Suppr超能文献

观察性研究中在选择基于非核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂和蛋白酶抑制剂的高效抗逆转录病毒疗法时的医疗服务提供者偏倚与HIV治疗结果

Provider bias in the selection of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy and HIV treatment outcomes in observational studies.

作者信息

Wood Evan, Hogg Robert S, Heath Katherine V, de la Rosa Rafael, Lee Nelson, Yip Benita, O'Shaughnessy Michael V O, Montaner Julio S G

机构信息

BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada.

出版信息

AIDS. 2003 Dec 5;17(18):2629-34. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200312050-00010.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the characteristics of patients prescribed non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) and protease inhibitors (PI), and evaluate treatment outcomes in a setting in which nevirapine has been preferentially recommended since 1998.

METHODS

A population-based analysis of antiretroviral-naive adults who started highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) between 1 August 1996 and 31 July 2000, and who were followed until 31 March 2002. We compared baseline characteristics, and evaluated virological responses and mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 439 patients (28.8%) started HAART with NNRTI (94.1% used nevirapine), 100 (6.6%) used a double PI, and 983 (64.6%) used a single PI-based regimen. Substantial differences were observed between the baseline clinical characteristics of these populations. In adjusted analyses, in comparison with single PI therapy, only the use of NNRTI was associated with more rapid HIV-RNA suppression [relative hazard (RH) 1.42; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-1.65; P < 0.001]. A total of 204 deaths were identified in the study population [42 (9.6%) NNRTI; 11 (11%) double PI; 151 (15.4%) single PI, respectively]. In adjusted analysis, NNRTI (RH 1.01; 95% CI 0.71-1.45) and double PI-based HAART (RH 0.74; 95% CI 0.40-1.39) had similar mortality rates to the single PI reference category.

CONCLUSION

NNRTI use was associated with more rapid virological suppression, whereas similar rates of rebound and mortality were found. Nevertheless, major baseline differences existed between patients prescribed the various initial regimens. As such, it is likely that similar selection factors may explain why our findings contrast with several non-randomized studies showing worse clinical outcomes of patients prescribed nevirapine.

摘要

目的

比较接受非核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂(NNRTI)和蛋白酶抑制剂(PI)治疗患者的特征,并评估自1998年以来优先推荐使用奈韦拉平的情况下的治疗效果。

方法

对1996年8月1日至2000年7月31日期间开始接受高效抗逆转录病毒治疗(HAART)且未接受过抗逆转录病毒治疗的成年患者进行基于人群的分析,并随访至2002年3月31日。我们比较了基线特征,并评估了病毒学反应和死亡率。

结果

总体而言,439例患者(28.8%)开始使用NNRTI进行HAART(94.1%使用奈韦拉平),100例(6.6%)使用双PI,983例(64.6%)使用基于单PI的治疗方案。这些人群的基线临床特征存在显著差异。在调整分析中,与单PI治疗相比,仅使用NNRTI与更快的HIV-RNA抑制相关[相对风险(RH)1.42;95%置信区间(CI)1.22-1.65;P<0.001]。研究人群中共有204例死亡[分别为42例(9.6%)使用NNRTI;11例(11%)使用双PI;151例(15.4%)使用单PI]。在调整分析中,NNRTI(RH 1.01;95%CI 0.71-1.45)和基于双PI的HAART(RH 0.74;95%CI 0.40-1.39)的死亡率与单PI参考类别相似。

结论

使用NNRTI与更快的病毒学抑制相关,而反弹率和死亡率相似。然而,接受不同初始治疗方案的患者之间存在主要的基线差异。因此,类似的选择因素可能解释了为什么我们的研究结果与一些非随机研究相反,那些研究显示接受奈韦拉平治疗的患者临床结局更差。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验