Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of boosted darunavir-based antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1-positive patients: results from a meta-analysis of clinical trials

Darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) is a second-generation protease inhibitor used in treatment-naïve and -experienced HIV-positive adult patients. To evaluate efficacy and safety in these patient settings, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. We considered eight studies involving 4...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Antinori, A., Lazzarin, A., Uglietti, A., Palma, M., Mancusi, D., Termini, R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5869729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29588457
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23375-6
Descripción
Sumario:Darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) is a second-generation protease inhibitor used in treatment-naïve and -experienced HIV-positive adult patients. To evaluate efficacy and safety in these patient settings, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. We considered eight studies involving 4240 antiretroviral treatment (ART)-naïve patients and 14 studies involving 2684 ART-experienced patients. Regarding efficacy in the ART-naive patients, the virological response rate was not significantly different between DRV/r and the comparator. For the ART-experienced failing patients, the virological response rate was significantly higher with DRV/r than with the comparator (RR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.01–2.08); conversely, no significant differences were found between the treatment-experienced and virologically controlled DRV/r and comparator groups. Regarding safety, the discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) and DRV/r-related serious adverse events (SAEs) did not significantly differ from the rates in the comparator group (RR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.59–1.19 and RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.57–1.05, respectively). Our meta-analysis indicated that DRV/r-based regimens were effective and tolerable for both types of patients, which was consistent with published data.