Glaxosmithkline plc- ARIA Study Shows Superior Efficacy of Triumeq® for Treatment-naïve women living with HIV

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...
- Advertisement -

ViiV Healthcare presented 48-week data from the phase IIIb, open-label, international, multi-centre ARIA study which showed superior efficacy for Triumeq® (dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine) compared with atazanavir boosted with ritonavir (ATV/r) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) in 495 treatment-naïve women living with HIV.

1 Results show statistically superior viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA <50 c/mL) rates at week 48: 82% versus 71% (adjusted difference 10.5%, 95% CI: 3.1%-17.8%, p=0.005) respectively.1ARIA was a non-inferiority study with a pre-specified analysis for superiority. Both non-inferiority and superiority endpoints were met, with superiority being driven by lower rates of both virological failures and discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs) in the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine group.1

“Women account for over half of the almost 35 million adults living with HIV worldwide, yet unfortunately they are consistently under-represented in HIV clinical trials.” said John C Pottage, Jr, MD, Chief Scientific and Medical Officer, ViiV Healthcare. “For this reason, we are committed to ensuring that the specific treatment needs of women are investigated. This trial not only provides physicians with important additional information about Triumeq, it also builds on the strong body of evidence supporting the efficacy of dolutegravir-based regimens in a broad range of patient populations.”

The safety profile of dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine was favourable compared to ATV/r plus TDF/FTC, with fewer drug-related adverse events (AEs) reported on the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine arm (33% vs 49%); there were also fewer AEs leading to discontinuation compared to those in the ATV/r plus TDF/FTC arm (4% vs 7%).1

Drug-related AEs reported in the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine arm included, nausea (31 individuals / 13%), diarrhoea (12 / 5%), headache (5 / 2%) and dyspepsia (4 / 2%).1 In the ATV/r plus TDF/FTC group, drug-related AEs included nausea (35 / 14%), diarrhoea (18 / 7%), ocular icterus (18 / 7%), dyspepsia (15 / 6%), headache (14 / 6%) and jaundice (13 / 5%).1

There were fewer subjects meeting virologic non-response criteria (VL >50c/mL) in the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine arm (6%) compared to the other group (14%) at week 48.1 Of the women that met protocol-defined virologic withdrawal criteria, none on the dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine arm had treatment-emergent resistance mutations to the components of dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine, compared with one in the comparator group.1

About HIV
HIV stands for the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Unlike some other viruses, the human body cannot get rid of HIV, so once someone has HIV they have it for life. There is no cure for HIV, but effective treatment can control the virus so that people with HIV can enjoy healthy and productive lives.2

About HIV in women
Globally, HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of death for women of reproductive age (15–44 years old)3 and infection rates in young women (aged 15-24) are twice as high as those seen in young men.4 Despite the scale of the challenge, women are routinely under-represented in HIV clinical trials.5 This may be in part due to lack of child-care services, exclusions from study protocols due to the potential for pregnancy and lack of support in the home.5 As a result there are gaps in our knowledge about issues regarding antiretroviral treatments that are particular to women.5

About Triumeq®
Triumeq is a once-daily dolutegravir-based regimen, containing the un-boosted integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) dolutegravir and the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) abacavir and lamivudine.

Two essential steps in the HIV life cycle are replication – when the virus turns its RNA copy into DNA – and integration – the moment when viral DNA becomes part of the host cell’s DNA. These processes require two enzymes called reverse transcriptase and integrase. NRTIs and INSTIs interfere with the action of the two enzymes to prevent the virus from replicating. This decrease in replication will lead to less virus being available to cause subsequent infection of uninfected cells.

ViiV Healthcare Global/US

Sébastien Desprez
+44 7920 567 707
Media enquiries:
Patricia O’Connor
+44 208 047 5982
Marc Meachem
+1 919 483 8756
GSK Global Media enquiries:
Simon Steele
+44 (0) 20 8047 5502
Claire Brough
+44 (0) 20 8047 5502
Catherine Hartley
+44 (0) 20 8047 5502
David Daley
+44 (0) 20 8047 5502

 

Sources:

1. C. Orell et al. Superior efficacy of dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC) fixed dose combination (FDC) compared with ritonavir (RTV) boosted atazanavir (ATV) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) in treatment-naïve women with HIV-1 infection (ARIA Study). Presented at the International AIDS Conference, 18-22 July, Durban, South Africa. Abstract #10215.

2. World Health Organization (WHO). 2015. HIV/AIDS media fact sheet. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs360/en/ Last accessed July 2016.

3. UNAIDS, 2016-2021 Strategy On the Fast-Track to end AIDS. Available at: http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/20151027_UNAIDS_PCB37_15_18_EN_rev1.pdf Last accessed July 2016.

4. UNAIDS Factsheet – Adolescents, young people and HIV. Available at: http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/en/media/unaids/contentassets/documents/factsheet/2012/20120417_FS_adolescentsyoungpeoplehiv_en.pdf. Last accessed July 2016.

5. Curno, J. Mirjam et al. A Systematic Review of the Inclusion (or Exclusion) of Women in HIV Research: From Clinical Studies of Antiretrovirals and Vaccines to Cure Strategies. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes. 2016 Feb 1;71(2):181-8.

6. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01910402). Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01910402. Last accessed June 2016.

7. Raffi F, Jaeger H, Quiros-Roldan E, Albrecht H, Belonosova E, Gatell JM, Baril J-G, Domingo P, Brennan C, Almond S, Min S, for the SPRING-2 Study Group. Once-daily dolutegravir versus twice-daily raltegravir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection (SPRING-2 study): 96 week results from a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13(11):927-935.

8. Walmsley S, Baumgarten A, Berenguer J, et al. Brief Report: Dolutegravir plus abacavir/lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in Antiretroviral therapy-naïve patients: Week 96 and Week 144 Results from the SINGLE randomized clinical trial. JAIDS. 2015;70(5):515-519.

9. Molina J, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir versus darunavir plus ritonavir for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection (FLAMINGO): 96 week results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3b study. Lancet HIV. 2015;2:e127-136.

10. Cahn P, Pozniak AL, Mingrone H, Shuldyakov A, Brites C, Andrade-Villanueva JF, Richmond G, Buendia CB, Fourie J, Ramgopal M, Hagins D, Felizarta F, Madruga J, Reuter T, Newman T, Small CB, Lombaard J, Grinsztejn B, Dorey D, Underwood M, Griffith S, Min S, for the extended SAILING Study Team. Dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-experienced, integrase-inhibitor-naive adults with HIV: week 48 results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SAILING study. Lancet. 2013;382(9893):700 -708.

11. Castagna S, et al. Dolutegravir in antiretroviral-experienced patients with raltegravir- and/or elvitegravir-resistant HIV-1: 24-week results of the Phase III VIKING-3 study. J Infect Dis. 2014;210:354–62.

12. Triumeq® (dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine) US prescribing information. Available at: https://www.gsksource.com/pharma/content/dam/GlaxoSmithKline/US/en/Prescribing_Information/Triumeq/pdf/TRIUMEQ-PI-MG.PDF

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...

Danaher Prepares to Introduce Advanced AI-Powered Laboratory

In a significant step for pharmaceutical research, Danaher has...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »