Clinical outcome among HIV-infected patients starting saquinavir hard gel compared to ritonavir or indinavir

被引:11
|
作者
Kirk, O
Mocroft, A
Pradier, C
Bruun, JN
Hemmer, R
Clotet, B
Miller, V
Viard, JP
Phillips, AN
Lundgren, JD
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Hvidovre Hosp, Dept Infect Dis, EuroSIDA Coordinating Ctr, Copenhagen, Denmark
[2] UCL Royal Free & UCL Med Sch, Royal Free Ctr HIV Med, London, England
[3] Hop Archet, Dept Infect Dis, Nice, France
[4] Ulleval Hosp, Dept Infect Dis, Oslo, Norway
[5] Ctr Hosp, Dept Malad Infect, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
[6] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Hosp Germans Trias & Pujol, irsiCaixa Fdn, Retrovirol Lab, Badalona, Spain
[7] JW Goethe Univ Hosp, Zentrum Inneren Med, Frankfurt, Germany
[8] Hop Necker Enfants Malad, Serv Immunol Clin, Paris, France
关键词
protease inhibitor therapy; highly active antiretroviral therapy; virological response; immunological response; clinical progression;
D O I
10.1097/00002030-200105250-00008
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the clinical response among patients who initiate protease inhibitor therapies with different virological potency. Design: We analysed patients who started indinavir, ritonavir or saquinavir hard gel capsule (hgc) as part of at least triple therapy during prospective follow-up within the EuroSIDA study. Methods: Changes in plasma viral load (pVL) and CD4 cell count from baseline were compared between treatment groups. Time to new AIDS-defining events and death were compared in Kaplan-Meier models, and Cox models were established to further assess differences in clinical progression (new AIDS/death). Adjustment was made for differences in baseline parameters, in particular pVL, CD4 cell count, and region of Europe. Results: A total of 2708 patients (median follow-up: 30 months) were included, of which 556 started ritonavir (21%), 1342 indinavir (50%), and 810 saquinavir hgc (30%). The three groups were fairly evenly balanced at baseline regarding CD4 count, previous diagnosis of AIDS and pVL, After 12 months, the median changes in CD4 cell count were 90, 96 and 74 x 10(6) cells/l, respectively; P < 0.001, the proportions of patients with pVL < 500 copies/ml were 47, 54 and 41%; P < 0.001, and the proportions with clinical progression were 11.9, 9.2 and 11.9%, respectively; P = 0.20 (log-rank lest). In multivariate models the relative risk of clinical progression for indinavir compared with saquinavir hgc was: 0.77 (0.60-0.99); P = 0.043, and for ritonavir 0.83 (0.62-1.11); P = 0.20. Conclusions: Saquinavir hgc was associated with an inferior long-term clinical response relative to indinavir, which was consistent with the observed differences in virological and immunological responses. (C) 2001 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
引用
收藏
页码:999 / 1008
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Saquinavir pharmacokinetics alone and in combination with ritonavir in HIV-infected patients
    Merry, C
    Barry, MG
    Mulcahy, F
    Ryan, M
    Heavey, J
    Tjia, JF
    Gibbons, SE
    Breckenridge, AM
    Back, DJ
    AIDS, 1997, 11 (04) : F29 - F33
  • [2] Antiretroviral drug concentrations in semen of HIV-infected men: differential penetration of indinavir, ritonavir and saquinavir
    Taylor, S
    Back, DJ
    Drake, SM
    Workman, J
    Reynolds, H
    Gibbons, SE
    White, DJ
    Pillay, D
    JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY, 2001, 48 (03) : 351 - 354
  • [3] Ritonavir pharmacokinetics alone and in combination with saquinavir in HIV-infected patients
    Merry, C
    Barry, MG
    Mulcahy, F
    Tjia, JF
    Halifax, KL
    Heavey, J
    Kelly, C
    Back, DJ
    AIDS, 1998, 12 (03) : 325 - 327
  • [4] Saquinavir/ritonavir have better short term antiviral efficacy than either ritonavir or indinavir in HIV-infected antiretroviral naive patients.
    Gerstoft, J
    Kirk, O
    Katzenstein, T
    Mathiesen, L
    Nielsen, H
    Lundgren, JD
    Pedersen, C
    AIDS, 1998, 12 : S9 - S9
  • [5] Ritonavir-saquinavir rescue therapy in HIV-positive patients failing with indinavir, ritonavir or saquinavir
    De Wit, S
    Cassano, P
    Hermans, P
    Sommereijns, B
    Kabeya, K
    O'Doherty, E
    Clumeck, N
    AIDS, 1999, 13 (13) : 1794 - 1795
  • [6] Lopinavir/ritonavir vs. indinavir/ritonavir in antiretroviral naive HIV-infected patients: immunovirological outcome and side effects
    Bongiovanni, M
    Bini, T
    Chiesa, E
    Cicconi, P
    Adorni, F
    Monforte, AA
    ANTIVIRAL RESEARCH, 2004, 62 (01) : 53 - 56
  • [7] Continued indinavir versus switching to indinavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected patients with suppressed viral load
    Arnaiz, JA
    Mallolas, J
    Podzamczer, D
    Gerstoft, J
    Lundgren, JD
    Cahn, P
    Fätkenheuer, G
    D'Arminio-Monforte, A
    Casiró, A
    Reiss, P
    Burger, DM
    Stek, M
    Gatell, JM
    AIDS, 2003, 17 (06) : 831 - 840
  • [8] Clinical pharmacology of HIV protease inhibitors: focus on saquinavir, indinavir, and ritonavir
    R.M.W. Hoetelmans
    C.H.W. Koks
    J.H. Beijnen
    P.L. Meenhorst
    J.W. Mulder
    D.M. Burger
    Pharmacy World and Science, 1997, 19 : 159 - 175
  • [9] Clinical pharmacology of HIV protease inhibitors: focus on saquinavir, indinavir, and ritonavir
    Hoetelmans, RMW
    Meenhorst, PL
    Mulder, JW
    Burger, DM
    Koks, CHW
    Beijnen, JH
    PHARMACY WORLD & SCIENCE, 1997, 19 (04): : 159 - 175
  • [10] Pharmacokinetics and safety of saquinavir/ritonavir and omeprazole in HIV-infected subjects
    Singh, K.
    Dickinson, L.
    Chaikan, A.
    Back, D.
    Fletcher, C.
    Pozniak, A.
    Moyle, G.
    Nelson, M.
    Gazzard, B.
    Herath, D.
    Boffito, M.
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2008, 83 (06) : 867 - 872