Quality of life among HIV-infected individuals failing first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Torres TS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6100767 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Quality of life among HIV-infected individuals failing first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings.
Torres Thiago S TS Harrison Linda J LJ La Rosa Alberto M AM Lavenberg Jeffrey A JA Zheng Lu L Safren Steven A SA Ngongondo McNeil M Poongulali Selvamuthu S Matoga Mitch M Samaneka Wadzanai W Collier Ann C AC Hughes Michael D MD
AIDS care 20180118 8
We evaluated health-related quality of life (QoL) in HIV infection participants with virologic failure (VF) on first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in 9 resource-limited settings (RLS). ACTG SF-21 was completed by 512 participants at A5273 study entry; 8 domains assessed: general health perceptions (GHP), physical functioning (PF), role functioning (RF), social functioning (SF), cognitive functioning (CF), pain (P), mental health (MH), and energy/fatigue (E/F); each was scored between 0 (wors ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective:The use of some antiretroviral drugs has been associated with a higher risk of diabetes mellitus (DM) in HIV-infected patients, but the risk associated with antiretroviral drug combinations remains unclear. We investigated the association between first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens, recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2016, and the risk of DM in adults. Method:We selected all HIV-infected adults within the Thai National AIDS Program who started a first-line ART regimen consisting the following between October 2006 and September 2013: zidovudine+lamivudine+nevirapine; tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)+lamivudine+nevirapine; zidovudine+lamivudine+efavirenz; TDF+lamivudine/emtricitabine+efavirenz; zidovudine+lamivudine+ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r); or TDF+lamivudine+LPV/r. Diagnosis of DM was defined as having at least 2 of the following characteristics: fasting plasma glucose ?126 mg/dl, 2010 WHO ICD-10 codes E11-E14, or prescription of antidiabetic drugs. To identify ART regimens associated with DM, we used competing risks regression models that considered mortality without DM as a competing event and adjusted for sex, age, pancreas disease, and stratified by groups defined by a score summarizing the propensity to receive a specific first-line ART regimen. Results:Data from 35 710 adults (49.1% male; median age, 35.0 years; median follow-up, 2.0 years) were included. In the multivariable analysis with zidovudine+lamivudine+nevirapine as the reference group, a higher risk of DM was observed with TDF+lamivudine/emtricitabine+efavirenz (adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [aSHR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.9), zidovudine+lamivudine+efavirenz (aSHR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.7-2.3), and TDF+lamivudine+LPV/r (aSHR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.9-3.9). Conclusions:Several of the WHO recommended ART regimens, particularly tenofovir + lamivudine +LPV/r and regimens containing efavirenz, may be associated with an increased risk of DM.
| S-EPMC6778321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe results of international clinical trials that are assessing when to initiate antiretroviral therapy (ART) will not be available for several years.ObjectiveTo inform HIV treatment decisions about the optimal CD4 threshold at which to initiate ART in South Africa while awaiting the results of these trials.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis by using a computer simulation model of HIV disease.Data sourcesPublished data from randomized trials and observational cohorts in South Africa.Target populationHIV-infected patients in South Africa.Time horizon5-year and lifetime.PerspectiveModified societal.InterventionNo treatment, ART initiated at a CD4 count less than 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L, and ART initiated at a CD4 count less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L.Outcome measuresMorbidity, mortality, life expectancy, medical costs, and cost-effectiveness.Results of base-case analysisIf 10% to 100% of HIV-infected patients are identified and linked to care, a CD4 count threshold for ART initiation of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L would reduce severe opportunistic diseases by 22,000 to 221,000 and deaths by 25,000 to 253,000 during the next 5 years compared with ART initiation at 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L; cost increases would range from $142 million (10%) to $1.4 billion (100%). Either ART initiation strategy would increase long-term survival by at least 7.9 years, with a mean per-person life expectancy of 3.8 years with no ART and 12.5 years with an initiation threshold of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L. Compared with an initiation threshold of 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L, a threshold of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1200 per year of life saved.Results of sensitivity analysisInitiating ART at a CD4 count less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L would remain cost-effective over the next 5 years even if the probability that the trial would demonstrate the superiority of earlier therapy is as low as 17%.LimitationThis model does not consider the possible benefits of initiating ART at a CD4 count greater than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L or of reduced HIV transmission.ConclusionEarlier initiation of ART in South Africa will probably reduce morbidity and mortality, improve long-term survival, and be cost-effective. While awaiting trial results, treatment guidelines should be liberalized to allow initiation at CD4 counts less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L, earlier than is currently recommended.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.
