BACKGROUND: We assessed the virological response of dual therapy with DRV/r, plus raltegravir, maraviroc or etravirine, in virological failure patients and in virologically suppressed patients collected in the Italian Antiretroviral Resistance Database (ARCA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients remaining free of virological failure (confirmed >50 copies/mL or any change in the regimen). Subjects had a resistance test and at least one follow-up visit. Observation was censored at last visit under dual therapy and survival analysis and proportional hazard models were used. RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of the 221 patients started DRV/r with RAL, 20.4 % with ETV, and 12.2 % with MAR; 31.2 % virological failures were observed. At survival analysis, the overall proportion of failure was 29.2 % at 1 year and 33.8 % at 2 years. The proportion of failure was lower in patients starting with undetectable vs. detectable viral load (13.3 and 25.2 % vs. 37.4 and 38.8 % at 1 and 2 years, respectively, p = 0.001 for both analyses) and in patients treated with DRV 600 BID vs. 800 QD (HR: 0.56, 95 % CI: 0.31-0.99, p < 0.05). By regimen, the adjusted proportional model showed no significant difference among the three regimens. A significant lower risk of failure was associated with higher GSS (HIV-DB HR: 0.53, 95 % CI: 0.32-0.88, p = 0.014; Rega 0.60, 0.40-0.88, p < 0.01; ANRS 0.55, 0.34-0.90, p = 0.017), while a higher risk of failure with detectable HIV-RNA (3.02, 1.70-5.72, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among experienced patients, the best candidates for dual-therapy regimens including DRV/r are those with undetectable viral load and higher GSS.
BACKGROUND: We assessed the virological response of dual therapy with DRV/r, plus raltegravir, maraviroc or etravirine, in virological failurepatients and in virologically suppressed patients collected in the Italian Antiretroviral Resistance Database (ARCA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients remaining free of virological failure (confirmed >50 copies/mL or any change in the regimen). Subjects had a resistance test and at least one follow-up visit. Observation was censored at last visit under dual therapy and survival analysis and proportional hazard models were used. RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of the 221 patients started DRV/r with RAL, 20.4 % with ETV, and 12.2 % with MAR; 31.2 % virological failures were observed. At survival analysis, the overall proportion of failure was 29.2 % at 1 year and 33.8 % at 2 years. The proportion of failure was lower in patients starting with undetectable vs. detectable viral load (13.3 and 25.2 % vs. 37.4 and 38.8 % at 1 and 2 years, respectively, p = 0.001 for both analyses) and in patients treated with DRV 600 BID vs. 800 QD (HR: 0.56, 95 % CI: 0.31-0.99, p < 0.05). By regimen, the adjusted proportional model showed no significant difference among the three regimens. A significant lower risk of failure was associated with higher GSS (HIV-DB HR: 0.53, 95 % CI: 0.32-0.88, p = 0.014; Rega 0.60, 0.40-0.88, p < 0.01; ANRS 0.55, 0.34-0.90, p = 0.017), while a higher risk of failure with detectable HIV-RNA (3.02, 1.70-5.72, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among experienced patients, the best candidates for dual-therapy regimens including DRV/r are those with undetectable viral load and higher GSS.
Authors: Ighovwerha Ofotokun; Anandi N Sheth; Sara E Sanford; Kirk A Easley; Neeta Shenvi; Kelly White; Molly E Eaton; Carlos Del Rio; Jeffrey L Lennox Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Babafemi Taiwo; Lu Zheng; Sebastien Gallien; Roy M Matining; Daniel R Kuritzkes; Cara C Wilson; Baiba I Berzins; Edward P Acosta; Barbara Bastow; Peter S Kim; Joseph J Eron Journal: AIDS Date: 2011-11-13 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: G Sterrantino; M Zaccarelli; G Colao; F Baldanti; S Di Giambenedetto; T Carli; F Maggiolo; M Zazzi Journal: Infection Date: 2012-01-12 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: Maile Ray; Roger Logan; Jonathan A C Sterne; Sonia Hernández-Díaz; James M Robins; Caroline Sabin; Loveleen Bansi; Ard van Sighem; Frank de Wolf; Dominique Costagliola; Emilie Lanoy; Heiner C Bucher; Viktor von Wyl; Anna Esteve; Jordi Casbona; Julia del Amo; Santiago Moreno; Amy Justice; Joseph Goulet; Sara Lodi; Andrew Phillips; Rémonie Seng; Laurence Meyer; Santiago Pérez-Hoyos; Patricia García de Olalla; Miguel A Hernán Journal: AIDS Date: 2010-01-02 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: M Zaccarelli; P Lorenzini; V Tozzi; F Forbici; F Ceccherini-Silberstein; C Gori; R D'Arrigo; M P Trotta; P Narciso; C F Perno; A Antinori Journal: Infection Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 3.553
Authors: M A Boyd; N Kumarasamy; C L Moore; C Nwizu; M H Losso; L Mohapi; A Martin; S Kerr; A H Sohn; H Teppler; O Van de Steen; J-M Molina; S Emery; D A Cooper Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-06-15 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Elżbieta Jabłonowska; Ewa Siwak; Monika Bociąga-Jasik; Jacek Gąsiorowski; Anna Kalinowska; Ewa Firląg Burkacka; Kamila Wójcik-Cichy; Anna Piątek; Iwona Cielniak; Andrzej Horban Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 3.240