BACKGROUND: Success of antiretroviral therapy depends on high rates of adherence, but few interventions are effective. Our objective was to determine if modified directly observed therapy (mDOT) improves initial antiretroviral success. METHODS: In an open-label, randomized trial comparing mDOT (Monday-Friday for 24 weeks) and self-administered therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir soft gel capsules (800 mg/200 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and either extended-release stavudine (100 mg) or tenofovir (300 mg), all taken once daily, 82 participants received mDOT and 161, self-administered therapy. Participant eligibility included a plasma human immunodeficiency virus RNA level higher than 2000 copies/mL and being naïve to antiretroviral therapy. A total of 243 participants were predominantly male (79%) (median age, 38 years), with 84 Latinos (35%), 74 non-Latino blacks (30%), and 79 non-Latino whites (33%). The study was conducted at 23 AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) sites in the United States and 1 site in South Africa between October 2002 and January 2006. The primary outcome was virologic success at week 24 and secondary outcomes were virologic success, clinical progression, and adherence at week 48. RESULTS: Over 24 weeks, mDOT had greater virologic success (0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.95) than self-administered therapy (0.84; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.89), but the difference (0.07; lower bound 95% CI, -0.01) did not reach the prespecified threshold of 0.075. Over 48 weeks, virologic success was not significantly different between mDOT (0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.81) and self-administered therapy (0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.84) (difference, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.07 [P = .19]). CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefit of mDOT was marginal and not sustained after discontinuation. Modified DOT should not be incorporated routinely for care of treatment-naïve human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Success of antiretroviral therapy depends on high rates of adherence, but few interventions are effective. Our objective was to determine if modified directly observed therapy (mDOT) improves initial antiretroviral success. METHODS: In an open-label, randomized trial comparing mDOT (Monday-Friday for 24 weeks) and self-administered therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir soft gel capsules (800 mg/200 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and either extended-release stavudine (100 mg) or tenofovir (300 mg), all taken once daily, 82 participants received mDOT and 161, self-administered therapy. Participant eligibility included a plasma human immunodeficiency virus RNA level higher than 2000 copies/mL and being naïve to antiretroviral therapy. A total of 243 participants were predominantly male (79%) (median age, 38 years), with 84 Latinos (35%), 74 non-Latino blacks (30%), and 79 non-Latino whites (33%). The study was conducted at 23 AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) sites in the United States and 1 site in South Africa between October 2002 and January 2006. The primary outcome was virologic success at week 24 and secondary outcomes were virologic success, clinical progression, and adherence at week 48. RESULTS: Over 24 weeks, mDOT had greater virologic success (0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.95) than self-administered therapy (0.84; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.89), but the difference (0.07; lower bound 95% CI, -0.01) did not reach the prespecified threshold of 0.075. Over 48 weeks, virologic success was not significantly different between mDOT (0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.81) and self-administered therapy (0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.84) (difference, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.07 [P = .19]). CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefit of mDOT was marginal and not sustained after discontinuation. Modified DOT should not be incorporated routinely for care of treatment-naïve humanimmunodeficiency virus type 1-infectedpatients.
Authors: Julia H Arnsten; Penelope A Demas; Richard W Grant; Marc N Gourevitch; Homayoon Farzadegan; Andrea A Howard; Ellie E Schoenbaum Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: H Liu; C E Golin; L G Miller; R D Hays; C K Beck; S Sanandaji; J Christian; T Maldonado; D Duran; A H Kaplan; N S Wenger Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: D R Bangsberg; F M Hecht; E D Charlebois; A R Zolopa; M Holodniy; L Sheiner; J D Bamberger; M A Chesney; A Moss Journal: AIDS Date: 2000-03-10 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: D L Paterson; S Swindells; J Mohr; M Brester; E N Vergis; C Squier; M M Wagener; N Singh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2000-07-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: James C M Brust; Alain H Litwin; Karina M Berg; Xuan Li; Moonseong Heo; Julia H Arnsten Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2010-11-23 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Jean B Nachega; Richard E Chaisson; Rene Goliath; Anne Efron; Mohammad A Chaudhary; Malathi Ram; Chelsea Morroni; Hennie Schoeman; Amy R Knowlton; Gary Maartens Journal: AIDS Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Ayesha De Costa; Anita Shet; Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy; Per Ashorn; Bo Eriksson; Lennart Bogg; Vinod K Diwan Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Parya Saberi; Torsten B Neilands; Eric Vittinghoff; Mallory O Johnson; Margaret Chesney; Susan E Cohn Journal: AIDS Patient Care STDS Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 5.078
Authors: Megan M McLaughlin; Molly F Franke; Maribel Muñoz; Adrianne K Nelson; Olga Saldaña; Janeth Santa Cruz; Milagros Wong; Zibiao Zhang; Leonid Lecca; Eduardo Ticona; Jorge Arevalo; Eduardo Sanchez; Jose Luis Sebastián; Sonya Shin Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2018-01
Authors: Heather J Ribaudo; Kimberly Y Smith; Gregory K Robbins; Charles Flexner; Richard Haubrich; Yun Chen; Margaret A Fischl; Bruce R Schackman; Sharon A Riddler; Roy M Gulick Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Robert Gross; Scarlett L Bellamy; Jennifer Chapman; Xiaoyan Han; Jacqueline O'Duor; Steven C Palmer; Peter S Houts; James C Coyne; Brian L Strom Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 21.873