Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Nevirapine/zidovudine/lamivudine has superior immunological and virological responses not reflected in clinical outcomes in a 48-week randomized comparison with abacavir/zidovudine/lamivudine in HIV-infected Ugandan adults with low CD4 cell counts.
Munderi, P; Walker, A S; Kityo, C; Babiker, A G; Ssali, F; Reid, A; Darbyshire, J H; Grosskurth, H; Mugyenyi, P; Gibb, D M; Gilks, C F.
Affiliation
  • Munderi P; MRC/UVRI Uganda Research Unit on AIDS, Entebbe, Uganda.
HIV Med ; 11(5): 334-44, 2010 May.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20136661
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Triple nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor regimens have advantages as first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART), avoiding hepatotoxicity and interactions with anti-tuberculosis therapy, and sparing two drug classes for second-line ART. Concerns exist about virological potency; efficacy has not been assessed in Africa.

METHODS:

A safety trial comparing nevirapine with abacavir was conducted in two Ugandan Development of Antiretroviral Therapy in Africa (DART) centres 600 symptomatic antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected adults with CD4 counts <200 cells/microL were randomized to zidovudine/lamivudine plus abacavir or nevirapine (placebo-controlled to 24-week primary toxicity endpoint, and then open-label). Documented World Health Organization (WHO) stage 4 events were independently reviewed and plasma HIV-1 RNA assayed retrospectively. Exploratory efficacy analyses are intention-to-treat.

RESULTS:

The median pre-ART CD4 count was 99 cells/microL, and the median pre-ART viral load was 284 600 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL. A total of 563 participants (94%) completed 48 weeks of follow-up, 25 (4%) died and 12 (2%) were lost to follow-up. The randomized drug was substituted in 21 participants (7%) receiving abacavir vs. 34 (11%) receiving nevirapine (P=0.09). At 48 weeks, 62% of participants receiving abacavir vs. 77% of those receiving nevirapine had viral loads <50 copies/mL (P<0.001), and mean CD4 count increases from baseline were +147 vs. +173 cells/microL, respectively (P=0.006). Nine participants (3%) receiving abacavir vs. 16 (5%) receiving nevirapine died [hazard ratio (HR) 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-1.25; P=0.15]; 20 receiving abacavir vs. 32 receiving nevirapine developed new or recurrent WHO 4 events or died (HR=0.60; 95% CI 0.34-1.05; P=0.07) and 48 receiving abacavir vs. 68 receiving nevirapine developed new or recurrent WHO 3 or 4 events or died (HR=0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.96; P=0.03). Seventy-one participants (24%) receiving abacavir experienced 91 grade 4 adverse events compared with 130 events in 109 participants (36%) on nevirapine (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

The clear virological/immunological superiority of nevirapine over abacavir was not reflected in clinical outcomes over 48 weeks. The inability of CD4 cell count/viral load to predict initial clinical treatment efficacy is unexplained and requires further evaluation.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: HIV Infections / HIV-1 / Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Country/Region as subject: Africa Language: En Journal: HIV Med Journal subject: SINDROME DA IMUNODEFICIENCIA ADQUIRIDA (AIDS) Year: 2010 Type: Article Affiliation country: Uganda

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: HIV Infections / HIV-1 / Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Country/Region as subject: Africa Language: En Journal: HIV Med Journal subject: SINDROME DA IMUNODEFICIENCIA ADQUIRIDA (AIDS) Year: 2010 Type: Article Affiliation country: Uganda