| S-EPMC3092478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe evaluated improvement of quality of life (QoL) after 1 year of second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) use in resource-limited settings (RLS) among adult men and women, comparing two randomized treatment arms.DesignThe AIDS Clinical Trial Group A5273 was a randomized clinical trial of second-line ART comparing lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) + raltegravir with LPV/r + nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in participants failing a non-NRTI-containing regimen at 15 sites in nine RLS. Participants completed the AIDS Clinical Trial Group short-form-21 which has eight QoL domains with a standard score ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).MethodsDifferences in QoL by randomized arm, as well as by demographic and clinical variables, were evaluated by regression models for baseline and week 48 QoL scores fitted using the generalized estimating equations method.ResultsA total of 512 individuals (49% men, median age 39 years) were included. A total of 512 and 492 participants had QoL assessments at baseline and week 48, respectively. QoL improved significantly from baseline to week 48 (P < 0.001 for all domains). There was no significant difference between treatment arms for any domain. Individuals with higher viral load and lower CD4 cell count at baseline had lower mean QoL at baseline but larger improvements such that mean QoL was similar at week 48.ConclusionImprovements in QoL were similar after starting second-line ART of LPV/r combined with either raltegravir or NRTIs in RLS. QoL scores at baseline were lower among participants with worse disease status prior to starting second-line, but after 1 year similar QoL scores were achieved.
| S-EPMC5832593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The impact of maternal antiretrovirals (ARVs) during pregnancy, labor, and postpartum on infant outcomes is unclear.Infants born to HIV-infected mothers in ARV studies were followed for 18 months.Between June 2006 and December 2008, 236 infants enrolled from Africa (n = 36), India (n = 47), Thailand (n = 152), and Brazil (n = 1). Exposure to ARVs in pregnancy included ? 3 ARVs (10%), zidovudine/intrapartum ARV (81%), and intrapartum ARV (9%). There were 4 infant infections (1 in utero, 3 late postpartum) and 4 deaths with 1.8% mortality (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1%-3.5%) and 96.4% HIV-1-free survival (95% CI, 94.0%-98.9%). Birth weight was ? 2.5 kg in 86%. In the first 6 months, Indian infants (nonbreastfed) had lowest median weights and lengths and smallest increases in growth. After 6 months, African infants had the lowest median weight and weight-for-age z scores. Infants exposed to highest maternal viral load had the lowest height and height-for-age z scores. Serious adverse events occurred in 38% of infants, did not differ by country, and correlated with less maternal ARV exposure. Clinical diagnoses were seen in 84% of Thai, 31% of African, and 9% of Indian infants. Congenital defects/inborn errors of metabolism were seen in 18 (7.6%) infants, of which 17 were Thai (11%: 95% CI, 6.7%-17.0%); none had first trimester ARV exposure.Infant follow-up in large international cohorts is feasible and provides important safety and HIV transmission data following maternal ARV exposure. Increased surveillance increases identification of congenital/inborn errors.
