阿巴卡韦与拉米夫定联合依非韦伦、安普那韦/利托那韦或司他夫定进行初始治疗的长期结果。

Long-term results of initial therapy with abacavir and Lamivudine combined with Efavirenz, Amprenavir/Ritonavir, or Stavudine.

作者信息

Bartlett John A, Johnson Judy, Herrera Gisela, Sosa Nestor, Rodriguez Alan, Liao Qiming, Griffith Sandy, Irlbeck David, Shaefer Mark S

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

出版信息

J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006 Nov 1;43(3):284-92. doi: 10.1097/01.qai.0000243092.40490.26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare alternative class-sparing antiretroviral regimens in treatment-naive subjects.

DESIGN

Open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of up to 3 consecutive treatment regimens over 96 weeks.

METHODS

Two hundred ninety-one subjects received abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine and efavirenz (nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NNRTIs]), ritonavir-boosted amprenavir (protease inhibitor [PI]), or stavudine (nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor [NRTI]) by random assignment. The primary end points were the percentages of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA levels <400 copies/mL and time to treatment failure over 96 weeks.

RESULTS

Ninety percent of subjects completed 96 weeks of follow-up, and 79% remained on study treatment. At week 96, there were no differences between arms in the percentages of subjects with plasma HIV-1 RNA levels <400 and <50 copies/mL, mean changes in plasma HIV-1 RNA levels, time to treatment failure, time to first or second virologic failure, or CD4 cell counts. The NNRTI arm had a greater percentages of subjects with RNA levels <or=50 copies/mL at weeks 24 and 48 and a greater overall duration of plasma HIV-1 RNA levels <400 copies/mL. Three subjects in the NNRTI arm had treatment failure on their first regimen and switched therapy compared with 16 in the NRTI arm and 13 in the PI arm. Twenty-one subjects had hypersensitivity reactions attributed to ABC (7.3%). Fewer drugs were used by subjects in the NNRTI arm, and fewer subjects in the NNRTI arm used 3 drug classes.

CONCLUSIONS

All treatment regimens demonstrated excellent 96-week results. Secondary analyses favored the NNRTI regimen over the PI and NRTI regimens.

摘要

目的

比较初治患者中不同的保留类别抗逆转录病毒治疗方案。

设计

开放标签、多中心、随机试验,在96周内连续进行多达3种治疗方案。

方法

291名受试者通过随机分组接受阿巴卡韦(ABC)、拉米夫定和依非韦伦(非核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂[NNRTIs])、利托那韦增强的安普那韦(蛋白酶抑制剂[PI])或司他夫定(核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂[NRTI])治疗。主要终点是血浆HIV-1 RNA水平<400拷贝/mL的受试者百分比以及96周内治疗失败的时间。

结果

90%的受试者完成了96周的随访,79%仍在接受研究治疗。在第96周时,各治疗组之间在血浆HIV-1 RNA水平<400和<50拷贝/mL的受试者百分比、血浆HIV-1 RNA水平的平均变化、治疗失败时间、首次或第二次病毒学失败时间或CD4细胞计数方面没有差异。NNRTI组在第24周和第48周时血浆HIV-1 RNA水平<或=50拷贝/mL的受试者百分比更高,且血浆HIV-1 RNA水平<400拷贝/mL的总体持续时间更长。NNRTI组有3名受试者在第一个治疗方案上出现治疗失败并更换了治疗,而NRTI组有16名,PI组有13名。21名受试者出现了归因于ABC的超敏反应(7.3%)。NNRTI组的受试者使用的药物较少,且使用3种药物类别的受试者也较少。

结论

所有治疗方案在96周时均显示出良好的效果。二次分析显示NNRTI方案优于PI和NRTI方案。

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