Charles Craig

Viruses from 15 of 35 maraviroc-treated participants with virologic failure and CCR5-tropic (R5) virus in the MOTIVATE studies at Week 24 had reduced maraviroc susceptibility. On-treatment amino acid changes were observed in the viral envelope glycoprotein 120 third variable (V3)–loop stems and tips and differed between viruses. No amino acid change reliably predicted reduced susceptibility, indicating that resistance was genetic context–dependent. Through Week 24, poor adherence was associated with maraviroc-susceptible virologic failure, whereas reduced maraviroc susceptibility was associated with suboptimal background regimen activity, highlighting the importance of overall regimen activity and good adherence. Predictive values of pretreatment V3-loop sequences containing these Week 24 mutations or other variants present at >3% in pretreatment viruses of participants with virologic failure at Week 48 were retrospectively assessed. Week 48 clinical outcomes were evaluated for correlates with pretreatment V3-loop CCR5-tropic sequences from 704 participants (366 responders; 338 virologic failures [83 with R5 virus with maraviroc susceptibility assessment]). Seventy-five amino acid variants with >3% prevalence were identified among 23 V3-loop residues. Previously identified variants associated with resistance in individual isolates were represented, but none were associated reliably with virologic failure alone or in combination. Univariate analysis showed virologic-failure associations with variants 4L, 11R, and 19S (P < 0.05). However, 11R is a marker for CXCR4 tropism, whereas neither 4L nor 19S was reliably associated with reduced maraviroc susceptibility in R5 failure. These findings from a large study of V3-loop sequences confirm lack of correlation between V3-loop genotype and clinical outcome in participants treated with maraviroc. Clinical trial registration numbers (ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT00098306 and NCT00098722

Introduction: Maraviroc inhibits CCR5-tropic HIV-1 across different subtypes in vitro and has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials. V3-loop amino acid variants observed in individual maraviroc-resistant viruses have not been found to be predictive of reduced susceptibility. Sequence-database searches have demonstrated that approximately 7.3% of viruses naturally encode these variants, raising concerns regarding potential pre-existing resistance. A study from Russia reported that combinations of these same amino acids are present in the V3 loops of the Russian variant subtype A (IDU-A, now A6) with a much greater prevalence (range: 74.4%–92.3%) depending on the combination. However, these studies and database searches did not include phenotypic evaluation. Methods: Sixteen Russian HIV-1 isolates (including sub-subtype A6 viruses) were assessed for V3 loop sequence and phenotypic susceptibility to maraviroc. Results: All 12 of the A6 viruses and 2/4 subtype B isolates encoded V3-loop variants that have previously been identified in individual virus isolates with reduced susceptibility to maraviroc. However, despite the prevalence of these V3-loop amino acid variants among the tested viruses, phenotypic sensitivity to maraviroc was observed in all instances. Similarly, reduced susceptibility to maraviroc was not found in virus from participants who experienced virologic failure in a clinical study of maraviroc in Russia (A4001101, [NCT01275625]). Discussion: Altogether, these data confirm that the presence of individual or combinations of V3-loop amino acid residues in sub-subtype A6 viruses alone does not predict natural resistance to maraviroc and that V3-loop genotype analysis of R5 virus prior to treatment is not helpful in predicting clinical outcome.

Maraviroc blocks HIV-1 entry into CD4+ cells by interrupting the interaction between viral gp120 and cell-surface CCR5. Resistance to CCR5 antagonist–mediated inhibition can develop by unmasking pre-existing CXCR4-using virus or through selection of CCR5-tropic resistant virus, characterized by plateaus in maximum percent inhibition <95%. Here, we examine viral escape in maraviroc-treated participants during virologic failure through Week 48 in the MOTIVATE 1 and 2 trials. Resistance was assessed relative to number of active drugs in participants’ optimized background therapy, pharmacokinetic adherence markers, Baseline demographic data, HIV-1 RNA and CD4+ counts. For participants with R5 virus confirmed ( post hoc) at Screening, Baseline genotypic weighted optimized background therapy susceptibility scores (gwOBTSS) were assigned where possible. Through Week 48, 219/392 (56%) participants with an assigned gwOBTSS achieved a virologic response. Of those remaining, 48/392 (12%) had CXCR4-using virus; 58/392 (15%) had R5 virus (maraviroc sensitive: n = 35/392, 9%; maraviroc resistant: n = 18/392, 5%; undeterminable: n = 5/392, 1%) and 67/392 (17%) had no failure tropism result. When optimized background therapy provided limited support to maraviroc (gwOBTSS <2), 143/286 (50%) responded to therapy, while 76/106 (72%) participants with gwOBTSS ≥2 responded ( p < 0.001). Resistance rates were highest for participants with gwOBTSS <2, accounting for 45/48 (94%) of total CXCR4-using emergence and 18/18 (100%) of total CCR5-tropic resistance. R5 viruses from participants with gwOBTSS ≥2 ( n = 10) were exclusively maraviroc sensitive; five of these participants had pharmacokinetic and/or pill-count markers of non-adherence. When co-administered with a fully active background regimen, maraviroc did not readily generate resistance in the clinical setting. Trial registry name: ClinicalTrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ), NCT00098722 and NCT00098306

