ライフサイエンスコーパス: tenofovir alafenamide

1 received dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide).

2 ignificantly reduced in patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide.

3 not suitable for NtRTIs such as abacavir or tenofovir alafenamide.

4 nistered with coformulated emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide.

5 cobicistat, 200 mg emtricitabine, and 10 mg tenofovir alafenamide.

6 n serum creatinine was small in both groups (tenofovir alafenamide 0.01 mg/dL [95% CI 0.00 to 0.02] v

7 cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg (tenofovir alafenamide group

8 cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg once per day.

9 cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg, which was taken once per da

10 Seven patients in the tenofovir alafenamide (2%) and three (1%) in the tenofov

11 bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg or coformulated dolutegravir

12 bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg or dolutegravir 50 mg with c

13 status, to receive once-daily oral doses of tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg or tenofovir disoproxil fuma

14 g with coformulated emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg, with matching placebo, once

15 ivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) or to continue a single-ta

16 ivirine (25 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg) or to remain on a single-t

17 common adverse events overall were headache (tenofovir alafenamide 40 [14%] patients vs tenofovir dis

18 Tenofovir alafenamide, a tenofovir prodrug, results in 9

19 coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide achieved virological suppression i

20 al and bone toxic effects; the novel prodrug tenofovir alafenamide achieves 90% lower plasma tenofovi

21 22 (4%) patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide and 12 (4%) patients receiving ten

22 ents were randomly assigned (285 assigned to tenofovir alafenamide and 141 assigned to tenofovir diso

23 ) and AST (20 [3%] of 577 patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide and 19 [7%] of 288 patients receiv

24 ssigned and 873 received treatment (581 with tenofovir alafenamide and 292 with tenofovir disoproxil

25 At week 48, 296 (94%) of 316 participants on tenofovir alafenamide and 294 (94%) of 313 on tenofovir

26 received bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide and 33 received dolutegravir plus

27 s in ALT (62 [11%] of 577 patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide and 36 [13%] of 288 patients recei

28 ed (438 with rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide and 437 with efavirenz, emtricitab

29 treatment to 1733 patients (866 given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide and 867 given E/C/F/tenofovir diso

30 RETATION: Bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide and dolutegravir plus emtricitabin

31 14 (5%) patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide and nine (6%) patients receiving t

32 with the NRTI combination emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination to dol

33 tegravir coformulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination versus

34 et darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as a potential switch option for t

35 ese findings support guidelines recommending tenofovir alafenamide-based regimens, including coformul

36 mide and dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide both showed high efficacy up to 24

37 n containing rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide compared with remaining on rilpivi

38 on-inferiority with a 10% efficacy margin of tenofovir alafenamide compared with tenofovir disoproxil

39 Switching to a tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimen from one contai

40 us RNA suppression while receiving a TDF- or tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimen.

41 Tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimens can have impro

42 rev, showed no impact on response to TDF- or tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimens.

43 The novel prodrug tenofovir alafenamide delivers the nucleotide reverse tr

44 nt taking bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide discontinued because of a drug-rel

45 coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide does not require HLA B*5701 testin

46 330 with dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide [dolutegravir group]).

47 cobicistat, 200 mg emtricitabine, and 10 mg tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide) or 3

48 nt (327 with bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide fixed-dose combination [bictegravi

49 ombination of 200 mg emtricitabine and 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide for 48 weeks.

50 Switching to rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide from efavirenz, emtricitabine, and

51 Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), a new prodrug of t

52 lated adverse events were more common in the tenofovir alafenamide group (204 patients [21%] vs 76 [1

53 630 participants were randomised (316 to the tenofovir alafenamide group and 314 to the tenofovir dis

54 959 patients were randomly assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and 477 to the tenofovir dis

55 arate, with 800 (92%) of 866 patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group and 784 (90%) of 867 patient

56 314) in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 93.0% of patients (n=293

57 187 (32%) of 581 patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group and 96 (33%) of 292 patients

58 noted in 932 (97%) patients assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and in 444 (93%) assigned to

59 s maintained in 314 (94%) of patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with 307 (93%) in t

60 had study-drug related adverse events in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with 37 (12%) of 31

61 ch significantly improved in patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with those in the t

62 pants in the rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group experienced treatment-relate

63 ts in the bictegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group versus 22 (67%) of 33 in the

64 ine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg (tenofovir alafenamide group) or to carry on taking one o

65 3 in the dolutegravir plus emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group.

