| Studies 
Look at Long-term Efficacy Safety of Tenofovir (Viread/Truvada/Atripla), including 
Kidney Toxicity and Bone Loss By 
Liz Highleyman
 
  Tenofovir 
(Viread) is among the most widely prescribed antiretroviral drugs, and is 
a component of the Truvada (tenofovir/emtricitabine) and Atripla (tenofovir/emtricitabine/efavirenz) 
fixed-dose combination pills. Several 
presentations last month at the 48th International Conference 
on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC 2008) provided new data on 
tenofovir's long-term efficacy and safety, in particular the occurrence of kidney 
and bone problems, which have been attributed to tenofovir in some previous studies. Atripla 
Efficacy and Side Effects In 
study AI26607, participants on stable antiretroviral 
therapy with HIV suppression < 200 cells/mm3 for at least 3 months were 
randomly assigned to stay on their current HAART regimen (n = 97) or switch to 
Atripla (n = 203), which provides a full NNRTI-based antiretroviral regimen in 
a single once-daily pill.  Most 
patients (88%) were men, about two-thirds were white, and the mean age was 43 
years. The median baseline CD4 count was about 540 cells/mm3 and 96% had HIV RNA 
< 50 copies/mL.  Results  
     At 48 weeks in an intent-to-treat TLOVR 
analysis, 87% of patients who switched to Atripla and 85% who stayed on their 
current regimen maintained HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL.
  
     Participants who switched from a NNRTI-based 
regimen were more liked to maintain viral suppression than those who switched 
from a protease inhibitor (PI)-based 
regimen (92% vs 83%).
 
  
     Discontinuation rates were similar for 
those who switched to Atripla and those who stayed on their baseline regimen.
 
  
     Adverse event rates were significantly 
higher in the Atripla arm (5% vs 1%), largely due to efavirenz-related neuropsychiatric 
symptoms, most of which were mild and temporary.
 
  
     At 48 weeks, estimated GFR (glomerular 
filtration rate, a measure of kidney function) was unchanged from baseline in 
both arms.
 
  
     Fasting triglyceride levels declined more 
in the Atripla arm (median -20 vs -3 mg/dL), almost entirely attributable to those 
who switched from PI-based regimens.
 
  
     Excellent adherence (96% or better) was 
reported in both arms.
 
  
     Participants taking Atripla were more 
likely to report that their regimen was convenient (97% vs 81%).
 In 
conclusion, the investigators wrote, "High and comparable rates of virologic 
suppression were maintained with [efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir] vs [baseline 
regimen], regardless of type of prior antiretroviral therapy." "Mild, 
transient nervous system symptoms occurred with [efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir], 
particularly with prior PI-based antiretroviral therapy," they added. Orlando 
Immunology Center, Orlando, FL; Denver Infectious Disease Consultants, Denver, 
CO; Gilead Sciences, Inc., Foster City, CA; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ. Long-term 
Atripla |  |  | Atripla 
Tablet  | 
 In 
Gilead's Study 934, participants starting antiretroviral therapy for the first 
time were randomly assigned to receive Truvada 
or the Combivir (zidovudine/lamivudine) 
coformulation pill, both in combination with efavirenz 
(Sustiva). After 144 weeks, 286 patients from both arms switched to the Atripla 
pill and continued follow-up.  Most 
participants in the extension study (88%) were men, 65% were white, the mean age 
was 40 years, the median CD4 count was 535 cells/mm3, and about 95% had HIV RNA 
< 50 copies/mL.  Results  
     48 weeks after switching to Atripla, 94% 
of patients originally assigned to Truvada and 90% originally assigned to Combivir 
maintained viral suppression < 50 copies/mL in a missing=failure analysis.
  
     Mean CD4 counts increased by 1 and 21 
cells/mm3, respectively.
 
  
     Patients who switched from Combivir were 
more likely to experience adverse events (those switching from Truvada were already 
taking the same drugs in a different formulation).
 
  
     Serum creatinine, serum phosphorous, and 
estimated GFR (all measures of kidney function) remained stable in both arms.
 
  
     Total cholesterol rose by 6 mg/dL in the 
Truvada-to-Atripla arm and fell by 9 mg/dL in the Combivir-to-Atripla arm.
 
  
     LDL ("bad") cholesterol remained 
unchanged in the Truvada-to-Atripla arm and fell by 6 mg/dL in the Combivir-to-Atripla 
arm.
 
  
     Fasting triglycerides fell by 3 and 21 
mg/dL, respectively.
 
  
     Total limb fat did not change significantly 
in either arm.
 "Switching 
Truvada or Combivir + efavirenz to a single tablet once-daily regimen of [efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir] 
was well-tolerated and resulted in maintenance of virologic suppression through 
48 weeks," the researchers concluded.  However, 
they added, "In patients on Combivir + efavirenz for 3 years, switching to 
Atripla did not significantly improve limb fat after 48 weeks." Orlando 
Immunology Ctr., Orlando, FL; Chelsea & Westminster Hosp, London, UK; Johns 
Hopkins Univ, Baltimore, MD; Univ Hosp La Paz, Madrid, Spain; Gilead Sciences, 
Foster City, CA.
 Bone 
Loss
 
 Another 
research team looked at changes in bone mineral density among patients taking 
tenofovir/emtricitabine. 
Studies have shown that people with HIV have an elevated risk of bone loss (osteopenia 
and the more serious osteoporosis), but the reasons for this are not 
fully understood.
 
 The 
investigators hypothesized that tenofovir might contribute to abnormal calcium 
metabolism via secondary hyperparathyroidism, or excess production of parathyroid 
hormone, which regulates calcium and phosphate levels.
 
 In 
this prospective cross-sectional study, they reviewed medical records and interviewed 
51 HIV positive men on HAART with normal kidney function (GFR > 60) and normal 
serum calcium levels; 34 were taking antiretroviral regimens containing tenofovir 
plus emtricitabine (Emtriva; 
also in the Truvada and Atripla 
pills).
 Parathyroid 
hormone levels were measured using the Immulite 2000 assay with an upper limit 
of normal (ULN) of 65 pg/mL, and compared in patients taking or not taking tenofovir. 
Most participants (80%) were white, the mean age was 49 years, the mean duration 
of HIV infection was 12 years, the median CD4 count was 443 cells/mm3, and 75% 
had undetectable HIV RNA. Tenofovir recipients and those not taking tenofovir 
did not differ with respect to age, duration of infection, body mass index, CD4 
count, viral load, or baseline GFR.
 
 Results
  
 
     82% of participants had suboptimal vitamin 
D levels, but the likelihood was similar in both tenofovir recipients and non-recipients.
  
     Overall, parathyroid hormone levels were 
higher in tenofovir recipients than in people taking non-tenofovir-containing 
regimens.
 
  
     Among men with low vitamin D levels, the 
mean parathyroid hormone level was significantly higher in those taking tenofovir 
(80 vs 55 pg/mL; P = 0.02).
 
  
     Within the low vitamin D group, tenofovir 
recipients were more likely than non-recipients to have an above-normal parathyroid 
hormone level (39% vs 7%; P = 0.036).
 
  
     Among tenofovir recipients, parathyroid 
hormone levels were far higher in those with low versus sufficient vitamin D (87 
vs 43 pg/mL; P = 0.002).
 
  
     No patients with an optimal vitamin D 
level had elevated parathyroid hormone.
 Based 
on these findings, the investigators concluded, "[Tenofovir/emtricitabine] 
appears to be associated with [secondary hyperparathyroidism] in patients with 
low vitamin D, but not in patients with sufficient vitamin D, suggesting that 
adequate doses of vitamin D supplements along with tenofovir may prevent [secondary 
hyperparathyroidism], a serious condition linked to bone loss and cardiovascular 
disease."
 They suggested that tenofovir in the setting of low vitamin 
D may decrease whole-body calcium levels, triggering increased parathyroid hormone 
production and increased calcium resorption, leading to reduced bone mineral density.
 They 
recommended that patients taking tenofovir should have their vitamin D and parathyroid 
hormone levels checked, and urged further research to investigate whether prophylactic 
use of vitamin D and calcium supplements might prevent increases in parathyroid 
hormone and preserve bone in this population.
 Mount Sinai School of 
Medicine, New York, NY.
 
 Kidney 
Function
 
 Finally, 
2 reports looked at kidney 
(renal) dysfunction in people taking tenofovir. The drug has not been associated 
with kidney dysfunction in clinical trials, but some observational studies indicate 
that certain susceptible individuals (for example, those with pre-existing kidney 
disease) may experience tenofovir-related kidney toxicity. This has mostly been 
seen in highly treatment-experienced patients.
 
 Researchers 
at Johns Hopkins assessed whether tenofovir was associated with renal dysfunction 
in patients starting HAART for the first time. They compared all treatment-naive 
patients with an estimated GFR > 50 ml/min/1.73m2 (by MDRD) who started either 
tenofovir (n=201) or alternative nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) 
(n=231) after January 2002, analyzing the time to 25% and 50% decline in GFR. 
 About 60% of participants were men, about 75% were black (a group with 
a higher rate of HIV-associate kidney disease), the mean age was 40 years, and 
the mean CD4 count was about 250 cells/mm3. Baseline GFR was similar in both groups 
(101 vs 110), and similar proportions had pre-existing hypertension (25%) and 
diabetes 
(5%).
 
 Results
  
 
     A modest decline in GFR was observed among 
patients starting both tenofovir and alterative NRTIs as part of first-line therapy.
  
     There were no significant differences 
in percentages of patients who experienced a 25% decline in renal function after 
1 year (23.4% in the tenofovir arm vs 20.2% in the alternative-NRTI arm; P = 0.51) 
or after 2 years (30.1% vs 28.4%, respectivelyl P = 0.59).
 
  
     Likewise, there were no differences in 
proportions with a 50% decline in renal function after 1 year (4.7% taking tenofovir, 
5.5% taking other NRTIs; P = 0.49) or after 2 years (5.1% vs 6.9%, respectively; 
P = 0.65).
 
  
     There remained no differences between 
the tenofovir and alternative-NRTI groups in 25% or 50% kidney function decline 
after adjusting for age, race, baseline GFR, baseline CD4 cell count, use of a 
ritonavir-boosted PI vs a NNRTI, presence of diabetes, or hypertension.
 
  
     However, older age, lower CD4 count, and 
hypertension were each associated with GFR decline independent of tenofovir use 
(all P < 0.05).
 
  
     There was a statistical interaction between 
tenofovir and boosted PI use, yielding a 2.1-fold greater risk of a 50% decline 
in GFR compared with use of alternative NRTIs + a boosted PI.
 In 
conclusion, the researchers stated, "Our results emphasize the importance 
of having a control group who receive an alternative NRTI, since a modest decline 
in [GFR] was observed among patients taking both tenofovir and [alternative NRTIs]." "Our 
results support use of tenofovir within the initial antiretroviral therapy regimen," 
they concluded. "Our data also suggest that GFR should be monitored more 
closely in older patients, those with CD4 counts < 200 cells/mm3, when hypertension 
is present, and when a [ritonavir-boosted PI] is used.'" Johns 
Hopkins Univ. School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. In 
a related report, researchers in Philadelphia also compared kidney function in 
patients taking tenofovir with NNRTIs (n = 110) versus boosted PIs (n = 140). 
At baseline, study participants had been on HAART for at least 3 months. Here 
too, a majority were men and about two-thirds were African-American. Overall, 
3 patients changed their regimens due to renal problems. However, the investigators 
observed no evidence of significant changes in GFR from baseline during the first 
2 years of therapy (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis including age, sex, hypertension, 
diabetes, and treatment-naive or experienced status did not alter these findings. 
 "There 
was no change in creatinine clearance with either a boosted PI or NNRTI," 
they concluded. "Sub-analysis of the [African-American] population did show 
a significant difference in first year of therapy; however, these differences 
were not statistically different over the second year of treatment." Jefferson 
Med. College, Philadelphia, PA; Drexel Univ. College of Med., Philadelphia, PA.
 11/11/08
 
 References
 
 E 
DeJesus, B Young, J Flaherty, and others. Simplification of Antiretroviral Therapy 
(ART) with Efavirenz (EFV)/Emtricitabine (FTC)/Tenofovir DF (TDF) Single-Tablet-Regimen 
vs. Continued Unmodified ART in Virologically-Suppressed, HIV-1-Infected Patients. 
48th International Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC 
2008). Washington, DC. October 25-28, 2008. Abstract H-1234.
 E. 
DeJesus, A Pozniak, J Gallant, and others. The 48-Week Efficacy and Safety of 
Switching to Fixed-Dose Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir DF in HIV-1-Infected 
Patients Receiving HAART. 48th International Conference on Antimicrobial Agents 
and Chemotherapy (ICAAC 2008). Washington, DC. October 25-28, 2008. Abstract H-1235. K 
Childs, S Fishman, K Bateman, and others. Should Vitamin D Be Prescribed with 
Tenofovir/FTC? 48th International Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 
(ICAAC 2008). Washington, DC. October 25-28, 2008. Abstract H-2300. R 
Moore and J Gallant. Renal Function after Use of Tenofovir as Part of the Initial 
ART Regimen. 48th International Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 
(ICAAC 2008). Washington, DC. October 25-28, 2008. Abstract H-2297. WR 
Short, P Solari, and B Kaplan. Comparison of Renal Function on NNRTI vs. Boosted 
PI based Tenofovir based Regimens. 48th International Conference on Antimicrobial 
Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC 2008). Washington, DC. October 25-28, 2008. Abstract 
H-2298. |