| Literature DB >> 29631557 |
Jose Gaby Tshikuka1,2, Goabaone Rankgoane-Pono3, Mgaywa Gilbert Mjungu Damas Magafu3,4, Tiny Masupe3, Mooketsi Molefi3, Maurice Nsikungu-Kalukul5, John Thato Tlhakanelo3, Shimeles Genna Hamda3, Vincent Setlhare3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cARTs) regiments are known to prolong the recipients' life even though they are risk factors for diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRCs). We sought to: (i) examine cART relationship with DRCs among patients attending HIV clinics in Gaborone, Botswana (which cART regimens are associated with shorter/longer time to the event), (ii) characterize patients' underlying biomedical and demographic risk factors of DRC and identify the most important, (iii) investigate survival of patients on different cART regimens in the presence of these risk factors.Entities:
Keywords: Combination antiretroviral therapy; Diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities; HIV patients; Recipients’ underlying risk factors; Survival function
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29631557 PMCID: PMC5891989 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5232-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) regimen and unadjusted hazard ratio among recipients attending two HIV clinics in Gaborone, Botswana. Status variable: Diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRCs) (N = 531)
| Proportion | Unadjusted | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Covariates | Number (%) | HR | 95%CI | |
| On cART line1 | 318 (59.9) | 2.03 | 1.26–3.27 | 0.004 |
| On cART line2 | 209 (39.4) | 0.48 | 0.30–0.79 | 0.003 |
| On cART line3 | 4 (0.8) | 0.95 | 0.13–6.83 | 0.90 |
| On cART line2/3 | 213 (40.1) | 0.49 | 0.31–0.79 | 0.004 |
HR = Hazard ratio, CI = confidence interval, On cART line1 = recipients of first-line combinations antiretroviral therapy, On cART line2 = recipients of second-line combinations antiretroviral therapy, On cART line3 = recipients of third-line combinations antiretroviral therapy, On cART line2/3 = aggregated recipients of second- and third- line combinations antiretroviral therapy
Proportions of underlying biomedical and demographic characteristics and unadjusted hazard ratios among cART recipients attending two HIV clinics in Gaborone, Botswana. Status variable: Diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRCs, N = 531)
| Covariates | Proportion Number (%) | Unadjusted | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95%CI | P value | ||
| Male | 163 (30.7) | 0.58 | 0.38–0.89 | 0.012 |
| Age ± SE | 41.39 ± 0.38 | 1.03 | 1.01–1.05 | 0.006 |
| ≤35 years old | 132 (24.9) | 0.40 | 0.20–0.80 | 0.01 |
| CD4–1 ≤ 200 cells/mm3 | 124 (23.4) | 1.6 | 1.03–2.6 | 0.036 |
| CD4–1 ≥ 350 cells/mm3 | 24 (4.5) | 0.99 | 0.31–3.16 | 0–90 |
| CD4–2 ≤ 200 cells/mm3 | 34 (6.4) | 0.94 | 0.38–2.32 | 0.89 |
| CD4–2 ≥ 350 cells/mm3 | 420 (79.1) | 1,16 | 0.67–2.04 | 0.58 |
| PMH Clinic | 314 (50.1) | 6.41 | 3.55–11.56 | 0.001 |
| Adherence | ||||
| No | 31 (5.8) | 1 | – | – |
| Yes | 478 (90.0) | 4.53 | 1.42–14.47 | 0.01 |
| Unknown | 22 (4.1) | 1.14 | 0.41–3.12 | 0.79 |
| 1Switched cART Line | ||||
| Did not switch | 235 (44.3) | 1 | – | – |
| From cART line1 to line 2 | 281 (52.9) | 0.75 | 0.49–1.15 | 0.18 |
| Unknown | 15 (2.8) | 1.28 | 0.46–3.58 | 0.63 |
| BMI at cART | ||||
| Normal weight | 337 (63.5) | 1 | – | – |
| Underweight | 80 (15.1) | 0.88 | 0.46–1.69 | 0.71 |
| Overweight | 114 (21.4) | 1.63 | 1.02–2.61 | 0.043 |
