Second-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings: the experience of Médecins Sans Frontières (original) (raw)
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2014
Virologic failure (VF) on a first-line ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) regimen is associated with low rates of resistance, but optimal management after failure is unknown. The analysis included participants in randomized trials who experienced VF on a first-line regimen of PI/r plus 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) and had at least 24 weeks of follow-up after VF. Antiretroviral management and virologic suppression (human immunodeficiency virus type 1 [HIV-1] RNA <400 copies/mL) after VF were assessed. Of 209 participants, only 1 participant had major PI-associated treatment-emergent mutations at first-line VF. The most common treatment approach after VF (66%) was to continue the same regimen. The virologic suppression rate 24 weeks after VF was 64% for these participants, compared with 72% for those who changed regimens (P = .19). Participants remaining on the same regimen had lower NRTI resistance rates (11% vs 30%; P = .003) and higher CD4(+) ce...
HIV Clinical Trials, 2006
Members of the study group are listed in the Appendix. Background: Few published studies have considered both the short-and longterm virologic or immunologic response to combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and the impact of different cART strategies. Purpose: To compare time to initial virologic (<500 copies/mL) or immunologic (>200/mm 3 cell increase) response in antiretroviral-naïve patients starting either a single protease inhibitor (PI; n = 183), a ritonavir-boosted PI regimen (n = 197), or a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based cART regimen (n = 447) after January 1, 2000, and the odds of lack of virologic or immunologic response at 3 years after starting cART. Method: Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression. Results: After adjustment, compared to patients taking an NNRTI-regimen, patients taking a single-PI regimen were significantly less likely to achieve a viral load (VL) <500 copies/mL (relative hazard [RH] 0.74, 95% CI 0.54-0.84, p = .0005); there was no difference between the boosted-PI regimen and the NNRTI regimen (p = .72). There were no differences between regimens in the risk of >200/mm 3 CD4 cell increase after starting cART (p > .3). At 3 years after starting cART, patients taking a single-PI-based regimen were more likely to not have virologic suppression (<500 copies/mL; odds ratio [OR] 1.60, 95% CI 1.06-2.40, p = .024), while there were no differences in the odds of having an immunologic response (>200/mm 3 increase; p > .15). This model was adjusted for CD4 and VL at starting cART, age, prior AIDS diagnosis, year of starting cART, and region of Europe. Conclusion: Compared to patients starting an NNRTI-based regimen, patients starting a single-PI regimen were less likely to be virologically suppressed at 3 years after starting cART. These results should be interpreted with caution, because of the potential biases associated with observational studies. Ultimately, clinical outcomes, such as new AIDS diagnoses or deaths, will be the measure of efficacy of cART regimens, which requires the follow-up of a very large number of patients over many years.
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2008
for the Clinical Epidemiology Group of the French Hospital Database on HIV (ANRS CO4)# Background: Contrary to current HIV/AIDS management guidelines, and despite the arrival of potent combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) many years ago, some patients are still treated with dual nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) regimens. Methods: We selected 5222 patients who received dual NRTI therapy for at least 6 months during 1998 to 2002, representing 9.9% of the 52,981 ARV-treated patients recorded in the French Hospital Database on HIV. Factors associated with switching to cART or with ARV discontinuation were identified by using Cox models. Results: The 3-year probabilities of switching to cART and of antiretroviral (ARV) drug discontinuation were 55.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53.8 to 56.7) and 10.9% (95% CI: 10.1 to 11.8), respectively, whereas 1591 patients (30.5%) kept the dual NRTI therapy during all the study period. Place of birth and region of care did not influence the choice of treatment strategy. After adjustment, the likelihood of switching to cART was lower among women, intravenous drug users, and patients with an undetectable plasma viral load (pVL) on at least 1 occasion during follow-up; in contrast, it was higher among patients with AIDS and those with a low CD4 cell count at enrollment or at the last follow-up visit. The likelihood of ARV discontinuation was higher among women and intravenous drug users and lower among patients with a low CD4 cell count at inclusion or at the last follow-up visit and among patients with an undetectable pVL on at least 1 occasion during follow-up. The likelihood of switching to cART or discontinuing ARV drugs was higher among patients receiving zidovudine/zalcitabine or didanosine/ stavudine than among those receiving zidovudine/lamivudine. Conclusions: In France, until recent years, some patients (mainly women and intravenous drug users) were still receiving dual NRTI therapy despite free access to care and to highly effective ARV regimens. Dual NRTI therapy is gradually being replaced by cART, although some patients with satisfactory immunovirologic status are discontinuing all ARV drugs.
