Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2013 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana / Analysis of costs and cost-effectiveness of preferred GESIDA/National AIDS Plan regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus infected adult patients in 2013

INTRODUCCIÓN: El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida ha propuesto «pautas preferentes» de tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV) como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por VIH para 2013. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. MÉTODOS: Evaluación económica de costes y eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral < 50 copias/ml en la semana 48 en análisis por intención de tratar. Se definió coste de iniciar tratamiento con una pauta como los costes del TARV y de todas sus consecuencias (efectos adversos [EA], cambios de pauta y estudio de resistencias) que se producen en las siguientes 48 semanas. Se utilizó la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud, considerando solo costes directos diferenciales: fármacos (a precio oficial), manejo de EA, estudios de resistencias y determinación de HLA B*5701. El ámbito es Espańa, con costes de 2013. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad determinista construyendo 3 escenarios para cada pauta: basal, más favorable y más desfavorable. RESULTADOS: En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 6.747 euros para TDF/FTC + NVP y 12.059 euros para TDF/FTC + RAL. La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC + LPV/r y ABC/3TC + ATV/r, y 0,87 para TDF/FTC + RAL y ABC/3TC + RAL. La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 8.396 y 13.930 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para TDF/FTC/RPV y TDF/FTC + RAL, respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Considerando el precio oficial del TARV, la pauta más eficiente fue TDF/FTC/RPV, seguida de las otras pautas que contienen no nucleósidos. El análisis de sensibilidad confirmó la robustez de estos hallazgos

INTRODUCTION: The GESIDA and National AIDS Plan panel of experts have proposed "preferred regimens" of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients for 2013. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and effectiveness of initiating treatment with these "preferred regimens". METHODS: An economic assessment of costs and effectiveness (cost/effectiveness) was performed using decision tree analysis models. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of having viral load < 50 copies/mL at week48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regime was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regime and drug resistance analyses) during the first 48 weeks. The perspective of the analysis is that of the National Health System was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies, and determination of HLA B*5701. The setting is Spain and the costs are those of 2013. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was performed, constructing three scenarios for each regimen: baseline, most favourable, and most unfavourable cases. RESULTS: In the baseline case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6,747euros for TDF/FTC+NVP to 12,059 euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The effectiveness ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and ABC/3TC+ATV/r, and 0.87 for TDF/FTC+RAL and ABC/3TC+RAL. Effectiveness, in terms of cost/effectiveness, varies between 8,396euros and 13,930 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for TDF/FTC/RPV and TDF/FTC+RAL, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Taking ART at official prices, the most effective regimen was TDF/FTC/RPV, followed by the rest of non-nucleoside containing regimens. The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings

[Analysis of costs and cost-effectiveness of preferred GESIDA/National AIDS Plan regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus infected adult patients in 2013]. / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2013 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana.

INTRODUCTION: The GESIDA and National AIDS Plan panel of experts have proposed "preferred regimens" of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients for 2013. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and effectiveness of initiating treatment with these "preferred regimens". METHODS: An economic assessment of costs and effectiveness (cost/effectiveness) was performed using decision tree analysis models. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of having viral load <50copies/mL at week48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regime was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regime and drug resistance analyses) during the first 48weeks. The perspective of the analysis is that of the National Health System was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies, and determination of HLA B*5701. The setting is Spain and the costs are those of 2013. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was performed, constructing three scenarios for each regimen: baseline, most favourable, and most unfavourable cases. RESULTS: In the baseline case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6,747euros for TDF/FTC+NVP to 12,059euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The effectiveness ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and ABC/3TC+ATV/r, and 0.87 for TDF/FTC+RAL and ABC/3TC+RAL. Effectiveness, in terms of cost/effectiveness, varies between 8,396euros and 13,930euros per responder at 48weeks, for TDF/FTC/RPV and TDF/FTC+RAL, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Taking ART at official prices, the most effective regimen was TDF/FTC/RPV, followed by the rest of non-nucleoside containing regimens. The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings.

[Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the preferred treatments by GESIDA/National Plan for AIDS for the initial antiretroviral therapy in adult human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infected patients in 2012]. / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida en 2012 para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial en adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH).

