TY - JOUR
T1 - Efavirenz versus boosted atazanavir-containing regimens and immunologic, virologic, and clinical outcomes
T2 - A prospective study of HIV-positive individuals
AU - The HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration
AU - Cain, Lauren E.
AU - Caniglia, Ellen C.
AU - Phillips, Andrew
AU - Olson, Ashley
AU - Muga, Roberto
AU - Pérez-Hoyos, Santiago
AU - Abgrall, Sophie
AU - Costagliola, Dominique
AU - Rubio, Rafael
AU - Jarrín, Inma
AU - Bucher, Heiner
AU - Fehr, Jan
AU - Van Sighem, Ard
AU - Reiss, Peter
AU - Dabis, François
AU - Vandenhende, Marie Anne
AU - Logan, Roger
AU - Robins, James
AU - Sterne, Jonathan A.C.
AU - Justice, Amy
AU - Tate, Janet
AU - Touloumi, Giota
AU - Paparizos, Vasilis
AU - Esteve, Anna
AU - Casabona, Jordi
AU - Seng, Rémonie
AU - Meyer, Laurence
AU - Jose, Sophie
AU - Sabin, Caroline
AU - Hernán, Miguel A.
AU - Ainsworth, Jonathan
AU - Anderson, Jane
AU - Babiker, Abdel
AU - Delpech, Valerie
AU - Dunn, David
AU - Fisher, Martin
AU - Gazzard, Brian
AU - Gilson, Richard
AU - Gompels, Mark
AU - Hill, Teresa
AU - Johnson, Margaret
AU - Leen, Clifford
AU - Orkin, Chloe
AU - Pillay, Deenan
AU - Sachikonye, Memory
AU - Schwenk, Achim
AU - Walsh, John
AU - Hill, T.
AU - Thornton, A.
AU - Delpech, V.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Objective: To compare regimens consisting of either ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or efavirenz and a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. Design: Prospective studies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals in Europe and the United States included in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration. Methods: HIV-positive, antiretroviral therapy-naive, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)-free individuals were followed from the time they started an atazanavir or efavirenz regimen. We estimated an analog of the "intention-to-treat" effect for efavirenz versus atazanavir regimens on clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes with adjustment via inverse probability weighting for time-varying covariates. Results: A total of 4301 individuals started an atazanavir regimen (83 deaths, 157 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths) and 18,786 individuals started an efavirenz regimen (389 deaths, 825 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths). During a median follow-up of 31 months, the hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.98 (0.77, 1.24) for death and 1.09 (0.91, 1.30) for AIDS-defining illness or death comparing efavirenz with atazanavir regimens. The 5-year survival difference was 0.1% (95% confidence interval: -0.7%, 0.8%) and the AIDS-free survival difference was -0.3% (-1.2%, 0.6%). After 12 months, the mean change in CD4 cell count was 20.8 (95% confidence interval: 13.9, 27.8) cells/mm3 lower and the risk of virologic failure was 20% (14%, 26%) lower in the efavirenz regimens. Conclusion: Our estimates are consistent with a smaller 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for efavirenz compared with atazanavir regimens. No overall differences could be detected with respect to 5-year survival or AIDS-free survival.
AB - Objective: To compare regimens consisting of either ritonavir-boosted atazanavir or efavirenz and a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbone with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. Design: Prospective studies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals in Europe and the United States included in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration. Methods: HIV-positive, antiretroviral therapy-naive, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)-free individuals were followed from the time they started an atazanavir or efavirenz regimen. We estimated an analog of the "intention-to-treat" effect for efavirenz versus atazanavir regimens on clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes with adjustment via inverse probability weighting for time-varying covariates. Results: A total of 4301 individuals started an atazanavir regimen (83 deaths, 157 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths) and 18,786 individuals started an efavirenz regimen (389 deaths, 825 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths). During a median follow-up of 31 months, the hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.98 (0.77, 1.24) for death and 1.09 (0.91, 1.30) for AIDS-defining illness or death comparing efavirenz with atazanavir regimens. The 5-year survival difference was 0.1% (95% confidence interval: -0.7%, 0.8%) and the AIDS-free survival difference was -0.3% (-1.2%, 0.6%). After 12 months, the mean change in CD4 cell count was 20.8 (95% confidence interval: 13.9, 27.8) cells/mm3 lower and the risk of virologic failure was 20% (14%, 26%) lower in the efavirenz regimens. Conclusion: Our estimates are consistent with a smaller 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for efavirenz compared with atazanavir regimens. No overall differences could be detected with respect to 5-year survival or AIDS-free survival.
KW - Atazanavir
KW - Efavirenz
KW - HIV
KW - Mortality
KW - Observational studies
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011957194&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/MD.0000000000005133
DO - 10.1097/MD.0000000000005133
M3 - Article
C2 - 27741139
AN - SCOPUS:85011957194
SN - 0025-7974
VL - 95
JO - Medicine (United States)
JF - Medicine (United States)
IS - 41
M1 - e5133
ER -