Detailed clonal phenotypic/genotypic analyses explored viral-escape mechanisms during maraviroc-based therapy in highly treatment-experienced participants from the MOTIVATE trials. To allow real-time assessment of samples while maintaining a blind trial, the first 267 enrolled participants were selected for evaluation. At failure, plasma samples from 20/50 participants (16/20 maraviroc-treated) with CXCR4-using virus and all 38 (13 maraviroc-treated) with CCR5-tropic virus were evaluated. Of those maraviroc-treated participants with CXCR4-using virus at failure, genotypic and phenotypic clonal tropism determinations showed >90% correspondence in 14/16 at Day 1 and 14/16 at failure. Phylogenetic analysis of clonal sequences detected pre-treatment progenitor CXCR4-using virus, or on-treatment virus highly divergent from the Day 1 R5 virus, excluding possible co-receptor switch through maraviroc-mediated evolution. Re-analysis of pre-treatment samples using the enhanced-sensitivity Trofile^® assay detected CXCR4-using virus pre-treatment in 16/20 participants failing with CXCR4-using virus. Post-maraviroc reversion of CXCR4-use to CCR5-tropic occurred in 7/8 participants with follow-up, suggesting selective maraviroc inhibition of CCR5-tropic variants in a mixed-tropic viral population, not emergence of de novo mutations in CCR5-tropic virus, as the main virologic escape mechanism. Maraviroc-resistant CCR5-tropic virus was observed in plasma from 5 treated participants with virus displaying reduced maximal percent inhibition (MPI) but no evidence of IC₅₀ change. Env clones with reduced MPI showed 1–5 amino acid changes specific to each V3-loop region of env relative to Day 1. However, transferring on-treatment resistance-associated changes using site-directed mutagenesis did not always establish resistance in Day 1 virus, and key ‘signature’ mutation patterns associated with reduced susceptibility to maraviroc were not identified. Evolutionary divergence of the CXCR4-using viruses is confirmed, emphasizing natural selection not influenced directly by maraviroc; maraviroc simply unmasks pre-existing lineages by inhibiting the R5 virus. For R5-viral failure, resistance development through drug selection pressure was uncommon and manifested through reduced MPI and with virus strain–specific mutational patterns.