Assessment of Second-Line Antiretroviral Regimens for HIV Therapy in Africa
New England Journal of Medicine, 2014
Background The efficacy and toxic effects of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) are uncertain when these agents are used with a protease inhibitor in second-line therapy for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in resource-limited settings. Removing the NRTIs or replacing them with raltegravir may provide a benefit. Methods In this open-label trial in sub-Saharan Africa, we randomly assigned 1277 adults and adolescents with HIV infection and first-line treatment failure to receive a ritonavirboosted protease inhibitor (lopinavir-ritonavir) plus clinician-selected NRTIs (NRTI group, 426 patients), a protease inhibitor plus raltegravir in a superiority comparison (raltegravir group, 433 patients), or protease-inhibitor monotherapy after 12 weeks of induction therapy with raltegravir in a noninferiority comparison (monotherapy group, 418 patients). The primary composite end point, good HIV disease control, was defined as survival with no new World Health Organization stage 4 events, a CD4+ count of more than 250 cells per cubic millimeter, and a viral load of less than 10,000 copies per milliliter or 10,000 copies or more with no protease resistance mutations at week 96 and was analyzed with the use of imputation of data (≤4%). Results Good HIV disease control was achieved in 60% of the patients (mean, 255 patients) in the NRTI group, 64% of the patients (mean, 277) in the raltegravir group (P = 0.21 for the comparison with the NRTI group; superiority of raltegravir not shown), and 55% of the patients (mean, 232) in the monotherapy group (noninferiority of monotherapy not shown, based on a 10-percentage-point margin). There was no significant difference in rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events among the three groups (P = 0.82). The viral load was less than 400 copies per milliliter in 86% of patients in the NRTI group, 86% in the raltegravir group (P = 0.97), and 61% in the monotherapy group (P<0.001). Conclusions When given with a protease inhibitor in second-line therapy, NRTIs retained substantial virologic activity without evidence of increased toxicity, and there was no advantage to replacing them with raltegravir. Virologic control was inferior with protease-inhibitor monotherapy. (Funded by European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership and others; EARNEST Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN 37737787, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00988039.
HIV Medicine, 2018
ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to evaluate the long‐term response to antiretroviral treatment (ART) based on atazanavir/ritonavir (ATZ/r)‐, darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r)‐, and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)‐containing regimens.MethodsData were analysed for 5678 EuroSIDA‐enrolled patients starting a DRV/r‐, ATZ/r‐ or LPV/r‐containing regimen between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2013. Separate analyses were performed for the following subgroups of patients: (1) ART‐naïve subjects (8%) at ritonavir‐boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) initiation; (2) ART‐experienced individuals (44%) initiating the new PI/r with a viral load (VL) ≤500 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL; and (3) ART‐experienced patients (48%) initiating the new PI/r with a VL >500 copies/mL. Virological failure (VF) was defined as two consecutive VL measurements >200 copies/mL ≥24 weeks after PI/r initiation. Kaplan–Meier and multivariable Cox models were used to compare risks of failure by PI/r‐based regimen. The main analysis was pe...
Outcome of patients on second line antiretroviral therapy under programmatic condition in India
BMC Infectious Diseases, 2015
Background: The National AIDS Control Organization of India has been providing free second line antiretroviral therapy (ART) since 2008. This observational study reports the survival and virologic suppression of patients on second-line ART under programmatic condition and type of mutations acquired by those failing therapy. Methods: 170 patients initiated on second-line therapy between 2008 and 2012 were followed up till 2013. Viral Load (VL) was repeated at 6 months for all patients and at 12 months for those with VL >400 copies/ml at 6 months. Adequate virological response was defined as plasma HIV-1 VL <400 copies/ml and virological failure was defined as VL >1000 copies/ml. Genotyping was done in 16 patients with virological failure. Results: Out of 170 patients, 110 (64.7 %) were alive and on therapy and 35 (20.5 %) expired. In the first year the occurrence of death was 13.7 /100 person years while between1 and 5 year it was 3.88 /100 person years. In the first year, duration of immunological failure >12 months, weight <45 kg, WHO clinical stage 3 and 4 and WHO criteria CD4 count less than pretherapy baseline [hazard ratio HR 4.2. 15.8, 11.9 & 4.1 respectively] and beyond first year poor first and second line adherence and first line CD4 count < 200/μL [HR 5.2,15.8, 3.3 respectively] had high risk of death. 119/152 (78.2 %) had adequate virological response and 27/152 (17.7 %) had virological failure. High viral load at baseline and poor second line adherence (Odds Ratio 3.4 & 2.8 respectively) had increased risk of virological failure. Among those genotyped, 50 % had major Protease Inhibitor mutation (M46I commonest) however 87.5 % were still susceptible to darunavir. Conclusions: Second line therapy has shown high early mortality but good virological suppression under programmatic conditions.
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 2020
ObjectivesWe compared 48 week effectiveness and safety of first-line antiretroviral regimens.MethodsWe analysed HIV treatment-naive adults from the Cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS) starting the most commonly used antiretroviral regimens from 2014 to 2018. We used multivariable regression models to assess the impact of initial regimen on: (i) viral suppression (VS) (viral load <50 copies/mL); (ii) change in CD4 cell count; (iii) CD4/CD8 normalization (>0.4 and >1); (iv) CD4 percentage normalization (>29%); (v) multiple T-cell marker recovery (MTMR: CD4 > 500 cells/mm3 plus CD4 percentage >29% plus CD4/CD8 > 1); (vi) lipid, creatinine and transaminase changes; and (vii) discontinuations due to adverse events (AE).ResultsAmong 3945 individuals analysed, the most frequently prescribed regimens were ABC/3TC/DTG (34.0%), TAF/FTC/EVG/CBT (17.2%), TDF/FTC + DTG (11.9%), TDF/FTC/EVG/CBT (11.7%), TDF/FTC/RPV (11.5%), TDF/FTC + bDRV (8.3%) and TDF/FT...
AIDS Research and Therapy, 2007
Background: Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with stavudine and lamivudine is widely used as the first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in resource-limited settings. Lipodystrophy is common and options for switching ART regimen are limited; this situation can lead to patients' poor adherence and antiretroviral resistance. Treatment interruption (TI) in patients with high CD4 cell counts, lipodystrophy, and limited options may be an alternative in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to determine time to resume ART after TI and predictors for early resumption of ART in a resource-limited setting.
The Lancet HIV, 2019
Background Antiretroviral therapy (ART) management is challenging for individuals in resource-limited settings presenting for third-line treatment because of complex resistance patterns, partly due to reduced access to viral load monitoring. We aimed to evaluate use of newer antiretroviral drugs and contemporary management approaches, including population-based sequencing, to select appropriate antiretrovirals, plasma viral load monitoring, and interventions to improve adherence in individuals presenting with second-line viral failure. Methods A5288 was a phase 4, third-line ART strategy study done at 19 urban sites in ten countries that enrolled adult participants with confirmed plasma HIV-1 RNA (viral load) of 1000 copies per mL or more after more than 24 weeks of protease inhibitor-based second-line ART. The primary objective was to use antiretrovirals (raltegravir, etravirine, and ritonavir-boosted darunavir) and diagnostic monitoring technologies, including viral load, genotyping, and adherence support to achieve viral load suppression (defined as ≤200 copies per mL) in 65% or more of participants. ART history and real-time drug resistance genotypes were used to assign participants to one of four cohorts: cohort A (no lopinavir resistance) stayed on second-line ART and cohorts B (B1, best available nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs] plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir; B2, ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus etravirine; B3, ritonavir-boosted darunavir, raltegravir, and either tenofovir plus emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), C (ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir plus tenofovir-emtricitabine or tenofovir plus lamivudine), and D (best available NRTIs plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus raltegravir) were defined by increasing levels of resistance and received appropriate regimens, including new antiretrovirals. Participants in Cohort B without detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned by blocked randomisation to cohorts B1 and B2, and those with detectable hepatitis B surface antigen were assigned to cohort B3. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01641367. Findings From Jan 10, 2013, to Sept 10, 2015, 545 participants were enrolled. 287 (53%) were assigned to cohort A, 74 (14%) to B1, 72 (13%) to B2, eight (1%) to B3, 70 (13%) to C, and 34 (6%) to D. Overall, 349 (64%, 95% CI 60-68) participants achieved viral suppression at week 48, with proportions varying from 125 (44%) of 287 in cohort A to 65 (88%) of 74 in cohort B1, 63 (88%) of 72 in B2, eight (100%) of eight in B3, 63 (90%) of 70 in C, and 25 (74%) of 34 in D. Participants in cohort A remained on their second-line protease inhibitor, and had the most participants with grade 3 or higher adverse events (147 [51%]). Interpretation Targeted real-time genotyping to select third-line ART can appropriately allocate more costly antiretrovirals to those with greater levels of HIV drug resistance.