Back to Search Start Over

Time to treatment disruption in children with HIV-1 randomized to initial antiretroviral therapy with protease inhibitors versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

Authors :
Yin, Dwight E.
Ludema, Christina
Cole, Stephen R.
Golin, Carol E.
Miller, William C.
Warshaw, Meredith G.
McKinney, Ross E.
Source :
PLoS ONE. 11/23/2020, Vol. 15 Issue 11, p1-18. 18p.
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Background: Choice of initial antiretroviral therapy regimen may help children with HIV maintain optimal, continuous therapy. We assessed treatment-naïve children for differences in time to treatment disruption across randomly-assigned protease inhibitor versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based initial antiretroviral therapy. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter phase 2/3, randomized, open-label trial in Europe, North and South America from 2002 to 2009. Children aged 31 days to <18 years, who were living with HIV-1 and treatment-naive, were randomized to antiretroviral therapy with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus a protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Time to first documented treatment disruption to any component of antiretroviral therapy, derived from treatment records and adherence questionnaires, was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimators and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The modified intention-to-treat analysis included 263 participants. Seventy-two percent (n = 190) of participants experienced at least one treatment disruption during study. At 4 years, treatment disruption probabilities were 70% (protease inhibitor) vs. 63% (non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for treatment disruptions comparing protease inhibitor vs. non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based regimens was 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88–1.61 (adjusted HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.91–1.68). By study end, treatment disruption probabilities converged (protease inhibitor 81%, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor 84%) with unadjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84–1.48 (adjusted HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84–1.50). Reported reasons for treatment disruptions suggested that participants on protease inhibitors experienced greater tolerability problems. Conclusions: Children had similar time to treatment disruption for initial protease inhibitor and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy, despite greater reported tolerability problems with protease inhibitor regimens. Initial pediatric antiretroviral therapy with either a protease inhibitor or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor may be acceptable for maintaining optimal, continuous therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
19326203
Volume :
15
Issue :
11
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
PLoS ONE
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
147160007
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242405