Superior Outcomes With Continuing Tenofovir Versus Switching to Zidovudine in Second-Line Antiretroviral Therapy in Haiti.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pierre S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8661077 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:There is debate over using tenofovir or zidovudine alongside lamivudine in second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) following stavudine failure. We analysed outcomes in cohorts from South Africa, Zambia and ZimbabwePatients aged ?16 years who switched from a first-line regimen including stavudine to a ritonavir-boosted lopinavir-based second-line regimen with lamivudine or emtricitabine and zidovudine or tenofovir in seven ART programmes in southern Africa were included. We estimated the causal effect of receiving tenofovir or zidovudine on mortality and virological failure using Cox proportional hazards marginal structural models. Its parameters were estimated using inverse probability of treatment weights. Baseline characteristics were age, sex, calendar year and country. CD4(+) T-cell count, creatinine and haemoglobin levels were included as time-dependent confounders.A total of 1,256 patients on second-line ART, including 958 on tenofovir, were analysed. Patients on tenofovir were more likely to have switched to second-line ART in recent years, spent more time on first-line ART (33 versus 24 months) and had lower CD4(+) T-cell counts (172 versus 341 cells/?l) at initiation of second-line ART. The adjusted hazard ratio comparing tenofovir with zidovudine was 1.00 (95% CI 0.59, 1.68) for virological failure and 1.40 (0.57, 3.41) for death.We did not find any difference in treatment outcomes between patients on tenofovir or zidovudine; however, the precision of our estimates was limited. There is an urgent need for randomized trials to inform second-line ART strategies in resource-limited settings.
| S-EPMC4043936 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite sparse efficacy data, tenofovir-emtricitabine or tenofovir-lamivudine plus nevirapine is used in many resource-constrained settings.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients initiating nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) with either tenofovir-emtricitabine or lamivudine (tenofovir group) or zidovudine-lamivudine (zidovudine group). Clinical, virologic, and immunologic evaluations were performed at baseline and every 6 months. Virologic failure was defined as 2 consecutive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-RNA values >1000 copies/mL. Patients were included from ART initiation until time of failure, regimen switch, discontinuation, or last HIV-RNA measurement. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model factors influencing time to failure. Bias due to dependent censoring was investigated via inverse probability weighted pooled logistic regression.ResultsA total of 5547 patients were evaluated; 1484 (26.8%) were in the tenofovir group and 4063 (73.2%) were in the zidovudine group. In the adjusted model, tenofovir regimen (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.79) and higher baseline log10 HIV-RNA (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.28) were associated with virologic failure. Higher baseline log10 CD4+ cell count (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, .40-.63) and increasing age (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, .97-.99) decreased the risk of virologic failure. Inverse probability weighting results were consistent with the primary analysis.ConclusionsCompared with zidovudine-lamivudine, the use of tenofovir-lamivudine or emtricitabine in combination with nevirapine was a strong predictor of virologic failure in our cohort, which was not explained by other risk factors or criteria for regimen selection.
| S-EPMC4725384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRecycling tenofovir and lamivudine/emtricitabine (XTC) with dolutegravir would provide a more tolerable, affordable, and scalable second-line regimen than dolutegravir with an optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone. We evaluated efficacy of tenofovir/lamivudine/dolutegravir (TLD) in patients failing first-line tenofovir/XTC/efavirenz or nevirapine.DesignSingle arm, prospective, interventional study.SettingTwo primary care clinics in Khayelitsha, South Africa.ParticipantsSixty adult patients with two viral loads greater than 1000 copies/ml.InterventionParticipants were switched to TLD with additional dolutegravir (50 mg) for 2 weeks to overcome efavirenz induction.Primary outcomeProportion achieving viral load less than 50 copies/ml at week 24 using the FDA snapshot algorithm.ResultsBaseline median CD4+ cell count was 248 cells/μl, viral load 10 580 copies/ml and 48 of 54 (89%) had resistance (Stanford score ≥15) to one or both of tenofovir and XTC. No participants were lost to follow-up. At week 24, 51 of 60 [85%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 73-93%] were virologically suppressed, six had viral load 50-100 copies/ml, one had viral load 100-1000 copies/ml, one no viral load in window, and one switched because of tenofovir-related adverse event. No integrase mutations were detected in the one participant meeting criteria for resistance testing. Virological suppression was achieved by 29 of 35 (83%, 95% CI 66-93%) with resistance to tenofovir and XTC, 11 of 13 (85%, 95% CI 55-98%) with resistance to XTC, and six of six (100%, 95% CI 54-100%) with resistance to neither.ConclusionA high proportion of adults switching to second-line TLD achieved virologic suppression despite substantial baseline NRTI resistance and most not suppressed had low-level viraemia (≤100 copies/ml). This suggests recycling tenofovir and XTC with dolutegravir could provide an effective second-line option.
