Article

Outcome of a second-line protease inhibitor-containing regimen in patients failing or intolerant of a first highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Institute of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, L. Sacco Hospital, University of Milan, Italy.
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (Impact Factor: 4.65). 06/2000; 24(2):115-22. DOI: 10.1097/00126334-200006010-00005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The outcome of second-line protease inhibitor (PI)-containing highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was investigated in 263 patients who were failed by (n = 148) or intolerant of (n = 115) a first HAART regimen. The endpoints were virologic failure (decline in HIV RNA < 1 log10 copies/ml after > or = 2 months) and discontinuation due to intolerance/toxicity. During a median follow-up of 483 days (33-1087 days), 154 patients (59%) discontinued the second regimen, 86 (33%) because of intolerance/toxicity; another 135 patients (51.3%) showed virologic failure. Independent factors associated with virologic failure (Cox's model) were 7 to 12 months of first HAART (hazard ratio [HR] 1.70 versus < or = 6 months: 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-2.70) and gender (HR 1.58 males versus females: 95% CI, 1.04-2.30); the negatively associated factors were advanced age (HR 0.61 > 34 years versus < or = 34 years: 95% CI, 0.42-0.88), a saquinavir-containing first HAART (HR 0.57 versus indinavir: 95% CI, 0.34-0.93) and change due to intolerance/toxicity (HR 0.58 versus failure: 95% CI, 0.35-0.98). The independent variables predictive of discontinuation due to intolerance/toxicity were the reason for switching (HR 1.79 intolerance versus failure: 95% CI, 1.02-3.16) and the first protease inhibitor (PI) regimen (HR 0.42 ritonavir versus indinavir: 95% CI, 0.22-0.80). Given that patients who are failed by a first regimen are at high risk of having rescue therapy fail as well, second-line regimens including therapies directed by testing of drug resistance patterns of clinical viral isolates are warranted. Patients experiencing toxicity due to a first PI-containing regimen are at risk of toxicity to other PIs and should be addressed to PI-sparing HAART.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
65 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The introduction of HIV-1 protease inhibitors in 1995 ushered in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy. For the first time, inhibition of two key enzymes responsible for HIV replication, reverse transcriptase and protease, was possible. The combination of two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors with a single protease inhibitor proved highly effective at reducing viral burden. In resource-rich countries where such combination therapy is readily available, dramatic reductions in HIV-related morbidity and mortality have been seen. However, long-term use of highly active antiretroviral therapy has led to several issues, including development of drug resistance and metabolic complications. Atazanavir (formerly BMS-232632), a novel azapeptide protease inhibitor, is a potent protease inhibitor that is not associated with significant dyslipidaemia as seen with other protease inhibitors. In this review, the current standard approach to the treatment of HIV in the US will be discussed as background to understand the potential utility of this new antiretroviral agent.
    Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs 10/2002; 11(9):1295-301. · 4.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has transformed HIV infection into a treatable, chronic condition. However, the need to continue treatment for decades rather than years, calls for a long-term perspective of ART. Adherence to the regimen is essential for successful treatment and sustained viral control. Studies have indicated that at least 95% adherence to ART regimens is optimal. It has been demonstrated that a 10% higher level of adherence results in a 21% reduction in disease progression. The various factors affecting success of ART are social aspects like motivation to begin therapy, ability to adhere to therapy, lifestyle pattern, financial support, family support, pros and cons of starting therapy and pharmacological aspects like tolerability of the regimen, availability of the drugs. Also, the regimen′s pill burden, dosing frequency, food requirements, convenience, toxicity and drug interaction profile compared with other regimens are to be considered before starting ART. The lack of trust between clinician and patient, active drug and alcohol use, active mental illness (e.g. depression), lack of patient education and inability of patients to identify their medications, lack of reliable access to primary medical care or medication are considered to be predictors of inadequate adherence. Interventions at various levels, viz. patient level, medication level, healthcare level and community level, boost adherence and overall outcome of ART.
    Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (ISSN: 0378-6323) Vol 71 Num 5.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nephrolithiasis is a well-known complication of indinavir treatment and may result in urological symptoms ranging from renal colic to renal insufficiency. To obtain further knowledge regarding the incidence and risk factors of urological symptoms associated with indinavir sulfate use. This study was performed in the ATHENA (AIDS Therapy Evaluation National AIDS Therapy Evaluation Centre) cohort of patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) receiving antiretroviral therapy in the Netherlands. The incidence rate of urological symptoms was assessed in a subcohort of 1219 patients starting HIV protease inhibitor treatment after 1996. Urological symptoms were defined as an initial report of nephrolithiasis, renal colic, flank pain, hematuria, renal insufficiency, or nephropathy. Using multivariate Cox regression analysis, risk factors for urological symptoms during indinavir treatment were subsequently studied among the subset of 644 patients who started indinavir treatment after 1996. The incidence of urological symptoms was 8.3 per 100 treatment-years for indinavir vs 0.8 per 100 treatment-years for other HIV protease inhibitors. Risk factors for urological symptoms during indinavir treatment were low weight (relative risk [RR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.9), low lean body mass (RR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.9), undetectable HIV-1 RNA when starting indinavir treatment (RR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0), prior treatment change because of intolerance (RR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.2-5.1), indinavir regimens of 1000 mg or more twice daily (RR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3-8.2), and warm environmental temperatures (RR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.7-8.8). Risk estimates were highest among patients with a low lean body mass. Increased alertness for urological symptoms is warranted for patients starting indinavir treatment, particularly among those with a low lean body mass, during indinavir regimens of 1000 mg or more twice daily, and in warm weather environments.
    Archives of Internal Medicine 08/2002; 162(13):1493-501. · 11.46 Impact Factor