Does short-term virologic failure translate to clinical events in antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in clinical practice?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether differences in short-term virologic failure among commonly used antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens translate to differences in clinical events in antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating ART. DESIGN: Observational cohort study of patients initiating ART between January 2000 and December 2005. SETTING: The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC) is a collaboration of 15 HIV cohort studies from Canada, Europe, and the United States. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: A total of 13 546 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-positive patients initiating ART with efavirenz, nevirapine, lopinavir/ritonavir, nelfinavir, or abacavir as third drugs in combination with a zidovudine and lamivudine nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term (24-week) virologic failure (>500 copies/ml) and clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation (incident AIDS-defining event, death, and a composite measure of these two outcomes). RESULTS: Compared with efavirenz as initial third drug, short-term virologic failure was more common with all other third drugs evaluated; nevirapine (adjusted odds ratio = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.58-2.22), lopinavir/ritonavir (1.32, 95% CI = 1.12-1.57), nelfinavir (3.20, 95% CI = 2.74-3.74), and abacavir (2.13, 95% CI = 1.82-2.50). However, the rate of clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation appeared higher only with nevirapine (adjusted hazard ratio for composite outcome measure 1.27, 95% CI = 1.04-1.56) and abacavir (1.22, 95% CI = 1.00-1.48). CONCLUSION: Among antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating therapy, between-ART regimen, differences in short-term virologic failure do not necessarily translate to differences in clinical outcomes. Our results should be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of residual confounding by indication.

Virologic failure and second-line antiretroviral therapy in children in South Africa--the IeDEA Southern Africa collaboration

Background: With expanding pediatric antiretroviral therapy (ART) access, children will begin to experience treatment failure and require second-line therapy. We evaluated the probability and determinants of virologic failure and switching in children in South Africa. Methods: Pooled analysis of routine individual data from children who initiated ART in 7 South African treatment programs with 6-monthly viral load and CD4 monitoring produced Kaplan-Meier estimates of probability of virologic failure (2 consecutive unsuppressed viral loads with the second being >1000 copies/mL, after ≥24 weeks of therapy) and switch to second-line. Cox-proportional hazards models stratified by program were used to determine predictors of these outcomes. Results: The 3-year probability of virologic failure among 5485 children was 19.3% (95% confidence interval: 17.6 to 21.1). Use of nevirapine or ritonavir alone in the initial regimen (compared with efavirenz) and exposure to prevention of mother to child transmission regimens were independently associated with failure [adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval): 1.77 (1.11 to 2.83), 2.39 (1.57 to 3.64) and 1.40 (1.02 to 1.92), respectively]. Among 252 children with ≥1 year follow-up after failure, 38% were switched to second-line. Median (interquartile range) months between failure and switch was 5.7 (2.9-11.0). Conclusions: Triple ART based on nevirapine or ritonavir as a single protease inhibitor seems to be associated with a higher risk of virologic failure. A low proportion of virologically failing children were switched.

Does short-term virologic failure translate to clinical events in antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in clinical practice?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether differences in short-term virologic failure among commonly used antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens translate to differences in clinical events in antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating ART. DESIGN: Observational cohort study of patients initiating ART between January 2000 and December 2005. SETTING: The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC) is a collaboration of 15 HIV cohort studies from Canada, Europe, and the United States. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: A total of 13 546 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-positive patients initiating ART with efavirenz, nevirapine, lopinavir/ritonavir, nelfinavir, or abacavir as third drugs in combination with a zidovudine and lamivudine nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term (24-week) virologic failure (>500 copies/ml) and clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation (incident AIDS-defining event, death, and a composite measure of these two outcomes). RESULTS: Compared with efavirenz as initial third drug, short-term virologic failure was more common with all other third drugs evaluated; nevirapine (adjusted odds ratio = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.58-2.22), lopinavir/ritonavir (1.32, 95% CI = 1.12-1.57), nelfinavir (3.20, 95% CI = 2.74-3.74), and abacavir (2.13, 95% CI = 1.82-2.50). However, the rate of clinical events within 2 years of ART initiation appeared higher only with nevirapine (adjusted hazard ratio for composite outcome measure 1.27, 95% CI = 1.04-1.56) and abacavir (1.22, 95% CI = 1.00-1.48). CONCLUSION: Among antiretroviral-naïve patients initiating therapy, between-ART regimen, differences in short-term virologic failure do not necessarily translate to differences in clinical outcomes. Our results should be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of residual confounding by indication.

