months. MEASUREMENTS: The frequency and magnitude of decreased susceptibility, measured with a phenotypic assay using recombinant constructs, to five protease inhibitors. Decreased susceptibility was defined as > 2.5-fold increase in the 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) compared with drug sensitive control virus. RESULTS: At study entry, patients were being treated with nelfinavir (63%), indinavir (25%), or another protease inhibitor (11%). HIV isolates from these patients were susceptible (fold change < 2.5) to all five protease inhibitors in 18% of patients and to none in 8%. Isolates from patients receiving nelfinavir were less likely to have reduced susceptibility to other protease inhibitors than isolates from patients treated with indinavir (P < 0.001) or one of the other three agents (P < 0.001), even after adjustment for the duration of prior protease inhibitor use. Reduced susceptibility to saquinavir and amprenavir was observed significantly less frequently than for the other protease inhibitors. CONCLUSION: The frequency of protease inhibitor cross-resistance and the magnitude of changes in susceptibility varied according to the initial protease inhibitor used in the failing treatment regimen. Significantly less protease inhibitor cross-resistance was demonstrated for isolates from patients failing a nelfinavir-containing regimen compared with those from patients receiving other protease inhibitors.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

International perspectives on antiretroviral resistance. Phenotypic and genotypic resistance assays: methodology, reliability, and interpretations.

Phenotypic and genotypic resistance assays-methods to measure the susceptibility of HIV to drug therapy-are becoming widely available to clinicians for use in aiding long-term antiretroviral treatment planning. Phenotypic tests assess the actual response of a patient's viral isolate to individual antiretroviral drugs in culture, and genotypic tests sequence viral DNA, providing an inferred measure of resistance based on the evaluator's knowledge of established HIV-1 genetic mutational patterns for resistance to antiretroviral drugs. These tests, when used as intended, can provide information useful in planning successful antiretroviral regimens. Both types of assays have been shown to provide reliable and reproducible measures of resistance, with certain caveats: accuracy depends on the experience of the interpreter and laboratory; results from the available tests are not interchangeable, and clinically relevant thresholds of resistance have not been fully defined. Because of pharmacokinetic and cross-resistance issues, the extrapolation of single-drug data to combination regimens is difficult to accomplish and must be pooled with treatment and viral load history to best identify effective subsequent treatment regimens. This article describes the experience to date establishing the efficacy, accuracy, reproducibility, and limitations of the phenotypic and genotypic resistance assays used today.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed2001

International perspectives on antiretroviral resistance. Clinical utility of resistance testing: retrospective and prospective data supporting use and current recommendations.

Data from retrospective and prospective studies support use of genotypic and phenotypic resistance assays to guide treatment changes when initial or subsequent antiretroviral regimens fail. Several retrospective studies have shown that response to antiretroviral therapy can be predicted based on genotypic analysis of HIV, with baseline genotypic evidence of resistance predicting virologic failure. Other retrospective analyses demonstrated that phenotypic drug sensitivity correlates with increased viral load suppression, particularly when virus remains sensitive to two or three drugs at initiation of the regimen. Furthermore, prospective studies such as VIRADAPT and Genotype-Assisted Antiretroviral Resistance Testing (GART) have substantiated that drug selection based on genotypic assay results yield superior viral suppression compared with empiric treatment assignment. One additional study suggested significant improvement in short-term virologic outcome when phenotypic testing was used to guide treatment selection. Based on these findings, resistance testing is currently recommended for patients with acute HIV infection, those who have failed one or more antiretroviral regimens, and pregnant women. Although these tests move toward becoming a standard of care, several research questions remain: the long-term benefit of resistance testing is not yet certain, the interpretation of specific genotypic resistance patterns needs to be better defined, and clinical cut-off points for phenotypic resistance need to be established. As these issues continue to be studied, resistance testing likely will prove a reliable tool to help plan successful ART strategies.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed2001

Pharmacokinetic study of human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitors used in combination with amprenavir.

In an open-label, randomized, multicenter, multiple-dose pharmacokinetic study, we determined the steady-state pharmacokinetics of amprenavir with and without coadministration of indinavir, nelfinavir, or saquinavir soft gel formulation in 31 human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected subjects. The results indicated that amprenavir plasma concentrations were decreased by saquinavir soft gel capsule (by 32% for area under the concentration-time curve at steady state [AUC(ss)] and 37% for peak plasma concentration at steady state [C(max,ss)]) and increased by indinavir (33% for AUC(ss)). Nelfinavir significantly increased amprenavir minimum drug concentration at steady state (by 189%) but did not affect amprenavir AUC(ss) or C(max,ss). Nelfinavir and saquinavir steady-state pharmacokinetics were unchanged by coadministration with amprenavir compared with the historical monotherapy data. Concentrations of indinavir, coadministered with amprenavir, in plasma decreased in both single-dose and steady-state evaluations. The changes in amprenavir steady-state pharmacokinetic parameters, relative to those for amprenavir alone, were not consistent among protease inhibitors, nor were the changes consistent with potential interactions in CYP3A4 metabolism or P-glycoprotein transport. No dose adjustment of either protease inhibitor in any of the combinations studied is needed.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Antiretroviral activity and safety of abacavir in combination with selected HIV-1 protease inhibitors in therapy-naive HIV-1-infected adults.

OBJECTIVE: To assess antiretroviral efficacy and safety of abacavir in combination with selected HIV-1 protease inhibitors. DESIGN: A 48-week, open-label study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-two antiretroviral naive HIV-1-infected adults (CD4 cell count > or = 100 cells/mm3, plasma HIV-1 RNA > or = 5,000 copies/ml) were randomly assigned to receive abacavir (300 mg twice daily) in combination with standard doses of one of five protease inhibitors: indinavir, saquinavir soft-gel, ritonavir, nelfinavir or amprenavir. Adults who met protocol-defined switch criteria at or after week 8 could modify their randomized therapy. Antiretroviral activity was assessed by the proportion of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA < or = 400 and < or = 50 copies/ml, and by changes in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels and CD4 cell counts. Safety was assessed by monitoring clinical adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. RESULTS: At week 48, the proportion of subjects in the indinavir, saquinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir and amprenavir groups with plasma HIV-1 RNA < or = 400 copies/ml was 53, 50, 50, 41 and 56%, respectively, and the proportion with HIV-1 RNA < or = 50 copies/ml was 47, 56, 50, 47, and 44%, respectively (by intent-to-treat analysis). Median reductions from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA for each group ranged from 1.7 to 2.4 log10 copies/ml. The median CD4 cell count increase from baseline was 195, 131, 116, 136 and 259 cells/mm3 in the indinavir, saquinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir, and amprenavir groups, respectively. Overall, the most common adverse events attributed to study drugs were diarrhoea, nausea, malaise/fatigue, headache and perioral paresthesia. The frequency of treatment-limiting adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Abacavir is safe and effective when used in combination with a protease inhibitor.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

A dose-ranging study to evaluate the antiretroviral activity and safety of amprenavir alone and in combination with abacavir in HIV-infected adults with limited antiretroviral experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antiretroviral activity and safety of multiple escalating doses of amprenavir administered alone, and in combination with abacavir in HIV-1-infected adults. DESIGN: Sixty-two HIV-1-infected subjects were enrolled in a multicentre, open-label, non-randomized, dose-escalating trial. METHODS: Subjects were assigned to one of six dose groups and received amprenavir 300 mg twice daily, 300 mg three times daily, 900, 1050, or 1,200 mg twice daily for 4 weeks. One dose group received amprenavir 900 mg twice daily in combination with abacavir 300 mg twice daily for 4 weeks. Antiretroviral activity was assessed by measuring changes from baseline in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels and CD4 cell counts. Safety was evaluated by monitoring clinical adverse events and changes in laboratory values. Genotypic and phenotypic analyses were performed using ABI sequencing and the recombinant virus assay, respectively. RESULTS: At week 4, amprenavir monotherapy (900, 1,050, or 1,200 mg twice daily) resulted in marked decreases in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels (1.3-1.6 log10 copies/ml), and substantial increases in CD4 cell counts in the two dose groups who received 1,050 mg twice daily (118 x 10(6) cells/mm3) or 1,200 mg twice daily (114 x 10(6) cells/mm3). Amprenavir/abacavir resulted in median plasma HIV-1 RNA reductions of 1.8 log10 copies/ml, and median CD4 cell count increases of 138 x 10(6) cells/mm3. Amprenavir was reasonably well tolerated with few treatment-limiting adverse events. No known active site mutations associated with amprenavir resistance were selected in any of the dose groups, and no significant phenotypic resistance to amprenavir developed during 4 weeks of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The antiviral effect of amprenavir monotherapy increased with escalating doses, and all amprenavir doses were reasonably well tolerated over 4 weeks of therapy. Amprenavir/abacavir combination therapy elicited a potent antiviral effect. The three highest doses of amprenavir (900, 1,050 and 1,200 mg twice daily) were selected to design subsequent Phase II and III studies that confirmed the safety profile and efficacy of amprenavir in combination regimens and led to the approval of amprenavir in the USA in 1999.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

