Continuation of Protease-Inhibitor Based Second-Line Therapy vs. Switch to B/F/TAF in Virologically Suppressed Adults

This randomized trial compares the efficacy of switching to a fixed-dose combination of B/F/TAF versus continuing a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) regimen in HIV-1 infected participants who are virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA \<200 copies) on a second-line bPI regimen. Half of participants will receive B/F/TAF and half will continue a bPI regimen. The hypothesize is that B/F/TAF will have efficacy that is non-inferior to the boosted PI regimen.

The second generation integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) dolutegravir (DTG) and bictegravir (BIC) are widely prescribed for the treatment of HIV, due to their favorable tolerability and toxicity profile, durable efficacy, and high barrier to resistance. However, there are limited data to guide the management of patients who are already virally suppressed on a second-line bPI regimen. Though bPIs have a high barrier to resistance and durable virologic efficacy, they have several important drug-drug interactions, are associated with unfavorable long-term metabolic effects, and may be poorly tolerated. For these reasons, a second-generation INSTI would be preferable to a boosted PI regimen, as long INSTIs are demonstrated to have non-inferior efficacy for patients who are already suppressed on a second-line bPI regimen. In the proposed study, the efficacy of continuing the bPI regimen will be compared to switching to B/F/TAF.