Tenofovir microbiology

Tenofovir
Viread® FDA Package Insert
Description
Clinical Pharmacology
Microbiology
Indications and Usage
Contraindications
Warnings and Precautions
Adverse Reactions
Drug Interactions
Overdosage
Clinical Studies
Dosage and Administration
How Supplied
Labels and Packages

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Ahmed Zaghw, M.D. [2]

Microbiology

Mechanism of Action

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is an acyclic nucleoside phosphonate diester analog of adenosine monophosphate. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate requires initial diester hydrolysis for conversion to tenofovir and subsequent phosphorylations by cellular enzymes to form tenofovir diphosphate, an obligate chain terminator. Tenofovir diphosphate inhibits the activity of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase and HBV reverse transcriptase by competing with the natural substrate deoxyadenosine 5'-triphosphate and, after incorporation into DNA, by DNA chain termination. Tenofovir diphosphate is a weak inhibitor of mammalian DNA polymerases α, β, and mitochondrial DNA polymerase γ.

Antiviral Activity against HIV

The antiviral activity of tenofovir against laboratory and clinical isolates of HIV-1 was assessed in lymphoblastoid cell lines, primary monocyte/macrophage cells and peripheral blood lymphocytes. The EC50 (50% effective concentration) values for tenofovir were in the range of 0.04 µM to 8.5 µM. In drug combination studies, tenofovir was not antagonistic with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (abacavir, didanosine, lamivudine, stavudine, zalcitabine, zidovudine), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (delavirdine, efavirenz, nevirapine), and protease inhibitors (amprenavir, indinavir, nelfinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir). Tenofovir displayed antiviral activity in cell culture against HIV-1 clades A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and O (EC50 values ranged from 0.5 µM to 2.2 µM) and strain specific activity against HIV-2 (EC50 values ranged from 1.6 µM to 5.5 µM).

Resistance

HIV-1 isolates with reduced susceptibility to tenofovir have been selected in cell culture. These viruses expressed a K65R substitution in reverse transcriptase and showed a 2–4 fold reduction in susceptibility to tenofovir.

In Study 903 of treatment-naïve subjects (VIREAD + lamivudine + efavirenz versus stavudine + lamivudine + efavirenz) [See Clinical Studies (14.1)], genotypic analyses of isolates from subjects with virologic failure through Week 144 showed development of efavirenz and lamivudine resistance-associated substitutions to occur most frequently and with no difference between the treatment arms. The K65R substitution occurred in 8/47 (17%) analyzed patient isolates on the VIREAD arm and in 2/49 (4%) analyzed patient isolates on the stavudine arm. Of the 8 subjects whose virus developed K65R in the VIREAD arm through 144 weeks, 7 of these occurred in the first 48 weeks of treatment and one at Week 96. Other substitutions resulting in resistance to VIREAD were not identified in this trial.

In Study 934 of treatment-naïve subjects (VIREAD + EMTRIVA + efavirenz versus zidovudine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC) + efavirenz) [See Clinical Studies (14.1)], genotypic analysis performed on HIV-1 isolates from all confirmed virologic failure subjects with greater than 400 copies/mL of HIV-1 RNA at Week 144 or early discontinuation showed development of efavirenz resistance-associated substitutions occurred most frequently and was similar between the two treatment arms. The M184V substitution, associated with resistance to EMTRIVA and lamivudine, was observed in 2/19 analyzed subject isolates in the VIREAD + EMTRIVA group and in 10/29 analyzed subject isolates in the zidovudine/lamivudine group. Through 144 weeks of Study 934, no subjects have developed a detectable K65R substitution in their HIV-1 as analyzed through standard genotypic analysis.

Cross-Resistance

Cross-resistance among certain reverse transcriptase inhibitors has been recognized. The K65R substitution selected by tenofovir is also selected in some HIV-1 infected subjects treated with abacavir, didanosine, or zalcitabine. HIV-1 isolates with this substitution also show reduced susceptibility to emtricitabine and lamivudine. Therefore, cross-resistance among these drugs may occur in patients whose virus harbors the K65R substitution. HIV-1 isolates from subjects (N=20) whose HIV-1 expressed a mean of 3 zidovudine-associated reverse transcriptase substitutions (M41L, D67N, K70R, L210W, T215Y/F, or K219Q/E/N), showed a 3.1-fold decrease in the susceptibility to tenofovir.

In Studies 902 and 907 conducted in treatment-experienced subjects (VIREAD + Standard Background Therapy (SBT) compared to Placebo + SBT) [SeeClinical Studies (14.1)], 14/304 (5%) of the VIREAD-treated subjects with virologic failure through Week 96 had greater than 1.4-fold (median 2.7-fold) reduced susceptibility to tenofovir. Genotypic analysis of the baseline and failure isolates showed the development of the K65R substitution in the HIV-1 reverse transcriptase gene.

The virologic response to VIREAD therapy has been evaluated with respect to baseline viral genotype (N=222) in treatment-experienced subjects participating in Studies 902 and 907. In these clinical trials, 94% of the participants evaluated had baseline HIV-1 isolates expressing at least one NRTI substitution. Virologic responses for subjects in the genotype substudy were similar to the overall trial results.

Several exploratory analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of specific substitutions and substitutional patterns on virologic outcome. Because of the large number of potential comparisons, statistical testing was not conducted. Varying degrees of cross-resistance of VIREAD to pre-existing zidovudine resistance-associated substitutions (M41L, D67N, K70R, L210W, T215Y/F, or K219Q/E/N) were observed and appeared to depend on the type and number of specific substitutions. VIREAD-treated subjects whose HIV-1 expressed 3 or more zidovudine resistance-associated substitutions that included either the M41L or L210W reverse transcriptase substitution showed reduced responses to VIREAD therapy; however, these responses were still improved compared with placebo. The presence of the D67N, K70R, T215Y/F, or K219Q/E/N substitution did not appear to affect responses to VIREAD therapy. Subjects whose virus expressed an L74V substitution without zidovudine resistance associated substitutions (N=8) had reduced response to VIREAD. Limited data are available for subjects whose virus expressed a Y115F substitution (N=3), Q151M substitution (N=2), or T69 insertion (N=4), all of whom had a reduced response.

In the protocol defined analyses, virologic response to VIREAD was not reduced in subjects with HIV-1 that expressed the abacavir/emtricitabine/lamivudine resistance-associated M184V substitution. HIV-1 RNA responses among these subjects were durable through Week 48.

Studies 902 and 907 Phenotypic Analyses

Phenotypic analysis of baseline HIV-1 from treatment-experienced subjects (N=100) demonstrated a correlation between baseline susceptibility to VIREAD and response to VIREAD therapy. Table 15 summarizes the HIV-1 RNA response by baseline VIREAD susceptibility.==References==

Adapted from the FDA Package Insert.