Clinical, Virologic, and Immunologic Response to Efavirenz-or Protease Inhibitor???Based Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in a Cohort of Antiretroviral-Naive Patients With Advanced HIV Infection (EfaVIP 2 Study)

Abstract

: In severely immunosuppressed, antiretroviral-naive, HIV-1-infected patients, treatment with an EFV-based regimen compared with a nonboosted PI-based regimen resulted in a superior virologic response with no difference in immunologic or clinical effectiveness.

The effect evaluation of highly active antiretroviral therapy to patients with AIDS in Hubei province of China

“…In our investigation, the mean of objects' baseline CD4 + T cell count added 114/μL and 116/μL after the therapy for 3 and 6 months respectively, which indicated that HAART was useful to reconstruct immune function. This result is also consistent with the investigative findings of other countries [12][13][14] .…”

Comparison of the effectiveness of initial combined antiretroviral therapy with nelfinavir or efavirenz at a university-based outpatient service in Brazil

“…Concerning antiretroviral effectiveness, the percentage of patients with an HIV-1 viral load <400 copies/mL at month 12 in the group of patients receiving EFV-based HAART was similar to those reported in other studies (10,19,20). However, a recently published systematic overview whose primary goal was the comparison of the effectiveness of a three-drug combination antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naive HIVinfected persons showed a higher effectiveness (73%) on the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors than that observed in our study (65%) (21).…”

Italian Consensus Statement on Management of HIV-Infected Individuals with Advanced Disease Naïve to Antiretroviral Therapy

“…A virologic, but not immunologic, superiority has been documented for non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI)-based regimens when these are compared to mostly unboosted protease inhibitor (PI)-based cART in randomized trials and retrospective cohort studies [31,32]. One randomized comparative trial performed in a naïve patient population containing a relevant proportion (about 40%) of patients with advanced HIV infection showed that lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-containing regimens were associated with a better CD4+ T cell count increase as well as with a reduced risk of resistance mutation development at treatment failure, while efavirenz-containing regimens showed more likely virologic success [33].…”

“…While numerous data are available on the potency of regimens containing efavirenz [32,34], empirical evidence for using regimens containing nevirapine in this population is limited (B-I). Even if specific studies on a direct comparison are lacking, regimens containing non-thymidine nucleoside analogues seem to be more desirable since they are associated with a better CD4+ cells recovery (B-I).…”