Suppr超能文献

六种不同的基于利托那韦增强型蛋白酶抑制剂方案在抗逆转录病毒治疗经验丰富的HIV感染患者中的疗效。

Performance of six different ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based regimens in heavily antiretroviral-experienced HIV-infected patients.

作者信息

de Mendoza Carmen, Valer Luisa, Ribera Esteve, Barreiro Pablo, Martín-Carbonero Luz, Ramirez German, Soriano Vincent

机构信息

Department of Infectious Diseases, Hospital Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.

出版信息

HIV Clin Trials. 2006 Jul-Aug;7(4):163-71. doi: 10.1310/hct0704-163.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Regimens based on ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PI/r) are often used as rescue interventions. It is unclear whether significant differences exist between distinct PI/r.

METHOD

All HIV+ patients who had experienced PI failure at two HIV clinics and were rescued with a regimen based on saquinavir (SQV)/r 1000/100 mg bid, indinavir (IDV)/r 800/100 mg bid, lopinavir (LPV)/r 400/100 mg bid, amprenavir (APV)/r 600/100 mg bid, atazanavir (ATV)/r 300/100 mg qd, or tipranavir (TPV)/r 500/200 mg bid were retrospectively examined. A significant virological response (VR) was defined as >1 log reduction in plasma HIV-RNA or to <50 copies/mL at week 24.

RESULTS

A total of 389 patients were included in the analysis: 139 on SQV/r, 35 on IDV/r, 129 on LPV/r, 35 on APV/r, 29 on ATV/r, and 22 on TPV/r. No significant differences in HIV-RNA and CD4 counts at baseline were recognized between groups. In a multivariate analysis, only the total number of protease resistance mutations was associated with a lower VR (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.87, p < .001). The presence of <5 or > or =5 protease resistance mutations at baseline was the best threshold to discriminate the achievement of VR in any treatment group. In an intent-to-treat analysis, for individuals with 5 protease resistance mutations, the rates of VR were 64% with TPV/r, 47% with LPV/r, 46% with SQV/r, 33% with ATV/r, 25% with IDV/r, and 16% with APV/r. Adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal occurred more frequently using IDV/r (22.8%) than others (p = .03).

CONCLUSION

The rate of VR in salvage therapy using PI/r-based regimens is relatively high in PI-experienced patients. The efficacy is greatly influenced by the number of baseline protease resistance mutations; 5 mutations is the best threshold to predict the chances of VR to any PI/r-based regimen.

摘要

背景

基于利托那韦增强型蛋白酶抑制剂(PI/r)的治疗方案常被用作挽救性干预措施。目前尚不清楚不同的PI/r之间是否存在显著差异。

方法

对所有在两家艾滋病诊所经历过蛋白酶抑制剂治疗失败且接受基于沙奎那韦(SQV)/r 1000/100毫克每日两次、茚地那韦(IDV)/r 800/100毫克每日两次、洛匹那韦(LPV)/r 400/100毫克每日两次、安普那韦(APV)/r 600/100毫克每日两次、阿扎那韦(ATV)/r 300/100毫克每日一次或替拉那韦(TPV)/r 500/200毫克每日两次方案挽救治疗的HIV阳性患者进行回顾性研究。显著病毒学应答(VR)定义为第24周时血浆HIV-RNA下降>1 log或降至<50拷贝/毫升。

结果

共有389例患者纳入分析:139例接受SQV/r治疗,35例接受IDV/r治疗,129例接受LPV/r治疗,35例接受APV/r治疗,29例接受ATV/r治疗,22例接受TPV/r治疗。各组间基线时HIV-RNA和CD4细胞计数无显著差异。多因素分析显示,只有蛋白酶耐药突变总数与较低的VR相关(优势比[OR]=0.77,95%可信区间0.68-0.87,p<.001)。基线时存在<5个或≥5个蛋白酶耐药突变是区分任何治疗组VR达成情况的最佳阈值。在意向性分析中,对于有5个蛋白酶耐药突变的个体,TPV/r的VR率为64%,LPV/r为47%,SQV/r为46%,ATV/r为33%,IDV/r为25%,APV/r为16%。使用IDV/r导致治疗中断的不良事件发生率(22.8%)高于其他药物(p=0.03)。

结论

在有蛋白酶抑制剂治疗经验的患者中,使用基于PI/r的方案进行挽救治疗的VR率相对较高。疗效受基线蛋白酶耐药突变数量的极大影响;5个突变是预测任何基于PI/r方案VR可能性的最佳阈值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验