CD4+ cell count, viral load, and highly active antiretroviral therapy use are independent predictors of body composition alterations in HIV-infected adults: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: To understand the concurrent effects of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, the immune system, and antiretroviral therapy on body composition alterations, we examined annualized composition changes in HIV-infected adults who were receiving stable antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: With use of data from the Nutrition For Healthy Living Study, we performed multivariate analyses using longitudinal models to evaluate the relationship of CD4+ cell count, viral load, and highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) or antiretroviral therapy (ART) with changes in trunk and extremity composition for 110 men and 42 women who provided data relating to 194 study intervals (i.e., intervals of time between 2 assessment visits). Of these intervals, 165 involved HAART use (89.7% involved protease inhibitor-based regimens), and 29 did not involve HAART use. Patients receiving HAART or ART (who had continuous use during the interval) were compared with HAART- or ART-naive subjects. RESULTS: The median length of intervals between visits was 12.9 months (interquartile range, 12.1-17.6 months). In models adjusted for HAART or ART use, baseline CD4+ cell count was positively associated with increased trunk fat (mean increase per year, 2.3% per 100 cells/mm3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7%-3.9%]) and, in men, with increased extremity fat (mean increase per year, 1.8% per 100 cells/mm3; 95% CI, 0.6%-3.0%). Increase in CD4+ cell count predicted increased extremity lean mass (mean increase per year, 0.6% per 100 cells/mm3; 95% CI, 0.05%-1.1%). Higher baseline viral load predicted fat loss (trunk fat loss per year, -5.0% per log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, -9.4% to -0.7%; extremity fat loss per year, -3.4% per log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, -6.1% to -0.6%), as did zidovudine use (trunk fat loss per year, -10.8%; 95% CI, -20.4% to -1.4%; extremity fat loss per year, -4.9%; 95% CI, -9.8% to -0.01%). HAART use independently predicted decreased bone mineral content (extremity bone mineral content loss per year, -1.6%; 95% CI, -3.1% to -0.08%) but did not predict changes in fat or lean mass. Receipt of protease inhibitor-based HAART predicted a -1.9% decrease in extremity bone mineral content per year (95% CI, -3.6% to -0.2%), and zidovudine use predicted a -2.6% decrease in trunk bone mineral content per year (95% CI, -4.4% to -0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline viral load, CD4+ cell count, and change in CD4+ cell count predicted alterations in trunk fat, extremity fat, and lean mass. HAART use and zidovudine use were associated with bone loss, and zidovudine use was associated with fat loss, but HAART use was not associated with fat mass changes.

A comparison of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 3 intervention strategies for AIDS wasting.

OBJECTIVE: To compare oxandrolone (OX) or strength training with nutrition alone (NA) for AIDS wasting. SUBJECTS: Fifty patients with AIDS; 47 completing the study. INTERVENTIONS: Randomization to (1) NA with placebo pills, (2) nutrition with 10 mg of OX administered orally twice a day, or (3) nutrition with progressive resistance training (PRT) for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Midthigh cross-sectional muscle area (CSMA), physical functioning (PF), costs, and cost-effectiveness in dollars/quality-adjusted life-years (dollars/QALYs). RESULTS: The OX and PRT subjects had increases in CSMA (7.0% +/- 2.5%, P = 0.01; 5.0% +/- 2.0%, P = 0.04, respectively), although these increases did not differ significantly from the NA arm (NA: 1.0% +/- 1.0%; OX vs. NA: P = 0.09; PRT vs. NA: P = 0.26). Only PRT caused significant improvements in PF (mean +/- SE: 10.4 +/- 3.8 points on a 100-point scale) and 7 measures of strength (P values: 0.04 to <0.001). There were no overall differences between groups in PF change. Among patients with impaired baseline PF, however, OX was significantly less effective than NA and PRT was significantly better than NA. All treatments led to increases in protein intake and performance; NA and PRT also increased caloric intake. The institutional costs per subject in this trial were 983 dollars for NA, 3772 dollars for OX, and 3189 dollars for PRT. At a community-based level of intensity, the institutional costs per QALY were 45,000 dollars (range: 42,000 dollars-64,000 dollars) for NA, 147,000 dollars (range: 147,000 dollars-163,000 dollars) for OX, and 31,000 dollars (range: 21,000 dollars-44,000 dollars) for PRT. CONCLUSIONS: OX and PRT induce similar improvements in body composition, but PRT improves quality of life more than nutrition or OX, particularly among patients with impaired PF. PRT was the most cost-effective intervention, and OX was the least cost-effective intervention.