Not all missed doses are the same: sustained NNRTI treatment interruptions predict HIV rebound at low-to-moderate adherence levels

Jean-Jacques Parienti, Moupali Das-Douglas, Véronique Massari, David Guzman, Steven G Deeks, Renaud Verdon, David R Bangsberg, Jean-Jacques Parienti, Moupali Das-Douglas, Véronique Massari, David Guzman, Steven G Deeks, Renaud Verdon, David R Bangsberg

Abstract

Background: While the relationship between average adherence to HIV potent antiretroviral therapy is well defined, the relationship between patterns of adherence within adherence strata has not been investigated. We examined medication event monitoring system (MEMS) defined adherence patterns and their relation to subsequent virologic rebound.

Methods and results: We selected subjects with at least 3-months of previous virologic suppression on a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based regimen from two prospective cohorts in France and North America. We assessed the risk of virologic rebound, defined as HIV RNA of >400 copies/mL according to several MEMS adherence measurements. Seventy two subjects were studied, five of them experienced virologic rebound. Subjects with and without virologic rebound had similar baseline characteristics including treatment durations, regimen (efavirenz vs nevirapine), and dosing schedule. Each 10% increase in average adherence decreased the risk of virologic rebound (OR = 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.37, 0.81], P<0.002). Each additional consecutive day off therapy for the longest treatment interruption (OR = 1.34; 95%CI [1.15, 1.68], P<0.0001) and each additional treatment interruption for more than 2 days (OR = 1.38; 95%CI [1.13, 1.77], P<0.002) increased the risk of virologic rebound. In those with low-to-moderate adherence (i.e. <80%), treatment interruption duration (16.2 days versus 6.1 days in the control group, P<0.02), but not average adherence (53.1% vs 55.9%, respectively, P = 0.65) was significantly associated with virologic rebound.

Conclusions: Sustained treatment interruption may pose a greater risk of virologic rebound on NNRTI therapy than the same number of interspersed missed doses at low-to-moderate adherence.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Dr. Parienti has received grant support, travel grants, and/or honoria from Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbott, and Gilead. Dr. Bangsberg has received grant support from Abbott, BMS, and Gilead.

Figures

Figure 1. Predicted and observed risk of…
Figure 1. Predicted and observed risk of viral control according to the longer interval of treatment discontinuation, POSOVIR and REACH cohorts.
Figure 2. Relationship between average adherence and…
Figure 2. Relationship between average adherence and longer treatment interruption among subjects with (red) and without (green and blue) virologic rebound, POSOVIR and REACH cohorts.
- The red lines on the X and Y-axis correspond to mean average adherence (%) and treatment interruption duration (days), respectively, among subjects with subsequent HIV RNA≥400 copies/ml. The blue lines on the X and Y-axis correspond to mean average adherence (%) and treatment interruption duration (days), respectively, among subjects with subsequent HIV RNA

