Efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in antiretroviral‐experienced subjects infected with different subtypes of HIV‐1

Maroldo, Laura; Fredrick, LM; Robinson-Morgan, K; Trinh, Roger; Podsadecki, TJ

doi:10.1186/1758-2652-13-s4-p30

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four genotypic resistance-evaluation algorithms were developed for interpretation of genotypic data for this drug [36] – [39] and used in clinical practice. Both the number of mutations that contribute to resistance and the combinations in which they appear have been studied [40] – [45] , but a broad comparison of accumulation of mutations and long-term treatment outcome in the different subtypes is still limited [32] , [33] , [46] , [47] . Analysis of potential differences is confounded by dissimilarities in the conditions existing in different countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparable Long-Term Efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Similar Drug-Resistance Profiles in Different HIV-1 Subtypes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAnalysis of potentially different impact of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (LPV/r) on non-B subtypes is confounded by dissimilarities in the conditions existing in different countries. We retrospectively compared its impact on populations infected with subtypes B and C in Israel, where patients infected with different subtypes receive the same treatment.MethodsClinical and demographic data were reported by physicians. Resistance was tested after treatment failure. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS.Results607 LPV/r treated patients (365 male) were included. 139 had HIV subtype B, 391 C, and 77 other subtypes. At study end 429 (71%) were receiving LPV/r. No significant differences in PI treatment history and in median viral-load (VL) at treatment initiation and termination existed between subtypes. MSM discontinued LPV/r more often than others even when the virologic outcome was good (p = 0.001). VL was below detection level in 81% of patients for whom LPV/r was first PI and in 67% when it was second (P = 0.001). Median VL decrease from baseline was 1.9±0.1 logs and was not significantly associated with subtype. Median CD4 increase was: 162 and 92cells/µl, respectively, for patients receiving LPV/r as first and second PI (P = 0.001), and 175 and 98, respectively, for subtypes B and C (P<0.001). Only 52 (22%) of 237 patients genotyped while under LPV/r were fully resistant to the drug; 12(5%) were partially resistant. In48%, population sequencing did not reveal resistance to any drug notwithstanding the virologic failure. No difference was found in the rates of resistance development between B and C (p = 0.16).ConclusionsTreatment with LPV/r appeared efficient and tolerable in both subtypes, B and C, but CD4 recovery was significantly better in virologically suppressed subtype-B patients. In both subtypes, LPV/r was more beneficial when given as first PI. Mostly, reasons other than resistance development caused discontinuation of treatment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparable Long-Term Efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Similar Drug-Resistance Profiles in Different HIV-1 Subtypes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in antiretroviral‐experienced subjects infected with different subtypes of HIV‐1

Abstract: 7‐11 November 2010, Tenth International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection, Glasgow, UK

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Comparable Long-Term Efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Similar Drug-Resistance Profiles in Different HIV-1 Subtypes

Comparable Long-Term Efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Similar Drug-Resistance Profiles in Different HIV-1 Subtypes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About