HIV InfectionsPhase 4NCT00127972
2NN & CHARM Long-Term Follow-up Study
A Phase 4 study testing stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine in people with HIV Infections, run by International Antiviral Therapy Evaluation Center at 1 site in Australia.
Trial summary
It is desirable to obtain extended follow up data on subjects who participated in the 2NN study and the CHARM study in order to see if the beneficial effect of using nevirapine continues up to 144 weeks of treatment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- HIV Infections
- What is being tested?
- stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine
- How many people
- 763 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustralia
- Study dates
- Feb 2004to Apr 2007
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Participation in the original 2NN or CHARM study
Who cannot join
- None
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: A Retrospective Study to Compare the 3-Year Antiviral Efficacy of Nevirapine and Efavirenz in Combination With D4t and 3tc in 2NN Patients and of Trizivir Versus Trizivir Plus Nevirapine in CHARM Patients
It is desirable to obtain extended follow up data on subjects who participated in the 2NN study and the CHARM study in order to see if the beneficial effect of using nevirapine continues up to 144 weeks of treatment.
Read the detailed description
The 2NN study has been completed, the first large randomised trial comparing the efficacy and safety of ART containing two nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (nRTI: d4T+3TC) and either NVP-od, NVP-bd, EFV or the combination of NVP+EFV in the treatment of chronically HIV-1 infected ART naive patients. Data from this randomized study show no significant differences in response to treatment, and virologic and immunologic efficacy in the single NNRTI arms NVP-od, NVP-bd and EFV. This contrasts with previous cohort studies, which showed a relative hazard in virologic or treatment failure of more than two for those starting with NVP compared to those starting with EFV.
Despite the results of the 2NN study, question remains whether the comparability of NVP and EFV is maintained over a longer period of follow-up. Therefore, this study is designed to assess the durability of the efficacy of the regimens used in the 2NN study.
In the initial CHARM study, the effect of adding nevirapine and/or hydrea to a triple NRTI regimen (trizivir i.e. abacavir, lamivudine and zidovudine) in terms of efficacy and tolerability was investigated in anti retroviral naïve patients. The primary endpoint was treatment failure and follow up was 72 weeks. A total of 229 patients were included. The use of hydrea was prematurely stopped because adding hydrea significantly contributed to treatment failure through enhancement of the toxicities associated with its use. Subjects in the nevirapine group reached a plasma HIV-1 RNA level < 50 copies/ml quicker (log rank test p = 0.011). In addition, in an as treated analysis only 16.2% of subjects adding nevirapine versus 39.5% adding no nevirapine reached the primary endpoint (p=0.027). These results resemble the findings in the ACTG A5059 study. The trizivir arm of this ACTG study was stopped, because anti-retroviral naïve subjects randomized to receive trizivir experienced virological failure earlier and more frequent than subjects who were randomized to receive either of the two other treatment regimens being evaluated in that study. The two other treatment regimens were:
- a combination of zidovudine plus lamivudine plus efavirenz and
- trizivir plus efavirenz.
It is desirable to obtain extended follow up data on subjects who participated in the CHARM study in order to see if the beneficial effect of adding nevirapine to trizivir continues or even increases after 72 weeks of treatment.
In addition to this main objective, another important issue regards the known association between the use of nevirapine and the occurrence of certain untoward effects, including the development of rash, clinical hepatitis and a hypersensitivity syndrome which usually presents with rash, elevated alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase, eosinophilia and a host of other constitutional symptoms. The possibility that a metabolite of nevirapine might be responsible for one or the other of these events has been evaluated but could not be confirmed. Data is equivocal on whether nevirapine levels themselves are associated with these events, probably because of "noise" in the retrospective analyses that was used. Animal models would suggest, though, that supratherapeutic nevirapine levels are associated with these events. It seems reasonable to assume that there is a sub-population of people at risk for all of these events (especially hypersensitivity) based on their genetic make-up in that it is known that many patients easily tolerate significantly elevated levels of nevirapine while others may get these side effects with relatively normal levels.
To facilitate the safe administration of nevirapine to patients, this study also aims to identify a gene or genes closely associated with these events, and from that a phenotype associated with that genotype which is at increased risk.
- Conditions
- HIV Infections
- Being tested
- stavudine, lamivudine, nevirapine, efavirenz, trizivir
- Keywords
- nevirapine, efavirenz, hiv-1, Treatment Experienced
- Medical subject headings
- HIV Infections, Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
stavudineDrug
lamivudineDrug
nevirapineDrug
efavirenzDrug
trizivirDrug
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
To determine whether the number of patients with treatment failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between study arms
Secondary outcomes (2)
To determine whether the percentage of patients with treatment failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between the treatment arms
To determine whether the percentage of patients with virologic failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between the treatment arms
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Aug 2005 (estimated)
- Study startFeb 2004
- Study completionApr 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HIV InfectionsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 763 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- International Antiviral Therapy Evaluation Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Boehringer Ingelheim
- Investigators
- Joep MA Lange, MD PhD, Study chair, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)Mark Bloch, MD, Principal investigator, Holdsworth House General Practice
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00127972
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 04IAT0035
- Status last verified
- Apr 2007
- First submitted
- 8 Aug 2005
- Last updated
- 30 Apr 2007
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Apr 2007. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Retrospective Study to Compare the 3-Year Antiviral Efficacy of Nevirapine and Efavirenz in Combination With D4t and 3tc in 2NN Patients and of Trizivir Versus Trizivir Plus Nevirapine in CHARM Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00127972
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 04IAT0035
- Conditions
- HIV Infections
- Keywords
- nevirapine, efavirenz, hiv-1, Treatment Experienced
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 763 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- International Antiviral Therapy Evaluation CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Boehringer Ingelheim
- Study start
- Feb 2004
- Study completion
- Apr 2007 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Aug 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
It is desirable to obtain extended follow up data on subjects who participated in the 2NN study and the CHARM study in order to see if the beneficial effect of using nevirapine continues up to 144 weeks of treatment.
