Dataset Information

Nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir for HIV-infected children.

ABSTRACT: Nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy is the predominant (and often the only) regimen available for children in resource-limited settings. Nevirapine resistance after exposure to the drug for prevention of maternal-to-child human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission is common, a problem that has led to the recommendation of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in such settings. Regardless of whether there has been prior exposure to nevirapine, the performance of nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in young children has not been rigorously established.In a randomized trial conducted in six African countries and India, we compared the initiation of HIV treatment with zidovudine, lamivudine, and either nevirapine or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in HIV-infected children 2 to 36 months of age who had no prior exposure to nevirapine. The primary end point was virologic failure or discontinuation of treatment by study week 24.A total of 288 children were enrolled; the median percentage of CD4+ T cells was 15%, and the median plasma HIV type 1 (HIV-1) RNA level was 5.7 log(10) copies per milliliter. The percentage of children who reached the primary end point was significantly higher in the nevirapine group than in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (40.8% vs. 19.3%; P<0.001). Among the nevirapine-treated children with virologic failure for whom data on resistance were available, more than half (19 of 32) had resistance at the time of virologic failure. In addition, the time to a protocol-defined toxicity end point was shorter in the nevirapine group (P=0.04), as was the time to death (P=0.06).Outcomes were superior with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir among young children with no prior exposure to nevirapine. Factors that may have contributed to the suboptimal results with nevirapine include elevated viral load at baseline, selection for nevirapine resistance, background regimen of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, and the standard ramp-up dosing strategy. The results of this trial present policymakers with difficult choices. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; P1060 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00307151.).

SUBMITTER: Violari A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3443859 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir for HIV-infected children.

Violari Avy A Lindsey Jane C JC Hughes Michael D MD Mujuru Hilda A HA Barlow-Mosha Linda L Kamthunzi Portia P Chi Benjamin H BH Cotton Mark F MF Moultrie Harry H Khadse Sandhya S Schimana Werner W Bobat Raziya R Purdue Lynette L Eshleman Susan H SH Abrams Elaine J EJ Millar Linda L Petzold Elizabeth E Mofenson Lynne M LM Jean-Philippe Patrick P Palumbo Paul P

The New England journal of medicine 20120601 25

<h4>Background</h4>Nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy is the predominant (and often the only) regimen available for children in resource-limited settings. Nevirapine resistance after exposure to the drug for prevention of maternal-to-child human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission is common, a problem that has led to the recommendation of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in such settings. Regardless of whether there has been prior exposure to nevirapine, the performance of nevirapine versu ...[more]

PMID: 22716976

Similar Datasets

Project description:While studies of HIV-infected adults on antiretroviral treatment (ART) report no sex differences in immune recovery and virologic response but more ART-associated complications in women, sex differences in disease progression and response to ART among children have not been well assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate for sex differences in response to ART in South African HIV-infected children who were randomized to continue ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-based ART or switch to nevirapine-based ART.ART outcomes in HIV-infected boys and girls in Johannesburg, South Africa from 2005-2010 were compared. Children initiated ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-based ART before 24 months of age and were randomized to remain on LPV/r or switch to nevirapine-based ART after achieving viral suppression. Children were followed for 76 weeks post-randomization and then long-term follow up continued for a minimum of 99 weeks and maximum of 245 weeks after randomization. Viral load, CD4 count, lipids, anthropometrics, drug concentrations, and adherence were measured at regular intervals. Outcomes were compared between sexes within treatment strata.A total of 323 children (median age 8.8 months, IQR 5.1-13.5), including 168 boys and 155 girls, initiated LPV/r-based ART and 195 children were randomized. No sex differences in risk of virological failure (confirmed viral load >1000 copies/mL) by 156 weeks post-randomization were observed within either treatment group. Girls switched to nevirapine had more robust CD4 count improvement relative to boys in this group through 112 weeks post-randomization. In addition, girls remaining on LPV/r had higher plasma concentrations of ritonavir than boys during post-randomization visits. After a mean of 3.4 years post-randomization, girls remaining on LPV/r also had a higher total cholesterol:HDL ratio and lower mean HDL than boys on LPV/r.Sex differences are noted in treated HIV-infected children even at a young age, and appear to depend on treatment regimen. Future studies are warranted to determine biological mechanisms and clinical significance of these differences.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00117728.