Cellular restoration in HIV infected persons treated with abacavir and a protease inhibitor: age inversely predicts naive CD4 cell count increase.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize early and later indices of cellular restoration among HIV-1 infected persons treated with abacavir and one protease inhibitor and to identify predictors of CD4 cell increases. METHODS: Flow-cytometric analyses of lymphocyte phenotypes among 71 antiretroviral treatment naive adults in a 48 week treatment trial. RESULTS: During the first 4 weeks of therapy, increases in naive and memory CD4 cells and in B cells were seen; naive CD8 cells increased while CD8 cells remained stable as memory CD8 cells decreased. During the second phase total CD4 and naive CD4 and CD8 cells increased while total CD8 and memory CD8 cells decreased. The numbers of CD4 cells that expressed CD28 increased from a median of 308 x 10(6)/l at baseline to 477 x 10(6)/l at week 48. Higher baseline plasma HIV-1 RNA levels predicted the magnitude of early CD4 (r = 0.35; P = 0.01), memory CD4 (r = 0.38; P = 0.001) and CD28 CD4 cell (r = 0.29; P = 0.01) restoration but was not related to second phase changes. Younger age predicted a greater second phase (but not first phase) increase in naive CD4 cells (r = -0.31; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Higher baseline levels of HIV-1 replication determine the magnitude of first phase CD4 cell increases after suppression of HIV-1 replication. Second phase (primarily naive) CD4 cell increases are not related to HIV-1 replication but are inversely relate to age suggesting that thymic potential is a major determinant of long term cellular restoration in HIV-1 infected persons receiving antiretroviral therapy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Competing drug-drug interactions among multidrug antiretroviral regimens used in the treatment of HIV- infected subjects: ACTG 884.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the steady state concentrations of saquinavir, ritonavir, nelfinavir, delavirdine, and adefovir in six different three- and four-drug combination regimens. DESIGN: Randomized, partially double-blinded, multicenter study in a population of indinavir-experienced subjects with virologic failure. The first seven subjects enrolled in each of the six treatment arms from 10 participating sites were entered into this pharmacokinetic evaluation. SETTING: Multicenter study of the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG). PATIENTS: HIV-infected subjects. INTERVENTIONS: A 12-hour pharmacokinetic study was conducted after 2 weeks of drug administration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Area under the concentration-time curve with statistical comparisons to evaluate the effect of the second protease inhibitor and the effect of the non-protease inhibitors. RESULTS: There was no difference in saquinavir concentrations according to whether the second protease inhibitor was ritonavir or nelfinavir. Saquinavir concentrations in the groups receiving the combination of delavirdine plus adefovir dipivoxil were reduced by approximately 50% compared with those receiving delavirdine. Delavirdine concentrations were reduced by approximately 50%, in the delavirdine plus adefovir dipivoxil arms compared with the delavirdine arms. CONCLUSIONS: Saquinavir concentrations were significantly lower in the arms containing the combination of delavirdine and adefovir dipivoxil compared with the arms containing delavirdine. Delavirdine concentrations were significantly lower when coadministered with adefovir dipivoxil. These drug-drug interactions were not expected, the mechanism(s) is (are) not clear, and additional studies are warranted. This study illustrates the need to understand more fully the pharmacokinetic characteristics of complex combination antiretroviral regimens prior to use in patient management.

Adenine↗
PubMed2000

Randomized study of saquinavir with ritonavir or nelfinavir together with delavirdine, adefovir, or both in human immunodeficiency virus-infected adults with virologic failure on indinavir: AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study 359.

This study compared antiretroviral activity among 6 "salvage" therapy regimens. The study was a prospective, randomized, 2x3 factorial, multicenter study of the AIDS Clinical Trials Group. The study enrolled 277 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients naive to nonnucleoside analogues who had taken indinavir >6 months. The patients had 2000-200,000 HIV RNA copies/mL. Patients received saquinavir with ritonavir or nelfinavir together with delavirdine and/or adefovir and were followed for safety and antiretroviral response between baseline and week 16. At week 16, 30% (77/254) of patients had </=500 HIV RNA copies/mL. Virologic response did not differ significantly between pooled ritonavir and nelfinavir groups (28% vs. 33%; P=.50) or between pooled delavirdine and delavirdine/adefovir groups (40% vs. 33%; P=.42). Pooled delavirdine groups had a greater virologic response rate than did adefovir groups (40% vs. 18%; P=.002). Overall, one-third of patients who experienced virologic failure on an indinavir-containing regimen suppressed virus load levels while they were taking a new salvage regimen.

Adenine↗
PubMed2000

Virologic and CD4+ cell responses to new nucleoside regimens: switching to stavudine or adding lamivudine after prolonged zidovudine treatment of human immunodeficiency virus infection. ACTG 302 Study Team. AIDS Clinical Trials Group.

Clinical benefit of zidovudine alone in the treatment of HIV infection wanes after several years, with decreasing CD4+ cell numbers and increasing HIV RNA in plasma. To develop treatment strategies following prolonged zidovudine treatment, 92 subjects from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) 175 study after a median of 3.6 years of zidovudine monotherapy were randomized to treatment with stavudine or zidovudine and lamivudine. Evaluation of long-term changes, the average of 40- and 48-week HIV plasma RNA, demonstrated that lamivudine and zidovudine provided significantly greater virologic suppression compared with stavudine (mean decrease 0.70 versus 0.18 1og10 copies/ml,p = 0.003). Twenty-nine percent of zidovudine plus lamivudine recipients had HIV RNA levels below 500 copies per milliliter at 48 weeks as compared with 4% of stavudine recipients (p = 0.02). Both regimens significantly increased CD4+ cell numbers, the means of weeks 40 and 48 rose to 49 and 36 CD4+ cells per cubic millimeter among zidovudine plus lamivudine and stavudine recipients, respectively. Treatments were well tolerated and only 3 of 92 subjects died or developed AIDS within 48 weeks. In zidovudine-experienced subjects, addition of lamivudine resulted in significantly decreased plasma HIV RNA levels at 48 weeks compared with treatment with stavudine alone.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Effect of influenza vaccination on viral replication and immune response in persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus receiving potent antiretroviral therapy.

Nineteen patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) with varying levels of viral suppression achieved with antiretroviral therapy were evaluated to determine whether trivalent influenza vaccine activated HIV replication. Humoral immune responses and CD4+ lymphocyte subsets were compared in 5 HIV-uninfected vaccinated subjects. Transient elevations of plasma HIV RNA levels (76-89 copies/mL) appeared within 2 weeks in 3 of 11 patients with <50 copies/mL at baseline. Sustained elevation in HIV plasma RNA was observed in 7 of 8 patients with baseline HIV RNA of >50 copies/mL. HIV DNA decreased in patients with <400 RNA copies/mL at baseline and showed an HIV RNA increase after vaccination (n=8) when compared with 8 patients with <50 copies/mL at baseline who lacked viral response to vaccination. Concurrent decreases in proviral DNA and memory phenotype CD4+ cells in association with increased plasma HIV RNA after vaccination in patients with <400 RNA copies/mL at baseline suggest that in vivo mobilization of the latently infected cell reservoir may occur during potent antiretroviral therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

A phase II safety and efficacy study of amprenavir in combination with zidovudine and lamivudine in HIV-infected patients with limited antiretroviral experience. Amprenavir PROAB2002 Study Team.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of amprenavir (APV) in combination with lamivudine (3TC) and zidovudine (ZDV). DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, partially blinded trial. SETTING: Nine study sites in the United States and Europe. PATIENTS: A group of 84 HIV-infected subjects with no prior 3TC or protease inhibitor therapy experience, CD4 cell count > or = 150 x 10(6) cells/l, and plasma HIV RNA > 10000 copies/ml. INTERVENTIONS: 3TC/ZDV with one of three doses of APV (900, 1050, or 1200 mg) versus 3TC/ZDV with 1050 mg placebo. All medications were dosed twice daily. The 1050 mg placebo and the APV 1050 mg dose were administered blinded. After 12 weeks, APV 1050 mg was substituted for 1050 mg placebo in the control group and the blind was maintained. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reduction in plasma HIV RNA from baseline; proportion of subjects with plasma HIV RNA < 400 copies/ml; and an increase in CD4 cell count from baseline. RESULTS: During the initial 12-week study period, APV/3TC/ZDV-treated subjects had greater viral suppression than the group receiving two nucleosides. By 48 weeks, 89% of subjects in the group taking the highest APV dose (1200 mg) had plasma HIV RNA < 400 copies/ml while 42% of the 900 mg group and 60% of the 3TC/ZDV group (1050 mg APV added at week 12) had plasma HIV RNA < 400 copies/ml using an as-treated analysis. By 60 weeks, 86% of subjects in the APV 1200 mg group had plasma HIV RNA < 400 copies/ml in the as-treated analysis, while 25% (900 mg), 43% (1050 mg), and 20% (1200 mg) of subjects had viral load <400 copies/ml in a strict intent-to-treat analysis owing to treatment discontinuations. Median CD4 cell count increases at week 60 were highest for the three treatment groups who received APV throughout the study, by intent-to-treat and as-treated analyses. The most common adverse events considered to be possibly drug related were nausea, rash, oral paresthesia, diarrhea, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with APV, dosed at 1200 mg twice daily in combination with 3TC/ZDV, resulted in sustained viral suppression. This combination represents a potent alternative initial antiretroviral regimen for protease inhibitor-naive individuals.

Adult↗