Case-control study of factors associated with virologic failure in HIV-infected children on HAART in Botswana, a developing African country

According to the United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS, 2008), in 2007 about 67 per cent of all HIV-infected patients in the world were in Sub-Saharan Africa, with 35% of new infections and 38% of the AIDS deaths occurring in Southern Africa. Globally, the number of children younger than 15 years of age infected with HIV increased from 1.6 million in 2001 to 2.0 million in 2007 and almost 90% of these were in Sub-Saharan Africa. (UNAIDS, 2008).^ Both clinical and laboratory monitoring of children on Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy (HAART) are important and necessary to optimize outcomes. Laboratory monitoring of HIV viral load and genotype resistance testing, which are important in patient follow-up to optimize treatment success, are both generally expensive and beyond the healthcare budgets of most developing countries. This is especially true for the impoverished Sub-Saharan African nations. It is therefore important to identify those factors that are associated with virologic failure in HIV-infected Sub-Saharan African children. This will inform practitioners in these countries so that they can predict which patients are more likely to develop virologic failure and therefore target the limited laboratory monitoring budgets towards these at-risk patients. The objective of this study was to examine those factors that are associated with virologic failure in HIV-infected children taking Highly Active Anti-retroviral Therapy in Botswana, a developing Sub-Saharan African country. We examined these factors in a Case-Control study using medical records of HIV-infected children and adolescents on HAART at the Botswana-Baylor Children's Clinical Center of Excellence (BBCCCOE) in Gaborone, Botswana. Univariate and Multivariate Regression Analyses were performed to identify predictors of virologic failure in these children.^ The study population comprised of 197 cases (those with virologic failure) and 544 controls (those with virologic success) with ages ranging from 3 months to 16 years at baseline. Poor adherence (pill count <95% on at least 3 consecutive occasions) was the strongest independent predictor of virologic failure (adjusted OR = 269.97, 95% CI = 104.13 to 699.92; P < 0.001). Other independent predictors of virologic failure identified were: First Line NNRTI with Nevirapine (OR = 2.99, 95% CI = 1.19 to7.54; P = 0.020), Baseline HIV-1 Viral Load >750,000/ml (OR = 257, 95% CI = 1.47 to 8.63; P = 0.005), Positive History of PMTCT (OR = 11.65, 95% CI = 3.04-44.57; P < 0.001), Multiple Care-givers (>=3) (OR = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.06 to 6.19; P = 0.036) and Residence in a Village (OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 1.36 to 5.97; P = 0.005).^ The results of this study may help to improve virologic outcomes and reduce the costs of caring for HIV-infected children in resource-limited settings. ^ Keywords: Virologic Failure, Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy, Sub-Saharan Africa, Children, Adherence.^

Virologic and immunologic responses in treatment-naive patients to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or efavirenz with a common backbone.

Background: Atazanavir boosted with ritonavir (ATV/r) and efavirenz (EFV) are both recommended as first-line therapies for HIV-infected patients. We compared the 2 therapies for virologic efficacy and immune recovery. Methods: We included all treatment-naïve patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study starting therapy after May 2003 with either ATV/r or EFV and a backbone of tenofovir and either emtricitabine or lamivudine. We used Cox models to assess time to virologic failure and repeated measures models to assess the change in CD4 cell counts over time. All models were fit as marginal structural models using both point of treatment and censoring weights. Intent-to-treat and various as-treated analyses were carried out: In the latter, patients were censored at their last recorded measurement if they changed therapy or if they were no longer adherent to therapy. Results: Patients starting EFV (n = 1,097) and ATV/r (n = 384) were followed for a median of 35 and 37 months, respectively. During follow-up, 51% patients on EFV and 33% patients on ATV/r remained adherent and made no change to their first-line therapy. Although intent-to-treat analyses suggest virologic failure was more likely with ATV/r, there was no evidence for this disadvantage in patients who adhered to first-line therapy. Patients starting ATV/r had a greater increase in CD4 cell count during the first year of therapy, but this advantage disappeared after one year. Conclusions: In this observational study, there was no good evidence of any intrinsic advantage for one therapy over the other, consistent with earlier clinical trials. Differences between therapies may arise in a clinical setting because of differences in adherence to therapy.

Genome-wide association study of virologic response with efavirenz-containing or abacavir-containing regimens in AIDS clinical trials group protocols.

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz and abacavir are components of recommended first-line regimens for HIV-1 infection. We used genome-wide genotyping and clinical data to explore genetic associations with virologic failure among patients randomized to efavirenz-containing or abacavir-containing regimens in AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) protocols. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Virologic response and genome-wide genotype data were available from treatment-naive patients randomized to efavirenz-containing (n=1596) or abacavir-containing (n=786) regimens in ACTG protocols 384, A5142, A5095, and A5202. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of association results across race/ethnic groups showed no genome-wide significant associations (P<5×10) with virologic response for either efavirenz or abacavir. Our sample size provided 80% power to detect a genotype relative risk of 1.8 for efavirenz and 2.4 for abacavir. Analyses focused on CYP2B genotypes that define the lowest plasma efavirenz exposure stratum did not show associations nor did analysis limited to gene sets predicted to be relevant to efavirenz and abacavir disposition. CONCLUSION: No single polymorphism is associated strongly with virologic failure with efavirenz-containing or abacavir-containing regimens. Analyses to better consider context, and that minimize confounding by nongenetic factors, may show associations not apparent here.