INTRODUCTION: The GESIDA and National AIDS Plan panel of experts propose «preferred regimens¼ of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients for 2012. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with these «preferred regimens¼. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) using decision tree analysis model. Efficacy was defined as the probability of having a viral load <50 copies/ml at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regime was defined as the costs of ART and all its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regime, and drug resistance analyses) during the first 48 weeks. The perspective of the analysis is that of the National Health System, considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance and determination of HLA B 5701. The setting is Spain and the costs are those of 2012. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regime: baseline, most favourable, and most unfavourable cases. RESULTS: In the baseline case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 6,895 euros for TDF/FTC+NVP to 12,067 euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The efficacy ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and 0.87 for TDF/FTC+RAL. Efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, varies between 9,387 and 13,823 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for TDF/FTC/EFV and TDF/FTC+RAL, respectively. In the most unfavourable scenario, the most efficient regime is TDF/FTC+NVP (9,742 per responder). CONCLUSION: Considering the official prices of ART, the most efficient regimens are TDF/FTC/EFV (baseline case and most favourable scenarios), and TDF/FTC+NVP (most unfavourable scenario).

Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial / Costs and cost effectiveness analysis of preferred GESIDA regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy

Introducción El panel de expertos de GESIDA/Plan Nacional del Sida propone «pautas preferentes» de tratamiento antirretroviral como terapia de inicio en pacientes infectados por el VIH. Las pautas preferentes se basan en resultados de ensayos clínicos y en la opinión de los expertos del panel. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los costes y la eficiencia (coste/eficacia) de iniciar tratamiento con estas pautas. Métodos Evaluación económica de los costes y de la eficiencia (coste/eficacia) mediante la construcción de árboles de decisión. Se definió eficacia como la probabilidad de tener carga viral <50 copias ml en la semana 48 un análisis por intención de tratar perspectiva es del sistema nacional salud habiéndose tenido cuenta solo los costes directos diferenciales fármacos manejo efectos adversos estudios resistencias y determinación hla b 5701 el ámbito España horizonte temporal semanas se refieren a 2011 realizó sensibilidad determinista construyendo tres escenarios para cada pauta: basal más favorable desfavorable Resultados En el escenario basal, los costes de iniciar tratamiento oscilaron entre 7.550 euros para ABC/3TC+EFV y 13.327 euros para TDF/FTC+RAL. La eficacia osciló entre 0,66 para ABC/3TC+LPV/r y 0,86 para TDF/FTC+RAL. La eficiencia, en términos de coste/eficacia, osciló entre 10.175 y 15.539 euros por respondedor a las 48 semanas, para TDF/FTC/EFV y TDF/FTC+RAL, respectivamente. Conclusión La pauta más eficiente fue TDF/FTC+EFV, seguida de ABC/3TC+EFV. El análisis de sensibilidad confirmó la robustez de estos hallazgos(AU)

Introduction GESIDA (AIDS Study Group) and the National AIDS Plan panel of experts propose “preferred regimens” of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients. These preferred regimens are based on the results of clinical trials, and on the opinions of the experts of the panel. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the cost effectiveness of initiating treatment following these guidelines. Methods Economic assessment of costs and cost effectiveness through the construction of decision trees. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of having viral load <50 copies ml at week 48 in an intention-to-treat analysis the perspective of is that national health system taking into account only differential direct costs art management adverse effects studies resistance and determination hla b 5701 area spain time horizon weeks are those 2011 a deterministic sensitivity was performed building three scenarios for each regimen: baseline most favourable unfavourable Results In the baseline scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 7,550 Euros for the ABC/3TC+EFV to 13,327 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The efficacy ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and 0.86 for TDF/FTC+RAL. Efficiency, in terms of cost effectiveness, varies between 10,175 and 15,539 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for TDF/FTC/EFV and TDF/FTC+RAL respectively. Conclusion The most efficient regimen was TDF/FTC+EFV, followed by ABC/3TC+EFV. Sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings (AU)

[Costs and cost effectiveness analysis of preferred GESIDA regimens for initial antiretroviral therapy]. / Análisis de costes y de coste/eficacia de las pautas preferentes de GESIDA para el tratamiento antirretroviral inicial.

INTRODUCTION: GESIDA (AIDS Study Group) and the National AIDS Plan panel of experts propose "preferred regimens" of antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV infected patients. These preferred regimens are based on the results of clinical trials, and on the opinions of the experts of the panel. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the cost effectiveness of initiating treatment following these guidelines. METHODS: Economic assessment of costs and cost effectiveness through the construction of decision trees. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of having viral load <50 copies/mL at week 48 in an intention-to-treat analysis. The perspective of the analysis is that of the National Health System, taking into account only the differential direct costs (ART, management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and determination of HLA B * 5701). The area is Spain, the time horizon is 48 weeks, and the costs are those of 2011. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed, building three scenarios for each regimen: baseline, the most favourable, and the most unfavourable. RESULTS: In the baseline scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 7,550 Euros for the ABC/3TC+EFV to 13,327 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL. The efficacy ranges between 0.66 for ABC/3TC+LPV/r and 0.86 for TDF/FTC+RAL. Efficiency, in terms of cost effectiveness, varies between 10,175 and 15,539 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for TDF/FTC/EFV and TDF/FTC+RAL respectively. CONCLUSION: The most efficient regimen was TDF/FTC+EFV, followed by ABC/3TC+EFV. Sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of these findings.

Eligibility for and outcome of treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in a cohort of HIV-infected people in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (TLTBI) in persons infected with the human immunodeficiency virus, but few studies have investigated the operational aspects of implementing TLTBI in the co-infected population.The study objectives were to describe eligibility for TLTBI as well as treatment prescription, initiation and completion in an HIV-infected Spanish cohort and to investigate factors associated with treatment completion. METHODS: Subjects were prospectively identified between 2000 and 2003 at ten HIV hospital-based clinics in Spain. Data were obtained from clinical records. Associations were measured using the odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: A total of 1242 subjects were recruited and 846 (68.1%) were evaluated for TLTBI. Of these, 181 (21.4%) were eligible for TLTBI either because they were tuberculin skin test (TST) positive (121) or because their TST was negative/unknown but they were known contacts of a TB case or had impaired immunity (60). Of the patients eligible for TLTBI, 122 (67.4%) initiated TLTBI: 99 (81.1%) were treated with isoniazid for 6, 9 or 12 months; and 23 (18.9%) with short-course regimens including rifampin plus isoniazid and/or pyrazinamide. In total, 70 patients (57.4%) completed treatment, 39 (32.0%) defaulted, 7 (5.7%) interrupted treatment due to adverse effects, 2 developed TB, 2 died, and 2 moved away. Treatment completion was associated with having acquired HIV infection through heterosexual sex as compared to intravenous drug use (OR:4.6; 95% CI:1.4-14.7) and with having taken rifampin and pyrazinamide for 2 months as compared to isoniazid for 9 months (OR:8.3; 95% CI:2.7-24.9). CONCLUSIONS: A minority of HIV-infected patients eligible for TLTBI actually starts and completes a course of treatment. Obstacles to successful implementation of this intervention need to be addressed.

[Factors related to non-prescription of tuberculin skin testing in a cohort of HIV-infected people]. / Factores asociados con la no realización de la prueba de la tuberculina en una cohorte de pacientes VIH positivos.

INTRODUCTION: Tuberculin skin testing (TST) for tuberculosis (TB) is recommended for all patients with HIV infection because of the known relationship between these two conditions. In this report we analyze the incidence and variables associated with non-prescription of TST in a cohort of HIV-infected people. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Longitudinal study conducted between 2000 and 2002 at 10 HIV hospital-based clinics. All HIV-infected patients who had not been regularly followed-up previously in dedicated clinics were identified. Data about TST and other variables related to TB were obtained from the clinical records. We calculated the percentage of patients who did not undergo TST and the associated factors, using odds ratios (ORs) and the 95% CI to investigate associations. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1242 patients met the inclusion criteria. TST was not performed in 185 patients (17.6% of those eligible). The fact of being an intravenous drug abuser was associated with a higher probability of TST non-prescription (OR: 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.5), whereas being unemployed (OR: 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.0), having a CD4 cell count >200 (CD4 200-499: OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9. CD4> or =500: OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6), and contact with persons with TB (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) were associated with a lower probability. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the percentage of TST non-prescription was quite high. The results suggest that TST non-prescription in this population is related to the clinicians' expectations regarding the results of the test and the patients' adherence to treatment for latent TB infection.

