Modeling of HIV‐1 prophylactic efficacy and toxicity with islatravir shows non‐superiority for oral dosing, but promise as a subcutaneous implant

• প্রধান লেখক: Hee‐yeong Kim (Author), Lanxin Zhang (Author), Craig W. Hendrix (Author), Jessica E. Haberer (Author), Max vonKleist (Author)
• বিন্যাস: গ্রন্থ
• প্রকাশিত: Wiley, 2024-10-01T00:00:00Z.
• বিষয়গুলি: article
• অনলাইন ব্যবহার করুন: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 2163-8306; 10.1002/psp4.13212
• Keywords: Therapeutics. Pharmacology; RM1-950
• Source: CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology, Vol 13, Iss 10, Pp 1693-1706 (2024)

Abstract HIV prevention with pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) constitutes a major pillar in fighting the ongoing epidemic. While daily oral PrEP adherence may be challenging, long‐acting (LA‐)PrEP in oral or implant formulations could overcome frequent dosing with convenient administration. The novel drug islatravir (ISL) may be suitable for LA‐PrEP, but dose‐dependent reductions in CD4+ T cell and lymphocyte counts were observed at high doses. We developed a mathematical model to predict ISL pro‐drug levels in plasma and active intracellular ISL‐triphosphate concentrations after oral vs. subcutaneous implant dosing. Using phase II trial data, we simulated antiviral effects and estimated HIV risk reduction for multiple dosages and dosing frequencies. We then established exposure thresholds where no adverse effects on immune cells were observed. Our findings suggest that implants with 56-62 mg ISL offer effective HIV risk reduction without reducing lymphocyte counts. Oral 0.1 mg daily, 3-5 mg weekly, and 10 mg biweekly ISL provide comparable efficacy, but weekly and biweekly doses may affect lymphocyte counts, while daily dosing regimen offered no advantage over existing oral PrEP. Oral 0.5-1 mg on demand provided >90% protection, while not being suitable for post‐exposure prophylaxis. These findings suggest ISL could be considered for further development as a promising and safe agent for implantable PrEP.