Antiviral therapy · 2015
Efficacy and safety of a switch to rilpivirine-based regimens in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients: a cohort study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gazaignes Sandrine, Resche-Rigon Matthieu, Gatey Caroline, Yang Chloe, Denis Blandine, Fonsart Julien, Desseaux Kristell, Guionie Michel, Rozenbaum Willy, Delaugerre Constance, Molina Jean-Michel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Rilpivirine (RPV) is a second-generation once-daily non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) which has shown non-inferior antiviral activity to efavirenz in treatment-naive patients. Data in treatment-experienced patients are more limited. We wished to assess the efficacy and safety of a switch to RPV-based regimens in well-suppressed treatment-experienced patients.
METHODS: Between September 2012 and June 2013, all antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml, and switching to an RPV-based regimen, were analysed in this retrospective observational monocentric cohort study. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with virological success defined as a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml at 12 months using the FDA snapshot algorithm.
RESULTS: A total of 281 participants were studied and 97% received a combination of RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. At month 12, the rate of virological success was 59% and increased to 72% using available data beyond month 12. Sixteen (6%) patients experienced virological failure, which was associated with the presence of the M184V/I resistance mutation in prior genotypes (P=0.02) and the use of a non-NNRTI as third agent before the switch (P=0.03). RPV-based regimens were overall well tolerated and only 23 (8%) patients discontinued ART because of adverse events, mostly neuropsychiatric adverse events. Switching to RPV was associated with significant but modest improvement of the lipid profile.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients fully suppressed on ART, a switch to an RPV-based regimen should only be considered in the absence of prior virological failure or resistance mutations to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and NNRTIs to avoid virological failures.
METHODS: Between September 2012 and June 2013, all antiretroviral therapy (ART)-experienced HIV-1-infected patients with a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml, and switching to an RPV-based regimen, were analysed in this retrospective observational monocentric cohort study. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with virological success defined as a plasma HIV RNA level <50 copies/ml at 12 months using the FDA snapshot algorithm.
RESULTS: A total of 281 participants were studied and 97% received a combination of RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine. At month 12, the rate of virological success was 59% and increased to 72% using available data beyond month 12. Sixteen (6%) patients experienced virological failure, which was associated with the presence of the M184V/I resistance mutation in prior genotypes (P=0.02) and the use of a non-NNRTI as third agent before the switch (P=0.03). RPV-based regimens were overall well tolerated and only 23 (8%) patients discontinued ART because of adverse events, mostly neuropsychiatric adverse events. Switching to RPV was associated with significant but modest improvement of the lipid profile.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients fully suppressed on ART, a switch to an RPV-based regimen should only be considered in the absence of prior virological failure or resistance mutations to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and NNRTIs to avoid virological failures.