tenofovir alafenamide
Sources réglementaires consultées
Indications approuvées
- Traitement de l’hépatite B chronique chez l’adulte et l’enfant à partir de 6 ans pesant au moins 25 kg.
Contre-indications
Absolues
- Hypersensibilité au ténofovir alafénamide.
Mises en garde cliniques
- L’arrêt peut provoquer une exacerbation sévère du VHB ; surveiller la fonction hépatique pendant au moins plusieurs mois. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
- Mise en garde majeure · Atteinte rénale, tubulopathie proximale et syndrome de Fanconi ont été rapportés ; évaluer la fonction rénale avant et pendant le traitement. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
- Confirmer le statut VIH avant l’instauration ; ne pas utiliser le ténofovir alafénamide contre le VHB en monothérapie en cas de coinfection VIH non traitée. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
Interactions médicamenteuses
- SévèreInducteurs de la P-gp tels que rifampicine, carbamazépine, phénytoïne ou millepertuis
Mécanisme: Ils réduisent l’exposition au ténofovir alafénamide et peuvent entraîner une perte d’efficacité.
Recommandation: L’association n’est pas recommandée.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
- SévèreMédicaments néphrotoxiques ou sécrétés par le tubule rénal
Mécanisme: Ils peuvent augmenter l’exposition ou la toxicité rénale.
Recommandation: Éviter ou surveiller étroitement la fonction rénale.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
- ModéréeAutres produits contenant TAF, TDF ou adéfovir
Mécanisme: Ils dupliquent l’exposition antivirale et la toxicité.
Recommandation: Ne pas associer.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 1161154001
Effets indésirables
Communs (≥1%)
Céphalées, diarrhée, vomissements, nausées, douleur abdominale et augmentation des ALAT
Rares mais graves
Exacerbation sévère de l’hépatite B, insuffisance rénale et syndrome de Fanconi
Grossesse et allaitement
Il peut être envisagé pendant la grossesse si nécessaire. Il ne doit pas être utilisé pendant l’allaitement.
Bibliographie récente (PubMed)
There are gaps in uptake of, adherence to, and persistence in the use of preexposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention among cisgender women. We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving adolescent girls and young women in South Africa and Uganda. Participants were assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks, daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF; active control); all participants also received the alternate subcutaneous or oral placebo. We assessed the efficacy of lenacapavir and F/TAF by comparing the incidence of HIV infection with the estimated background incidence in the screened population and evaluated relative efficacy as compared with F/TDF. Among 5338 participants who were initially HIV-negative, 55 incident HIV infections were observed: 0 infections among 2134 participants in the lenacapavir group (0 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 0.19), 39 infections among 2136 participants in the F/TAF group (2.02 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.76), and 16 infections among 1068 participants in the F/TDF group (1.69 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.74). Background HIV incidence in the screened population (8094 participants) was 2.41 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.82 to 3.19). HIV incidence with lenacapavir was significantly lower than background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.04; P<0.001) and than HIV incidence with F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.10; P<0.001). HIV incidence with F/TAF did not differ significantly from background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.28; P = 0.21), and no evidence of a meaningful difference in HIV incidence was observed between F/TAF and F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.14). Adherence to F/TAF and F/TDF was low. No safety conce
Although single-tablet, oral bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide or dolutegravir and lamivudine are preferred regimens in several major guidelines and are widely used in many countries, they have not been compared in a fully powered trial. This study aimed to prospectively compare the 48-week results of dolutegravir and lamivudine versus bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as maintenance therapies for people with HIV. PASO-DOBLE is a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial done over 48 weeks at 30 sites in Spain. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1, without previous viral failure, who had reached virological suppression on oral regimens containing at least one pill a day, cobicistat, efavirenz, or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and no previous use of dolutegravir or bictegravir, and plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL for at least 24 weeks were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch regimens to dolutegravir 50 mg and lamivudine 300 mg or bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg once daily, using random block permutation, stratified by tenofovir alafenamide presence at baseline and sex assigned at birth. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL at week 48 in the intention-to-treat exposed population (ie, all participants who received at least one dose of study medication). The primary and safety analysis was done in the intention-to-treat exposed population. The non-inferiority margin was 4%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.govNCT04884139 and is incomplete. Between July 14, 2021, and March 24, 2023, 553 participants initiated dolutegravir and lamivudine (n=277) or bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=276). The difference in the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL between the dolutegravir and lamivudine group (six [2%] of 277) and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and t
Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine is the only approved complete long-acting regimen for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression dosed every 2 months. The SOLAR study aimed to compare long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine every 2 months with continued once-daily bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression in adults living with HIV. SOLAR is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study. The study was done in 118 centres across 14 countries. Participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL were randomly assigned (2:1), stratified by sex at birth and BMI, to either long-acting cabotegravir (600 mg) plus rilpivirine (900 mg) dosed intramuscularly every 2 months or to continue daily oral bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Participants randomly assigned to long-acting therapy had a choice to receive cabotegravir (30 mg) plus rilpivirine (25 mg) once daily as an optional oral lead-in for approximately 1 month. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological non-response (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, 4% non-inferiority margin; modified intention-to-treat exposed population) at month 11 (long-acting start with injections group) and month 12 (long-acting with oral lead-in group and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04542070, and is ongoing. 837 participants were screened between Nov 9, 2020, and May 31, 2021, and 687 were randomly assigned to switch treatment or continue existing treatment. Of 670 participants (modified intention-to-treat exposed population), 447 (67%) switched to long-acting therapy (274 [61%] of 447 start with injections; 173 [39%] of 447 with oral lead-in) and 223 (33%) continued bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Baseline c
New HIV infections occur annually in Canada, highlighting the need for pre- and postexposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP). Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Pan-Canadian Network for HIV/AIDS and STBBI (sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections) Clinical Trials Research, we have updated the 2017 guideline on clinical indications and drug regimens for PrEP and PEP in Canada. Drawing on meetings with community-based organizations representing key populations affected by HIV in Canada, along with evidence from 3 systematic reviews on PrEP, PEP, and HIV risk assessment tools (searches to June 2024), our diverse panel of 19 experts formulated recommendations on PrEP and PEP. We used a formal evidence-to-decision-making framework and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We followed the Guidelines International Network principles for managing competing interests. Our guideline development and reporting adhere with Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II. This guideline contains 31 recommendations and 10 good practice statements. Although it is appropriate to prescribe PrEP to adults and adolescents who request it, clinicians are also encouraged to assess HIV risk during routine health visits to identify people who would benefit from PrEP. Clinicians should elicit information about patients' anatomy and sexual partners in a culturally sensitive and affirming manner to determine which PrEP regimens - daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), on-demand TDF/FTC, daily oral tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine, or long-acting injectable cabotegravir - are suitable options. When assessing whether PEP is needed, clinicians should consider the likelihood that the source person has transmissible HIV, as well as the biological risk of HIV transmission based on exposure type. Preferred PEP regimens are dolutegravir plus TDF/FTC, or bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabin