Giovanni Guaraldi1, Marianna Menozzi2, Stefano Zona2, Andrea Calcagno3, Ana R Silva4, Antonella Santoro2, Andrea Malagoli2, Giovanni Dolci2, Chiara Mussi5, Cristina Mussini2, Matteo Cesari6, Saye H Khoo7. 1. Modena HIV Metabolic Clinic, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy giovanni.guaraldi@unimore.it. 2. Modena HIV Metabolic Clinic, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. 3. Unit of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy. 4. Department Infectious Diseases, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal. 5. Geriatrics Division, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. 6. Gérontopôle, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse, Toulouse, France. 7. Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool & Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between polypharmacy and ART, delivered as conventional multi-tablet three-drug regimens, single-tablet regimens or less-drug regimens (simplified mono or dual regimens). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of electronic data from the prospective Modena HIV Metabolic Clinic Cohort Study. We included the last clinical observation for each patient from January 2006 to December 2015. Polypharmacy was defined as the use of five or more medications (excluding ART). Multi-morbidity was classified as the presence of two or more non-infectious comorbidities. Factors associated with different ART regimens were analysed using multivariable multinomial logistic regression analyses with multi-tablet three-drug regimens as the reference. RESULTS: A total of 2944 patients (33.7% females) were included in the analysis. Multinomial logistic regression analysis identified polypharmacy to be negatively associated with single-tablet regimens [relative risk reduction (RRR) = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.28-0.81] independently from frailty (RRR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.59-0.78), after correction for age, gender, HIV infection duration, current and nadir CD4 and calendar year. This association was not found comparing multi-tablet three-drug regimens and less-drug regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Single-tablet regimens are less likely to be prescribed in patients with polypharmacy. Single-tablet regimens are perceived to be less flexible in patients with multi-morbidity and at higher risk of drug-drug interaction.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between polypharmacy and ART, delivered as conventional multi-tablet three-drug regimens, single-tablet regimens or less-drug regimens (simplified mono or dual regimens). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of electronic data from the prospective Modena HIV Metabolic Clinic Cohort Study. We included the last clinical observation for each patient from January 2006 to December 2015. Polypharmacy was defined as the use of five or more medications (excluding ART). Multi-morbidity was classified as the presence of two or more non-infectious comorbidities. Factors associated with different ART regimens were analysed using multivariable multinomial logistic regression analyses with multi-tablet three-drug regimens as the reference. RESULTS: A total of 2944 patients (33.7% females) were included in the analysis. Multinomial logistic regression analysis identified polypharmacy to be negatively associated with single-tablet regimens [relative risk reduction (RRR) = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.28-0.81] independently from frailty (RRR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.59-0.78), after correction for age, gender, HIV infection duration, current and nadir CD4 and calendar year. This association was not found comparing multi-tablet three-drug regimens and less-drug regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Single-tablet regimens are less likely to be prescribed in patients with polypharmacy. Single-tablet regimens are perceived to be less flexible in patients with multi-morbidity and at higher risk of drug-drug interaction.
Authors: Samuel F Freedman; Carrie Johnston; John J Faragon; Eugenia L Siegler; Tessa Del Carmen Journal: Eur Geriatr Med Date: 2018-12-06 Impact factor: 1.710
Authors: Krista J Siefried; Limin Mao; Lucette A Cysique; John Rule; Michelle L Giles; Don E Smith; James McMahon; Tim R Read; Catriona Ooi; Ban K Tee; Mark Bloch; John de Wit; Andrew Carr Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Pablo F Belaunzaran-Zamudio; Yanink Caro-Vega; Mark J Giganti; Jessica L Castilho; Brenda E Crabtree-Ramirez; Bryan E Shepherd; Fernando Mejía; Carina Cesar; Rodrigo C Moreira; Marcelo Wolff; Jean W Pape; Denis Padgett; Catherine C McGowan; Juan G Sierra-Madero Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-06-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mohammed Ibn-Mas'ud Danjuma; Safah Khan; Farah Wahbeh; Lina Mohammad Naseralallah; Unwam E Jumbo; Abdelnaser Elzouki Journal: AIDS Res Ther Date: 2022-08-02 Impact factor: 2.846
Authors: R Morillo-Verdugo; M A Robustillo-Cortés; L Abdel-Kader Martín; M Álvarez de Sotomayor Paz; F Lozano de León Naranjo; C V Almeida González Journal: Rev Esp Quimioter Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 1.553