HR = Hazard ratio, CI = confidence interval, 1Switched cART regimens = switched from the initial cART line to another line, Unknown = whether the patient switched regimen or not is unclear, BMI at cART = BMI at initiation on cART, CD4–1 cells/mm3 = CD4 count at initiation on cART, CD4–2 cells/mm3 = CD4 count after initiation on cART
Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) regimen and patient biomedical and demographic factors independently associated with the development of diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRCs). Status or event variable†: Diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRCs, N = 531)
| Covariates | Proportion Number (%) | Unadjusted | Adjusted | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95%CI | HR | 95%CI | ||
| cART Line1 | 0318 (59.9.1) | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| cART Line2/3 | 213 (40.1) | 0.49* | 0.31–0.79 | 0.53* | 0.33–0.87 |
| CD4–1 > 200 cells/mm3 | 407 (76.6) | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| CD4–1 ≤ 200 cells/mm3 | 124 (23.4) | 1.6* | 1.03–3.2 | 1.68* | 1.03–2.73 |
| Adherence | |||||
| No | 31 (5.8) | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Yes | 478 (90.0) | 4.53* | 1.42–14.5 | 3.05© | 0.92–10.0 |
| Unknown | 22 (4.1) | 1.14 | 0.41–3.12 | 0.89 | 0.32–2.51 |
| BMI at cART | |||||
| Normal Weight | 337 (63.5) | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Under weight | 80 (15.1) | 0.88 | 0.46–1.69 | 0.74 | 0.37–1.44 |
| Overweight | 114 (21.4) | 1.6* | 1.02–2.61 | 1.63* | 1.07–2.64 |
| Female | 368 (69.3) | 1 | – | 1 | – |
| Male | 163 (30.7) | 0.58* | 0.38–0.89 | 0.49* | 0.32–0.77 |
†likelihood chi-square statistic = 36.25, p = 0.0001; CD4–1 = CD4 at initiation on cART, HR = Hazard ratio, CI = confidence interval, BMI at cART = BMI at initiation on cART, *P < 0.05, ©p = 0.06 (borderline); note that all variables, including age as continuous variable or age groups, that did not achieve p < 0.05 are not included in this model
Fig. 1Hazard function for recipients of cART first-line, second-line and third-line: a 12 years retrospective cohort study in two HIV Clinics in Botswana. cART line1 = cART first-line regimen, cART line2 = cART second-line regimen, cART line3 = cART thrid-line regimen
Fig. 2Survival function for recipients of cART first-line, and second-, third-line regimens: a 12 years retrospective cohort study in two HIV Clinics in Botswana. cART 2/3 = cART second-, and third-line regimen, cART line 1 = cART first-line regimen, log rankX2 = log rank chi square
Standard First and Second Line ART Regimens in Botswana: Composition of cART lines
| First line | First line Modifications | Second line | Second line Modifications |
|---|---|---|---|
| AZT +3TC (CBV-combivir) + EFV | TDF renal toxicity w/o CVD risk: | TDF + FTC + ALU | AZT Anemia and/or |
| TDF+ FTC (or 3TC) + EFV | CBV + ALU | If anemic ABC+ 3TC+ ALU | |
| D4T + 3TC + EFV | TDF + FTC = ALU | If renal insufficiency but no anemia: CBV + ALU |
Third line regimen was made up of other alternative combinations or salvage therapy. This was deployed in case of failure of both the standard first and second-line regimens
The Botswana National ART programme also called Masa was launched in 2002. Over the years the Ministry of health and wellness has issued and updated ARV treatment guidelines based on WHO recommendations. First line and second line regimens have therefore been modified over the years from 2002 to 2016. Between 2002 and 2015, the period for this study, the treatment regimens were as presented in Appendix adapted from the 2012 and before 2016 treatment guidelines [9–12]