Detailed description
The 2NN study has been completed, the first large randomised trial comparing the efficacy and safety of ART containing two nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (nRTI: d4T+3TC) and either NVP-od, NVP-bd, EFV or the combination of NVP+EFV in the treatment of chronically HIV-1 infected ART naive patients. Data from this randomized study show no significant differences in response to treatment, and virologic and immunologic efficacy in the single NNRTI arms NVP-od, NVP-bd and EFV. This contrasts with previous cohort studies, which showed a relative hazard in virologic or treatment failure of more than two for those starting with NVP compared to those starting with EFV.
Despite the results of the 2NN study, question remains whether the comparability of NVP and EFV is maintained over a longer period of follow-up. Therefore, this study is designed to assess the durability of the efficacy of the regimens used in the 2NN study.
In the initial CHARM study, the effect of adding nevirapine and/or hydrea to a triple NRTI regimen (trizivir i.e. abacavir, lamivudine and zidovudine) in terms of efficacy and tolerability was investigated in anti retroviral naïve patients. The primary endpoint was treatment failure and follow up was 72 weeks. A total of 229 patients were included. The use of hydrea was prematurely stopped because adding hydrea significantly contributed to treatment failure through enhancement of the toxicities associated with its use. Subjects in the nevirapine group reached a plasma HIV-1 RNA level < 50 copies/ml quicker (log rank test p = 0.011). In addition, in an as treated analysis only 16.2% of subjects adding nevirapine versus 39.5% adding no nevirapine reached the primary endpoint (p=0.027). These results resemble the findings in the ACTG A5059 study. The trizivir arm of this ACTG study was stopped, because anti-retroviral naïve subjects randomized to receive trizivir experienced virological failure earlier and more frequent than subjects who were randomized to receive either of the two other treatment regimens being evaluated in that study. The two other treatment regimens were:
- a combination of zidovudine plus lamivudine plus efavirenz and
- trizivir plus efavirenz.
It is desirable to obtain extended follow up data on subjects who participated in the CHARM study in order to see if the beneficial effect of adding nevirapine to trizivir continues or even increases after 72 weeks of treatment.
In addition to this main objective, another important issue regards the known association between the use of nevirapine and the occurrence of certain untoward effects, including the development of rash, clinical hepatitis and a hypersensitivity syndrome which usually presents with rash, elevated alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase, eosinophilia and a host of other constitutional symptoms. The possibility that a metabolite of nevirapine might be responsible for one or the other of these events has been evaluated but could not be confirmed. Data is equivocal on whether nevirapine levels themselves are associated with these events, probably because of "noise" in the retrospective analyses that was used. Animal models would suggest, though, that supratherapeutic nevirapine levels are associated with these events. It seems reasonable to assume that there is a sub-population of people at risk for all of these events (especially hypersensitivity) based on their genetic make-up in that it is known that many patients easily tolerate significantly elevated levels of nevirapine while others may get these side effects with relatively normal levels.
To facilitate the safe administration of nevirapine to patients, this study also aims to identify a gene or genes closely associated with these events, and from that a phenotype associated with that genotype which is at increased risk.
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Participation in the original 2NN or CHARM study
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| stavudine | Drug | – |
| lamivudine | Drug | – |
| nevirapine | Drug | – |
| efavirenz | Drug | – |
| trizivir | Drug | – |
Primary outcome
To determine whether the number of patients with treatment failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between study arms
2 secondary outcomes
To determine whether the percentage of patients with treatment failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between the treatment arms
To determine whether the percentage of patients with virologic failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between the treatment arms
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Apr 2007.
Related trials for HIV Infections
RecruitingPhase 2
Imaging and Biopsy of People With HIV-1 Undergoing Analytic Treatment Interruption
HIV
Recruiting
Feasibility Study Comparing One vs Two Probes for TA Among Cervical Cancer Screen Positive WLWH in C1001P-CS5 Rwanda
HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus), HPV
Not yet recruiting
Combating HIV Stigma in Healthcare Settings: A Standardized Patient Approach
Hiv
Recruiting
Feasibility Study Comparing One vs Two Probes for Thermal Ablation Among Cervical Cancer Screen Positive WLWH in C1001P-CS9 South Africa
HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus), HPV
Recruiting
Feasibility Study Comparing One vs Two Probes for Thermal Ablation Among Cervical Cancer Screen Positive Women Living With HIV in C1001P-CS7 Zimbabwe
HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus), HPV
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Joep MA Lange, MD PhD study chair
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Mark Bloch, MD principal investigator
Holdsworth House General Practice
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine in people with HIV Infections, run by International Antiviral Therapy Evaluation Center at 1 site in Australia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Apr 2007. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Australia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
To determine whether the number of patients with treatment failure after 144 weeks of follow-up is different between study arms. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Apr 2007.