| S-EPMC7612028 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe most recent World Health Organization (WHO) antiretroviral treatment guidelines recommend the inclusion of zidovudine (ZDV) or tenofovir (TDF) in first-line therapy. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis with emphasis on emerging patterns of drug resistance upon treatment failure and their impact on second-line therapy.MethodsWe used a stochastic simulation of a generalized HIV-1 epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa to compare two strategies for first-line combination antiretroviral treatment including lamivudine, nevirapine and either ZDV or TDF. Model input parameters were derived from literature and, for the simulation of resistance pathways, estimated from drug resistance data obtained after first-line treatment failure in settings without virological monitoring. Treatment failure and cost effectiveness were determined based on WHO definitions. Two scenarios with optimistic (no emergence; base) and pessimistic (extensive emergence) assumptions regarding occurrence of multidrug resistance patterns were tested.ResultsIn the base scenario, cumulative proportions of treatment failure according to WHO criteria were higher among first-line ZDV users (median after six years 36% [95% simulation interval 32%; 39%]) compared with first-line TDF users (31% [29%; 33%]). Consequently, a higher proportion initiated second-line therapy (including lamivudine, boosted protease inhibitors and either ZDV or TDF) in the first-line ZDV user group 34% [31%; 37%] relative to first-line TDF users (30% [27%; 32%]). At the time of second-line initiation, a higher proportion (16%) of first-line ZDV users harboured TDF-resistant HIV compared with ZDV-resistant viruses among first-line TDF users (0% and 6% in base and pessimistic scenarios, respectively). In the base scenario, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio with respect to quality adjusted life years (QALY) was US$83 when TDF instead of ZDV was used in first-line therapy (pessimistic scenario: US$ 315), which was below the WHO threshold for high cost effectiveness (US$ 2154).ConclusionsUsing TDF instead of ZDV in first-line treatment in resource-limited settings is very cost-effective and likely to better preserve future treatment options in absence of virological monitoring.
| S-EPMC3414499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) concentration in dried blood spots is a marker of long-term adherence. We investigated the relationship between TFV-DP concentrations and virological outcomes in participants initiating tenofovir-lamivudine-dolutegravir (TLD) as first-line or second-line antiretroviral therapy.SettingThree primary care clinics in Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa.MethodsWe conducted a post hoc analysis of 2 randomized controlled trials of participants initiating TLD. TFV-DP concentrations and viral loads were measured at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association with virological suppression (<50 copies/mL) per natural logarithm increase in TFV-DP concentration. Generalized estimating equations with logit link were used to assess associations with virological rebound. The Akaike Information Criterion and Quasi-likelihood Information Criteria were used to compare models built on continuous TFV-DP data to 4 previously defined concentration categories.ResultsWe included 294 participants in the analysis, 188 (64%) of whom initiated TLD as second-line therapy. Adjusted odds ratios (95% CIs) of virological suppression were 2.12 (1.23, 3.75), 3.11 (1.84, 5.65), and 4.69 (2.81, 8.68) per natural logarithm increase in TFV-DP concentration at weeks 12, 24, and 48, respectively. In participants with virological suppression at week 12, the adjusted odds ratio for remaining virologically suppressed was 3.63 (95% CI: 2.21 to 5.69) per natural logarithm increase in TFV-DP concentration. Models using continuous TFV-DP data had lower Akaike Information Criterion and Quasi-likelihood Information Criteria values than those using categorical data for predicting virological outcomes.ConclusionTFV-DP concentrations in dried blood spots exhibit a dose-response relationship with viral load. Analyzing TFV-DP concentrations as continuous variables rather than conventional categorization may be appropriate.