Background: Maraviroc is a CC-chemokine receptor 5 antagonist approved to treat adults infected with CC-chemokine receptor 5–tropic (R5) HIV-1. Study A4001031 was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of maraviroc in combination with optimized background therapy in treatment-experienced pediatric patients infected with R5 HIV-1 and support registration of maraviroc for pediatric use. Methods: This is an open-label, 2-stage, age-stratified, noncomparative multicenter study. One-hundred and three participants were enrolled into 4 age/formulation cohorts and dosed twice daily. Initial doses were determined by body surface area and optimized background therapy, based on drug interactions with maraviroc in adults. Dose adjustment and pharmacokinetic reevaluation occurred if the average concentrations (C _avg) at Week 2 were 1 log₁₀. Increases from baseline in the median CD4+ cell count and percentage were seen for all age groups. Conclusions: The maraviroc dosing strategy resulted in participants achieving the target C _avg, with exposure ranges similar to those observed in adults on approved doses. The safety and efficacy of maraviroc in this pediatric population were comparable to those seen in adults.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of maraviroc along with darunavir/ritonavir, all once daily, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 infected individuals. MODERN was a multicentre, double-blind, noninferiority, phase III study in HIV-1 infected, antiretroviral-naive adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA at least 1000 copies/ml and no evidence of reduced susceptibility to study drugs. At screening, participants were randomized 1 : 1 to undergo either genotypic or phenotypic tropism testing. Participants with CCR5-tropic HIV-1 were randomized 1 : 1 to receive maraviroc 150 mg once daily or tenofovir/emtricitabine once daily each with darunavir/ritonavir once daily for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml (Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm) at Week 48. A substudy evaluated bone mineral density, body fat distribution and serum bone turnover markers. Seven hundred and ninety-seven participants were dosed (maraviroc, n = 396; tenofovir/emtricitabine, n = 401). The Data Monitoring Committee recommended early study termination due to inferior efficacy in the maraviroc group. At Week 48, the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml was 77.3% for maraviroc and 86.8% for tenofovir/emtricitabine [difference of -9.54% (95% confidence interval: -14.83 to -4.24)]. More maraviroc participants discontinued for lack of efficacy, which was not associated with non-R5 tropism or resistance. Discontinuations for adverse events, Category C events, Grade 3/4 adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were similar between groups. A once-daily nucleos(t)ide-sparing two-drug regimen of maraviroc and darunavir/ritonavir was inferior to a three-drug regimen of tenofovir/emtricitabine and darunavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral-naive adults.

Entry inhibitors represent a potent class of antiretroviral drugs that target a host cell protein, CCR5, an HIV-1 entry coreceptor, and not viral protein. Lack of sensitivity can occur due to preexisting virus that uses the CXCR4 coreceptor, while true resistance occurs through viral adaptation to use a drug-bound CCR5 coreceptor. To understand this R5 resistance pathway, we analyzed >500 envelope protein sequences and phenotypes from viruses of 20 patients from the clinical trials MOTIVATE 1 and 2, in which treatment-experienced patients received maraviroc plus optimized background therapy. The resistant viral population was phylogenetically distinct and associated with a genetic bottleneck in each patient, consistent withde novoemergence of resistance. Recombination analysis showed that the C2-V3-C3 region tends to genotypically correspond to the recombinant's phenotype, indicating its primary importance in conferring resistance. Between patients, there was a notable lack of commonality in the specific sites conferring resistance, confirming the unusual nature of R5-tropic resistance. We used coevolutionary and positive-selection analyses to characterize the genotypic determinants of resistance and found that (i) there are complicated covariation networks, indicating frequent coevolutionary/compensatory changes in the context of protein structure; (ii) covarying sites under positive selection are enriched in resistant viruses; (iii) CD4 binding sites form part of a unique covariation network independent of the V3 loop; and (iv) the covariation network formed between the V3 loop and other regions of gp120 and gp41 intersects sites involved in glycosylation and protein secretion. These results demonstrate that while envelope sequence mutations are the key to conferring maraviroc resistance, the specific changes involved are context dependent and thus inherently unpredictable.IMPORTANCEThe entry inhibitor drug maraviroc makes the cell coreceptor CCR5 unavailable for use by HIV-1 and is now used in combination antiretroviral therapy. Treatment failure with drug-resistant virus is particularly interesting because it tends to be rare, with lack of sensitivity usually associated with the presence of CXCR4-using virus (CXCR4 is the main alternative coreceptor HIV-1 uses, in addition to CD4). We analyzed envelope sequences from HIV-1, obtained from 20 patients who enrolled in maraviroc clinical trials and experienced treatment failure, without detection of CXCR4-using virus. Evolutionary analysis was employed to identify molecular changes that confer maraviroc resistance. We found that in these individuals, resistant viruses form a distinct population that evolved once and was successful as a result of drug pressure. Further evolutionary analysis placed the complex network of interdependent mutational changes into functional groups that help explain the impediments to the emergence of maraviroc-associated R5 drug resistance.

