Treatment outcomes of patients on second-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis
ABSTRACT A growing proportion of patients on antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings have switched to second-line regimens. We carried out a systematic review in order to summarize reported rates and reasons for virological failure among people on second-line therapy in resource-limited settings.
Two reviewers independently searched four databases and three conference websites. Full text articles were screened and data extracted using a standardized data extraction form.
We retrieved 5812 citations, of which 19 studies reporting second-line failure rates in 2035 patients across low-income and middle-income countries were eligible for inclusion. The cumulative pooled proportion of adult patients failing virologically was 21.8, 23.1, 26.7 and 38.0% at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. Most studies did not report adequate information to allow discrimination between drug resistance and poor adherence as reasons for virological failure, but for those that did poor adherence appeared to be the main driver of virological failure. Mortality on second-line was low across all time points.
Rates of virological failure on second-line therapy are high in resource-limited settings and associated with duration of exposure to previous drug regimens and poor adherence. The main concern appears to be poor adherence, rather than drug resistance, from the limited number of studies accessing both factors. Access to treatment options beyond second-line remains limited and, therefore, a cause for a concern for those patients in whom drug resistance is the identified cause of virological failure.
SourceAvailable from: Daniel Nyogea[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Around 3.3 million children worldwide are infected with HIV and 90% of them live in sub-Saharan Africa. Our study aimed to estimate adherence levels and find the determinants, facilitators and barriers of ART adherence among children and teenagers in rural Tanzania.Methods We applied a sequential explanatory mixed method design targeting children and teenagers aged 2¿19 years residing in Ifakara. We conducted a quantitative cross sectional study followed by a qualitative study combining focus group discussions (FGDs) and in-depth interviews (IDIs). We used pill count to measure adherence and defined optimal adherence as¿>¿=80% of pills being taken. We analysed determinants of poor adherence using logistic regression. We held eight FGDs with adolescent boys and girls on ART and with caretakers. We further explored issues emerging in the FGDs in four in-depth interviews with patients and health workers. Qualitative data was analysed using thematic content analysis.ResultsOut of 116 participants available for quantitative analysis, 70% had optimal adherence levels and the average adherence level was 84%. Living with a non-parent caretaker predicted poor adherence status. From the qualitative component, unfavorable school environment, timing of the morning ART dose, treatment longevity, being unaware of HIV status, non-parental (biological) care, preference for traditional medicine (herbs) and forgetfulness were seen to be barriers for optimal adherence.Conclusion The study has highlighted specific challenges in ART adherence faced by children and teenagers. Having a biological parent as a caretaker remains a key determinant of adherence among children and teenagers. To achieve optimal adherence, strategies targeting the caretakers, the school environment, and the health system need to be designed.BMC Infectious Diseases 01/2015; 15(1):28. DOI:10.1186/s12879-015-0753-y · 2.56 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE New data and antiretroviral regimens expand treatment choices in resource-rich settings and warrant an update of recommendations to treat adults infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). OBJECTIVE To provide updated treatment recommendations for adults with HIV, emphasizing when to start treatment; what treatment to start; the use of laboratory monitoring tools; and managing treatment failure, switches, and simplification. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA SYNTHESIS An International Antiviral Society–USA panel of experts in HIV research and patient care considered previous data and reviewed new data since the 2012 update with literature searches in PubMed and EMBASE through June 2014. Recommendations and ratings were based on the quality of evidence and consensus. RESULTS Antiretroviral therapy is recommended for all adults with HIV infection. Evidence for benefits of treatment and quality of available data increase at lower CD4 cell counts. Recommended initial regimens include 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs; abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine) and a third single or boosted drug, which should be an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (dolutegravir, elvitegravir, or raltegravir), a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (efavirenz or rilpivirine) or a boosted protease inhibitor (darunavir or atazanavir). Alternative regimens are available. Boosted protease inhibitor monotherapy is generally not recommended, but NRTI-sparing approaches may be considered. New guidance for optimal timing of monitoring of laboratory parameters is provided. Suspected treatment failure warrants rapid confirmation, performance of resistance testing while the patient is receiving the failing regimen, and evaluation of reasons for failure before consideration of switching therapy. Regimen switches for adverse effects, convenience, or to reduce costs should not jeopardize antiretroviral potency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE After confirmed diagnosis of HIV infection, antiretroviral therapy should be initiated in all individuals who are willing and ready to start treatment. Regimens should be selected or changed based on resistance test results with consideration of dosing frequency, pill burden, adverse toxic effect profiles, comorbidities, and drug interactions.JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 07/2014; 312(4):410-25. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.8722 · 29.98 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Most patients who experience virologic failure (VF) on second line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in low-middle income countries fail due to poor adherence rather than antiretroviral resistance. A simple adherence tool designed to detect VF would conserve resources by rationally limiting need for viral load (VL) testing and, in those countries with access to third line ART, the need for resistance testing.Methods We conducted an observational cohort study of patients who initiated second line ART at a clinic in Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. Using clinical and pharmacy refill data extracted from the clinic¿s electronic database, we determined risk factors for VF. Three different methods of calculating short term pharmacy refill adherence were evaluated and compared with long term adherence since second line initiation. We also explored the ability of differing durations of short term pharmacy refill to predict VF on second line ART.ResultsWe included 274 patients with a median follow up of 27 months on second line ART. VF ranged between 3% and 16% within each six month interval after initiating second line ART. 243 patients with at least one VL after 4 months on second line were analysed in the statistical analysis. Pharmacy refill adherence assessed over shorter periods (4 to 6 months) predicted virologic suppression as well as pharmacy refill assessed over longer periods. The risk of VF fell 73% with each 10% increase in adherence measured from pharmacy refills over a 4 month period. Low CD4 count at second line ART initiation was a significant independent risk factor for VF.Conclusion Patients identified as poorly adherent by short term pharmacy refill are at risk for VF on second line ART. This pragmatic adherence tool could assist in identifying patients who require adherence interventions, and help rationalize use of VL monitoring and resistance testing among patients on second line ART.BMC Infectious Diseases 12/2014; 14(1):664. DOI:10.1186/s12879-014-0664-3 · 2.56 Impact Factor