| S-EPMC7615802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Dolutegravir has superior efficacy and tolerability than lopinavir-ritonavir in second-line antiretroviral therapy after failure of a first-line non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors-based regimen, when dolutegravir is accompanied by at least one fully active nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI). Resistance testing to select NRTIs is not feasible in low- and middle-income countries due to cost and limited laboratory capacity. Evidence suggests that recycling tenofovir plus lamivudine or emtricitabine backbone with dolutegravir could provide an effective second-line option. This study aims to determine the virologic efficacy of tenofovir-lamivudine-dolutegravir (TLD) with and without a lead-in supplementary dose of dolutegravir (to counteract the inducing effect of efavirenz) in patients failing a first-line regimen of tenofovir-emtricitabine-efavirenz (TEE). Methods: We will perform a parallel group, randomised (1:1), double blind, placebo-controlled, Phase II trial, comparing TLD fixed dose combination daily with a lead-in supplementary 50 mg dolutegravir dose versus matching placebo taken 12 hours later for the first 14 days, in patients failing a first-line TEE regimen. The trial will be set in two primary care clinics in Khayelitsha; a large, peri-urban informal settlement in Cape Town, South Africa. We will enrol 130 participants, with follow-up to 48 weeks. The primary endpoint is proportion achieving viral load <50 copies/mL at week 24 using a modified intention-to-treat analysis and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm. Secondary endpoints include virologic suppression at weeks 12 and 48, time to suppression, emergence of dolutegravir and new NRTI resistance mutations, safety, and tolerability. Discussion: Impaired viral fitness due to NRTI resistance mutations and dolutegravir's high barrier to resistance provide rationale for switching patients from a failing TEE regimen to TLD; however, clinical evidence regarding virologic efficacy is lacking. This study provides estimates of such a strategy's early virologic efficacy with and without a supplementary dolutegravir dosing. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03991013 (19/06/2019).
| S-EPMC9372637 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although tenofovir (TDF) is a common component of antiretroviral therapy (ART), recent evidence suggests inferior outcomes when it is combined with nevirapine (NVP). METHODS:We compared outcomes among patients initiating TDF + emtricitabine or lamivudine (XTC) + NVP, TDF + XTC + efavirenz (EFV), zidovudine (ZDV) + lamuvidine (3TC) + NVP, and ZDV + 3TC + EFV. We categorized drug exposure by initial ART dispensation by a time-varying analysis that accounted for drug substitutions and by predominant exposure (>75% of drug dispensations) during an initial window period. Risks for death and program failure were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. All regimens were compared with ZDV + 3TC + NVP. RESULTS:Between July 2007 and November 2010, 18,866 treatment-naive adults initiated ART: 18.2% on ZDV + 3TC + NVP, 1.8% on ZDV + 3TC + EFV, 36.2% on TDF + XTC + NVP, and 43.8% on TDF + XTC + EFV. When exposure was categorized by initial prescription, patients on TDF + XTC + NVP [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03 to 2.06] had a higher post-90-day mortality. TDF + XTC + NVP was also associated with an elevated risk for mortality when exposure was categorized as time-varying (AHR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.95) or by predominant exposure over the first 90 days (AHR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.34). However, these findings were not consistently observed across sensitivity analyses or when program failure was used as a secondary outcome. CONCLUSION:TDF + XTC + NVP was associated with higher mortality when compared with ZDV + 3TC + NVP but not consistently across sensitivity analyses. These findings may be explained in part by inherent limitations to our retrospective approach, including residual confounding. Further research is urgently needed to compare the effectiveness of ART regimens in use in resource-constrained settings.
