Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial explores pharmacokinetics of atazanavir boosting in children with HIV and tuberculosis, suggesting dosing adjustments may be needed.
Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (atazanavir/r) is an effective once-daily option for pediatric subsequent-line antiretroviral therapy when used with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). Tuberculosis co-treatment complicates its use because rifampicin markedly induces atazanavir/r clearance. Although twice-daily atazanavir/r can overcome this interaction in adults, data in children are lacking. We aimed to characterize atazanavir population pharmacokinetics in children with HIV and simulate the effect of rifampicin co-treatment. Atazanavir concentration-time data in African children with HIV from CHAPAS-4 (ISRCTN22964075) and VirTUAL (NCT03923231) were analyzed by nonlinear mixed-effect modeling. We investigated the effect of weight, age, atazanavir formulation, ritonavir dose, and NRTI backbone (tenofovir alafenamide [TAF]-emtricitabine, abacavir-lamivudine, or zidovudine-lamivudine). Simulations were performed across weight bands to evaluate atazanavir/r exposures under standard conditions and, using adult-derived induction effects, predict exposures and possible dosing regimens during rifampicin co-treatment. Seventy children were included, with a median (range) age of 10.9 (3.2-17.7) years and weight of 29 (15-85) kg. A two-compartment model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption best described atazanavir disposition. The estimated typical value of atazanavir clearance was 4.8 L/h for a 27-kg individual. Atazanavir pharmacokinetics in children were unaffected by the NRTI backbone. Once-daily atazanavir/r with current dosing guidelines achieved adequate exposures across weight bands. When simulating pharmacokinetics during rifampicin co-treatment, twice-daily atazanavir/r is expected to restore exposures to levels comparable to once-daily dosing without rifampicin. These findings provide a framework for future clinical evaluation in children with HIV and tuberculosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dyk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: