Print this page    •   Back to Web version of article

The Body Covers: The 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections

Fixed-Dose Pill of Abacavir/Lamivudine Taken Once a Day Is Comparable to Twice-a-Day Abacavir + Lamivudine

Coverage provided by Edwin DeJesus, M.D.

February 25, 2005

The combination of abacavir (ABC, Ziagen) and lamivudine (3TC, Epivir), given once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID), or as a fixed-dose combination (FDC), has been extensively studied in antiretroviral-naive patients as part of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)- and protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimens. Multiple clinical studies have proved the efficacy and safety of this combination, including the studies that led to the final approval of abacavir for once-daily use.1,2

It appears clear by now that the use of FDCs simplifies HIV care by reducing pill burden and dosing frequency. Some studies are starting to show some improvement in adherence with the use of FDCs. These improvements in adherence will invariably translate into better virologic outcome, and decreased morbidity from the progression of the HIV disease.

The SEAL study (also known as ESS30008) is a GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored study comparing the use of FDC abacavir/lamivudine (ABC/3TC, Epzicom, Kivexa) QD versus taking both abacavir and lamivudine as separate formulations BID. This phase III, randomized, open-label study enrolled HIV-1-infected patients who initiated treatment with abacavir BID and lamivudine BID, plus a PI or an NNRTI. At the time of study entry, all patients had been on therapy for at least 3 months, and they had an HIV RNA of less than 400 copies and a CD4+ cell count of greater than 50 cells.

Two hundred sixty patients were then randomized to continue their BID abacavir + lamivudine regimen (BID group), or to switch to the QD FDC abacavir/lamivudine (QD group). They all continued their third drug, which for two thirds of the patients was an NNRTI. Because these patients were already on therapy, the rate of discontinuation after switching or continuing with their regimen was very low (8% versus 10%, respectively).

The proportion of patients who continued to respond (non-virologic failures) was 95% for the QD group and 93% for the BID group. These results do not change if the patients are stratified by the third drug (PI or NNRTI) in their regimen. The proportion of patients with an HIV RNA of less than 50 copies was 81% for the QD group and 82% for the BID group in an intent-to-treat analysis. The CD4+ cell counts, which were fairly high at baseline (median 554 cells), remained stable in both groups.

Overall, abacavir and lamivudine, either given as individual components or as a FDC, were very well tolerated. Only 2 subjects discontinued the study due to adverse events, which were felt not to be related to study medication. As expected, no hypersensitivity to abacavir was reported in this experienced population.

During the 48 weeks of the study, 6 patients developed virologic failure: 4 were in the NNRTI group and 2 in the PI group. The virologic failure of these 6 patients was felt to be secondary to non-adherence.

For this study, the optimal adherence was considered anything above 95% based on previous data. The proportion of patients achieving this high level of adherence was 39% in the QD group and 31% in the BID group.

The authors concluded that FDC abacavir/lamivudine is associated with a potent and durable antiviral response, which was non-inferior to the response seen with the use of abacavir + lamivudine when given as separate components BID.

The results of this study, in my opinion, are expected and, not surprisingly, good. Patients already taking a stable antiretroviral regimen, and who have an undetectable viral load, are expected to continue to do well if the regimen is continued, or if the regimen is changed to something that appears to be simpler to take. Most patients who discontinue a study due to tolerability or adverse events do so at the beginning of their therapy. Because these patients were already taking abacavir and lamivudine, it was expected that few would have either tolerability or safety issues.

There are 3 important take-home messages from this study:

  1. It provides data reassuring us about the safety of switching patients on abacavir + lamivudine BID to FDC abacavir/lamivudine.

  2. It shows some data on the use of FDC abacavir/lamivudine in a treatment-experienced population.

  3. It reassures us of the unlikelihood of hypersensitivity to abacavir in this patient population.

At this point, there may be no good reason for a patient who can benefit from a QD regimen to continue to take abacavir + lamivudine BID rather than the new FDC abacavir/lamivudine.


  1. DeJesus E, Herrera G, Teofilo E, et al. Efficacy and safety of abacavir (ABC) versus zidovudine (ZDV) in antiretroviral therapy naive adults with HIV-1 infection (Study CNA30024). In: Program and abstracts of the 43rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; September 14-17, 2003; Chicago, Ill. Abstract H-446.

  2. DeJesus E, Cahn P, Castillo S, et al. Abacavir (ABC) once daily (OAD) plus lamivudine (3TC) OAD in combination with efavirenz (EFV) OAD is well-tolerated and effective in the treatment of antiretroviral therapy (ART) naive adults with HIV-1 infection (ZODIAC Study: CNA30021). In: Program and abstracts of the 43rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; September 14-17, 2003; Chicago, Ill. Abstract H-1722b.

Tell us what you think of The Body's conference coverage!

This article was provided by Copyright Body Health Resources Corporation. All rights reserved.

You can find this article online by typing the following address into your Web browser:

Please Note: Knowledge about HIV changes rapidly. Note the date of this article's publication, and before treating patients or employing any therapies described in these materials, verify all information independently. If you are a patient, please consult a doctor or other medical professional before acting on any of the information presented in this article.

General Disclaimer: The Body is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through The Body should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your healthcare provider.