Barbara Rossetti1, Massimiliano Fabbiani1, Domenico Di Carlo2, Francesca Incardona3,4, Ana Abecasis5, Perpetua Gomes6,7, Anna Maria Geretti8, Carole Seguin-Devaux9, Federico Garcia10, Rolf Kaiser11, Sara Modica1, Adrian Shallvari4, Anders Sönnerborg12, Maurizio Zazzi13. 1. Infectious Diseases Unit, University Hospital of Siena, Siena, Italy. 2. University of Milan 'La Statale', Milano, Italy. 3. EuResist Network, Roma, Italy. 4. I-PRO, Roma, Italy. 5. Global Health and Tropical Medicine (GHTM), Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical-Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. 6. Laboratório de Biologia Molecular (LMCBM, SPC, CHLO-HEM), Lisbon, Portugal. 7. Centro de Investigação Interdisciplinar Egas Moniz (CiiEM), Instituto Universitário Egas Moniz, Caparica, Portugal. 8. Institute of Infection, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. 9. Department of Infection and Immunity, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Luxembourg. 10. Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, Spain. 11. University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 12. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 13. University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: INSTIs have become a pillar of first-line ART. Real-world data are needed to assess their effectiveness in routine care. OBJECTIVES: We analysed ART-naive patients who started INSTI-based regimens in 2012-19 whose data were collected by INTEGRATE, a European collaborative study including seven national cohorts. METHODS: Kaplan-Meier analyses assessed time to virological failure (VF), defined as one viral load (VL) ≥1000 copies/mL, two consecutive VLs ≥50 copies/mL, or one VL ≥50 copies/mL followed by treatment change after ≥24 weeks of follow-up, and time to INSTIs discontinuation (INSTI-DC) for any reason. Factors associated with VF and INSTI-DC were explored by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 2976 regimens started, 1901 (63.9%) contained dolutegravir, 631 (21.2%) elvitegravir and 444 (14.9%) raltegravir. The 1 year estimated probabilities of VF and INSTI-DC were 5.6% (95% CI 4.5-6.7) and 16.2% (95% CI 14.9-17.6), respectively, and were higher for raltegravir versus both elvitegravir and dolutegravir. A baseline VL ≥100 000 copies/mL [adjusted HR (aHR) 2.17, 95% CI 1.55-3.04, P < 0.001] increased the risk of VF, while a pre-treatment CD4 count ≥200 cells/mm3 reduced the risk (aHR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.74, P < 0.001). Predictors of INSTI-DC included use of raltegravir versus dolutegravir (aHR 3.03, 95% CI 2.34-3.92, P < 0.001), use of >3 drugs versus 3 drugs (aHR 2.73, 95% CI 1.55-4.79, P < 0.001) and starting ART following availability of dolutegravir (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.83, P = 0.001). Major INSTI mutations indicative of transmitted drug resistance occurred in 2/1114 (0.2%) individuals. CONCLUSIONS: This large multi-cohort study indicates high effectiveness of elvitegravir- or dolutegravir-based first-line ART in routine practice across Europe.
BACKGROUND: INSTIs have become a pillar of first-line ART. Real-world data are needed to assess their effectiveness in routine care. OBJECTIVES: We analysed ART-naive patients who started INSTI-based regimens in 2012-19 whose data were collected by INTEGRATE, a European collaborative study including seven national cohorts. METHODS: Kaplan-Meier analyses assessed time to virological failure (VF), defined as one viral load (VL) ≥1000 copies/mL, two consecutive VLs ≥50 copies/mL, or one VL ≥50 copies/mL followed by treatment change after ≥24 weeks of follow-up, and time to INSTIs discontinuation (INSTI-DC) for any reason. Factors associated with VF and INSTI-DC were explored by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 2976 regimens started, 1901 (63.9%) contained dolutegravir, 631 (21.2%) elvitegravir and 444 (14.9%) raltegravir. The 1 year estimated probabilities of VF and INSTI-DC were 5.6% (95% CI 4.5-6.7) and 16.2% (95% CI 14.9-17.6), respectively, and were higher for raltegravir versus both elvitegravir and dolutegravir. A baseline VL ≥100 000 copies/mL [adjusted HR (aHR) 2.17, 95% CI 1.55-3.04, P < 0.001] increased the risk of VF, while a pre-treatment CD4 count ≥200 cells/mm3 reduced the risk (aHR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.74, P < 0.001). Predictors of INSTI-DC included use of raltegravir versus dolutegravir (aHR 3.03, 95% CI 2.34-3.92, P < 0.001), use of >3 drugs versus 3 drugs (aHR 2.73, 95% CI 1.55-4.79, P < 0.001) and starting ART following availability of dolutegravir (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.83, P = 0.001). Major INSTI mutations indicative of transmitted drug resistance occurred in 2/1114 (0.2%) individuals. CONCLUSIONS: This large multi-cohort study indicates high effectiveness of elvitegravir- or dolutegravir-based first-line ART in routine practice across Europe.