Pharmacokinetics of an indinavir-ritonavir-fosamprenavir regimen in patients with human immunodeficiency virus

Abstract

Study objective: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic compatibility of a ritonavir-boosted indinavir-fosamprenavir combination among patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Design: Single-center, nonrandomized, prospective, multiple-dose, two-phase pharmacokinetic study.

Setting: University research center.

Patients: Eight adult patients with HIV infection who had been receiving and tolerating indinavir 800 mg-ritonavir 100 mg twice/day for at least 2 weeks. Intervention. After 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on all patients (period A), fosamprenavir (a prodrug of amprenavir) 700 mg twice/day was coadministered for 5 days, with a repeat 12-hour pharmacokinetic sampling performed on the fifth day (period B).

Measurements and main results: Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for indinavir, ritonavir, and amprenavir: area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to 12 hours after dosing (AUC(0-12)), maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), and 12-hour plasma concentration (C(12)). For each parameter, the geometric mean, as well as the geometric mean ratio (GMR) comparing period B with period A, were calculated. Indinavir C(max) was lowered by 20% (GMR 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.96), AUC(0-12) was lowered by 6% (GMR 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.21), and C(12) was increased by 28% (GMR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78-2.10). Ritonavir AUC(0-12) was 20% lower (GMR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54-1.19), C(max) was 15% lower (GMR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55-1.32), and C(12) was 7% lower (GMR 0.93, 95% CI 0.49-1.76). With the exception of indinavir C(max), the changes in indinavir and ritonavir pharmacokinetic parameters observed after fosamprenavir coadministration were not statistically significant. The geometric means of amprenavir AUC(0-12), C(max), and C(12) were 41,517 ng*hour/ml (95% CI 30,317-56,854 ng*hr/ml), 5572 ng/ml (95% CI 4330-7170 ng/ml), and 2421 ng/ml (95% CI 1578-3712 ng/ml), respectively.

Conclusion: The combination of indinavir 800 mg-ritonavir 100 mg-fosamprenavir 700 mg twice/day appears to be devoid of a clinically significant drug-drug interaction and should be evaluated as an alternative regimen in salvage HIV treatment. This combination may be suitable as part of a background regimen to optimize the therapeutic benefit of newer classes of antiretroviral agents such as the integrase and coreceptor inhibitors in the treatment of multidrug-resistant viruses.

Figure 1

Effect of fosamprenavir on steady-state geometric mean (± standard error of the mean) indinavir and ritonavir concentrations in the eight study patients.

Figure 2

Pharmacokinetic parameters for indinavir during periods A and B. Bold lines denote the geometric means; the other lines connect the period A and B measurements for the eight study patients. The p values for the comparison of the geometric mean change from period A to period B were as follows: p=0.02 for maximum plasma concentration (A), p=0.30 for 12-hour plasma concentration (B), and p=0.60 for area under the concentration-time curve over 12 hours (C).