| 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 ReferenceG 
          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.
 
 
 | 
 |