HIV drug therapy duration; a Swedish real world nationwide cohort study on InfCareHIV 2009-2014.

BACKGROUND: As HIV infection needs a lifelong treatment, studying drug therapy duration and factors influencing treatment durability is crucial. The Swedish database InfCareHIV includes high quality data from more than 99% of all patients diagnosed with HIV infection in Sweden and provides a unique opportunity to examine outcomes in a nationwide real world cohort. METHODS: Adult patients who started a new therapy defined as a new 3rd agent (all antiretrovirals that are not N[t]RTIs) 2009-2014 with more than 100 observations in treatment-naive or treatment-experienced patients were included. Dolutegravir was excluded due to short follow up period. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios for treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: In treatment-naïve 2541 patients started 2583 episodes of treatments with a 3rd agent. Efavirenz was most commonly used (n = 1096) followed by darunavir (n = 504), atazanavir (n = 386), lopinavir (n = 292), rilpivirine (n = 156) and raltegravir (n = 149). In comparison with efavirenz, patients on rilpivirine were least likely to discontinue treatment (adjusted HR 0.33; 95% CI 0.20-0.54, p<0.001), while patients on lopinavir were most likely to discontinue treatment (adjusted HR 2.80; 95% CI 2.30-3.40, p<0.001). Also raltegravir was associated with early treatment discontinuation (adjusted HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.12-1.92, p = 0.005). The adjusted HR for atazanavir and darunavir were not significantly different from efavirenz. In treatment-experienced 2991 patients started 4552 episodes of treatments with a 3rd agent. Darunavir was most commonly used (n = 1285), followed by atazanavir (n = 806), efavirenz (n = 694), raltegravir (n = 622), rilpivirine (n = 592), lopinavir (n = 291) and etravirine (n = 262). Compared to darunavir all other drugs except for rilpivirine (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.52-0.83, p<0.001) had higher risk for discontinuation in the multivariate adjusted analyses; atazanavir (HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.48-1.97, p<0.001), efavirenz (HR 1.86; 95% CI 1.59-2.17, p<0.001), raltegravir (HR 1.35; 95% CI 1.15-1.58, p<0.001), lopinavir (HR 3.58; 95% CI 3.02-4.25, p<0.001) and etravirine (HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.31-1.98, p<0.001).Besides the 3rd agent chosen also certain baseline characteristics of patients were independently associated with differences in treatment duration. In naive patients, presence of an AIDS-defining diagnosis and the use of other backbone than TDF/FTC or ABC/3TC increased the risk for early treatment discontinuation. In treatment-experienced patients, detectable plasma viral load at the time of switch or being highly treatment experienced increased the risk for early treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment durability is dependent on several factors among others patient characteristics and ART guidelines. The choice of 3rd agent has a strong impact and significant differences between different drugs on treatment duration exist.

Patient preferences in severe COPD and asthma: a comprehensive literature review.

BACKGROUND: Management of chronic incurable diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma is difficult. Incorporation of patient preferences is widely encouraged. PURPOSE: To summarize original research articles determining patient preference in moderate-to-severe disease. METHODS: Acceptable articles consisted of original research determining preferences for any aspect of care in patients with COPD/asthma. The target population included those with severe disease; however, articles were accepted if they separated outcomes by severity or if the majority had at least moderate-to-severe disease. We also accepted simulation research based on scenarios describing situations involving moderate-to-severe disease that elicited preferences. Two reviewers searched Medline and Embase for articles published from the date of inception of the databases until the end of November 2014, with differences resolved through consensus discussion. Data were tabulated and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: About 478 articles identified, 448 were rejected and 30 analyzed. There were 25 on COPD and five on asthma. Themes identified as most important in COPD were symptom relief (dyspnea/breathlessness), a positive patient-physician relationship, quality-of-life impairments, and information availability. Patients strongly preferred sponsors' inhalers. At end-of-life, 69% preferred receiving CPR, 70% wanted noninvasive, and 58% invasive mechanical intervention. While patients with asthma preferred treatments that increased symptom-free days, they were willing to trade days without symptoms for a reduction in adverse events and greater convenience. Asthma patients were willing to pay for waking up once and not needing their inhaler over waking up once overnight and needing their inhaler. CONCLUSION: Few studies have examined patient preference in these diseases. More research is needed to fill in knowledge gaps.