HIV-1 transmission cluster with T215D revertant mutation among newly diagnosed patients from the Basque Country, Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the introduction of HIV-1 genetic forms and to examine transmission clusters and resistance to antiretroviral inhibitors among newly diagnosed patients from the Basque Country, Spain, during 2004-2007. METHODS: A total of 261 samples, corresponding to 47.5% heterosexuals, 37.9% men who have sex with men (MSM), and 11.1% intravenous drug users were analyzed in protease and reverse transcriptase to examine phylogenetic relationships and drug resistance-associated mutations. RESULTS: Subtype B was detected in 220 (84.3%) samples and non-B subtype variants in 41 (15.7%) samples. Nearly half (47%) of the sequences grouped in transmission clusters. One of these comprised 14 individuals, 12 of them MSM, with the T215D revertan mutation. In largest transmission clusters, the percentage of MSM was higher than heterosexuals (P < 0.001). Resistance mutations were detected in 29 (11.1%) patients: 20 (7.6%) of them to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; 6 (2.3%) to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI); and 1 each to protease inhibitors, protease inhibitor plus NNRTI, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor plus NNRTI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore recommendations for HIV-1 genotyping in newly diagnosed patients not only to provide information on transmitted drug resistance as an issue in public health and as a guide to future therapy but also to document transmission clusters and to increase the necessary preventive measures.

Didanosine, lamivudine, and efavirenz versus zidovudine, lamivudine, and efavirenz for the initial treatment of HIV type 1 infection: final analysis (48 weeks) of a prospective, randomized, noninferiority clinical trial, GESIDA 3903.

BACKGROUND: The combination of didanosine, lamivudine, and efavirenz (ddI/3TC/EFV) for the initial treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection has been insufficiently analyzed in clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized study to compare the noninferiority of ddI/3TC/EFV with the lamivudine-zidovudine tablet and EFV (COM/EFV), both administered with food to improve tolerability and convenience. Patients were stratified by HIV-1 RNA level of <5.0 log(10) or > or =5.0 log(10) copies/mL. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with an HIV-1 RNA level of <50 copies/mL at week 48, determined by intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-nine patients were randomized: 186 for ddI/3TC/EFV treatment and 183 for COM/EFV treatment. Both groups were well matched in terms of baseline characteristics; 19.3% of patients received a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention assessment of clinical category C, median HIV RNA level was 5.0 log(10) copies/mL, and median CD4(+) cell count was 208 cells/microL. At week 48, by intention-to-treat analysis, 70% of patients in the ddI/3TC/EFV group and 63% of patients in the COM/EFV group had an HIV-1 RNA level of <50 copies/mL (treatment difference, 7.1%; 95% confidence interval, -2.39% to 16.59%). Fourteen patients (8%) in the ddI/3TC/EFV arm (not the COM/EFV arm) and 26 patients (14%) in the COM/EFV arm (not the ddI/3TC/EFV arm) [corrected] discontinued the study medication because of adverse events (P = .046). One patient (1%) in the ddI/3TC/EFV arm and 11 patients (6%) in the COM/EFV arm discontinued medication because of hematological toxicity (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: At week 48, ddI/3TC/EFV administered once per day with food did not have results inferior to those of COM/EFV treatment. A statistically significantly higher proportion of patients in the COM/EFV arm than in the ddI/3TC/EFV arm discontinued therapy because of adverse events, mainly because of hematological toxicity. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00256828.

Síndrome general, tos y nódulo pulmonar cavitado en una paciente con VIH sin tratamiento antirretroviral / Systemic symptoms, cough and cavitated pulmonary nodule in an untreated HIV patient

No disponible

[Spanish GESIDA/Nacional AIDS Plan Recommendations for antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected Adults (October 2004)]. / Recomendaciones de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida respecto al tratamiento antirretroviral en pacientes adultos infectados por el VIH (octubre 2004).

OBJECTIVE: This consensus document is an update of antiretroviral therapy (ART) recommendations for adult patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). METHODS: To formulate these recommendations, a panel composed of members of the Grupo de Estudio de Sida (GESIDA; AIDS Study Group) and the Plan Nacional sobre el Sida (PNS; Spanish AIDS Plan) reviewed the advances in current understanding of the pathophysiology of HIV, the safety and efficacy findings from clinical trials, and the results from cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in biomedical journals or presented at scientific meetings over the last years. Three levels of evidence were defined according to the source of the data: randomized studies (level A), cohort or case-control studies (level B), and expert opinion (level C). The decision to recommend, consider or not recommend ART was established in each of these situations. RESULTS: ART consisting of at least three drugs is currently the initial treatment of choice for chronic HIV infection. These regimens should include 2 NRTI + 1 NNRTI or 2 NRTI + 1 PI. Initiation of ART is recommended in patients with symptomatic HIV infection. In asymptomatic patients, initiation of ART is recommended on the basis of CD4+ lymphocyte counts per L and plasma viral load, as follows: 1) Therapy should be started in patients with CD4+ counts of < 200 cells/microL; 2) Therapy should be started in most patients with CD4+ counts of 200-350 cells/microL, although it can be delayed when CD4+ count persists at around 350 cells/microL and viral load is low; and 3) Initiation of therapy can be delayed in patients with CD4+ counts of > 350 cells/microL. The initial objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable viral load. Adherence to therapy plays an essential role in maintaining the antiviral response. Because of the development of cross resistance, therapeutic options are limited when ART fails. Genotype studies are useful in these cases. Toxicity is a limiting factor in the use of ART, although the benefits outweigh the risks. In addition, the criteria for the use of ART are discussed in situations of acute infection, pregnancy, and post-exposure prophylaxis, and in the management of co-infection of HIV with HCV or HBV. CONCLUSIONS: CD4+ lymphocyte count is the most important reference factor for initiating ART in asymptomatic patients. The large number of available drugs, the increased sensitivity of tests to monitor viral load, and the possibility to determine viral resistance is leading to a more individualized approach to therapy.

Obstrucción intestinal en una mujer previamente sana / Intestinal occlusion in a previously healthy woman

No disponible

Características clinicoepidemiológicas de los pacientes recién diagnosticados de infección por el VIH / Clinico-epidemiological characterístic of recently diagnoses HIV-infected patients

No disponible

Tratamiento antirretroviral inicial / Initial antiretroviral treatment

Se revisa cuándo y con qué empezar el tratamiento antirretroviral (TARV). Con los actuales fármacos éste debe ser de por vida. El iniciar antes o después el TARV puede variar de forma sustancial el tiempo de exposición a los fármacos y obviar los inconvenientes de la terapia. En el otro lado de la balanza hay que poner el riesgo de progresión a sida o muerte que pueda acarrear el retraso del TARV. En los últimos 2 años se han publicado estudios de cohortes de pacientes con TARV que han favorecido una actitud más conservadora a la hora de iniciar el tratamiento. Desde las anteriores recomendaciones de GESIDA/PNS no ha habido cambios sustanciales en lo que se refiere a nuevos fármacos. Se revisa el papel de las nuevas formulaciones de fármacos previamente disponibles, de las pautas con inhibidores de la transcriptasa inversa no nucleósidos (ITINN) y del uso reforzado de los inhibidores de la proteasa (IP) (AU)

We reviewed when and with what to begin antiretroviral treatment (ARVT). With current drugs, antiretroviral treatment has to be for life. Beginning ARVT earlier or later can substantially vary the time exposed to the drugs and avoid drawbacks to the therapy. Balanced against this is the risk of progression to AIDS or death which delay in giving ARVT may occasion. In the last two years studies of cohorts of patients on ARVT have supported a more conservative approach to starting treatment. There have been no substantial changes in new drugs since earlier recommendations of Gesida/PNSS. The function of new formulae of previously available drugs, of ANNTI models and the reinforced use of the IP are reviewed (AU)

[Recommendations of the Spanish AIDS Study Group (GESIDA) and the National Aids Plan (PNS) for antiretroviral treatment in adult patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection in 2002]. / Recomendaciones de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida respecto al tratamiento antirretroviral en pacientes adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana en el año 2002.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update of recommendation on antiretroviral treatment (ART) in HIV-infected adults.Methods. These recommendations have been agreed by consensus by a committee of the spanish AIDS Study Group (GESIDA) and the National AIDS Plan. To do so, advances in the physiopathology of AIDS and the results on efficacy and safety in clinical trials, cohort and pharmacokinetics studies published in biomedical journals or presented at congresses in the last few years have been reviewed. Three levels of evidence have been defined according to the data source: randomized studies (level A), case-control or cohort studies (level B) and expert opinion (level C). Whether to recommend, consider, or not to recommend ART has been established for each situation. RESULTS: Currently, ART with combinations of at least three drugs constitutes the treatment of choice in chronic HIV infection. In patients with symptomatic HIV infection, initiation of ART is recommended. In asymptomatic patients initiation of ART should be based on the CD41/mL lymphocyte count and on the plasma viral load (PVL): a) in patients with CD41 lymphocytes < 200 cells/mL, initiation of ART is recommended; b) in patients with CD41 lymphocytes between 200 and 300 cells/mL, initiation of ART should, in most cases, be recommended; however, it could be delayed when the CD41 lymphocyte count remains close to 350 cells/mL and the PVL is low, and c) in patients with CD41 lymphocytes > 350 cells/mL, initiation of ART can be delayed. The aim of ART is to achieve an undetectable PVL. Adherence to ART plays a role in the durability of the antiviral response. Because of the development of cross-resistance, the therapeutic options in treatment failure are limited. In these cases, genotypic analysis is useful. Toxicity limits ART. The criteria for ART in acute infection, pregnancy and postexposure prophylaxis and in the management of coinfection with HIV and hepatitis C and B virus are controversial. CONCLUSIONS: The current approach to initiating ART is more conservative than in previous recommendations. In asymptomatic patients, the CD41 lymphocyte count is the most important reference factor for initiating ART. Because of the considerable number of drugs available, more sensitive monitoring methods (PVL) and the possibility of determining resistance, therapeutic strategies have become much more individualized.

Recomendaciones de GESIDA/Plan Nacional sobre el Sida respecto al tratamiento antirretroviral en pacientes adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana en el año 2002 / Spanish GESIDA/National AIDS Plan Recommendations for antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected Adults in the year 2002

Objetivo. Efectuar una puesta al día de las recomendaciones sobre el tratamiento antirretroviral (TAR) para los adultos infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH). Métodos. Estas recomendaciones se han consensuado por un comité del Grupo de Estudio de Sida (GESIDA) y del Plan Nacional sobre el Sida (PNS). Para ello, se han revisado los avances en la fisiopatología del VIH, los resultados de eficacia y seguridad de ensayos clínicos, estudios de cohortes y de farmacocinética, publicados en revistas biomédicas o presentados en congresos en los últimos años. Se han definido tres niveles de evidencia según la procedencia de los datos: estudios aleatorizados (nivel A), de cohortes o de caso-control (nivel B) u opinión de expertos (nivel C). En cada una de las situaciones se ha establecido recomendar, considerar o no recomendar el TAR. Resultados. En el momento actual, el TAR con combinaciones de al menos 3 fármacos constituye el tratamiento de elección de la infección crónica por el VIH.En los pacientes con una infección por VIH sintomática se recomienda iniciar el TAR. En los pacientes asintomáticos el inicio de TAR se basará en la cifra de linfocitos CD4+/microI y en la carga viral plasmática (CVP): a) en pacientes con linfocitos CD4 350 cél./microl se puede diferir el inicio del TAR. El objetivo del TAR es lograr una CVP indetectable. La adherencia al TAR tiene un papel en la durabilidad de la respuesta antiviral. Las opciones terapéuticas en los fracasos del TAR son limitadas por la aparición de resistencias cruzadas. Los estudios genotípicos en estos casos son de utilidad. La toxicidad es un factor limitante del TAR. También se discuten los criterios de TAR de la infección aguda, embarazo y profilaxis postexposición, y el manejo de la coinfección por el VIH y los virus de las hepatitis B y C (VHC y VHB). Conclusiones. En la actualidad existe una actitud más conservadora para iniciar el TAR que en recomendaciones previas. La cifra de linfocitos CD4+ es el factor de referencia más importante para iniciar el TAR en pacientes asintomáticos. Por otra parte, el número considerable de fármacos disponibles, los métodos de monitorización más sensibles (CVP) y la posibilidad de determinar las resistencias hacen que las estrategias terapéuticas sean mucho más individualizadas (AU)