Publication:
A randomized comparison of second-line lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy versus tenofovir/lamivudine/lopinavir/ritonavir in patients failing NNRTI regimens: The HIV STAR study

dc.contributor.authorTorsak Bunupuradahen_US
dc.contributor.authorPloenchan Chetchotisakden_US
dc.contributor.authorJintanat Ananworanichen_US
dc.contributor.authorWarangkana Munsakulen_US
dc.contributor.authorSupunnee Jirajariyavejen_US
dc.contributor.authorPacharee Kantipongen_US
dc.contributor.authorWisit Prasithsirikulen_US
dc.contributor.authorSomnuek Sungkanuparphen_US
dc.contributor.authorChureeratana Bowonwatanuwongen_US
dc.contributor.authorVirat Klinbuayaemen_US
dc.contributor.authorStephen J. Kerren_US
dc.contributor.authorJiratchaya Sophonphanen_US
dc.contributor.authorSorakij Bhakeecheepen_US
dc.contributor.authorBernard Hirschelen_US
dc.contributor.authorKiat Ruxrungthamen_US
dc.contributor.otherThe HIV Netherlands Australia Thailand Research Collaborationen_US
dc.contributor.otherKhon Kaen Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherSEARCHen_US
dc.contributor.otherChulalongkorn Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherBangkok Metropolitan Administrationen_US
dc.contributor.otherTaksin Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherChiangrai Prachanukroh Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherBamrasnaradura Infectious Disease Instituteen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherChonburi Regional Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherSanpatong Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of New South Wales (UNSW) Australiaen_US
dc.contributor.otherNational Health Security Officeen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversite de Geneveen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-11T04:58:37Z
dc.date.available2018-06-11T04:58:37Z
dc.date.issued2012-12-10en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Data informing the use of boosted protease inhibitor (PI) monotherapy as second-line treatment are limited. There are also no randomized trials addressing treatment options after failing first-line non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-regimens. Methods: HIV-infected subjects ≥18 years, with HIV RNA≥1,000 copies/ml while using NNRTI plus 2 NRTIs, and naive to PIs were randomized to lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) 400/100 mg twice daily monotherapy (mono-LPV/r) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) once daily plus lamivudine (3TC) twice daily plus LPV/r 400/100 mg twice daily (TDF/3TC/LPV/r) at nine sites in Thailand. The primary outcome was time-weighted area under curve (TWAUC) change in HIV RNA over 48 weeks. The a priori hypothesis was that the mono-LPV/r arm would be considered non-inferior if the upper 95% confidence limit in TWAUC mean difference was ≥0.5 log 10 copies/ml. Results: The intention-to-treat (ITT) population comprised 195 patients (mono-LPV/r n=98 and TDF/3TC/LPV/r n=97): male 58%, baseline mean (sd) age of 38 (7) years, CD4 + T-cell count of 204 (135) cells/mm 3 and HIV RNA of 4.1 (0.6) log 10 copies/ml. The majority had HIV-1 recombinant CRF01-AE infection, and thymidine analogue mutation (TAM)-2 was 3x more common than TAM-1. At 48 weeks, the difference in TWAUC HIV RNA between arms was 0.15 (95% CI -0.04, 0.33) log 10 copies/ml, consistent with our definition of non-inferiority. However, the proportion with HIV RNA < 50 copies/ml was significantly lower in the mono-LPV/r arm: 61% versus 83% (ITT, P < 0.01). Baseline HIV RNA≥5 log 10 copies/ml (P < 0.001) and mono-LPV/r use (P=0.003) were predictors of virological failure. Baseline genotypic sensitivity scores ≥2 and TAM-2 were associated with better virological control in subjects treated with the TDF-containing regimen. Conclusions: In PI-naive patients failing NNRTI-based first-line HAART, mono-LPV/r had a significantly lower proportion of patients with HIV RNA < 50 copies/ml compared to the TDF/3TC/LPV/r treatment. Thus, mono-LPV/r should not be recommended as a second-line option. ©2012 International Medical Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citationAntiviral Therapy. Vol.17, No.7 (2012), 1351-1361en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3851/IMP2443en_US
dc.identifier.issn20402058en_US
dc.identifier.issn13596535en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84867636454en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/14418
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84867636454&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.subjectPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceuticsen_US
dc.titleA randomized comparison of second-line lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy versus tenofovir/lamivudine/lopinavir/ritonavir in patients failing NNRTI regimens: The HIV STAR studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84867636454&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections