Dataset Information

Effectiveness of protease inhibitor monotherapy versus combination antiretroviral maintenance therapy: a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The unparalleled success of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is based on the combination of three drugs from two classes. There is insufficient evidence whether simplification to ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) monotherapy in virologically suppressed HIV-infected patients is effective and safe to reduce cART side effects and costs.

Methods

We systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, conference proceedings and trial registries to identify all randomised controlled trials comparing PI/r monotherapy to cART in suppressed patients. We calculated in an intention to treat (loss-of follow-up, discontinuation of assigned drugs equals failure) and per-protocol analysis (exclusion of protocol violators following randomisation) and based on three different definitions for virological failure pooled risk ratios for remaining virologically suppressed.

Findings

We identified 10 trials comparing 3 different PIs with cART based on a PI/r plus 2 reverse transcriptase inhibitors in 1189 patients. With the most conservative approach (viral load <50 copies/ml on two consecutive measurements), the risk ratios for viral suppression at 48 weeks of PI/r monotherapy compared to cART were in the ITT analysis 0.94 8 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.00) p?=?0.06; risk difference -0.06 (95%CI -0.11 to 0) p?=?0.05, p for heterogeneity ?=?0.08, I(2)?=?43.1%) and in the PP analysis 0.93 ((95%CI 0.90 to 0.97) p<0.001; risk difference -0.07 (95%CI -0.10 to -0.03) p<0.001, p for heterogeneity ?=?0.44, I(2)?=?0%). Reintroduction of cART in 44 patients with virological failure led in 93% to de-novo viral suppression.

Interpretation

Virologically well suppressed HIV-infected patients have a lower chance to maintain viral suppression when switching from cART to PI/r monotherapy. Failing patients achieve high rates of de-novo viral suppression following reintroduction of reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

SUBMITTER: Mathis S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3139616 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of protease inhibitor monotherapy versus combination antiretroviral maintenance therapy: a meta-analysis.

Mathis Sandra S Khanlari Bettina B Pulido Federico F Schechter Mauro M Negredo Eugenia E Nelson Mark M Vernazza Pietro P Cahn Pedro P Meynard Jean-Luc JL Arribas Jose J Bucher Heiner C HC

PloS one 20110719 7

<h4>Background</h4>The unparalleled success of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is based on the combination of three drugs from two classes. There is insufficient evidence whether simplification to ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) monotherapy in virologically suppressed HIV-infected patients is effective and safe to reduce cART side effects and costs.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, conference proceedings and trial registries t ...[more]

PMID: 21811554

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHIV infection is associated with significant neurocognitive deficits making maximization of cognitive function among children receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) a public health imperative. Non-protease inhibitors (non-PIs) achieve higher drug levels in the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) compared to PIs, potentially leading to better neurocognitive function by reducing CSF viral load and inflammation. ART that maximises children's neurodevelopment and school achievement could result in improved quality of life and productivity as adults, but little research to date has examined whether non-PI ART is associated with better neurocognitive outcomes. We compared the neurocognitive function between children living with HIV receiving PI-based and non PI-based ART.MethodsWe recruited a consecutive sample of clinically stable Ugandan children living with HIV aged 5-12 years who received PI-based or non PI-based ART for ≥ 1 year (viral load < 1000 copies). Neurocognitive function was assessed using the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, the Test of Variables of Attention, and Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency. Age-adjusted neurocognitive z-scores for the two groups were compared using linear regression models in STATA version 13. The Hommel's method was used to adjust for multiple testing.ResultsWe enrolled 76 children living with HIV; 34 on PI ART and 42 on non-PI ART. Mean (±SD) age was greater in the non-PI vs. PI group (9.5 ± 1.9 vs. 8.5 ± 2.0) years (p = 0.03). Children in the non-PI group had lower socioeconomic scores (5.7 ± 3.3 vs. 7.4 ± 2.8, p = 0.02). There was no difference in neurocognitive function between the groups (adjusted p > 0.05) for KABC and TOVA. Children in the PI group had better total BOT scores than their counterparts (46.07 ± 1.40) vs. 40.51 (1.24), p = 0.03).ConclusionsWe detected no difference in neurocognitive function among children on PI and non PI-based ART therapy based on KABC and TOVA tests. Children on PI based ART had better motor function than their counterparts. We recommend a prospective study with a larger sample size.

Project description:BackgroundPneumonia and bloodstream infections (BSI) due to extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Acinetobacter baumannii, XDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are associated with high mortality rates, and therapeutic options remain limited. This trial assessed whether combination therapy with colistin and meropenem was superior to colistin monotherapy for the treatment of these infections.MethodsThe OVERCOME (Colistin Monotherapy versus Combination Therapy) trial was an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We randomly assigned participants to receive colistin (5 mg/kg once followed by 1.67 mg/kg every 8 hours) in combination with either meropenem (1000 mg every 8 hours) or matching placebo for the treatment of pneumonia and/or BSI caused by XDR A. baumannii, XDR P. aeruginosa, or CRE. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included clinical failure and microbiologic cure.ResultsBetween 2012 and 2020, a total of 464 participants were randomly assigned to treatment, and 423 eligible patients comprised the modified intention-to-treat population. A. baumannii was the predominant trial pathogen (78%) and pneumonia the most common index infection (70%). Most patients were in the intensive care unit at the time of enrollment (69%). There was no difference in mortality (43 vs. 37%; P=0.17), clinical failure (65 vs. 58%; difference, 6.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.1 to 16.6), microbiologic cure (65 vs. 60%; difference, 4.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -5.6 to 15.2), or adverse events (acute kidney injury, 52 vs. 49% [P=0.55]; hypersensitivity reaction, 1 vs. 3% [P=0.22]; and neurotoxicity, 5 vs. 2% [P=0.29]) between patients receiving monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively.ConclusionsCombination therapy with colistin and meropenem was not superior to colistin monotherapy for the treatment of pneumonia or BSI caused by these pathogens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases protocol 10-0065; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01597973.).

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of protease inhibitor monotherapy versus combination antiretroviral maintenance therapy: a meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Publications

Effectiveness of protease inhibitor monotherapy versus combination antiretroviral maintenance therapy: a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets