Dataset Information

Abacavir-lamivudine versus tenofovir-emtricitabine for initial HIV-1 therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The use of fixed-dose combination nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) with a nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor is recommended as initial therapy in patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but which NRTI combination has greater efficacy and safety is not known.

Methods

In a randomized, blinded equivalence study involving 1858 eligible patients, we compared four once-daily antiretroviral regimens as initial therapy for HIV-1 infection: abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)-emtricitabine plus efavirenz or ritonavir-boosted atazanavir. The primary efficacy end point was the time from randomization to virologic failure (defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA level > or = 1000 copies per milliliter at or after 16 weeks and before 24 weeks, or > or = 200 copies per milliliter at or after 24 weeks).

Results

A scheduled interim review by an independent data and safety monitoring board showed significant differences in virologic efficacy, according to the NRTI combination, among patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more. At a median follow-up of 60 weeks, among the 797 patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more, the time to virologic failure was significantly shorter in the abacavir-lamivudine group than in the tenofovir DF-emtricitabine group (hazard ratio, 2.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.46 to 3.72; P<0.001), with 57 virologic failures (14%) in the abacavir-lamivudine group versus 26 (7%) in the tenofovir DF-emtricitabine group. The time to the first adverse event was also shorter in the abacavir-lamivudine group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the study groups in the change from the baseline CD4 cell count at week 48.

Conclusions

In patients with screening HIV-1 RNA levels of 100,000 copies per milliliter or more, the times to virologic failure and the first adverse event were both significantly shorter in patients randomly assigned to abacavir-lamivudine than in those assigned to tenofovir DF-emtricitabine. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00118898.)

SUBMITTER: Sax PE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2800041 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Abacavir-lamivudine versus tenofovir-emtricitabine for initial HIV-1 therapy.

Sax Paul E PE Tierney Camlin C Collier Ann C AC Fischl Margaret A MA Mollan Katie K Peeples Lynne L Godfrey Catherine C Jahed Nasreen C NC Myers Laurie L Katzenstein David D Farajallah Awny A Rooney James F JF Ha Belinda B Woodward William C WC Koletar Susan L SL Johnson Victoria A VA Geiseler P Jan PJ Daar Eric S ES

The New England journal of medicine 20091201 23

<h4>Background</h4>The use of fixed-dose combination nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) with a nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor or a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor is recommended as initial therapy in patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but which NRTI combination has greater efficacy and safety is not known.<h4>Methods</h4>In a randomized, blinded equivalence study involving 1858 eligible patients, we compared four once-daily a ...[more]

PMID: 19952143

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTherapy with tenofovir is associated with lower bone mineral density (BMD), higher markers of bone turnover and increased fracture risk in HIV-infected adults. Bone structural parameters generated by hip structural analysis may represent a separate measure of bone strength, but have not been assessed in HIV.MethodsDual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans from 254 HIV-infected adults randomised to simplify their existing dual nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy to coformulated tenofovir-emtricitabine or abacavir-lamivudine were analysed using DXA-derived hip structural analysis software. Hip structural parameters included femoral strength index, section modulus, cross-sectional area, and cross-sectional moment of inertia. We used one-way ANOVA to test the relationship between nucleoside analogue type at baseline and structural parameters, multivariable analysis to assess baseline covariates associated with femoral strength index, and t-tests to compare mean change in structural parameters over 96 weeks between randomised groups.ResultsParticipants taking tenofovir at baseline had lower section modulus (-107.3 mm2, p = 0.001), lower cross-sectional area (-15.01 mm3, p = 0.001), and lower cross-sectional moment of inertia (-2,036.8 mm4, p = 0.007) than those receiving other nucleoside analogues. After adjustment for baseline risk factors, the association remained significant for section modulus (p = 0.008) and cross-sectional area (p = 0.002). Baseline covariates significantly associated with higher femoral strength index were higher spine T-score (p = 0.001), lower body fat mass (p<0.001), lower bone alkaline phosphatase (p = 0.025), and higher osteoprotegerin (p = 0.024). Hip structural parameters did not change significantly over 96 weeks and none was significantly affected by treatment simplification to tenofovir-emtricitabine or abacavir-lamivudine.ConclusionIn this population, tenofovir use was associated with reduced composite indices of bone strength as measured by hip structural analysis, but none of the structural parameters improved significantly over 96 weeks with tenofovir cessation.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00192634.

Project description:BackgroundDarunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (D/C/F/TAF) is the reference for combination therapy based on protease inhibitors due to its efficacy, tolerability, and convenience. Head-to-head randomized comparisons between D/C/F/TAF and combination therapy based on integrase inhibitors in antiretroviral-naive patients are lacking.MethodsAdult (>18 years old) human immunodeficiency virus-infected antiretroviral-naive patients (HLA-B∗5701 negative and hepatitis B virus negative), with viral load (VL) ≥500 c/mL, were centrally randomized to initiate D/C/F/TAF or dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine (DTG/3TC/ABC) after stratifying by VL and CD4 count. Clinical and analytical assessments were performed at weeks 0, 4, 12, 24, and 48. The primary endpoint was VL <50 c/mL at week 48 in the intention-to-treat (ITT)-exposed population (US Food and Drug Administration snapshot analysis, 10% noninferiority margin).ResultsBetween September 2018 and 2019, 316 patients were randomized and 306 patients were included in the ITT-exposed analysis (151 D/C/F/TAF and 155 DTG/3TC/ABC). Almost all (94%) participants were male and their median age was 35 years. Forty percent had a baseline VL >100 000 copies/mL, and 13% had <200 CD4 cells/μL. Median weight was 73 kg and median body mass index was 24 kg/m2. At 48 weeks, 79% (D/C/F/TAF) versus 82% (DTG/3TC/ABC) had VL <50 c/mL (difference, -2.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -11.3 to 6.6). Eight percent versus four percent experienced virologic failure but no resistance-associated mutations emerged. Four percent versus six percent had drug discontinuation due to adverse events. In the per-protocol analysis, 94% versus 96% of patients had VL <50 c/mL (difference, -2%; 95% CI, -8.1 to 3.5). There were no differences in CD4 cell count or weight changes.ConclusionsWe could not demonstrate the noninferiority of D/C/F/TAF relative to DTG/ABC/3TC as initial antiretroviral therapy, although both regimens were similarly well tolerated.

Dataset Information

Abacavir-lamivudine versus tenofovir-emtricitabine for initial HIV-1 therapy.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Abacavir-lamivudine versus tenofovir-emtricitabine for initial HIV-1 therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets