PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The number of people living with HIV in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), who will fail first-line treatment and benefit from regimen switching, will steadily increase in the coming years. The diagnosis of treatment failure in many settings is challenging because of limited access to plasma HIV RNA testing. This article summarizes recent studies in LMICs, investigating the diagnosis of treatment failure. RECENT FINDINGS: WHO recommended clinico-immunological criteria to identify first-line treatment failure, which have a low sensitivity and positive predictive value. The addition of adherence criteria or alternative clinical and laboratory markers improves performance, but overall the results are suboptimal. This situation leads to both delayed and inappropriately premature switching to more expensive second-line agents. The cost-effectiveness of alternative monitoring strategies is debated, but there is increasing interest in the use of viral load testing to confirm virological failure before switching to second-line therapy. However, access to viral load testing in LMICs remains limited and a simple point-of-care assay is not yet available. SUMMARY: Monitoring the efficacy of antiretroviral therapy in LMICs remains a critical challenge. Current research priorities include the development of simpler, cheaper assays and optimizing monitoring strategies based on currently available technologies.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The number of people living with HIV in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), who will fail first-line treatment and benefit from regimen switching, will steadily increase in the coming years. The diagnosis of treatment failure in many settings is challenging because of limited access to plasma HIV RNA testing. This article summarizes recent studies in LMICs, investigating the diagnosis of treatment failure. RECENT FINDINGS: WHO recommended clinico-immunological criteria to identify first-line treatment failure, which have a low sensitivity and positive predictive value. The addition of adherence criteria or alternative clinical and laboratory markers improves performance, but overall the results are suboptimal. This situation leads to both delayed and inappropriately premature switching to more expensive second-line agents. The cost-effectiveness of alternative monitoring strategies is debated, but there is increasing interest in the use of viral load testing to confirm virological failure before switching to second-line therapy. However, access to viral load testing in LMICs remains limited and a simple point-of-care assay is not yet available. SUMMARY: Monitoring the efficacy of antiretroviral therapy in LMICs remains a critical challenge. Current research priorities include the development of simpler, cheaper assays and optimizing monitoring strategies based on currently available technologies.
Authors: Kara M Palamountain; Jeff Baker; Elliot P Cowan; Shaffiq Essajee; Laura T Mazzola; Mutsumi Metzler; Marco Schito; Wendy S Stevens; Gloria J Young; Gonzalo J Domingo Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: S E Rutstein; C E Golin; S B Wheeler; D Kamwendo; M C Hosseinipour; M Weinberger; W C Miller; A K Biddle; A Soko; M Mkandawire; R Mwenda; A Sarr; S Gupta; R Mataya Journal: AIDS Care Date: 2015-08-17
Authors: Michael Abouyannis; Joris Menten; Agnes Kiragga; Lutgarde Lynen; Gavin Robertson; Barbara Castelnuovo; Yukari C Manabe; Steven J Reynolds; Lesley Roberts Journal: AIDS Date: 2011-08-24 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Sarah E Rutstein; Deborah Kamwendo; Lebah Lugali; Isaac Thengolose; Gerald Tegha; Susan A Fiscus; Julie A E Nelson; Mina C Hosseinipour; Abdoulaye Sarr; Sundeep Gupta; Frank Chimbwandira; Reuben Mwenda; Ronald Mataya Journal: J Clin Virol Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 3.168
Authors: Samantha Byrnes; Andy Fan; Jacob Trueb; Francis Jareczek; Mark Mazzochette; Andre Sharon; Alexis F Sauer-Budge; Catherine M Klapperich Journal: Anal Methods Date: 2013-07-07 Impact factor: 2.896