| S-EPMC3362906 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:For second-line antiretroviral therapy, WHO recommends a boosted protease inhibitor plus nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). However, concerns about toxicity and cross-resistance motivated a search for regimens that do not contain NRTIs. We aimed to assess whether boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir would be non-inferior to boosted lopinavir plus NRTIs for virological suppression in resource-limited settings. METHODS:A5273 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study at 15 AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) research sites in nine resource-limited countries (three sites each in India and South Africa, two each in Malawi and Peru, and one each in Brazil, Kenya, Tanzania, Thailand, and Zimbabwe). Adults with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of at least 1000 copies per mL after at least 24 weeks on a regimen based on a non-NRTI inhibitor were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (100 mg ritonavir, 400 mg lopinavir) plus 400 mg raltegravir twice a day (raltegravir group) or to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus two or three NRTIs selected from an algorithm (eg, zidovudine after failure with tenofovir and vice versa; NRTI group). Randomised group assignment was done with a computer algorithm concealed to site personnel, and stratified by HIV-1 RNA viral load, CD4 cell count, and intention to use zidovudine, with the groups balanced by each site. The primary endpoint was time to confirmed virological failure (two measurements of HIV-1 RNA viral load >400 copies per mL) at or after week 24 in the intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority (10% margin) was assessed by comparing the cumulative probability of virological failure by 48 weeks. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01352715. FINDINGS:Between March 13, 2012, and Oct 2, 2013, we randomly assigned 515 participants: 260 to the raltegravir group and 255 to the NRTI group; two participants in the raltegravir group and one in the NRTI group were excluded from analyses because of ineligibility. By the end of follow-up (October, 2014), 96 participants had virological failure (46 in the raltegravir group and 50 in the NRTI group). By 48 weeks, the cumulative probability of virological failure was 10·3% (95% CI 6·5-14·0) in the raltegravir group and 12·4% (8·3-16·5) in the NRTI group, with a weighted difference of -3·4% (-8·4 to 1·5), indicating that raltegravir was non-inferior, but not superior, to NRTIs. 62 (24%) participants in the raltegravir group and 81 (32%) in the NRTI group had grade 3 or higher adverse events; 19 (7%) and 29 (11%), respectively, had serious adverse events. Three participants in each group died, all from HIV-related causes. INTERPRETATION:In settings with extensive NRTI resistance but no available resistance testing, our data support WHO's recommendation for ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus NRTI for second-line antiretroviral therapy. Ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus raltegravir is an appropriate alternative, especially if NRTI use is limited by toxicity. FUNDING:National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC4914044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between hair antiretroviral hair concentrations as an objective, cumulative adherence metric, with self-reported adherence and virologic outcomes.DesignAnalysis of cohort A of the ACTG-A5288 study. These patients in resource-limited settings were failing second-line protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) but were susceptible to at least one nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) and their protease inhibitor, and continued taking their protease inhibitor-based regimen.MethodsAntiretroviral hair concentrations in participants taking two NRTIs with boosted atazanavir (n = 69) or lopinavir (n = 112) were analyzed at weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 using liquid-chromatography--tandem-mass-spectrometry assays. Participants' self-reported percentage of doses taken in the previous month; virologic failure was confirmed HIV-1 RNA at least 1000 copies/ml at week 24 or 48.ResultsFrom 181 participants with hair samples (61% women, median age: 39 years; CD4+ cell count: 167 cells/μl; HIV-1 RNA: 18 648 copies/ml), 91 (50%) experienced virologic failure at either visit. At 24 weeks, median hair concentrations were 2.95 [interquartile range (IQR) 0.49-4.60] ng/mg for atazanavir, 2.64 (IQR 0.73--7.16) for lopinavir, and 0.44 (IQR 0.11--0.76) for ritonavir. Plasma HIV-1 RNA demonstrated inverse correlations with hair levels (rs -0.46 to -0.74) at weeks 24 and 48. Weaker associations were seen with self-reported adherence (rs -0.03 to -0.24). Decreasing hair concentrations were significantly associated with virologic failure, the hazard ratio (95% CI) for ATV, LPV, and RTV were 0.69 (0.56-0.86), 0.77 (0.68-0.87), and 0.12 (0.06-0.27), respectively.ConclusionProtease inhibitor hair concentrations showed stronger associations with subsequent virologic outcomes than self-reported adherence in this cohort. Hair adherence measures could identify individuals at risk of second-line treatment failure in need of interventions.
| S-EPMC8243835 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To compare WHO first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) with nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI)-based regimen with a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) regimen in a resource-limited setting regarding treatment outcome and emergence of drug resistance mutations (DRMs).Treatment-naive adults were randomized to nevirapine (NVP) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) regimens each in combination with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) or zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine (3TC). Primary endpoint was the incidence of therapeutical (clinical and/or virologic) failure at week 48 with follow-up till week 96.Four hundred and twenty-five patients (120 men; 305 women) received at least one dose of the study drug. mITT analysis showed no difference in proportion of therapeutical failure between treatment arms [67/209 (32%) in NVP vs. 63/216 (29%) LPV/r at week 48 (P?=?0.53); 88/209 (42%) in NVP vs. 83/216 (38%) in LPV/r at week 96 (P?=?0.49)]. Per-protocol analysis demonstrated significantly more virologic failure with NVP than with LPV/r regimens [at week 48: 19/167 (11%) vs. 7/166 (4%), P?=?0.014; at week 96: 27/158 (17%) vs. 13/159 (8%), P?=? 0.019)]. Drug resistance mutations to NNRTI were detected in 19 out of 22 (86.3%) and dual-class resistance to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) and NNRTI in 15 out of 27 (68.2%) of NVP failing patients. K65R mutation was present in seven out of 14 patients failing NVP-TDF/FTC regimen. No major protease inhibitor-DRM was detected among LPV/r failing patients. Discontinuation for adverse events was similar between treatment groups.In resource-limited settings, first-line NNRTI-NRTI regimen as compared with bPI-based regimen provides similar outcome but is associated with a significantly higher number of virologic failure and resistance mutations in both classes that jeopardize future options for second-line therapy.
