ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with baseline neurocognitive performance in HIV-infected participants enrolled in the Strategies for Management of Antiretroviral Therapy (SMART) neurology substudy. METHODS: Participants from Australia, North America, Brazil, and Thailand were administered a 5-test neurocognitive battery. Z scores and the neurocognitive performance outcome measure, the quantitative neurocognitive performance z score (QNPZ-5), were calculated using US norms. Neurocognitive impairment was defined as z scores <-2 in two or more cognitive domains. Associations of test scores, the QNPZ-5, and impairment with baseline factors including demographics and risk factors for HIV-associated dementia (HAD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) were determined in multiple regression. RESULTS: The 292 participants had a median CD4 cell count of 536 cells/mm(3), 88% had an HIV viral load < or =400 copies/mL, and 92% were taking antiretrovirals. Demographics, HIV, and clinical factors differed between locations. The mean QNPZ-5 score was -0.72; 14% of participants had neurocognitive impairment. For most tests, scores and z scores differed significantly between locations, with and without adjustment for age, sex, education, and race. Prior CVD was associated with neurocognitive impairment. Prior CVD, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension were associated with poorer neurocognitive performance but conventional HAD risk factors and the CNS penetration effectiveness rank of antiretroviral regimens were not. CONCLUSIONS: In this HIV-positive population with high CD4 cell counts, neurocognitive impairment was associated with prior CVD. Lower neurocognitive performance was associated with prior CVD, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia, but not conventional HAD risk factors. The contribution of CVD and cardiovascular risk factors to the neurocognition of HIV-positive populations warrants further investigation.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/psychology , Cognition/physiology , HIV Infections/psychology , HIV Seropositivity/psychology , Hypercholesterolemia/psychology , Adult , Australia , Brazil , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , Cardiovascular Diseases/virology , Female , HIV Infections/complications , HIV Infections/virology , HIV Seropositivity/complications , HIV Seropositivity/virology , Humans , Hypercholesterolemia/complications , Hypercholesterolemia/virology , Male , Middle Aged , Neuropsychological Tests , North America , Regression Analysis , Risk Factors , ThailandABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: TMC125-C227, an exploratory phase II, randomized, controlled, open-label trial, compared the efficacy and safety of TMC125 (etravirine) with an investigator-selected protease inhibitor (PI) in nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-resistant, protease inhibitor-naïve, HIV-1-infected patients. METHODS: Patients were randomized to TMC125 800 mg twice a day (bid) (phase II formulation; n=59) or the control PI (n=57), plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). RESULTS: In an unplanned interim analysis, patients receiving TMC125 demonstrated suboptimal virological responses relative to the control PI. Therefore, trial enrolment was stopped prematurely and TMC125 treatment discontinued after a median of 14.3 weeks. In this first-line NNRTI-failure population, baseline NRTI and NNRTI resistance was high and reduced virological responses were observed relative to the control PI. No statistically significant relationship was observed between TMC125 exposure and virological response at week 12. TMC125 was better tolerated than a boosted PI for gastrointestinal-, lipid- and liver-related events. CONCLUSIONS: In a PI-naïve population, with baseline NRTI and NNRTI resistance and NRTI recycling, TMC125 was not as effective as first use of a PI. Therefore the use of TMC125 plus NRTIs alone may not be optimal in PI-naïve patients with first-line virological failure on an NNRTI-based regimen. Baseline two-class resistance, rather than pharmacokinetics or other factors, was the most likely reason for suboptimal responses.
Subject(s)
HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Protease Inhibitors/administration & dosage , HIV-1 , Pyridazines/administration & dosage , Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Adult , Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active/methods , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Resistance, Viral/drug effects , Epidemiologic Methods , Female , HIV Protease Inhibitors/adverse effects , HIV Protease Inhibitors/pharmacokinetics , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nitriles , Pyridazines/adverse effects , Pyridazines/pharmacokinetics , Pyrimidines , RNA, Viral , Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/pharmacokinetics , Viral Load , Young AdultABSTRACT
Nineteen patients who completed a 27-month CD4-guided structured treatment interruption (STI) trial that showed similar efficacy in STI and continuous arms were asked to choose CD4-guided versus continuous HAART after the study ended. Six chose STI and 13 chose continuous HAART. Reasons for not choosing STIs were fear of developing HIV-related illnesses (38%), fear of CD4 drop (30.8%), fear of viral load increase (7.7%) and ease (7.7%). Those who preferred CD4-guided HAART had a higher median CD4 count nadir during STI and fewer on-off cycles. This study provides an important insight into the preference of patients towards STI in a resource-limited setting.
