Emtricitabine 200mg / Rilpivirine 25mg / Tenofovir disoproxil 245mg tablets

BackgroundNew HIV infections occur annually in Canada, highlighting the need for pre- and postexposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP). Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Pan-Canadian Network for HIV/AIDS and STBBI (sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections) Clinical Trials Research, we have updated the 2017 guideline on clinical indications and drug regimens for PrEP and PEP in Canada.MethodsDrawing on meetings with community-based organizations representing key populations affected by HIV in Canada, along with evidence from 3 systematic reviews on PrEP, PEP, and HIV risk assessment tools (searches to June 2024), our diverse panel of 19 experts formulated recommendations on PrEP and PEP. We used a formal evidence-to-decision-making framework and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We followed the Guidelines International Network principles for managing competing interests. Our guideline development and reporting adhere with Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II.RecommendationsThis guideline contains 31 recommendations and 10 good practice statements. Although it is appropriate to prescribe PrEP to adults and adolescents who request it, clinicians are also encouraged to assess HIV risk during routine health visits to identify people who would benefit from PrEP. Clinicians should elicit information about patients' anatomy and sexual partners in a culturally sensitive and affirming manner to determine which PrEP regimens - daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), on-demand TDF/FTC, daily oral tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine, or long-acting injectable cabotegravir - are suitable options. When assessing whether PEP is needed, clinicians should consider the likelihood that the source person has transmissible HIV, as well as the biological risk of HIV transmission based on exposure type. Preferred PEP regimens are dolutegravir plus TDF/FTC, or bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine.InterpretationMultiple safe, effective PrEP and PEP regimens are now available in Canada, making it increasingly possible to find suitable options for all who could benefit. Implementation of this guideline should expand access to biomedical HIV prevention interventions for those at risk and decrease the incidence of HIV in Canada.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

ObjectiveThis study evaluated rates of treatment-emergent resistance-associated mutations (TE-RAMs) and discontinuation due to adverse events (DC-AEs) across integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based single-tablet regimens and injectable cabotegravir + rilpivirine (CAB + RPV) in virologically suppressed people with HIV.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted for phase 2-4 randomized controlled trials with ≥48 weeks of follow-up involving virologically suppressed people with HIV aged ≥12 years and published January 2003-March 2024. A random-effects network meta-analysis estimated comparative rates of TE-RAMs and DC-AEs among regimens at 48 weeks. Risk of bias and strength of evidence were assessed using Cochrane RoB and CINeMA, respectively.ResultsFourteen (7509 participants) and nine (4656 participants) studies were included in the TE-RAMs and DC-AEs analyses, respectively. No significant differences in rates of TE-RAMs were observed; risk ratios (RRs) for TE-RAMs for bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC) and CAB + RPV every 4 weeks (Q4W) versus CAB + RPV every 8 weeks (Q8W) were 0.22 (95% CI, 0.02-2.04), 0.22 (95% CI, 0.00-19.85) and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.14-1.09). Compared with CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W, DC-AEs were significantly lower with B/F/TAF (RR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03-0.75] and RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.04-0.67], respectively) and DTG/ABC/3TC (RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.48] and RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.46], respectively).ConclusionsIn virologically suppressed people with HIV, switching to CAB + RPV Q8W yielded a non-significant increased risk of TE-RAMs compared with INSTI-based 2- and 3-drug regimens and CAB + RPV Q4W. Both CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W had significantly higher risks of DC-AEs than B/F/TAF and DTG/ABC/3TC. Findings highlight the importance of considering both resistance and tolerability when switching regimens.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

IntroductionPre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP) are important pillars of the HIV prevention portfolio to reduce the risk of acquisition just before or after HIV exposure. While PrEP efficacy has been elucidated in many randomized clinical trials, corresponding data for PEP is extremely difficult to obtain in a controlled setting. Consequently, it is almost impossible to study the impact of PEP initiation delay and duration on HIV risk reduction clinically, which would inform recommendations on PEP use.MethodsWe employ pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and viral dynamics models, along with individual factors, such as drug adherence to investigate the impact of initiation delay and PEP duration on HIV risk reduction. We evaluated PEP using two- and three-drug regimens with a TDF/FTC backbone. Moreover, we study PEP efficacy in the context of PrEP-to-PEP transitions.ResultsIn our simulations, early initiation of PEP emerged as a pivotal factor for HIV risk reduction. We found that 2-drug (TDF/FTC) PEP may insufficiently protect when initiated > 1 hour post-exposure. When adding a third drug, early initiation was still a critical factor; however, over 90% efficacy could be achieved when PEP was initiated 48 hours post-exposure and taken for at least 14-28 days, depending on the efficacy of the third-drug component. When investigating PrEP-PEP transitions, we observed that preceding PrEP can (1) contribute directly to prophylactic efficacy, and (2) boost subsequent PEP efficacy by delaying initial viral dynamics and building-up drug concentrations, overall facilitating self-managed transitioning between PrEP and PEP.ConclusionsOur study confirms the critical role of early (< 48 hours) PEP initiation, preferably with three drugs taken for 28 days. Self-start with TDF/FTC and later addition of a third drug is better than not self-starting. Furthermore, our study highlights the synergy between recent PrEP intake and PEP and may help to inform recommendations on PEP use.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Evaluation of the durable efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable therapy for HIV is needed in African populations. In a multicenter, open-label phase 3b trial, 512 African adults with HIV-1, stable on first-line oral therapy, with screening plasma viral load (VL) -1 and without past virologic failure were randomized (1:1) to continue oral therapy or switch to cabotegravir (600 mg) and rilpivirine (900 mg) intramuscular injections every 8 weeks (optional 4-week oral lead-in). VL was monitored every 24 weeks. Here the primary outcome for our analysis up to 96 weeks was VL -1, using the Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm (noninferiority margin 10%) in the intention-to-treat exposed population. At 96 weeks, 247/255 (97%) in the long-acting group and 250/257 (97%) in the oral therapy group had VL -1 (difference -0.4%; 95% confidence interval -3.1% to 2.0%), demonstrating noninferiority. Adverse events of severity grade ≥3 occurred in 41/255 (16%) in the long-acting group and in 22/257 (9%) in the oral therapy group, mostly considered unrelated to the study drug; only one treatment-related adverse event in the long-acting group led to a decision to discontinue treatment (injection-site abscess). Cabotegravir and rilpivirine long-acting therapy produced durable virologic suppression, met the prespecified noninferiority endpoint compared with oral therapy and demonstrated an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. Long-acting therapy may be considered for use in African treatment programs. PACTR registration: 202104874490818.

Abstract licence: CC BY