ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness of a raltegravir (RAL)-containing regimen plus an optimized background regimen in HIV-1 highly treatment-experienced patients. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort, multicentre study was conducted. METHODS: Adult (>16 years old) HIV treatment-experience patients starting therapy with a RAL-containing regimen were included. Effectiveness was evaluated as the percentage of patients with an undetectable HIV-1 RNA viral load (<50 and <200 copies/mL) after 48 weeks, and changes in CD4+ cell counts. We evaluated the risk factors associated with treatment failure. RESULTS: Of the 107 patients in the cohort, 86% were men, the median age was 45 years [interquartile range (IQR) 40-52] and the median number of previous regimens was six (IQR 4-7). After 48 weeks of treatment, 73% (IQR 63-80%) of patients (n = 78) had a viral load of <50 copies/mL and 85% (IQR 77-90%) (n = 91) had <200 copies/mL. In a logistic regression model, risk factors associated with a virological outcome of HIV-1 RNA of <200 copies/mL were age >40 years [odds ratio (OR) 5.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.61-18.84; P = 0.006] and use of tenofovir in the regimen (OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.03-0.80; P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: In this Mexican cohort, RAL achieved high rates of virological suppression and an increase in CD4+ cell count in highly treatment-experienced patients infected with HIV-1. Age >40 years was associated with a good virological outcome, contrary to tenofovir use, which was associated with a poor virological outcome.
Subject(s)
Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Raltegravir Potassium/therapeutic use , Adult , Anti-HIV Agents/administration & dosage , Cohort Studies , Female , HIV-1/drug effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Raltegravir Potassium/administration & dosage , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of efavirenz (EFV) vs lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in combination with azidothymidine/lamivudine in antiretroviral therapy naive, HIV+ individuals presenting for care with CD4 counts <200/mm. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, open label, multicenter trial in Mexico. HIV-infected subjects with CD4 <200/mm were randomized to receive open label EFV or LPV/r plus azidothymidine/lamivudine (fixed-dose combination) for 48 weeks. Randomization was stratified by baseline CD4 cell count (< or =100 or >100/mm). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at 48 weeks by intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients (85% men) were randomized to receive EFV (95) or LPV/r (94). Median baseline CD4 were 64 and 52/mm, respectively (P = not significant). At week 48, by intention-to-treat analysis, 70% of EFV and 53% of LPV/r patients achieved HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL [estimated difference 17% (95% confidence interval 3.5 to 31), P = 0.013]. The proportion with HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL was 73% with EFV and 65% with LPV/r (P = 0.25). Virologic failure occurred in 7 patients on EFV and 17 on LPV/r. Mean CD4 count increases (cells/mm) were 234 for EFV and 239 for LPV/r. Mean change in total cholesterol and triglyceride levels were 50 and 48 mg/dL in EFV and 63 and 116 mg/dL in LPV/r (P = 0.24 and P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In these very advanced HIV-infected ARV-naive subjects, EFV-based highly active antiretroviral therapy had superior virologic efficacy than LPV/r-based highly active antiretroviral therapy, with a more favorable lipid profile.
