ACTG
5202 Sub-study Finds Lipoatrophy Uncommon, Antiretroviral Drugs Have Varying
Effects on Bone and Body Fat
By
Liz Highleyman
 |
Grace
McComsey
(Photo by Liz Highleyman)
|
|
ACTG 5224s,
a sub-study of the larger ACTG 5202 trial, looked at 2 types of body
composition changes associated with antiretroviral
therapy, bone loss and body
fat changes.
ACTG 5202 was a randomized Phase 3b clinical trial comparing the effectiveness
of commonly used ART components. Two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase
inhibitor (NRTI) "backbones" -- abacavir/lamivudine (the drugs
in the Epzicom coformulation) and tenofovir/emtricitabine (the drugs
in the Truvada coformulation) -- were studied in combination with both
the non-nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) efavirenz
and the boosted protease inhibitor atazanavir.
Participants were enrolled during 2005-2007. The high viral load group
was unblinded
early after an interim analysis showed that abacavir/lamivudine
did not suppress HIV as well as tenofovir/emtricitabine in patients
with high viral load. The low viral load group continued follow-up through
September 2009, or 96 weeks after the last enrollment, so some patients
were followed for nearly 4 years.
Final ACTG 5202 data were also presented
at CROI. Overall, there were no significant differences among the
regimens with regard to virological suppression, though there were differences
in side effects, including cholesterol changes.
Grace McComsey presented the sub-study data on behalf of the A5224 team.
The investigators used dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans
to measure bone mineral density changes in the lumbar spine (lower back)
and hip bone, as well as the rate of bone fractures.
They also looked changes in limb fat and trunk (abdominal or central)
fat and the percentage of patients who developed lipoatrophy (defined
as >10% or greater loss of limb fat from baseline, a change
that might not be visually evident). Among people with HIV, fat gain
in the arms and legs is generally considered good (relative to the lipoatrophy
seen with older NRTIs) while abdominal fat gain is unfavorable; however,
some degree of weight gain may be due to a return to health among people
with AIDS-related wasting.
The sub-study included 269 participants, with similar numbers taking
each of the 4 combination regimens. Most participants (85%) were men,
about half were white, the median age was 38 years, and the median body
mass index (BMI) was 24.9 (the top of the "normal" category).
They had a relatively low median CD4 cell count of about 230 cells/mm3
and about 41% had a high viral load (>100,000 copies/mL).
None had diabetes or other conditions associated with bone or body fat
changes.
Results
 |
Bone
density dropped steeply with all regimens during the first 24 weeks
after starting therapy.
|
 |
Bone
density then began to rise, but did not reach baseline levels. |
 |
At
week 96, participants using tenofovir/emtricitabine experienced
significantly larger bone density decreases from baseline compared
with abacavir/lamivudine recipients: |
|
 |
Lumbar
spine: -1.3% vs -3.0%; |
 |
Hip
bone: -2.6% vs -3.9% for hip. |
|
 |
Looking
at the other 2 drugs, atazanavir/ritonavir was associated with more
bone loss than efavirenz at both sites: |
|
 |
Lumbar
spine: -1.7% vs -3.2%; |
 |
Hip
bone: -3.1% vs -3.4% for hip (not significant). |
|
 |
Among
patients followed through week 192 (about 45%), lumbar spine bone
density began to decrease at about 144 weeks in people taking tenofovir/emtricitabine
or atazanavir/ritonavir; this pattern was not seen with hip bone
density. |
 |
5.6% of participants in the sub-study had 1 or more bone fractures,
all of them traumatic (due to injury). |
 |
4.3%
of participants in the larger parent study had 1 or more fractures,
of which 12.7% were non-traumatic (spontaneous). |
 |
There
were no significant differences in fracture rates between the NRTI
