Key result
BIC/F/TAF shows no difference in platelet function versus DRV/c/F/TAF after 48 weeks.
Why the study?
This sub-study evaluated potential off-target cardiovascular impact by examining ex vivo platelet function in patients receiving BIC/F/TAF compared with DRV/c/F/TAF in a test-and-treat setting.
Does BIC/F/TAF compared to DRV/c/F/TAF affect ex vivo platelet function in patients initiating rapid ART?
RCT (n=21)
Open-label
Randomized
Yes
Does BIC/F/TAF compared to DRV/c/F/TAF affect ex vivo platelet function in patients initiating rapid ART?
In a small sub-study of patients initiating rapid ART, there was no difference in ex vivo platelet function between those taking BIC/F/TAF and DRV/c/F/TAF at 48 weeks.
No ex vivo platelet differences seen between regimens; leaves open off-target cardiovascular effects and requires larger prospective data.
Introduction The BIC-T&T study aimed to determine the efficacy of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (BIC/F/TAF) and darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (DRV/c/F/TAF) at suppressing viral load in a two-arm, open-label, multi-centre, randomised trial under a UK test-and-treat setting. This sub-study aimed to evaluate potential off-target cardiovascular impact by examining ex vivo platelet function.Methods Platelets were isolated by centrifugation of citrated blood from participants attending Chelsea and Westminster Hospital or St Mary’s Hospital at Week 48 following enrolment. Platelet activation was assessed by real-time flow cytometry to examine integrin activation and granule release and platelet aggregation was evaluated by light transmission aggregometry. Statistical significance was determined by 2-way ANOVA with a Šidák’s multiple comparisons post-test.Results An analysis of 21 participants was performed at Week 48 (96% male and 48% white; mean (range) age was 37 (23–78) years). No difference between arms was observed in ADP-, collagen- or thrombin receptor activator for peptide (TRAP)-6-evoked platelet αIIbβ3 integrin activation, granule release or platelet aggregation in response to any of the agonists tested. Despite differences in the demographics between treatment arms, the presence of an unboosted integrase inhibitor or boosted protease inhibitor in a test-and-treat setting did not impact platelet function.Conclusions Our study provides no evidence of differences in downstream platelet responses between participants taking BIC/F/TAF compared to DRV/c/F/TAF following 48 wk of treatment. Further data are required to explore whether there are biologically significant off-target effects, including effects on platelets and other components of the cardiovascular system between these two test-and-treat regimens. Clinical Trial Number NCT04653194.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khawaja et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in HIV infection (n=21). BIC/F/TAF vs. DRV/c/F/TAF was evaluated on Ex vivo platelet function (integrin activation, granule release, and platelet aggregation). BIC/F/TAF showed no difference in ex vivo platelet function (integrin activation, granule release, or aggregation) compared to DRV/c/F/TAF after 48 weeks of treatment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: