Search

Background: The use of either efavirenz or lopinavir-ritonavir plus two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) is recommended for initial therapy for patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, but which of the two regimens has greater efficacy is not known. The alternative regimen of lopinavir-ritonavir plus efavirenz may prevent toxic effects associated with NRTIs., Methods: In an open-label study, we compared three regimens for initial therapy: efavirenz plus two NRTIs (efavirenz group), lopinavir-ritonavir plus two NRTIs (lopinavir-ritonavir group), and lopinavir-ritonavir plus efavirenz (NRTI-sparing group). We randomly assigned 757 patients with a median CD4 count of 191 cells per cubic millimeter and a median HIV-1 RNA level of 4.8 log10 copies per milliliter to the three groups., Results: At a median follow-up of 112 weeks, the time to virologic failure was longer in the efavirenz group than in the lopinavir-ritonavir group (P=0.006) but was not significantly different in the NRTI-sparing group from the time in either of the other two groups. At week 96, the proportion of patients with fewer than 50 copies of plasma HIV-1 RNA per milliliter was 89% in the efavirenz group, 77% in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 83% in the NRTI-sparing group (P=0.003 for the comparison between the efavirenz group and the lopinavir-ritonavir group). The groups did not differ significantly in the time to discontinuation because of toxic effects. At virologic failure, antiretroviral resistance mutations were more frequent in the NRTI-sparing group than in the other two groups., Conclusions: Virologic failure was less likely in the efavirenz group than in the lopinavir-ritonavir group. The virologic efficacy of the NRTI-sparing regimen was similar to that of the efavirenz regimen but was more likely to be associated with drug resistance. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00050895 [ClinicalTrials.gov].)., (Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Subcutaneous limb fat loss continues to be one the most troubling side effects of long-term antiretroviral regimens. Nucleoside analogues and protease inhibitors (PIs) have been linked to the development of this complication., Methods: We evaluated the effects of nucleoside-sparing and PI-sparing regimens on fat distribution, bone mineral density, and metabolic parameters in 62 subjects, who were not selected for lipoatrophy, with advanced HIV (nadir CD4 count or=80,000 copies/mL) and an undetectable HIV viral load. Participants were randomized to switch their initial successful antiretroviral regimen to open-label lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) at a dose of 533/133 mg twice a day and efavirenz (EFV) at a dose of 600 mg/d (the nucleoside-sparing arm) versus EFV and 2 nucleoside analogues (the PI-sparing arm)., Findings: At week 48, the median change in limb fat in the nucleoside-sparing arm was 562 g (6%, interquartile range [IQR]: -218-1186 g) versus a loss of -242 g (-4%, IQR: -539-452 g) in the nucleoside-containing PI-sparing arm (P = 0.086). At the time of last observation (median = 102 weeks, IQR: 73-152 weeks), a median gain of 782 g (10%, IQR: -380-1168 g) of limb fat was noted in the nonnucleoside arm (n = 22) versus a loss of 850 g (-15%, IQR: -1270 to -526 g) in the nucleoside-containing arm (n = 25; P = 0.002)., Interpretation: The switch to a nucleoside-sparing combination antiretroviral regimen (LPV/r + EFV) was associated with significant improvement in limb fat. These results provide additional evidence that nucleoside analogues are important in the progressive limb fat loss that characterizes antiretroviral treatment and that switching medications can significantly improve this complication. This option has to be carefully balanced with the potential to increase serum lipid levels and the trend to increase virologic failure.