Cargando…
Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials
INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of protease inhibitor monotherapy has been analyzed with different endpoints: initial HIV-1 RNA rebound, long-term HIV-1 RNA suppression after re-intensification, treatment-emergent drug resistance, neurocognitive testing and HIV-1 RNA in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). MET...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
International AIDS Society
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4225292/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25397532 http://dx.doi.org/10.7448/IAS.17.4.19788 |
_version_ | 1782343476086571008 |
---|---|
author | Arribas, Jose Girard, Pierre-Marie Paton, Nicholas Winston, Alan Marcelin, Anne-Genevieve Elbirt, Daniel Hill, Andrew Blanca Hadacek, Maria |
author_facet | Arribas, Jose Girard, Pierre-Marie Paton, Nicholas Winston, Alan Marcelin, Anne-Genevieve Elbirt, Daniel Hill, Andrew Blanca Hadacek, Maria |
author_sort | Arribas, Jose |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of protease inhibitor monotherapy has been analyzed with different endpoints: initial HIV-1 RNA rebound, long-term HIV-1 RNA suppression after re-intensification, treatment-emergent drug resistance, neurocognitive testing and HIV-1 RNA in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). METHODS: A PUBMED search identified nine randomised trials of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy in patients with HIV RNA<50 copies/mL at baseline. Results from the recently completed PROTEA trial were also included. The percentage of patients with HIV RNA suppression <50 copies/mL was analyzed using switch equals failure and intensification included endpoints (ITT). The number of patients with new drug resistance mutations, HIV RNA in the CSF or change in neurocognitive function was analyzed by treatment arm. RESULTS: Four trials evaluated darunavir/r monotherapy (n=785: MONET, MONOI, MONARCH, PROTEA), five evaluated lopinavir/r monotherapy (n=592: OK-04, KalMo, KALESOLO, KRETA, MOST) and one evaluated both (MRC PIVOT, n=587). HIV-1 RNA suppression rates tended to be lower on PI monotherapy than triple therapy in “switch equals failure” analysis (76% vs 82%), but not when the outcome of intensification was included (87% vs 85%). There were small numbers of patients taking PI monotherapy with detectable HIV-1 RNA in the CSF, in three trials: PROTEA (n=2), MONOI (n=2) and MOST (n=5), but only two cases of CSF viral escape (MONOI). In two trials, there was no difference in neurocognitive test results between PI monotherapy and triple therapy, based on z-scores from five domains (in PROTEA, mean change in NPZ-5 score=0.0 for DRV/r monotherapy vs −0.10 for triple therapy); similar results were observed in the MRC PIVOT trial. The risk of treatment emergent NRTI or PI resistance (Table 1) was 11/973 (1.1%) for patients on PI monotherapy, versus 7/991 (0.7%) for patients on triple therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In 10 randomised trials of 1964 patients with HIV-1 RNA suppression at baseline, PI monotherapy showed a higher risk of HIV RNA elevations, and small numbers with HIV RNA detectable in CSF and concomitantly in the plasma. However there was no increased risk of treatment-emergent drug resistance, neurocognitive endpoints were not different between the arms and HIV-1 RNA suppression rates after intensification were similar between PI monotherapy and triple therapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4225292 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | International AIDS Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42252922014-11-12 Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials Arribas, Jose Girard, Pierre-Marie Paton, Nicholas Winston, Alan Marcelin, Anne-Genevieve Elbirt, Daniel Hill, Andrew Blanca Hadacek, Maria J Int AIDS Soc Poster Sessions – Abstract P256 INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of protease inhibitor monotherapy has been analyzed with different endpoints: initial HIV-1 RNA rebound, long-term HIV-1 RNA suppression after re-intensification, treatment-emergent drug resistance, neurocognitive testing and HIV-1 RNA in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). METHODS: A PUBMED search identified nine randomised trials of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy in patients with HIV RNA<50 copies/mL at baseline. Results from the recently completed PROTEA trial were also included. The percentage of patients with HIV RNA suppression <50 copies/mL was analyzed using switch equals failure and intensification included endpoints (ITT). The number of patients with new drug resistance mutations, HIV RNA in the CSF or change in neurocognitive function was analyzed by treatment arm. RESULTS: Four trials evaluated darunavir/r monotherapy (n=785: MONET, MONOI, MONARCH, PROTEA), five evaluated lopinavir/r monotherapy (n=592: OK-04, KalMo, KALESOLO, KRETA, MOST) and one evaluated both (MRC PIVOT, n=587). HIV-1 RNA suppression rates tended to be lower on PI monotherapy than triple therapy in “switch equals failure” analysis (76% vs 82%), but not when the outcome of intensification was included (87% vs 85%). There were small numbers of patients taking PI monotherapy with detectable HIV-1 RNA in the CSF, in three trials: PROTEA (n=2), MONOI (n=2) and MOST (n=5), but only two cases of CSF viral escape (MONOI). In two trials, there was no difference in neurocognitive test results between PI monotherapy and triple therapy, based on z-scores from five domains (in PROTEA, mean change in NPZ-5 score=0.0 for DRV/r monotherapy vs −0.10 for triple therapy); similar results were observed in the MRC PIVOT trial. The risk of treatment emergent NRTI or PI resistance (Table 1) was 11/973 (1.1%) for patients on PI monotherapy, versus 7/991 (0.7%) for patients on triple therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In 10 randomised trials of 1964 patients with HIV-1 RNA suppression at baseline, PI monotherapy showed a higher risk of HIV RNA elevations, and small numbers with HIV RNA detectable in CSF and concomitantly in the plasma. However there was no increased risk of treatment-emergent drug resistance, neurocognitive endpoints were not different between the arms and HIV-1 RNA suppression rates after intensification were similar between PI monotherapy and triple therapy. International AIDS Society 2014-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4225292/ /pubmed/25397532 http://dx.doi.org/10.7448/IAS.17.4.19788 Text en © 2014 Arribas J et al; licensee International AIDS Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Poster Sessions – Abstract P256 Arribas, Jose Girard, Pierre-Marie Paton, Nicholas Winston, Alan Marcelin, Anne-Genevieve Elbirt, Daniel Hill, Andrew Blanca Hadacek, Maria Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title | Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title_full | Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title_short | Efficacy of PI monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
title_sort | efficacy of pi monotherapy versus triple therapy for 1964 patients in 10 randomised trials |
topic | Poster Sessions – Abstract P256 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4225292/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25397532 http://dx.doi.org/10.7448/IAS.17.4.19788 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT arribasjose efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT girardpierremarie efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT patonnicholas efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT winstonalan efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT marcelinannegenevieve efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT elbirtdaniel efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT hillandrew efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials AT blancahadacekmaria efficacyofpimonotherapyversustripletherapyfor1964patientsin10randomisedtrials |