Minimizing Resistance Consequences After Virologic Failure on Initial Combination Therapy
- 1 March 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
- Vol. 41 (3), 323-331
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.qai.0000197070.69859.f3
Abstract
To identify optimal first-line therapies based on the rate of virologic success (VS) and the preservation of future treatment options in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive subjects. Systematic overview of genotypic resistance mutations from clinical trials of combination ART. Various sources were searched for studies in ART-naive subjects providing virologic response rates and genotypes from subjects with virologic failure. The International AIDS Society-USA genotypic resistance guidelines were used to calculate regimen resistance cost (RCreg) and number of active drug (AD) scores for each regimen and to rank the regimens. Intra- and interstudy comparisons showed higher VS rates for nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) regimens (range: 51%-76%) and boosted protease inhibitor (boosted PI) regimens (range: 55%-79%). Boosted PI failures had the lowest RCreg (range: 0.12-0.21) and the highest AD (range: 19.80-20.18) scores. NNRTI failures had higher RCreg (range: 0.00-1.22) and lower AD (range: 16.83-21) scores. NNRTI and boosted PI regimens provide the highest rates of VS in treatment-naive HIV-infected persons. Treatment option scores were higher in subjects who failed boosted PI- containing regimens versus NNRTI-containing regimens, however.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Long-term safety and durable antiretroviral activity of lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive patientsAIDS, 2004
- Assessing Resistance Costs of Antiretroviral Therapies via Measures of Future Drug OptionsThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2003
- Genotype and Phenotype at Baseline and at Failure in Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Infected Antiretroviral?Naive Patients in a Randomized Trial Comparing Zidovudine and Lamivudine plus Nelfinavir or NevirapineThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2003
- Lopinavir–Ritonavir versus Nelfinavir for the Initial Treatment of HIV InfectionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Overview of the effectiveness of triple combination therapy in antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 infected adultsAIDS, 2001
- Abacavir-Lamivudine-Zidovudine vs Indinavir-Lamivudine-Zidovudine in Antiretroviral-Naive HIV-Infected AdultsA Randomized Equivalence TrialJAMA, 2001
- A comparison of stavudine, didanosine and indinavir with zidovudine, lamivudine and indinavir for the initial treatment of HIV-1 infected individuals: Selection of thymidine analog regimen therapy (START II)*AIDS, 2000
- Absence of zidovudine resistance in antiretroviral-naive patients following zidovudine/lamivudine/protease inhibitor combination therapy: virological evaluation of the AVANTI 2 and AVANTI 3 studiesAIDS, 2000
- Meta-analysis of Two Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Combined Zidovudine and Didanosine Therapy With Combined Zidovudine, Didanosine, and Nevirapine Therapy in Patients With HIVJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 1999
- A Randomized, Double-blind Trial Comparing Combinations of Nevirapine, Didanosine, and Zidovudine for HIV-Infected PatientsJAMA, 1998