Tenofovir in Second-Line ART in Zambia and South Africa: Collaborative Analysis of Cohort Studies

Division of International and Environmental Health, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Finkenhubelweg 11, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland.
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (Impact Factor: 4.56). 06/2012; 61(1):41-8. DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3182632540
Source: PubMed


Tenofovir (TDF) is increasingly used in second-line antiretroviral treatment (ART) in sub-Saharan Africa. We compared outcomes of second-line ART containing and not containing TDF in cohort studies from Zambia and the Republic of South Africa (RSA).
Patients aged 16 years and older starting protease-inhibitor-based second-line ART in Zambia (1 cohort) and RSA (5 cohorts) were included. We compared mortality, immunological failure (all cohorts), and virological failure (RSA only) between patients receiving and not receiving TDF. Competing risk models and Cox models adjusted for age, sex, CD4 count, time on first-line ART, and calendar year were used to analyze mortality and treatment failure, respectively. Hazard ratios (HRs) were combined in fixed-effects meta-analysis.
1687 patients from Zambia and 1556 patients from RSA, including 1350 (80.0%) and 206 (13.2%) patients starting TDF, were followed over 4471 person-years. Patients on TDF were more likely to have started second-line ART in recent years and had slightly higher baseline CD4 counts than patients not on TDF. Overall, 127 patients died, 532 were lost to follow-up, and 240 patients developed immunological failure. In RSA, 94 patients had virologic failure. Combined HRs comparing TDF with other regimens were 0.60 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41 to 0.87) for immunologic failure and 0.63 (0.38-1.05) for mortality. The HR for virologic failure in RSA was 0.28 (0.09-0.90).
In this observational study, patients on TDF-containing second-line ART were less likely to develop treatment failure than patients on other regimens. TDF seems to be an effective component of second-line ART in southern Africa.

12 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is debate over using tenofovir or zidovudine alongside lamivudine in second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) following stavudine failure. We analyzed outcomes in cohorts from South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe METHODS: Patients aged ≥16 years who switched from a first-line regimen including stavudine to a ritonavir-boosted lopinavir-based second-line regimen with lamivudine or emtricitabine and zidovudine or tenofovir in seven ART programs in southern Africa were included. We estimated the causal effect of receiving tenofovir or zidovudine on mortality and virological failure using Cox proportional hazards marginal structural models. Its parameters were estimated using inverse probability of treatment weights. Baseline characteristics were age, sex, calendar year and country. CD4 cell count, creatinine and hemoglobin levels were included as time-dependent confounders. 1,256 patients on second-line ART, including 958 on tenofovir, were analyzed. Patients on tenofovir were more likely to have switched to second-line ART in recent years, spent more time on first-line ART (33 vs. 24 months) and had lower CD4 cell counts (172 vs. 341 cells/μl) at initiation of second-line ART. The adjusted hazard ratio comparing tenofovir with zidovudine was 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.59-1.68) for virologic failure and 1.40 (0.57-3.41) for death. We did not find any difference in treatment outcomes between patients on tenofovir or zidovudine; however, the precision of our estimates was limited. There is an urgent need for randomized trials to inform second-line ART strategies in resource-limited settings.
    Antiviral therapy 12/2013; 19(5). DOI:10.3851/IMP2710 · 3.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Roughly 4% of the 1.25 million patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Asia are using second-line therapy. To maximize patient benefit and regional resources, it is important to optimize the timing of second-line ART initiation and use the most effective compounds available. HIV-positive patients enrolled in the TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database who had used second-line ART for ≥6 months were included. ART use and rates and predictors of second-line treatment failure were evaluated. There were 302 eligible patients. Most were male (76.5%) and exposed to HIV via heterosexual contact (71.5%). Median age at second-line initiation was 39.2 years, median CD4 cell count was 146 cells per cubic millimeter, and median HIV viral load was 16,224 copies per milliliter. Patients started second-line ART before 2007 (n = 105), 2007-2010 (n = 147) and after 2010 (n = 50). Ritonavir-boosted lopinavir and atazanavir accounted for the majority of protease inhibitor use after 2006. Median follow-up time on second-line therapy was 2.3 years. The rates of treatment failure and mortality per 100 patient/years were 8.8 (95% confidence interval: 7.1 to 10.9) and 1.1 (95% confidence interval: 0.6 to 1.9), respectively. Older age, high baseline viral load, and use of a protease inhibitor other than lopinavir or atazanavir were associated with a significantly shorter time to second-line failure. Increased access to viral load monitoring to facilitate early detection of first-line ART failure and subsequent treatment switch is important for maximizing the durability of second-line therapy in Asia. Although second-line ART is highly effective in the region, the reported rate of failure emphasizes the need for third-line ART in a small portion of patients.
    JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 02/2015; 68(2):186-95. DOI:10.1097/QAI.0000000000000411 · 4.56 Impact Factor

Similar Publications