These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Effectiveness of boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in HIV type 1-infected patients who experienced virological failure with NNRTI-based antiretroviral therapy in a resource-limited setting. Author: Siripassorn K, Manosuthi W, Chottanapund S, Pakdee A, Sabaitae S, Prasithsirikul W, Tunthanathip P, Ruxrungtham K, Bamrasnaradura Study Team. Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses; 2010 Feb; 26(2):139-48. PubMed ID: 20156097. Abstract: A number of patients have experienced treatment failure while receiving non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART), particularly in resource-limited countries. The need remains for clinical data on protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens in these patients. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among HIV-1-infected patients who had failed NNRTI-based regimens, were naive to protease inhibitors (PIs), and subsequently initiated a salvage PI-based regimen between January 2004 and December 2006. The study period ended on 30 December 2007. One hundred and forty patients received a single-boosted PI +/- optimized background regimen (OBR) and 64 received double-boosted PIs. The median (IQR) duration of follow-up was 19 (13-29) months. The overall virological failure rate at 24 months was 15.2%. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two regimen groups (single-boosted PI +/- OBR 16.4% vs. double-boosted PIs 12.5%, log rank p = 0.818). At the end of the study, the median (IQR) change in CD4 cell counts for patients in the double-boosted PI group was higher than for patients in the single-boosted PI +/- OBR group [149 (53-322) vs. 105 (23-199), respectively, p = 0.012]. Patients receiving double-boosted PI regimens displayed a higher frequency of hypertriglyceridemia than those patients who received a single boosted PI +/- OBR (31% vs. 11%, respectively, p = 0.001). Boosted PI-based regimens showed acceptable virological outcomes among patients who had failed NNRTI-based ART. In the subgroup analysis, patients who received double-boosted PIs demonstrated a superior immunological response but not better virological outcomes compared to the single-boosted PI +/- OBR group.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]