Dataset Information

Response to First-Line Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors (PI/r)-Based Regimens in HIV Positive Patients Presenting to Care with Low CD4 Counts: Data from the Icona Foundation Cohort.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There are no data comparing the response to PI/r-based regimens in people presenting for care with low CD4 counts or AIDS (LC).

Aim

To compare the response to LPV/r-, DRV/r- or ATV/r-based cART regimens in LC initiating cART from ART-naive.

Methods

We included people enrolled in Icona with either CD4 counts ?350 cells/mm3 (low CD4-LC) or CD4 counts ?200 cells/mm3 (very low CD4-VLC) and/or AIDS, starting their first PI/r-based regimen after 2008. Initial regimens were compared by intention-to-treat: i) time to viral failure (VF) (first of 2 consecutive VL>200 copies/mL after?6 months); II) time to PI/r discontinuation/switching for any cause (TD) and for toxicity (TDT); III) treatment failure (TF) (VF or TD). Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses were used.

Results

1,362 LC patients were included (DRV/r 607; ATV/r 552; LPV/r 203); 813 VLC. In a median of 18 months (IQR:7-35), the 1-year probability of VF and TF were 2.8% (1.9-3.8) and 21.1% (18.7-23.4). In the adjusted analysis, patients initiating ATV/r had a 53% lower chance, and those initiating DRV/r a 61% lower chance of TD, as compared to LPV/r; the risk of TF was more likely in people starting LPV/r. Results were similar among VLC; in this subgroup LPV/r including regimens demonstrated a lower chance of VF.

Conclusions

We confirmed in LC a low chance of virological failure by 1 year, with small differences according to PI/r. However, larger differences were observed when comparing longer-term endpoints such as treatment failure. These results are important for people presenting late for care.

SUBMITTER: d'Arminio Monforte A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4922579 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Response to First-Line Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors (PI/r)-Based Regimens in HIV Positive Patients Presenting to Care with Low CD4 Counts: Data from the Icona Foundation Cohort.

d'Arminio Monforte Antonella A Cozzi-Lepri Alessandro A Maggiolo Franco F Rizzardini Giuliano G Manconi Paolo Emilio PE Gianotti Nicola N Quirino Tiziana T Pinnetti Carmela C Rusconi Stefano S De Luca Andrea A Antinori Andrea A

PloS one 20160627 6

<h4>Background</h4>There are no data comparing the response to PI/r-based regimens in people presenting for care with low CD4 counts or AIDS (LC).<h4>Aim</h4>To compare the response to LPV/r-, DRV/r- or ATV/r-based cART regimens in LC initiating cART from ART-naive.<h4>Methods</h4>We included people enrolled in Icona with either CD4 counts ≤350 cells/mm3 (low CD4-LC) or CD4 counts ≤200 cells/mm3 (very low CD4-VLC) and/or AIDS, starting their first PI/r-based regimen after 2008. Initial regimens ...[more]

PMID: 27348592

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNevirapine-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.MethodsIn 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionsOutcomes 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.).

Dataset Information

Response to First-Line Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors (PI/r)-Based Regimens in HIV Positive Patients Presenting to Care with Low CD4 Counts: Data from the Icona Foundation Cohort.

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Response to First-Line Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors (PI/r)-Based Regimens in HIV Positive Patients Presenting to Care with Low CD4 Counts: Data from the Icona Foundation Cohort.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets