Back to Search Start Over

Implication of First-Line Antiretroviral Therapy Choice on Second-Line Options

Authors :
Chika K. Onwuamah
Phyllis J. Kanki
Jay Osi Samuels
E O Idigbe
Mukhtar Ahmed
Ibrahim Dalhatu
Georgina N. Odaibo
Chunfu Yang
Elliot Raizes
Holly Rawizza
Godwin E. Imade
Seema T. Meloni
Rosemary A. Audu
Adesola Z. Musa
Jonathan Okpokwu
Prosper Okonkwo
Innocent A. O. Ujah
Beth Chaplin
Muhammad A Mu’azu
Oliver Ezechi
David O. Olaleye
Oche Agbaji
Source :
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Publication Year :
2017
Publisher :
Oxford University Press (OUP), 2017.

Abstract

BackgroundAlthough there are a number of studies comparing the currently recommended preferred and alternative first-line (1L) antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens on clinical outcomes, there are limited data examining the impact of 1L regimen choice and duration of virologic failure (VF) on accumulation of drug resistance mutations (DRM). The patterns of DRM from patients failing zidovudine (AZT)-containing versus tenofovir (TDF)-containing ART were assessed to evaluate the predicted susceptibility to second-line (2L) nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone options in the context of an ongoing programmatic setting that uses viral load (VL) monitoring.MethodsPaired samples from Nigerian ART patients who experienced VF and switched to 2L ART were retrospectively identified. For each sample, the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 polymerase gene was sequenced at 2 time points, and DRM was analyzed using Stanford University’s HIVdb program.ResultsSequences were generated for 191 patients. At time of 2L switch, 28.2% of patients on AZT-containing regimens developed resistance to TDF, whereas only 6.8% of patients on TDF-containing 1L had mutations compromising susceptibility to AZT. In a stratified evaluation, patients with 0–6 months between tested VL samples had no difference in proportion compromised to 2L, whereas those with >6 months between samples had a statistically significant difference in proportion with compromised 2L NRTI. In multivariate analyses, patients on 1L AZT had 9.90 times higher odds of having a compromised 2L NRTI option than patients on 1L TDF.ConclusionsIn the context of constrained resources, where VL monitoring is limited, we present further evidence to support use of TDF as the preferred 1L NRTI because it allows for preservation of the recommended 2L NRTI option.

Details

ISSN :
23288957
Volume :
4
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....e74e8f0914c7dbd3f813c5663166ba24
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofx233