Intracellular Pharmacokinetics of Tenofovir Diphosphate, Carbovir Triphosphate, and Lamivudine Triphosphate in Patients Receiving Triple-Nucleoside Regimens

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir DF) is an oral prodrug of tenofovir, a nucleotide (nucleoside monophosphate) analogue with activity against retroviruses, including HIV-1, HIV-2 and hepadnaviruses. Following absorption, tenofovir DF is rapidly converted to tenofovir, which is metabolised intracellularly to its active anabolite tenofovir diphosphate, which is a competitive inhibitor of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase and terminates the growing DNA chain. Tenofovir exerts antiviral effects in a variety of cell types, including resting cells. Tenofovir exhibits longer serum (17 hours) and intracellular (> or =60 hours) half-lives than those of nucleoside analogues, which supports a flexible once-daily administration schedule. The pharmacokinetics of tenofovir are dose-proportional and similar in healthy volunteers and HIV-infected individuals. The oral bioavailability of tenofovir is enhanced by administration with a high-fat meal, but is similar at steady state when administered with or without a typical meal. Tenofovir is not a substrate, inducer or inhibitor of human cytochrome P450 enzymes in vitro or in vivo. Tenofovir DF has been studied with 15 other antiretroviral and other concomitant medications frequently used in the HIV-1-infected population. With the exception of didanosine and atazanavir, which require dosage modifications, no clinically significant drug interactions have been observed with tenofovir DF. The recommended oral dosage of tenofovir DF in adults is 300 mg/day. Tenofovir is eliminated by renal elimination, including tubular secretion; dose-interval adjustments are necessary for tenofovir DF in patients with significant renal impairment. No dosage adjustment of tenofovir DF is necessary in patients with liver disease.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF) is a once-daily nucleotide analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tenofovir DF compared with stavudine in antiretroviral-naive patients. A prospective, randomized, double-blind study conducted at 81 centers in the United States, South America, and Europe from June 9, 2000, to January 30, 2004. A total of 753 patients infected with HIV who were antiretroviral naive were screened and 602 patients entered the study. Patients were randomized to receive either tenofovir DF (n = 299) or stavudine (n = 303), with placebo, in combination with lamivudine and efavirenz. Proportion of patients with HIV RNA levels of less than 400 copies/mL at week 48. In the primary intent-to-treat analysis in which patients with missing data or who added or switched antiretroviral medications before week 48 were considered as failures, the proportion of patients with HIV RNA of less than 400 copies/mL at week 48 was 239 (80%) of 299 in patients receiving tenofovir DF and 253 (84%) of 301 in patients receiving stavudine (95% confidence interval, -10.4% to 1.5%), exceeding the predefined -10% limit for equivalence. However, equivalence was demonstrated in the secondary analyses (HIV RNA <50 copies/mL) at week 48 and through 144 weeks. Virologic failure was associated most frequently with efavirenz and lamivudine resistance. Through 144 weeks, the K65R mutation emerged in 8 and 2 patients in the tenofovir DF and stavudine groups, respectively (P =.06). A more favorable mean change from baseline in fasting lipid profile was noted in the tenofovir DF group at week 144: for triglyceride levels (+1 mg/dL for tenofovir DF [n = 170] vs +134 mg/dL for stavudine [n = 162], P<.001), total cholesterol (+30 mg/dL [n = 170] vs +58 mg/dL [n = 162], P<.001), direct low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (+14 mg/dL [n = 169] vs +26 mg/dL [n = 161], P<.001), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (+9 mg/dL [n = 168] vs +6 mg/dL [n = 154], P =.003). Investigator-reported lipodystrophy was less common in the tenofovir DF group compared with the stavudine group (9 [3%] of 299 vs 58 [19%] of 301, P<.001). The number of bone fractures and the renal safety profile were similar between the 2 groups. Through 144 weeks, the combination of tenofovir DF, lamivudine, and efavirenz was highly effective and comparable with stavudine, lamivudine, and efavirenz in antiretroviral-naive patients. However, tenofovir DF appeared to be associated with better lipid profiles and less lipodystrophy.

Regimens containing three nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors offer an alternative to regimens containing nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors or protease inhibitors for the initial treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but data from direct comparisons are limited. This randomized, double-blind study involved three antiretroviral regimens for the initial treatment of subjects infected with HIV-1: zidovudine-lamivudine-abacavir, zidovudine-lamivudine plus efavirenz, and zidovudine-lamivudine-abacavir plus efavirenz. We enrolled a total of 1147 subjects with a mean baseline HIV-1 RNA level of 4.85 log10 (71,434) copies per milliliter and a mean CD4 cell count of 238 per cubic millimeter were enrolled. A scheduled review by the data and safety monitoring board with the use of prespecified stopping boundaries led to a recommendation to stop the triple-nucleoside group and to present the results in the triple-nucleoside group in comparison with pooled data from the efavirenz groups. After a median follow-up of 32 weeks, 82 of 382 subjects in the triple-nucleoside group (21 percent) and 85 of 765 of those in the combined efavirenz groups (11 percent) had virologic failure; the time to virologic failure was significantly shorter in the triple-nucleoside group (P<0.001). This difference was observed regardless of the pretreatment HIV-1 RNA stratum (at least 100,000 copies per milliliter or below this level; P< or =0.001 for both comparisons). Changes in the CD4 cell count and the incidence of grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. In this trial of the initial treatment of HIV-1 infection, the triple-nucleoside combination of abacavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine was virologically inferior to a regimen containing efavirenz and two or three nucleosides. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society