4 resultados para lamivudine (3TC)
Resumo:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of didadosine (ddI), lamivudine (3TC), and efavirenz (EFV). This was a follow-up to the VESD study, a 12-month open-label, observational, multicenter study of adult patients with HIV infection who started antiretroviral treatment with the ddI-3TC-EFV once-daily regimen. Of the 167 patients originally included, 106 patients remained on the same triple therapy at the end of the study (1 year), and they were offered an extra 24 months of follow-up; 96 were enrolled in this study (VESD-2). Seventy patients out of the initial cohort were still on the same regimen at month 36, with 97% of them with plasma viral load <50 copies /ml. An intention-to-treat analysis showed that the percentage of patients with plasma viral load <50 copies/ml was 73% at 36 months. CD4 cell counts increased 344 cells/microl over the 36 months. Safety and tolerance were good with no unexpected long-term toxicity. After 3 years of treatment with ddI-3TC-EFV, more than 40% of the patients were still receiving the initial antiretroviral therapy with sustained, durable immunovirological benefit and good acceptance. Long-term toxicity and virological failure were low.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Due to their low CNS penetrance, there are concerns about the capacity of non-conventional PI-based ART (monotherapy and dual therapies) to preserve neurocognitive performance (NP). METHODS We evaluated the NP change of aviremic participants of the SALT clinical trial (1) switching therapy to dual therapy (DT: ATV/r+3TC) or triple therapy (TT: ATV/r+2NRTI) who agreed to perform an NP assessment (NPZ-5) at baseline and W48. Neurocognitive impairment and NP were assessed using AAN-2007 criteria (2) and global deficit scores (GDS) (3). Neurocognitive change (GDS change: W48 - baseline) and the effect of DT on NP evolution crude and adjusted by significant confounders were determined using ANCOVA. RESULTS A total of 158 patients were included (Table 1). They had shorter times because HIV diagnosis, ART initiation and HIV-suppression and their virologic outcome at W48 by snapshot was higher (79.1% vs 72.7%; p=0.04) compared to the 128 patients not included in the sub-study. By AAN-2007 criteria, 51 patients in each ART group (68% vs 63%) were neurocognitively impaired at baseline (p=0.61). Forty-seven patients were not reassessed at W48: 30 lost of follow-up (16 DT-14 TT) and 17 had non-evaluable data (6 DT-11 TT). Patients retested were more likely to be men (78.9% vs 61.4%) and had neurological cofounders (9.6% vs 0%) than patients non-retested. At W48, 3 out of 16 (5.7%) patients on DT and 6 out of 21 (10.5%) on TT who were non-impaired at baseline became impaired (p=0.49) while 10 out of 37 (18.9%) on DT and 7 out of 36 (12.3%) on TT who were neurocognitively impaired at baseline became non-impaired (p=0.44). Mean GDS changes (95% CI) were: Overall -0.2 (-0.3 to -0.04): DT -0.26 (-0.4 to -0.07) and TT -0.08 (-0.2 to 0.07). NP was similar between DT and TT (0.15). This absence of differences was also observed in all cognitive tests. Effect of DT: -0.16 [-0.38 to 0.06]) (r(2)=0.16) on NP evolution was similar to TT (reference), even after adjusting (DT: -0.11 [-0.33 to 0.1], TT: reference) by significant confounders (geographical origin, previous ATV use and CD4 cell count) (r(2)=0.25). CONCLUSIONS NP stability was observed after 48 weeks of follow up in the majority of patients whether DT or TT was used to maintain HIV-suppression. Incidence rates of NP impairment or NP impairment recovery were also similar between DT and TT.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Rilpivirine (RPV) has a better lipid profile than efavirenz (EFV) in naïve patients (1). Switching to RPV may be convenient for many patients, while maintaining a good immunovirological control (2). The aim of this study was to analyze lipid changes in HIV-patients at 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera® (emtricitabine/RPV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate [FTC/RPV/TDF]). MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective, multicentre study of a cohort of asymptomatic HIV-patients who switched from a regimen based on 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI)+protease inhibitor (PI)/non nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or ritonavir boosted PI monotherapy to Eviplera® during February-December, 2013; all had undetectable HIV viral load for ≥3 months prior to switching. Patients with previous failures on antiretroviral therapy (ART) including TDF and/or FTC/3TC, with genotype tests showing resistance to components of Eviplera®, or who had changed the third drug of the ART during the study period were excluded. Changes in lipid profile and cardiovascular risk (CVR), and efficacy and safety at 24 weeks were analyzed. RESULTS Among 305 patients included in the study, 298 were analyzed (7 cases were excluded due to lack of data). Men 81.2%, mean age 44.5 years, 75.8% of HIV sexually transmitted. 233 (78.2%) patients switched from a regimen based on 2 NRTI+NNRTI (90.5% EFV/FTC/TDF). The most frequent reasons for switching were central nervous system (CNS) adverse events (31.0%), convenience (27.6%) and metabolic disorders (23.2%). At this time, 293 patients have reached 24 weeks: 281 (95.9%) have continued Eviplera®, 6 stopped it (3 adverse events, 2 virologic failures, 1 discontinuation) and 6 have been lost to follow up. Lipid profiles of 283 cases were available at 24 weeks and mean (mg/dL) baseline vs 24 weeks are: total cholesterol (193 vs 169; p=0.0001), HDL-c (49 vs 45; p=0.0001), LDL-c (114 vs 103; p=0.001), tryglycerides (158 vs 115; p=0.0001), total cholesterol to HDL-c ratio (4.2 vs 4.1; p=0.3). CVR decreased (8.7 vs 7.5%; p= 0.0001). CD4 counts were similar to baseline (653 vs 674 cells/µL; p=0.08), and 274 (96.8%) patients maintained viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS At 24 weeks after switching to Eviplera®, lipid profile and CVR improved while maintaining a good immunovirological control. Most subjects switched to Eviplera® from a regimen based on NNRTI, mainly EFV/FTC/TDF. CNS adverse events, convenience and metabolic disorders were the most frequent reasons for switching.
Resumo:
Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is responsible for up to 30% of cases of liver cirrhosis and up to 53% of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver failure caused by HBV. The success of transplantation, though, depends on receiving prophylactic treatment against post-transplant viral reactivation. In the absence of prophylaxis, liver transplantation due to chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is associated with high rates of viral recurrence and poor survival. The introduction of treatment with hepatitis B immunoglobulins (HBIG) during the 1990s and later the incorporation of oral antiviral drugs have improved the prognosis of these patients. Thus, LT for CHB is now a universally accepted option, with an estimated 5 years survival of around 85% vs the 45% survival seen prior to the introduction of HBIG. The combination of lamivudine plus HBIG has for many years been the most widely used prophylactic regimen. However, with the appearance of new more potent oral antiviral agents associated with less resistance (e.g., entecavir and tenofovir) for the treatment of CHB, new prophylactic strategies are being designed, either in combination with HBIG or alone as a monotherapy. These advances have allowed for more personalized prophylaxis based on the individual risk profile of a given patient. In addition, the small pool of donors has required the use of anti-HBc-positive donors (with the resulting possibility of transmitting HBV from these organs), which has been made possible by suitable prophylactic regimens.