Does short-term virologic failure translate to clinical events in antiretroviral-naive patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in clinical practice? The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC)

MJ Mugavero

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether differences in short-term virologic failure among commonly used anti retroviral therapy (ART) regimens translate to differences in clinical events in antiretroviral-naive patients initiating ART. Design: Observational cohort study of patients initiating ART between January 2000 and December 2005. Setting: The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC) is a collaboration of 15 HIV cohort studies from Canada, Europe, and the United States. Study participants: A total of 13 546 antiretroviral-naive HIV-positive patients initiating ART with efavirenz, nevirapine, lopinavir/ritonavir, nelfinavir, or abacavir as third drugs in combination with a zidovudine and lamivudine nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone. Main outcome measures: Short-term (24-week) virologic failure (>500 copies/ml) and clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation (incident AIDS-defining event, death, and a composite measure of these two outcomes). Results: Compared with efavirenz as initial third drug, short-term virologic failure was more common with all other third drugs evaluated; nevirapine (adjusted odds ratio=1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.58-2.22), lopinavir/ritonavir (1.32, 95% CI = 1.12-1.57), nelfinavir (3.20, 95% CI = 2.74-3.74), and abacavir (2.13, 95% CI = 1.82-2.50). However, the rate of clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation appeared higher only with nevirapine (adjusted hazard ratio for composite outcome measure 1.27, 95% CI = 1.04-1.56) and abacavir (1.22, 95% CI = 1.00-1.48). Conclusion: Among,antiretroviral-naive patients initiating therapy, between-ART regimen, differences in short-term virologic failure do not necessarily translate to differences in clinical outcomes. Our results should be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of residual confounding by indication. (C) 2008 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)2481-2492
Number of pages12
JournalAIDS
Volume22
Issue number18
Publication statusPublished - 2008
Externally publishedYes

Cite this