Self-reported nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy as a predictor of viral failure and mortality

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) on virologic failure and mortality in naive individuals starting ART. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: Eligible individuals enrolled in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, started ART between 2003 and 2012, and provided adherence data on at least one biannual clinical visit. Adherence was defined as missed doses (none, one, two, or more than two) and percentage adherence (>95, 90-95, and <90) in the previous 4 weeks. Inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models was used to estimate the effect of nonadherence on viral failure (HIV-1 viral load >500 copies/ml) and mortality. RESULTS: Of 3150 individuals followed for a median 4.7 years, 480 (15.2%) experienced viral failure and 104 (3.3%) died, 1155 (36.6%) reported missing one dose, 414 (13.1%) two doses and, 333 (10.6%) more than two doses of ART. The risk of viral failure increased with each missed dose (one dose: hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.79-1.67; two doses: 2.15, 1.31-3.53; more than two doses: 5.21, 2.96-9.18). The risk of death increased with more than two missed doses (HR 4.87, 2.21-10.73). Missing one to two doses of ART increased the risk of viral failure in those starting once-daily (HR 1.67, 1.11-2.50) compared with those starting twice-daily regimens (HR 0.99, 0.64-1.54, interaction P = 0.09). Consistent results were found for percentage adherence. CONCLUSION: Self-report of two or more missed doses of ART is associated with an increased risk of both viral failure and death. A simple adherence question helps identify patients at risk for negative clinical outcomes and offers opportunities for intervention.

Oral lesions as predictors of highly active antiretroviral therapy failure in Brazilian HIV-infected children

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the accuracy of HIV-related oral lesions to predict immune and virologic failure on HIV-infected children in use of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). STUDY DESIGN: Data for this cross-sectional analysis come from a longitudinal study being conducted through the HIV-AIDS Outpatient Unit, ENT Division, Hospital das Clinicas, Sao Paulo University Medical School. The study began in January 1990 and is still ongoing. The cut-off point for analyses purposes was December 2004. Subjects were 471 HIV-infected consecutive children attending the outpatient unit during this period, who enrolled regardless of medical or immunological status. The children have undertaken oral cavity examination, serum CD4(+) T-lymphocyte count, and, 271 of them, viral load measurement. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and relative risk were calculated. RESULTS: Oral lesions had moderate sensitivity, high specificity and positive predictive value to predict immune failure. It had low sensitivity and positive predictive value, and high specificity to predict virologic failure. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Oral manifestations of HIV can be important markers for immune suppression and for virologic failure, in Brazilian children undergoing HAART.

Rates and Predictors of Failure of First-line Antiretroviral Therapy and Switch to Second-line ART in South Africa

To measure rates and predictors of virologic failure and switch to second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in South Africa.

The effect of efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens on immunologic, virologic and clinical outcomes in a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE: To compare regimens consisting of either efavirenz or nevirapine and two or more nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) among HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive, and AIDS-free individuals with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective studies of HIV-infected individuals in Europe and the US included in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration. METHODS: Antiretroviral therapy-naive and AIDS-free individuals were followed from the time they started an NRTI, efavirenz or nevirapine, classified as following one or both types of regimens at baseline, and censored when they started an ineligible drug or at 6 months if their regimen was not yet complete. We estimated the 'intention-to-treat' effect for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens on clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. Our models included baseline covariates and adjusted for potential bias introduced by censoring via inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: A total of 15 336 individuals initiated an efavirenz regimen (274 deaths, 774 AIDS-defining illnesses) and 8129 individuals initiated a nevirapine regimen (203 deaths, 441 AIDS-defining illnesses). The intention-to-treat hazard ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens were 1.59 (1.27, 1.98) for death and 1.28 (1.09, 1.50) for AIDS-defining illness. Individuals on nevirapine regimens experienced a smaller 12-month increase in CD4 cell count by 11.49 cells/mul and were 52% more likely to have virologic failure at 12 months as those on efavirenz regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our intention-to-treat estimates are consistent with a lower mortality, a lower incidence of AIDS-defining illness, a larger 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for efavirenz compared with nevirapine.

Tenofovir or zidovudine in second-line antiretroviral therapy after stavudine failure in southern Africa

BACKGROUND 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. RESULTS 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. CONCLUSIONS 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.

