Tenofovir DF, emtricitabine, and efavirenz vs. zidovudine, lamivudine, and efavirenz for HIV

被引:709
|
作者
Gallant, JE
DeJesus, E
Arribas, JR
Pozniak, AL
Gazzard, B
Campo, RE
Lu, B
McColl, D
Chuck, S
Enejosa, J
Toole, JJ
Cheng, AK
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Div Infect Dis, Baltimore, MD 21287 USA
[2] Orlando Immunol Ctr, Orlando, FL USA
[3] Hosp La Paz, Madrid, Spain
[4] Chelsea & Westminster Hosp, London, England
[5] Univ Miami, Miami, FL 33152 USA
[6] Gilead Sci Inc, Foster City, CA 94404 USA
来源
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE | 2006年 / 354卷 / 03期
关键词
D O I
10.1056/NEJMoa051871
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Durable suppression of replication of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) depends on the use of potent, well-tolerated antiretroviral regimens to which patients can easily adhere. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, noninferiority study involving 517 patients with HIV infection who had not previously received antiretroviral therapy and who were randomly assigned to receive either a regimen of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF), emtricitabine, and efavirenz once daily (tenofovir-emtricitabine group) or a regimen of fixed-dose zidovudine and lamivudine twice daily plus efavirenz once daily (zidovudine-lamivudine group). The primary end point was the proportion of patients without baseline resistance to efavirenz in whom the HIV RNA level was less than 400 copies per milliliter at week 48 of the study. RESULTS: Through week 48, significantly more patients in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group reached and maintained the primary end point of less than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter than did those in the zidovudine-lamivudine group (84 percent vs. 73 percent, respectively; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 4 to 19 percent; P=0.002). This difference excludes the inferiority of the tenofovir DF, emtricitabine, and efavirenz regimen, indicating a significantly greater response with this regimen. Significant differences were also seen in the proportion of patients with HIV RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (80 percent in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group vs. 70 percent in the zidovudine-lamivudine group; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 2 to 17 percent; P=0.02) and in increases in CD4 cell counts (190 vs. 158 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 9 to 55; P=0.002). More patients in the zidovudine-lamivudine group than in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group had adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study drugs (9 percent vs. 4 percent, respectively; P=0.02). In none of the patients did the K65R mutation develop. CONCLUSIONS: Through week 48, the combination of tenofovir DF and emtricitabine plus efavirenz fulfilled the criteria for noninferiority to a fixed dose of zidovudine and lamivudine plus efavirenz and proved superior in terms of virologic suppression, CD4 response, and adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study drugs.
引用
收藏
页码:251 / 260
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Tenofovir DF and emtricitabine vs. zidovudine and lamivudine
    Jenny-Avital, ER
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 354 (23): : 2507 - 2507
  • [2] A Randomized Comparative Trial of Continued Abacavir/Lamivudine plus Efavirenz or Replacement with Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir DF in Hypercholesterolemic HIV-1 Infected Individuals
    Moyle, Graeme J.
    Orkin, Chloe
    Fisher, Martin
    Dhar, Jyoti
    Anderson, Jane
    Wilkins, Edmund
    Ewan, Jacqueline
    Ebrahimi, Ramin
    Wang, Hui
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (02):
  • [3] Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, emtricitabine, and efavirenz compared with zidovudine/lamivudine and efavirenz in treatment-naive patients - 144-week analysis
    Arribas, Jose R.
    Pozniak, Anton L.
    Gallant, Joel E.
    DeJesus, Edwin
    Gazzard, Brian
    Campo, Rafael E.
    Chen, Shan-Shan
    McColl, Damian
    Holmes, Charles B.
    Enejosa, Jeffrey
    Toole, John J.
    Cheng, Andrew K.
    [J]. JAIDS-JOURNAL OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES, 2008, 47 (01) : 74 - 78
  • [4] Week 96 analyses of emergent drug resistance from the STaR Study: rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF vs. efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF single-tablet regimens
    Porter, D. P.
    Kulkarni, R.
    Fralich, T.
    Miller, M. D.
    White, K. L.
    [J]. ANTIVIRAL THERAPY, 2014, 19 : A123 - A123
  • [5] SIMPLIFICATION OF THERAPY (ART) WITH EFAVIRENZ/EMTRICITABINE/TENOFOVIR DF SINGLE TABLET REGIMEN VS. CONTINUED ART IN SUPPRESSED, HIV-INFECTED PATIENTS
    Carlevari, M.
    Young, B.
    DeJesus, E.
    Morales-Ramirez, J. O.
    Ebrahimi, R.
    Maa, J-F
    McColl, D.
    Farajallah, A.
    Seekins, D.
    Flaherty, J.
    [J]. INFECTION, 2009, 37 : 63 - 63
  • [7] Efavirenz plus zidovudine and lamivudine, efavirenz plus indinavir, and indinavir plus zidovudine and lamivudine in the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults
    Staszewski, S
    Morales-Ramirez, J
    Tashima, KT
    Rachlis, A
    Skiest, D
    Stanford, J
    Stryker, R
    Johnson, P
    Labriola, DF
    Farina, D
    Manion, DJ
    Ruiz, NM
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1999, 341 (25): : 1865 - 1873
  • [9] HIV DNA as a predictor of residual viraemia in patients treated with tenofovir+lamivudine+efavirenz or stavudine+lamivudine+efavirenz
    Havlir, DV
    Strain, M
    Miller, MD
    Ignacio, C
    Lu, B
    Wong, J
    [J]. ANTIVIRAL THERAPY, 2003, 8 (03) : U65 - U65
  • [10] A Randomized Comparative Trial of Continued Zidovudine/Lamivudine or Replacement With Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine in Efavirenz-Treated HIV-1-Infected Individuals
    Fisher, Martin
    Moyle, Graeme J.
    Shahmanesh, Mohsen
    Orkin, Chloe
    Kingston, Margaret
    Wilkins, Edmund
    Ewan, Jacqueline
    Liu, Hui
    Ebrahimi, Ramin
    Reilly, Geraldine
    [J]. JAIDS-JOURNAL OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES, 2009, 51 (05) : 562 - 568