Fischl Margaret A, Collier Ann C, Mukherjee A Lisa, Feinberg Judith E, Demeter Lisa M, Tebas Pablo, Giuliano Marina, Dehlinger Marjorie, Garren Kevin, Brizz Barbara, Bassett Roland
AIDS Clinical Research Unit (R-60A), Department of Medicine, University of Miami School of Medicine, 1800 NW 10th Avenue, Miami, FL 33136, USA.
AIDS. 2007 Jan 30;21(3):325-33. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e328011ddfa.
Complex antiretroviral regimens can be associated with increased toxicity and poor adherence. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of switching to two simplified, class-sparing antiretroviral regimens.
We conducted a randomized, open-label study in 236 patients with virologic suppression who were taking a three- or four-drug protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor regimen for > or = 18 months. Patients received lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 533 mg/133 mg twice daily + efavirenz (EFV) 600 mg once daily or EFV + two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI). Primary study endpoint was time to first virologic failure (VF, confirmed HIV-1 RNA > 200 copies/ml) or discontinuation because of study drug-related toxicity.
After 2.1 years of follow up, patients receiving LPV/r + EFV discontinued treatment at a greater rate than patients receiving EFV + NRTI (P < 0.001). Twenty-one patients developed VF (14 receiving LPV/r + EFV and seven receiving EFV + NRTI) and 26 discontinued because of a study drug-related toxicity (20 receiving LPV/r + EFV and six receiving EFV + NRTI). Time to VF or study drug related-toxicity discontinuation was significantly shorter for LPV/r + EFV than EFV + NRTIs (P = 0.0015). A significantly higher risk of drug-related toxicity occurred with LPV/r + EFV, mainly for increased triglycerides (P = 0021). A trend toward a higher VF rate occurred with LPV/r + EFV in an intent-to-treat and as-treated analyses (P = 0.088 and P = 0.063 respectively).
Switching to EFV + NRTI resulted in better outcomes, fewer drug-related toxicity discontinuations and a trend to fewer virologic failures compared to switching to LPV/r + EFV.
复杂的抗逆转录病毒治疗方案可能会增加毒性并导致依从性差。我们的目的是比较换用两种简化的、不涉及特定药物类别的抗逆转录病毒治疗方案的疗效和安全性。
我们对236例病毒学抑制的患者进行了一项随机、开放标签研究,这些患者服用含三种或四种药物的蛋白酶抑制剂或非核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂方案≥18个月。患者接受洛匹那韦/利托那韦(LPV/r)533毫克/133毫克每日两次+依非韦伦(EFV)600毫克每日一次,或EFV+两种核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂(NRTI)。主要研究终点是首次病毒学失败(VF,确诊HIV-1 RNA>200拷贝/毫升)或因研究药物相关毒性而停药的时间。
经过2.1年的随访,接受LPV/r+EFV治疗的患者停药率高于接受EFV+NRTI治疗的患者(P<0.001)。21例患者出现VF(14例接受LPV/r+EFV,7例接受EFV+NRTI),26例因研究药物相关毒性而停药(20例接受LPV/r+EFV,6例接受EFV+NRTI)。LPV/r+EFV组出现VF或因研究药物相关毒性而停药的时间明显短于EFV+NRTI组(P=0.0015)。LPV/r+EFV组出现药物相关毒性的风险明显更高,主要是甘油三酯升高(P=0.021)。在意向性分析和实际治疗分析中,LPV/r+EFV组的VF率有升高趋势(分别为P=0.088和P=0.063)。
与换用LPV/r+EFV相比,换用EFV+NRTI可带来更好的结果,减少因药物相关毒性而停药的情况,且病毒学失败的趋势也更少。