The maraviroc (MVC) expanded access program (EAP) was initiated to increase MVC availability to patients with limited treatment options. Darunavir (DRV), raltegravir (RAL), and etravirine (ETV) were either recently approved or under regulatory review at study initiation and available for coadministration with MVC. Thus, the safety of MVC in combination with new antiretroviral therapies (ARVs) could be assessed. This open-label safety study of MVC was conducted at 262 sites worldwide in 1032 R5 HIV-positive treatment-experienced patients with limited/no therapeutic options. Study visits included screening, baseline, end of study or early discontinuation, and follow-up 30 days after last dose. Interim visits for HIV-1 RNA and CD4 cell counts occurred according to local HIV infection management guidelines. Safety data were analyzed overall and by subgroup based on ARV combination [MVC+optimized background therapy (OBT), MVC ± OBT+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL, MVC ± OBT+RAL+DRV/r, MVC ± OBT+RAL+ETV ± DRV/r]. Most (90.3%) adverse events (AEs) were of mild or moderate severity with few grade 3/4 events, discontinuations, or temporary discontinuations/dose reductions due to AEs or serious AEs. Similar results were observed across subgroups. Of treated patients, 79.9% and 50% had HIV-1 RNA < 400 copies/ml and < 50 copies/ml respectively, at the end of the study, early termination visits, or at last known status. Tropism changes and selection of MVC-resistant R5 virus, including high-level MVC dependence, were mechanisms of viral escape. MVC was well tolerated with virologic suppression observed in most patients.

Introduction: MODERN (A4001095) was the first prospective phase 3 study comparing genotype vs phenotype (Trofile™) tropism assessments.Materials and Methods: Treatment‐naïve adults with HIV‐1 RNA >1000 copies/mL were randomized 1:1 at screening to either genotype or Trofile for tropism assessment. Genotype was determined using the geno2pheno algorithm to assess triplicate HIV‐1 gp120 V3 loop sequences (plasma); false‐positive rate=10%. R5‐virus‐infected subjects were then randomized 1:1 to receive Maraviroc (MVC) 150 mg QD or Truvada 200/300 mg QD each with DRV/r 800/100 mg QD. Tropism of screening samples from enrolled subjects was also retrospectively determined using the alternate testing method. Positive predictive values (PPV) were estimated by%R5 subjects with Week 48 HIV‐1 RNA < 50 c/mL. PPV for each assay was estimated using the response rate among those randomized to that assay and using model‐based response estimates in those with R5 by that assay (at screening or retest).Results: The observed response rate was 146/181 (80.7%) for genotype vs 160/215 (74.4%) for Trofile (stratification adjusted difference=6.9%, 95% CI 1.3% to 15%). The model‐based estimates of PPV (±SE) were 79.1% (±2.42) and 76.3% (±2.38), respectively (difference = 2.8%, 95% CI −2.1% to 7.2%). There was no difference in response rate between assays in the Truvada arm (observed difference=− 0.1%, 95% CI −6.8% to 6.6%). Most enrolled subjects had R5 results at screening using both assays (285/396 (72%)), and of these subjects, 79.3% (226/285) had HIV‐1 RNA <50 c/mL at week 48 (Table 1). The few subjects classified as non‐R5 by the alternate assay had similar virologic responses to the concordant R5 group.Conclusion: There was a higher MVC response rate and model‐based positive predictive value with genotype compared to Trofile, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. The majority of subjects had concordant R5 tropism results. Either phenotype or genotype can effectively predict MVC response.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine in patients with HIV-1 and prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. Methods: In this 96-week, phase 2b study, 97 patients were randomized and treated with lersivirine 750 mg qd (n = 31), lersivirine 1,000 mg qd (n = 32), and etravirine 200 mg bid (n = 34), plus one optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg bid. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24. Results: At week 24, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (48.4%) and 1,000 mg (43.8%) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg qd (67.7%) (intention to treat [ITT], missing/switch/discontinuation equals failure [MSDF]). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and <400 copies/mL were also achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (41.9% and 41.9%, respectively) and 1,000 mg (31.3% and 34.4%, respectively) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg bid (61.8% and 70.6%, respectively) (ITT, MSDF). Least squares means (SE) change from baseline in log transformed HIV-1 RNA at week 48 was -1.42 (0.27) and -0.95 (0.28) copies/mL for lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd, respectively, versus -2.02 (0.26) copies/mL for etravirine 200 mg bid (ITT). Lersivirine and etravirine were generally safe and well-tolerated. Conclusions: Lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd was associated with lower rates of viral suppression at week 24 and week 48 versus etravirine in patients with prior NNRTI use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. No new safety signals were detected.