References

    1. Paterson DL, Swindells S, Mohr J, Brester M, Vergis EN, et al. Adherence to protease inhibitor therapy and outcomes in patients with HIV infection. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:21–30.
    1. Arnsten JH, Demas PA, Farzadegan H, Grant RW, Gourevitch MN, et al. Antiretroviral therapy adherence and viral suppression in HIV-infected drug users: comparison of self-report and electronic monitoring. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33:1417–1423.
    1. Parienti JJ, Massari V, Descamps D, Vabret A, Bouvet E, et al. Predictors of virologic failure and resistance in HIV-infected patients treated with nevirapine- or efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1311–1316.
    1. Bangsberg DR, Perry S, Charlebois ED, Clark RA, Roberston M, et al. Non-adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy predicts progression to AIDS. Aids. 2001;15:1181–1183.
    1. Hogg RS, Heath K, Bangsberg D, Yip B, Press N, et al. Intermittent use of triple-combination therapy is predictive of mortality at baseline and after 1 year of follow-up. Aids. 2002;16:1051–1058.
    1. Maggiolo F, Ravasio L, Ripamonti D, Gregis G, Quinzan G, et al. Similar adherence rates favor different virologic outcomes for patients treated with nonnucleoside analogues or protease inhibitors. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;40:158–163.
    1. Bangsberg DR. Less than 95% adherence to nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor therapy can lead to viral suppression. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;43:939–941.
    1. Shuter J, Sarlo JA, Kanmaz TJ, Rode RA, Zingman BS. HIV-infected patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir-based antiretroviral therapy achieve high rates of virologic suppression despite adherence rates less than 95%. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2007;45:4–8.
    1. Nachega JB, Hislop M, Dowdy DW, Chaisson RE, Regensberg L, et al. Adherence to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based HIV therapy and virologic outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:564–573.
    1. Parienti JJ, Massari V, Reliquet V, Chaillot F, Le Moal G, et al. Effect of twice-daily nevirapine on adherence in HIV-1-infected patients: a randomized controlled study. Aids. 2007;21:2217–2222.
    1. Kuss O. Global goodness-of-fit tests in logistic regression with sparse data. Stat Med. 2002;21:3789–3801.
    1. Oyugi JH, Byakika-Tusiime J, Ragland K, Laeyendecker O, Mugerwa R, et al. Treatment interruptions predict resistance in HIV-positive individuals purchasing fixed-dose combination antiretroviral therapy in Kampala, Uganda. Aids. 2007;21:965–971.
    1. Dybul M, Nies-Kraske E, Daucher M, Hertogs K, Hallahan CW, et al. Long-cycle structured intermittent versus continuous highly active antiretroviral therapy for the treatment of chronic infection with human immunodeficiency virus: effects on drug toxicity and on immunologic and virologic parameters. J Infect Dis. 2003;188:388–396.
    1. Dybul M, Nies-Kraske E, Dewar R, Maldarelli F, Hallahan CW, et al. A proof-of-concept study of short-cycle intermittent antiretroviral therapy with a once-daily regimen of didanosine, lamivudine, and efavirenz for the treatment of chronic HIV infection. J Infect Dis. 2004;189:1974–1982.
    1. Cohen CJ, Colson AE, Sheble-Hall AG, McLaughlin KA, Morse GD. Pilot study of a novel short-cycle antiretroviral treatment interruption strategy: 48-week results of the five-days-on, two-days-off (FOTO) study. HIV Clin Trials. 2007;8:19–23.
    1. Ribaudo HJ, Haas DW, Tierney C, Kim RB, Wilkinson GR, et al. Pharmacogenetics of plasma efavirenz exposure after treatment discontinuation: an Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:401–407.
    1. Martinez E, Arnaiz JA, Podzamczer D, Dalmau D, Ribera E, et al. Substitution of nevirapine, efavirenz, or abacavir for protease inhibitors in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1036–1046.
    1. Ruiz L, Paredes R, Gomez G, Romeu J, Domingo P, et al. Antiretroviral therapy interruption guided by CD4 cell counts and plasma HIV-1 RNA levels in chronically HIV-1-infected patients. Aids. 2007;21:169–178.
    1. Danel C, Moh R, Chaix ML, Gabillard D, Messou E, et al. A 2-months-off/4-Months-on antiretroviral therapy is clinically non-inferior to continuous therapy but leads to unacceptable resistance rates in african adults: Final results of the Trivacan ANRS 1269 Trial. 2008. Fifteenth Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, Boston, abstract 778.
    1. Riddler SA, Haubrich R, DiRienzo AG, Peeples L, Powderly WG, et al. Class-sparing regimens for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2095–2106.
    1. Gross R, Bilker WB, Wang H, Chapman J. How Long Is the Window of Opportunity Between Adherence Failure and Virologic Failure on Efavirenz-Based HAART? HIV Clin Trials. 2008;9:202–206.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する