Treatment outcomes of recommended first-line antiretroviral regimens in resource-limited clinics.

BACKGROUND: Although used globally, little data exist on the efficacy of nevirapine (NVP) used in combination with tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine or lamivudine (XTC), and no large randomized prospective control trials exists comparing this combination with efavirenz (EFV)/TDF/(XTC). METHODS: As part of the AIDSRelief program, a retrospective review of patient medical chart information along with a cross-sectional viral load, and adherence measurement was conducted between 2004 and 2009. An on-treatment analysis excluded patients who died, transferred out of care, or were lost to follow-up. A switch of antiretrovirals for any reason was considered a failure in the intent-to-treat analysis. Patients with only clinically relevant reasons for switching such as toxicity, adverse effects, viral failure or clinical/immunological failure, lost to follow-up, and death were considered failures as part of the modified-intent-to-treat analysis. Step-wise multiple regression analysis was used to identify variables that were associated with viral suppression. RESULTS: A random sample of 3862 patients met criteria and were included in this analysis. In the on-treatment analysis, older age (P < 0.004) and baseline CD4 <100 cells per cubic millimeter (P < 0.021) were the most significant variables impacting viral load. Patients on TDF/XTC/EFV achieved higher rates of viral suppression compared with patients on TDF/XTC/NVP or azidothymidine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC)/NVP. CONCLUSION: Our data show that patients on TDF/XTC/EFV had better outcomes than patients on TDF/XTC/NVP, AZT/3TC/EFV, or AZT/3TC/NVP. High rates of virologic suppression seen in patients on this regimen are consistent with previous studies and indicate the need to increase use of this regimen in HIV programs to promote sustainable viral suppression over time.

Treatment as prevention: preparing the way.

Potent antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces mortality and morbidity in people living with HIV by reducing viral load and allowing their immune systems to recover. The reduction in viral load soon after starting ART has led to the hypothesis that early and widespread ART could prevent onward transmission and therefore eliminate the HIV epidemic in the long term. While several authors have argued that it is feasible to use HIV treatment as prevention (TasP), provided treatment is started sufficiently early, others have reasonably drawn attention to the many operational difficulties that will need to be overcome if the strategy is to succeed in reducing HIV transmission. Furthermore, international public health policy must be based on more than theoretical studies, no matter how appealing. Community randomized controlled trials provide the gold standard for testing the extent to which early treatment reduces incidence, but much still needs to be understood and the immediate need is for operational studies to explore the practical feasibility of this approach. Here, we examine some of the issues to be addressed, the obstacles to be overcome, and strategies that may be necessary if TasP is to be effective. Studies of this kind will provide valuable information for the design of large-scale trials, as well as essential information that will be needed if early treatment is to be incorporated into public health policy.

Comparative outcomes of tenofovir-based and zidovudine-based antiretroviral therapy regimens in Lusaka, Zambia.

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.

Early clinical and programmatic outcomes with tenofovir-based antiretroviral therapy in Zambia.

BACKGROUND: In July 2007, amid some controversy over cost, Zambia was the first African country to introduce tenofovir (TDF) as a component of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) on a wide scale. METHODS: We compared drug substitutions, mortality, and "programmatic failure" among adults starting TDF-, zidovudine (ZDV)-, and stavudine (d4T)-containing ART. Programmatic failure was defined as death, withdrawal, or loss to follow-up. RESULTS: Between July 2007 and January 2009, 10,485 adults initiated ART (66% on TDF, 23% on ZDV, 11% on d4T), with a median follow-up time of 239 (interquartile range 98, 385) days. Those starting TDF were more likely to be male and more likely to have indicators of severe disease at baseline. In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, ZDV- (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 2.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.30-3.28) and d4T-based regimens (AHR = 1.92, 95% CI = 1.55-2.38) were associated with higher risk for drug substitution when compared with TDF-based regimens. Similar hazards were noted for overall mortality (ZDV: AHR = 0 .81, 95% CI = 0.62-1.06; d4T: AHR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.74-1.43) and programmatic failure (ZDV: AHR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88-1.11; d4T: AHR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.96-1.28) when compared with TDF. CONCLUSIONS: TDF is associated with similar clinical and programmatic outcomes as ZDV and d4T but appears to be better tolerated. Although further evaluation is needed, these results are encouraging and support Zambia's policy decision.