| S-EPMC4004638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for treatment of HIV in resource-limited settings call for 2 antiretroviral regimens. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of increasing the number of antiretroviral regimens is unknown. METHODS:Using a simulation model, we compared the survival and costs of current WHO regimens with two 3-regimen strategies: an initial regimen of 3 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors followed by the WHO regimens and the WHO regimens followed by a regimen with a second-generation boosted protease inhibitor (2bPI). We evaluated monitoring with CD4 counts only and with both CD4 counts and viral load. We used cost and effectiveness data from Cape Town and tested all assumptions in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS:Over the lifetime of the cohort, 25.6% of individuals failed both WHO regimens by virologic criteria. However, when patients were monitored using CD4 counts alone, only 6.5% were prescribed additional highly active antiretroviral therapy due to missed and delayed detection of failure. The life expectancy gain for individuals who took a 2bPI was 6.7-8.9 months, depending on the monitoring strategy. When CD4 alone was available, adding a regimen with a 2bPI was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2581 per year of life gained, and when viral load was available, the ratio was $6519 per year of life gained. Strategies with triple-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor regimens in initial therapy were dominated. Results were sensitive to the price of 2bPIs. CONCLUSIONS:About 1 in 4 individuals who start highly active antiretroviral therapy in sub-Saharan Africa will fail currently recommended regimens. At current prices, adding a regimen with a 2bPI is cost effective for South Africa and other middle-income countries by WHO standards.
| S-EPMC2757100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Efavirenz (EFV) is a non-nucleoside widely used as first-line therapy for HIV-1 infection. Most of the research available on EFV comes from trials performed in industrialized countries and only a few studies have evaluated EFV in resource-limited settings (RLSs). In this article, we present a systematic review of the available randomized-controlled trials performed in RLSs that have compared EFV with other antiretrovirals, such as nevirapine and protease inhibitors. The data derived from these studies show that both EFV and nevirapine are adequate first-line therapy options for HIV-1 infection in RLSs, even in patients with concomitant tuberculosis. However, EFV may show a slight benefit in terms of toxicity and adverse events. By contrast, the data comparing EFV versus protease inhibitors is contradictory and further studies may be required to elucidate these discrepancies.
| S-EPMC3374961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn resource-limited settings, HIV-1 drug resistance testing to guide antiretroviral therapy (ART) selection is unavailable. We retrospectively conducted genotypic analysis on archived samples from Nigerian patients who received targeted viral load testing to confirm treatment failure and report their drug resistance mutation patterns.MethodsStored plasma from 349 adult patients on non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) regimens was assayed for HIV-1 RNA viral load, and samples with more than 1000 copies/ml were sequenced in the pol gene. Analysis for resistance mutations utilized the IAS-US 2011 Drug Resistance Mutation list.ResultsOne hundred and seventy-five samples were genotyped; the majority of the subtypes were G (42.9%) and CRF02_AG (33.7%). Patients were on ART for a median of 27 months. 90% had the M184V/I mutation, 62% had at least one thymidine analog mutation, and 14% had the K65R mutation. 97% had an NNRTI resistance mutation and 47% had at least two etravirine-associated mutations. In multivariate analysis tenofovir-based regimens were less likely to have at least three nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations after adjusting for subtype, previous ART, CD4, and HIV viral load [P < 0.001, odds ratio (OR) 0.04]. 70% of patients on tenofovir-based regimens had at least two susceptible NRTIs to include in a second-line regimen compared with 40% on zidovudine-based regimens (P = 0.04, OR = 3.4).ConclusionsAt recognition of treatment failure, patients on tenofovir-based first-line regimens had fewer NRTI drug-resistant mutations and more active NRTI drugs available for second-line regimens. These findings can inform strategies for ART regimen sequencing to optimize long-term HIV treatment outcomes in low-resource settings.
| S-EPMC6519052 | biostudies-literature