Project description:BackgroundThe International Maternal Pediatric Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials Network (IMPAACT) P1060 study demonstrated short-term superiority of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) over nevirapine (NVP) in antiretroviral therapy (ART), regardless of prior NVP exposure. However, NVP-based ART had a marginal benefit in CD4 percentage (CD4%) and growth. We compared 5-year outcomes from this clinical trial.MethodsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected, ART-eligible children were enrolled into 2 cohorts based on prior NVP exposure and randomized to NVP- or LPV/r-based ART. The data safety monitoring board recommended unblinding results in both cohorts due to superiority of LPV/r for the primary endpoint: stopping randomized treatment, virologic failure (VF), or death by 6 months. Participants were offered a switch in regimens (if on NVP) and continued observational follow-up. We compared time to VF or death, death, and CD4% and growth changes using intention-to-treat analyses. Additionally, inverse probability weights were used to account for treatment switching and censoring.ResultsAs of September 2014, 329 of the 451 (73%) enrolled participants were still in follow-up (median, 5.3 years; interquartile range [IQR], 4.3-6.4), with 52% on NVP and 88% on LPV/r as originally randomized. NVP arm participants had significantly higher risk of VF or death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-2.65) but not death alone (aHR, 1.65; 95% CI, .72-3.76) compared with participants randomized to LPV/r. Mean CD4% was significantly higher in the NVP arm up to 1 year after ART initiation, but not beyond. Mean weight-for-age z scores were marginally higher in the NVP arm, but height-for-age z scores did not differ. Similar trends were observed in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsThese findings support the current World Health Organization recommendation of LPV/r in first-line ART regimens for HIV-infected children.Clinical trials registrationNCT00307151.

Project description:BackgroundAlbuvirtide (ABT), a fusion inhibitor against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, has good efficacy and tolerability for HIV treatment. However, there is a paucity of data regarding ABT-based regimen as second-line therapy. This current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching to ABT + ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) treatment in a cohort of HIV-infected individuals who failed initial treatment.MethodsThis retrospective comparative cohort study included patients who failed initial treatment and switched to either ABT + LPV/r (the ABT group) or two nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) + LPV/r (the NRTI group) between November 2019 and December 2020 in the People's Hospital of Zhaojue County in Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, China. All individuals were followed up from baseline to 12 weeks after conversion, or until the patient developed unacceptable toxic effects or was loss of follow-up. The proportion of patients who achieved virological suppression (viral load <50 copies/mL) at week 12 was considered a primary efficacy endpoint. Safety outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. All participants underwent resistance testing before regimen conversion. The linear regression model was applied to evaluate the association of CD4+ T cell count with the patient's clinical characteristics.ResultsA total of 71 patients were included in this study, the two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of age, sex, CD4+ T cell count, and viral load. The suppression of HIV-1 RNA to levels <50 copies/mL was achieved in 82.4% (28/31) and 29.7% (11/34) of patients in the ABT group and the NRTI group, respectively (P<0.001). Older age (P=0.016) and higher alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels (P=0.038), but not rescue regimen, were associated with attenuated CD4+ T cell recovery. Most adverse events mild in severity, with abdominal pain as the most reported event in two groups (26.8%, 19/71), and no severe adverse events were detected.ConclusionsConversion to ABT + LPV/r therapy appears to be an effective and safe strategy. This treatment regimen has great potential to be generalized in the HIV-infected population, although further testing in a larger patient population is required to verify these results.

Project description:BackgroundNevirapine (NVP) is widely used in antiretroviral treatment (ART) of HIV-1 globally. The primary objective of the AA5208/OCTANE trial was to compare the efficacy of NVP-based versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based initial ART.Methods and findingsIn seven African countries (Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), 500 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected women with CD4<200 cells/mm(3) were enrolled into a two-arm randomized trial to initiate open-label ART with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) once/day plus either NVP (n = 249) or LPV/r (n = 251) twice/day, and followed for ≥48 weeks. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to death or confirmed virologic failure ([VF]) (plasma HIV RNA<1 log(10) below baseline 12 weeks after treatment initiation, or ≥400 copies/ml at or after 24 weeks), with comparison between treatments based on hazard ratios (HRs) in intention-to-treat analysis. Equivalence of randomized treatments was defined as finding the 95% CI for HR for virological failure or death in the range 0.5 to 2.0. Baseline characteristics were (median): age = 34 years, CD4 = 121 cells/mm(3), HIV RNA = 5.2 log(10)copies/ml. Median follow-up = 118 weeks; 29 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. 42 women (37 VFs, five deaths; 17%) in the NVP and 50 (43 VFs, seven deaths; 20%) in the LPV/r arm reached the primary endpoint (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.29). During initial assigned treatment, 14% and 16% of women receiving NVP and LPV/r experienced grade 3/4 signs/symptoms and 26% and 22% experienced grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities. However, 35 (14%) women discontinued NVP because of adverse events, most in the first 8 weeks, versus none for LPV/r (p<0.001). VF, death, or permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 80 (32%) of NVP and 54 (22%) of LPV/r arms (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4), with the difference primarily due to more treatment discontinuation in the NVP arm. 13 (45%) of 29 women tested in the NVP versus six (15%) of 40 in the LPV/r arm had any drug resistance mutation at time of VF.ConclusionsInitial ART with NVP+TDF/FTC demonstrated equivalent virologic efficacy but higher rates of treatment discontinuation and new drug resistance compared with LPV/r+TDF/FTC in antiretroviral-naïve women with CD4<200 cells/mm(3).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00089505.

Dataset Information

Nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir for HIV-infected children.

Publications

Nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir for HIV-infected children.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets