2840. Long-term Efficacy, Safety, and Durability of CAB and RPV as Two Drug Oral Maintenance Therapy: LATTE Week 312 Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cabotegravir (CAB), an INI, is under development in both oral and long-acting (LA) injectable formulations. LATTE (NCT01641809) was designed to select a daily oral dose of CAB and evaluate a two-drug ART regimen with rilpivirine (RPV), as suppressive maintenance therapy. Results enabled the LATTE-2 (NCT02120352) study to evaluate CAB LA + RPV LA dosed once every 1 or 2 months. Methods Phase 2b, multicentre, partially blinded dose-ranging study in ART-naïve HIV infected adults, randomized 1:1:1:1 to the induction regimen of once-daily oral CAB 10, 30, or 60 mg or efavirenz (EFV) 600 mg with TDF/FTC or ABC/3TC through W24. CAB patients with VL <50 c/mL immediately prior to W24 discontinued NRTIs and began RPV 25 mg as a two-drug oral maintenance regimen through W96. No change was made to the EFV arm. After W96, at the start of the open-label (OL) phase, all patients randomized to CAB were given the option to continue and switch to the sponsor-selected dose of oral CAB 30 mg. EFV patients completed the study at W96. The OL phase was completed at W312 (288 weeks on CAB + RPV). Successful CAB + RPV patients transitioned to the POLAR study (NCT03639311). Results A total of 243 patients were randomized and initiated treatment (ITT-E). Of those randomized to CAB (n = 181), 160 patients began CAB + RPV (W24) and 138 continued into OL phase (W96). One hundred and ten patients successfully completed the study (W312). Among patients who began CAB + RPV at W24, 66% maintained <50 c/mL, 9% had HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 c/mL, and 25% were categorized as “No Virologic Data” by Snapshot at W312 (ITT-ME). There were 11 protocol-defined virologic failures (PDVF) on CAB; only 2 occurring after W144. Six patients developed treatment emergent (TE) resistance to one or both agents during the study; of which 4 patients developed TE major INI resistance mutations, 3 after W96. The median increase in CD4+ cell count from Baseline was 393 cells/mm3 (−174 to 1118). During the maintenance and OL phases, 4% of CAB patients reported drug-related AEs ≥ Grade 2; SAEs occurred in 9% of CAB patients (none drug related); 3% of CAB patients withdrew due to AEs. 43% of CAB patients who entered maintenance phase reported TE lab abnormalities ≥ Grade 3. Conclusion As maintenance therapy in virologically suppressed patients, the 2DR CAB + RPV provided durable viral suppression through W312. Through 7 years of study, CAB + RPV continues to be generally safe and well tolerated. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".