Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr ; 69(2): e49-56, 2015 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26009836

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Universal access to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is still elusive in most developing nations. We asked whether peer support influenced adherence and treatment outcome and if a single viral load (VL) could define treatment failure in a resource-limited setting. METHODS: A multicenter longitudinal and cross-sectional survey of VL, CD4 T cells, and adherence in 546 patients receiving HAART for up to 228 months. VL and CD4 counts were determined using m2000 Abbott RealTime HIV-1 assay and FACS counters, respectively. Adherence was assessed based on pill count and on self-report. RESULTS: Of the patients, 55.8%, 22.2%, and 22% had good, fair, and poor adherence, respectively. Adherence, peer support, and regimen, but not HIV disclosure, age, or gender, independently correlated with VL and durability of treatment in a multivariate analysis (P < 0.001). Treatment failure was 35.9% using sequential VL but ranged between 27% and 35% using alternate single VL cross-sectional definitions. More patients failed stavudine (41.2%) than zidovudine (37.4%) or tenofovir (28.8%, P = 0.043) treatment arms. Peer support correlated positively with adherence (χ(2), P < 0.001), with nonadherence being highest in the stavudine arm. VL before the time of regimen switch was comparable between patients switching and not switching treatment. Moreover, 36% of those switching still failed the second-line regimen. CONCLUSION: Weak adherence support and inaccessible VL testing threaten to compromise the success of HAART scale-up in Kenya. To hasten antiretroviral therapy monitoring and decision making, we suggest strengthening patient-focused adherence programs, optimizing and aligning regimen to WHO standards, and a single point-of-care VL testing when multiple tests are unavailable.


Subject(s)
Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active/methods , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Medication Adherence , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Drug Monitoring , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Kenya , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Failure , Viral Load , Young Adult
2.
Malar J ; 13: 33, 2014 Jan 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24472156

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This open-label, randomized study evaluated efficacy and safety of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) in treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in children below five years of age, to build evidence on use of AL as first-line treatment and DP as second-line treatment in Kenya. METHODS: A total of 454 children aged six to 59 months with uncomplicated falciparum malaria were randomized (1:1) to receive AL dispersible or DP paediatric tablets and followed up for 42 days. Primary efficacy variable was corrected adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) rate on day 28. Secondary variables included corrected (day 14, 28 and 42), uncorrected (day 3, 14, 28 and 42) cure rates, parasitological failure at days 3, 14 and 42. Acceptability and tolerability of both drugs were assessed by caregiver questionnaire. RESULTS: On day 28, corrected ACPR rates for AL dispersible and DP paediatric were 97.8% (95% CI: 94.9-99.3) and 99.1% (95% CI: 96.8-99.9), respectively, in intention-to-treat population, with no significant treatment differences noted between AL dispersible and DP paediatric arms. Additionally, no significant differences were observed for PCR corrected cure rates on days 14 and ACPR on day 42 for AL dispersible (100%; 96.8%) and DP paediatric (100%; 98.7%). Similarly, for PCR uncorrected cure rates, no significant differences were seen on days 3, 14, 28, and 42 for AL dispersible (99.1%; 98.7%; 81.1%; 67.8%) and DP paediatric (100%; 100%; 87.7%; 70.5%). Parasite clearance was rapid, with approximately 90% clearance achieved in 40 hours in both treatment arms. Incidence of adverse events was related to underlying disease; malaria being reported in both treatment arms. One serious adverse event was noted in AL dispersible (0.42%) arm, not related to study drug. Adherence to treatment regimen was higher for children treated with AL dispersible (93.6%) compared to DP paediatric (85.6%). Acceptability of AL dispersible regimen was assessed as being significantly better than DP paediatric. CONCLUSIONS: AL and DP were both efficacious and well tolerated, and had similar effects at day 42 on risk of recurrent malaria. No signs of Plasmodium falciparum tolerance to artemisinins were noted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PACTR201111000316370.


Subject(s)
Antimalarials/adverse effects , Antimalarials/pharmacology , Malaria, Falciparum/drug therapy , Plasmodium falciparum/drug effects , Antimalarials/administration & dosage , Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination , Artemisinins/administration & dosage , Artemisinins/adverse effects , Artemisinins/pharmacology , Child, Preschool , Drug Combinations , Ethanolamines/administration & dosage , Ethanolamines/adverse effects , Ethanolamines/pharmacology , Fluorenes/administration & dosage , Fluorenes/adverse effects , Fluorenes/pharmacology , Humans , Infant , Kenya , Malaria, Falciparum/parasitology , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Quinolines/administration & dosage , Quinolines/adverse effects , Quinolines/pharmacology , Tablets
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...