Keita-Perse O, Roger P M, Pradier C, Pugliese P, Cottalorda J, Dellamonica P
Service des Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales, Hôpital l'Archet 1, Nice, France.
AIDS. 1998 Oct 22;12(15):F175-9. doi: 10.1097/00002030-199815000-00002.
Tritherapies including protease inhibitors improve clinical status and usually increase CD4 T cell count. However, the dissociation between the marked decreases in viral load and the incomplete restoration of CD4 cell counts with a three-drug combination has been reported. We assessed this potential difference among our patients.
Patients were enrolled when a protease inhibitor was prescribed to them for the first time. Using a computerized medical record (ADDIS), we retrospectively assessed a potential relationship between the increase in CD4 T cells (deltaCD4) at M3, M6 and variables including sex, age, CDC staging, protease inhibitor, prior antiviral therapy, CD8 and viral load at baseline. We used Epi-Info 6.4 and BMDP software.
Data were analyzed on 154 patients. The median CD4 T cell count was 157 at baseline, 215 at month 3 and 202 at month 6. The median viral load was 52000 copies at baseline, 530 at month 3 and 500 at month 6. In a univariate analysis, a significant relationship was found between deltaCD4 and CD8 at baseline. A statistically significant negative correlation appeared between the CD8 cell count at baseline and deltaCD4 at M6 (r=-0.28, Pearson). Moreover, we found that there also was a relationship between deltaCD4 and viral load at baseline. There was a correlation between deltaCD4 at M6 and the viral load at M0 (r=0.37, Pearson). In a multiple regression model, after CD8 count at baseline had been accounted for, we found a significant correlation between deltaCD4 and viral load at baseline (multiple r=0.33 at M3, and 0.40 at M6).
Patients with a low viral load do not benefit from as great an increase in CD4 T cell count as others when they receive a tritherapy including protease inhibitors. These results suggest that another mechanism rather than direct viral pathogenicity leads to CD4 T cell destruction. This mechanism may not be efficiently stopped by antiviral therapy, especially protease inhibitors.
包括蛋白酶抑制剂在内的三联疗法可改善临床状况,通常还会使CD4 T细胞计数增加。然而,已有报道称,三联药物组合在使病毒载量显著下降的同时,CD4细胞计数却未完全恢复,二者存在脱节现象。我们评估了我们的患者中存在的这种潜在差异。
患者首次接受蛋白酶抑制剂治疗时被纳入研究。利用计算机化病历(ADDIS),我们回顾性评估了第3个月、第6个月时CD4 T细胞增加量(deltaCD4)与包括性别、年龄、疾病控制中心(CDC)分期、蛋白酶抑制剂、既往抗病毒治疗、基线时的CD8和病毒载量等变量之间的潜在关系。我们使用了Epi-Info 6.4和BMDP软件。
对154例患者的数据进行了分析。基线时CD4 T细胞计数中位数为157,第3个月时为215,第6个月时为202。基线时病毒载量中位数为52000拷贝,第3个月时为530,第6个月时为500。在单变量分析中,发现deltaCD4与基线时的CD8之间存在显著关系。基线时的CD8细胞计数与第6个月时的deltaCD4之间出现了具有统计学意义的负相关(r = -0.28,Pearson检验)。此外,我们发现deltaCD4与基线时的病毒载量之间也存在关系。第6个月时的deltaCD4与第0个月时的病毒载量之间存在相关性(r = 0.37,Pearson检验)。在多元回归模型中,在考虑了基线时的CD8计数后,我们发现deltaCD4与基线时的病毒载量之间存在显著相关性(第3个月时复相关系数r = 0.33,第6个月时为0.40)。
病毒载量低的患者在接受包括蛋白酶抑制剂在内的三联疗法时,CD4 T细胞计数的增加幅度不如其他患者。这些结果表明,导致CD4 T细胞破坏的是另一种机制,而非直接的病毒致病性。这种机制可能无法通过抗病毒治疗,尤其是蛋白酶抑制剂得到有效阻断。