Search

Background: Two-drug regimens (2DR) to treat HIV infection have the potential to reduce long-term toxicity and increase therapeutic options for people living with HIV (PLHIV). Prior phase III trials, SWORD-1 and SWORD-2, as well as GEMINI-1 and GEMINI-2, have demonstrated that a dolutegravir-based 2DR is as effective as three- or four-drug regimens among virologically suppressed patients. Limited information exists, however, on patient and provider experiences with 2DR to inform roll-out and integration into routine clinical care., Methods: We conducted 39 in-depth interviews with PLHIV currently on 2DR in the context of routine care and 8 of their clinical care providers in the United States (U.S.) and Spain. Participants included 33 male and 6 female PLHIV and 8 providers. Interview topics explored perceptions of and experiences with 2DR compared to prior anti-retroviral regimens (ARVs), side effects, patient satisfaction, and clinical performance. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic content analysis., Results: Participants viewed 2DR as a significant and positive advance, in terms of its ability to effectively treat HIV with reduced toxicity and essentially no reported side effects. Patients noted the central role providers played in the decision to switch to a 2DR regimen and, among U.S. participants, the importance of insurance coverage making this preferred option feasible. Patients and providers agreed that a 2DR regimen would be appropriate for any PLHIV regardless of whether they were treatment naïve or had significant experience with ARVs., Conclusions: Participants' experiences with a 2DR regimen were positive with no participants, reporting side effects and all reporting continued viral suppression. Providers valued the reduced toxicity offered by 2DR and served as the primary gateway to a transition to 2DR for patients in both settings. This study provides a foundation for further research on the transition to 2DR regimens in other populations and contexts including low- and middle-income settings., Competing Interests: Authors WD, AM, TK, and DK received support for this study via a ViiV Healthcare contract; authors UFB, SM, SM, HK, AC were investigators on trials supported in part by ViiV Healthcare; author YP is an employee of ViiV Healthcare and author MM was an employee of ViiV Healthcare at the time of this research. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to analyse CD4 cell count and viral load dynamics in patients undergoing antiretroviral therapy and their association with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) classification system., Methods: CD4 cell count and viral load were determined in 2982 patients who were classified according to clinical and immunological CDC stages. Measurements were carried out at baseline and at the 3rd, 6th and 12th months., Results: Clear differences in the immunological and virological responses to therapy were observed depending on the CDC stage, with better results associated with less advanced stages. There was a marked parallelism in the CD4 cell count curves of the different CDC stages over the year of follow up, in both naïve and experienced patients, indicating that the increase in CD4 cell count at each time-point was similar for all clinical and immunological CDC stages. However, as the baseline values were closely associated with CDC stage, the CD4 cell counts finally reached were clearly dependent on CDC stage. The highest virological responses were observed during the initial 3 months, particularly in naïve patients, but whereas naïve patients showed additional increases up to the 6th month experienced patients reached a plateau at the 3rd month. The CD4 increases were also higher during the initial 3 months but persisted during the year of follow-up., Conclusion: Both clinical and immunological CDC stages at baseline are highly predictive of the immunological and virological response to therapy, a finding that could have clinical implications.