It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
Efavirenz (EFV) and boosted protease inhibitors (bPIs) are still the preferred options for firstline antiretroviral regimens (firstline ART) in Latin America and have comparable short-term efficacy. We assessed the long-term durability and outcomes of patients receiving EFV or bPIs as firstline ART in the Caribbean, Central and South America network for HIV epidemiology (CCASAnet).
Methods
We included ART-naïve, HIV-positive adults on EFV or bPIs as firstline ART in CCASAnet between 2000 and 2016. We investigated the time from starting until ending firstline ART according to changes of third component for any reason, including toxicity and treatment failure, death, and/or loss to follow-up. Use of a third-line regimen was a secondary outcome. Kaplan-Meier estimators of composite end points were generated. Crude cumulative incidence of events and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were estimated accounting for competing risk events.
Results
We included 14 519 patients: 12 898 (89%) started EFV and 1621 (11%) bPIs. The adjusted median years on firstline ART were 4.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4–4.7) on EFV and 3.8 (95% CI, 3.8–4.0) on bPI (P < .001). Cumulative incidence of firstline ART ending at 10 years of follow-up was 32% (95% CI, 31–33) on EFV and 44% (95% CI, 39–48) on bPI (aHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78–0.97). The cumulative incidence rates of third-line initiation in the bPI-based group were 6% (95% CI, 2.4–9.6) and 2% (95% CI, 1.4–2.2) among the EFV-based group (P < .01).
Conclusions
Durability of firstline ART was longer with EFV than with bPIs. EFV-based regimens may continue to be the preferred firstline regimen for our region in the near future due to their high efficacy, relatively low toxicity (especially at lower doses), existence of generic formulations, and affordability for national programs.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Departmento de Infectología, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición “Salvador Zubirán,” Mexico City, Mexico
2 Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
3 Instituto de Pesquisa Clínica Evandro Chagas, Fundacão Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
4 Fundacion Arriaran, University of Chile School of Medicine, Santiago, Chile
5 Les Centres GHESKIO, Port-au-Prince, Haiti; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
6 Instituto Hondureño de Seguridad Social, Tegucigalpa, Honduras
7 Instituto de Medicina Tropical Alexander von Humboldt, Lima, Peru