Efficacy of Antiretroviral Therapy Switch in HIV-Infected Patients: A 10-Year Analysis of the EuResist Cohort

Introduction: Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has been shown to be effective in many recent trials. However, there is limited data on time trends of HAART efficacy after treatment change. Methods: Data from different European cohorts were compiled within the EuResist Project. The efficacy of HAART defined by suppression of viral replication at 24 weeks after therapy switch was analyzed considering previous treatment modifications from 1999 to 2008. Results: Altogether, 12,323 treatment change episodes in 7,342 patients were included in the analysis. In 1999, HAART after treatment switch was effective in 38.0% of the patients who had previously undergone 1–5 therapies. This figure rose to 85.0% in 2008. In patients with more than 5 previous therapies, efficacy rose from 23.9 to 76.2% in the same time period. In patients with detectable viral load at therapy switch, the efficacy rose from 23.3 to 66.7% with 1–5 previous treatments and from 14.4 to 55.6% with more than 5 previous treatments. Conclusion: The results of this large cohort show that the outcome of HAART switch has improved considerably over the last years. This result was particularly observed in the context after viral rebound. Thus, changing HAART is no longer associated with a high risk of treatment failure.

[1]  C. Katlama,et al.  HIV-Infected Adults With a CD4 Cell Count Greater Than 500 Cells/mm3 on Long-Term Combination Antiretroviral Therapy Reach Same Mortality Rates as the General Population , 2007, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[2]  A. Mocroft,et al.  Detection of HIV drug resistance during antiretroviral treatment and clinical progression in a large European cohort study , 2008, AIDS.

[3]  Christine Katlama,et al.  Efficacy of enfuvirtide in patients infected with drug-resistant HIV-1 in Europe and Australia. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  C. Delaugerre,et al.  Switch from enfuvirtide to raltegravir in virologically suppressed multidrug-resistant HIV-1-infected patients: a randomized open-label trial. , 2009, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[5]  J. Gatell,et al.  Substitution of raltegravir for ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors in HIV-infected patients: the SPIRAL study , 2010, AIDS.

[6]  R. Weber,et al.  Durability and outcome of initial antiretroviral treatments received during 2000--2005 by patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. , 2008, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[7]  S. Hammer,et al.  Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1 infection: 2008 recommendations of an International AIDS Society-USA panel. , 2008, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[8]  C. Leen,et al.  Efficacy and safety of atazanavir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy in patients with virologic suppression switched from a stable, boosted or unboosted protease inhibitor treatment regimen: the SWAN Study (AI424-097) 48-week results. , 2007, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[9]  R. Kaiser,et al.  Antiretroviral Therapy Optimisation without Genotype Resistance Testing: A Perspective on Treatment History Based Models , 2010, PloS one.

[10]  John T Brooks,et al.  Mortality in the Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Era: Changing Causes of Death and Disease in the HIV Outpatient Study , 2006, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[11]  O. Hamouda,et al.  [Long-term efficacy of second-line treatment of HIV infection after class change following virological failure on protease inhibitor-based therapy]. , 2010, Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift.

[12]  Amalio Telenti,et al.  Antiretroviral Treatment of Adult HIV Infection2010 Recommendations of the International AIDS Society–USA Panel , 2010 .

[13]  C. Latkin,et al.  Correlates of Lending Needles/Syringes Among HIV-Seropositive Injection Drug Users , 2007, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[14]  A. Mocroft,et al.  History of viral suppression on combination antiretroviral therapy as a predictor of virological failure after a treatment change * , 2010, HIV medicine.

[15]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Comparison of Classifier Fusion Methods for Predicting Response to Anti HIV-1 Therapy , 2008, PloS one.

[16]  M. Prosperi,et al.  Predictors of successful genotype-guided antiretroviral therapy in treatment-experienced individuals over calendar years: a cohort study. , 2009, Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology.

[17]  D. Podzamczer,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Switching From Boosted Lopinavir to Boosted Atazanavir in Patients With Virological Suppression Receiving a LPV/r-Containing HAART: The ATAZIP Study , 2009, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[18]  S. Cole,et al.  The Association of HIV Susceptibility Testing With Survival Among HIV-Infected Patients Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy: A Cohort Study , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.