Virologic and immunologic responses in treatment-naive patients to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or efavirenz with a common backbone

Background: Atazanavir boosted with ritonavir (ATV/r) and efavirenz (EFV) are both recommended as first-line therapies for HIV-infected patients. We compared the 2 therapies for virologic efficacy and immune recovery. Methods: We included all treatment-naïve patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study starting therapy after May 2003 with either ATV/r or EFV and a backbone of tenofovir and either emtricitabine or lamivudine. We used Cox models to assess time to virologic failure and repeated measures models to assess the change in CD4 cell counts over time. All models were fit as marginal structural models using both point of treatment and censoring weights. Intent-to-treat and various as-treated analyses were carried out: In the latter, patients were censored at their last recorded measurement if they changed therapy or if they were no longer adherent to therapy. Results: Patients starting EFV (n = 1,097) and ATV/r (n = 384) were followed for a median of 35 and 37 months, respectively. During follow-up, 51% patients on EFV and 33% patients on ATV/r remained adherent and made no change to their first-line therapy. Although intent-to-treat analyses suggest virologic failure was more likely with ATV/r, there was no evidence for this disadvantage in patients who adhered to first-line therapy. Patients starting ATV/r had a greater increase in CD4 cell count during the first year of therapy, but this advantage disappeared after one year. Conclusions: In this observational study, there was no good evidence of any intrinsic advantage for one therapy over the other, consistent with earlier clinical trials. Differences between therapies may arise in a clinical setting because of differences in adherence to therapy.

Self-reported nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy as a predictor of viral failure and mortality.

OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) on virologic failure and mortality in naive individuals starting ART. DESIGN Prospective observational cohort study. METHODS Eligible individuals enrolled in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, started ART between 2003 and 2012, and provided adherence data on at least one biannual clinical visit. Adherence was defined as missed doses (none, one, two, or more than two) and percentage adherence (>95, 90-95, and <90) in the previous 4 weeks. Inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models was used to estimate the effect of nonadherence on viral failure (HIV-1 viral load >500 copies/ml) and mortality. RESULTS Of 3150 individuals followed for a median 4.7 years, 480 (15.2%) experienced viral failure and 104 (3.3%) died, 1155 (36.6%) reported missing one dose, 414 (13.1%) two doses and, 333 (10.6%) more than two doses of ART. The risk of viral failure increased with each missed dose (one dose: hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.79-1.67; two doses: 2.15, 1.31-3.53; more than two doses: 5.21, 2.96-9.18). The risk of death increased with more than two missed doses (HR 4.87, 2.21-10.73). Missing one to two doses of ART increased the risk of viral failure in those starting once-daily (HR 1.67, 1.11-2.50) compared with those starting twice-daily regimens (HR 0.99, 0.64-1.54, interaction P = 0.09). Consistent results were found for percentage adherence. CONCLUSION Self-report of two or more missed doses of ART is associated with an increased risk of both viral failure and death. A simple adherence question helps identify patients at risk for negative clinical outcomes and offers opportunities for intervention.

Evaluating New Matrix Pooled Testing Methods for Detecting HIV Treatment Failure with and without Covariate Information

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-08

Long-Term Trends of HIV Type 1 Drug Resistance Prevalence among Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients in Switzerland.

Background. Accurate quantification of the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) drug resistance in patients who are receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) is difficult, and results from previous studies vary. We attempted to assess the prevalence and dynamics of resistance in a highly representative patient cohort from Switzerland. Methods. On the basis of genotypic resistance test results and clinical data, we grouped patients according to their risk of harboring resistant viruses. Estimates of resistance prevalence were calculated on the basis of either the proportion of individuals with a virologic failure or confirmed drug resistance (lower estimate) or the frequency-weighted average of risk group-specific probabilities for the presence of drug resistance mutations (upper estimate). Results. Lower and upper estimates of drug resistance prevalence in 8064 ART-exposed patients were 50% and 57% in 1999 and 37% and 45% in 2007, respectively. This decrease was driven by 2 mechanisms: loss to follow-up or death of high-risk patients exposed to mono- or dual-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor therapy (lower estimates range from 72% to 75%) and continued enrollment of low-risk patients who were taking combination ART containing boosted protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors as first-line therapy (lower estimates range from 7% to 12%). A subset of 4184 participants (52%) had 1 study visit per year during 2002-2007. In this subset, lower and upper estimates increased from 45% to 49% and from 52% to 55%, respectively. Yearly increases in prevalence were becoming smaller in later years. Conclusions. Contrary to earlier predictions, in situations of free access to drugs, close monitoring, and rapid introduction of new potent therapies, the emergence of drug-resistant viruses can be minimized at the population level. Moreover, this study demonstrates the necessity of interpreting time trends in the context of evolving cohort populations.