66 Patients given tenofovir alafenamide had a significantly smaller decrea

67 03 to 0.01]; p=0.32), but patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide had a smaller reduction in creatin

68 268 (94%) of 285 patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide had HBV DNA less than 29 IU/mL at

69 371 (64%) patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide had HBV DNA less than 29 IU/mL at

70 Patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide had significantly smaller mean per

71 Patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide had significantly smaller mean ser

72 rmulation of rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide has recently been approved, and we

73 ty advantages, fixed-dose emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide has the potential to become an imp

74 ir disoproxil fumarate to emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide, high rates of virological suppres

75 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in HIV-infected, treatment-naive a

76 of fixed-dose combination emtricitabine with tenofovir alafenamide in patients switched from emtricit

77 ast quantifiable concentration (AUClast) for tenofovir alafenamide, incidence of treatment-emergent s

78 Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel prodrug formulated to d

79 Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug that

80 Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug with

81 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is a once-daily, integrase strand

82 Tenofovir alafenamide is a prodrug that reduces tenofovi

83 The prodrug tenofovir alafenamide is associated with improved renal

84 tions with the backbone of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide, might provide an advantage to pat

85 coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=316) or coformulated dolutegrav

86 668 were randomly assigned to receive either tenofovir alafenamide (n=333) or tenofovir disoproxil fu

87 domly assigned (2:1) to receive either 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fum

88 weeks, more than 90% of patients given E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide or E/C/F/tenofovir disoproxil fuma

89 ose 200 mg emtricitabine with 10 mg or 25 mg tenofovir alafenamide or to continue 200 mg emtricitabin

90 bine, and 10 mg tenofovir alafenamide (E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide) or 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fu

91 f resistance to elvitegravir, emtricitabine, tenofovir alafenamide, or tenofovir.

92 94 (90%) of 438 participants assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide regimen and 402 (92%) of 437 assig

93 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide regimen was well tolerated and ach

94 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide regimen were similar to those prev

95 The TDF analogue tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has demonstrated equal effic

96 Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is a novel prodrug of tenofo

97 used vaginally in HIV prevention trials, and Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), an improved prodrug of TFV,

98 tients given bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide than in those given dolutegravir,

99 common with bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide than with dolutegravir, abacavir,

100 feriority of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lam

101 CI -4.2 to 3.7), showing non-inferiority of tenofovir alafenamide to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

102 CI -2.5 to 5.1), showing non-inferiority of tenofovir alafenamide to tenofovir disproxil fumarate.

103 last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) of tenofovir alafenamide, treatment-emergent serious advers

104 of darunavir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus continuing a regimen of boo

105 in patients switched to a regimen containing tenofovir alafenamide versus in those remaining on one c

106 infection (51 [9%] of 581 patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide vs 22 [8%] of 292 patients receivi

107 iation [CV] 25.5%), and the mean AUClast for tenofovir alafenamide was 189 ng x h per mL (CV 55.8%).

108 t of variation 58%), and the mean AUClast of tenofovir alafenamide was 333 ng x h/mL (45%).

109 In patients with HIV, tenofovir alafenamide was as efficacious as tenofovir di

110 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was efficacious and well tolerated

111 Switching to rilpivirine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to continuing ril

112 E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to E/C/F/tenofovi

113 patients with HBeAg-positive HBV infection, tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to tenofovir diso

114 HBeAg-negative chronic HBV, the efficacy of tenofovir alafenamide was non-inferior to that of tenofo

115 mbination of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was safe and well tolerated compar

116 Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was safe and well tolerated with b

117 elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide were higher, but modestly so, than

118 e and fractures, our data suggest that E/C/F/tenofovir alafenamide will have a favourable long-term r