| S-EPMC3215810 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecycling tenofovir and lamivudine/emtricitabine with dolutegravir (TLD) after failure of non-nucleoside transcriptase inhibitor first-line antiretroviral therapy is more tolerable and scalable than dolutegravir plus optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Studies have demonstrated TLD's efficacy as second line, but long-term follow-up is limited.MethodsARTIST is a single arm, prospective, interventional study conducted in Khayelitsha, South Africa, which switched 62 adults with 2 viral loads >1000 copies/mL from tenofovir, lamivudine/emtricitabine, and an non-nucleoside transcriptase inhibitor to TLD. We report efficacy to 72 weeks and, in a post hoc analysis, evaluated viral load trajectories of individuals with viremic episodes.ResultsVirologic suppression was 86% [95% confidence interval (CI) 74 to 93], 74% (95% CI: 61 to 84), and 75% (95% CI: 63 to 86) <50 copies/mL and 95%, 84%, and 77% <400 copies/mL at week 24, 48, and 72, respectively, with 89% (50/56) resistant (Stanford score ≥15) to tenofovir and/or lamivudine preswitch. No participants developed integrase-inhibitor resistance. Of the 20 participants not suppressed at week 24 and/or 48, 2 developed virologic failure, 1 switched regimen (adverse event), 2 were lost to follow-up, 1 missed the visit, 1 transferred out, 9 resuppressed <50 copies/mL with enhanced adherence counseling, and 4 remained viremic (3 with <200 copies/mL) at week 72.ConclusionsRecycling NRTIs with dolutegravir was effective for most participants to 72 weeks. Most with viremia did not develop virologic failure and subsequently suppressed with enhanced adherence counseling or continued to have low-level viremia. No integrase-inhibitor resistance was detected despite low-level viremia in a minority of participants.
| S-EPMC7614301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTenofovir (TDF) and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) were not introduced to China as second-line medications until 2009. The efficacy and safety of TDF/3TC/LPV/r based second-line regimen have not been evaluated in Chinese HIV patients who failed first-line regimens.MethodsThis was a multicenter cohort study recruiting patients from Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, and Henan provinces between November 2008 and January 2010. Eighty HIV infected patients failing first-line regimens with serum creatinine lower than 1.5 times the upper limit of normal received TDF+ lamivudine (3TC)+ LPV/r were followed up for 120 weeks. CD4 cell count, viral load, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were monitored at each visit.ResultsAt baseline, 31.2% and 48.8% of patients had moderate/high-level resistance to TDF and 3TC, respectively; while 2.5% of patients had only low-level resistance to LPV/r. During 120 weeks of follow-up, virological suppression rate reached over 70% (<40 copies/ml) and 90% (<400 copies/ml), and median CD4 cell count increased from 157 cells/?L at baseline to 307 cells/?L at week 120. Baseline drug-resistance mutations had no impact on the efficacy of second-line antiretroviral therapy. Median eGFR dropped from 104.7 ml/min/1.73m2 at baseline to 95.6 ml/min/1.73m2 at week 24 and then recovered after week 96.ConclusionThis study for the first time demonstrated that TDF+ 3TC+ LPV/r was efficacious as second-line regimen with acceptable nephrotoxicity profiles in patients who failed zidovudine or stavudine based first-line regimens in China.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00872417.
| S-EPMC4379083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimsBesifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV), an acyclic nucleotide phosphonate, shows potent antiviral activity against hepatitis B virus. Our previous 48-week trial revealed that BSV has comparable antiviral efficacy to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and better safety profiles in terms of improved renal and bone safety. This extension study evaluated the prolonged efficacy and safety of BSV in treatment-naive chronic hepatitis B patients.MethodsPatients continued to participate in an open-label BSV study after an initial 48-week double-blind comparison of BSV and TDF treatment. The antiviral efficacy and drug safety was evaluated up to 192 weeks in two groups: patients continuing BSV treatment (BSV-BSV) and patients switching from TDF to BSV after 48 weeks (TDF-BSV).ResultsAmong 197 patients receiving randomized treatments, 170 (86%) entered the open-label phase and 152 (77%) entered the 192-week extension study. Virological response rates over 192 weeks were 92.50% and 93.06% in the BSV-BSV and TDF-BSV groups, respectively (P=0.90). Hepatitis B envelop antigen seroconversion and alanine aminotransferase normalization rates were similar between the groups (P=0.75 and P=0.36, respectively). There were no drug-resistant mutations to BSV. Bone mineral density and renal function were well preserved in the BSV-BSV group, whereas these initially worsened then recovered after switching therapy in the TDF-BSV group.ConclusionBSV maintained potent antiviral efficacy after 192 weeks and showed no evidence of drug resistance. BSV was safe, well tolerated, and effective in patients who switched from TDF to BSV. Trial Registration Number: NCT01937806 (date: 10 Sep 2013).
| S-EPMC8046633 | biostudies-literature