backbones or between atazanavir/ritonavir and efavirenz. |
 |
16%
of participants overall had 10% limb fat loss at week 96, with no
statistically significant differences between the regimens: |
 |
Abacavir/lamivudine
+ efavirenz: 18.9%; |
 |
Abacavir/lamivudine
+ atazanavir/ritonavir: 16.3%; |
 |
Tenofovir/emtricitabine
+ efavirenz: 14.3%; |
 |
Tenofovir/emtricitabine
+ atazanavir/ritonavir: 15.6%. |
|
 |
In
a post hoc analysis of >20% or greater limb fat loss,
there was more variation: |
 |
Abacavir/lamivudine
+ efavirenz: 3.8%; |
 |
Abacavir/lamivudine
+ atazanavir/ritonavir: 6.1%; |
 |
Tenofovir/emtricitabine
+ efavirenz: 8.9%; |
 |
Tenofovir/emtricitabine
+ atazanavir/ritonavir: 0%. |
|
 |
In
an intent-to-treat analysis at 96 weeks, absolute amountand percentage
change of limb fat increased to a similar extent with both NRTI
backbones (1.1 with tenofovir/emtricitabine vs 1.7 kg with abacavir/lamivudine). |
 |
After
96 weeks, limb fat continued to rise with both backbones, but more
steeply with abacavir/lamivudine, so the difference between them
widened by week 192. |
 |
In
a 96-week intent-to-treat analysis, the absolute amount of limb
fat rose significantly more with atazanavir/ritonavir than with
efavirenz (1.9 vs 1.0 kg, respectively), and the percentage increase
was twice as large with atazanavir/ritonavir (about 15% vs 30%). |
 |
With
longer follow-up, limb fat declined among atazanavir/ritonavir recipients
starting about week 96, but then rose again after week 144; efavirenz
recipients experienced a continued rise, so changes were similar
by week 192. |
 |
In
an ad hoc analysis of trunk fat, absolute amounts gained (1.5-2.0
kg) and percentage changes (about 25%) were similar with tenofovir/emtricitabine
and abacavir/lamivudine. |
 |
Trunk
fat rose significantly more with atazanavir/ritonavir than with
efavirenz in absolute amount (about 1.2 vs 2.5 kg) and percentage
(about 20% vs nearly 40%, respectively). |
The researchers
concluded that, "All regimens appeared to produce an initial bone
loss with subsequent stabilization after week 48. [Tenofovir/emtricitabine]
led to greater bone mineral density loss in hip and lumbar spine than
[abacavir/lamivudine]. Atazanavir/ritonavir led to greater bone mineral
density loss in lumbar spine (but not hip) than efavirenz. Fractures
were similarly distributed among study arms."
With regard to fat, they concluded, "Regimens containing [tenofovir/emtricitabine]
or [abacavir/lamivudine] increased limb fat and trunk fat and were not
significantly different (by intent-to-treat). Atazanavir/ritonavir led
to great gain in limb fat and trunk fat than efavirenz."
Finally, they noted, "Lipoatrophy, even the mild protocol-defined
form, occurred in 16% of the participants and was not significantly
different between [tenofovir/emtricitabine] and [abacavir/lamivudine]
or between efavirenz and atazanavir/ritonavir."
Speaking at an accompanying press conference, McComsey said these lipoatrophy
rates were "very low," which offers "very encouraging
news" that modern ART regimens do not cause some of the problems
seen with certain older drugs.
Case
Western Reserve Univ, Cleveland, OH; Harvard Sch of Publ Hlth, Boston,
MA; Los Angeles Biomed Res Inst at Harbor-UCLA, Torrance, CA; Social
& Sci Systems, Inc, Silver Spring, MD; Univ of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
PA; Frontier Sci and Tech Res Fndn, Amherst, NY; Brigham and Women`s
Hosp, Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA.
3/2/10
Reference
G
McComsey, D Kitch, E Daar, and others. Bone and Limb Fat Outcomes of
ACTG A5224s, a Substudy of ACTG A5202: A Prospective, Randomized, Partially
Blinded Phase III Trial of ABC/3TC or TDF/FTC with EFV or ATV/r for
Initial Treatment of HIV-1 Infection. 17th Conference on Retroviruses
& Opportunistic Infections (CROI 2010). San Francisco. February
16-19, 2010. Abstract 106LB.
|
|