A comparison of exposure groups in the EuroSIDA study: starting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), response to HAART, and survival.

Background: Concerns have been raised that intravenous drug users may be less likely to start highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and that adherence to therapy may be poor among this group of patients. Given the decreased mortality and incidence of AIDS-defining illnesses among patients-with HIV who start HAART, this may lead to a poorer prognosis among intravenous drug users.Purpose: To compare homosexual men, intravenous drug users, and heterosexuals in EuroSIDA, a prospective European cohort of 7331 patients with HIV in terms of starting a HAART treatment regimen, immunologic and virologic response to therapy, and survival.Methods: 6645 patients were included in this analysis. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the factors associated with use of HAART regimens and survival following recruitment to the EuroSIDA study.Results: In a multivariate logistic regression model, intravenous drug users were significantly less likely to be receiving HAART at: recruitment to EuroSIDA (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.62; p < .0001) when compared with homosexual men. Similarly, during follow-up,:intravenous drug users were at a 27% reduced risk of starting HAART, after adjustment for other factors related to starting HAART (relative hazard [RH], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.82; p < .0001). There were no differences between heterosexual and homosexual patients, and similar results were found within regions of Europe (South, Central:and Northern). Among those patients who started HAART, there were no significant differences between exposure groups in CD4 lymphocyte count response to HAART or virologic response to HAART. After adjustment for factors related to survival, intravenous drug users were at a small, but nonsignificant increased risk of death compared with homosexuals (RH 1.16; 95% CI, 0.99-1.38; p = .074).Conclusions: Intravenous drug users were significantly less likely to start HAART, bur among those who did, response to therapy was:similar to that of other exposure groups. There were no differences in risk of death. If intravenous drug users continue to use HAART less commonly than other exposure groups, it may result in a poorer prognosis, a different spectrum of AIDS-defining illnesses, and differential long-term clinical needs.

[1]  S. Hammer,et al.  Antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in 1997. Updated recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel. , 1998, JAMA.

[2]  J. Corbeil,et al.  Recombination leads to the rapid emergence of HIV-1 dually resistant mutants under selective drug pressure. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  V. M. Shadle,et al.  Self-reported antiretroviral therapy in injection drug users. , 1998, JAMA.

[4]  R. Freeman,et al.  Compliance with AZT treatment regimen of HIV-seropositive injection drug users: a neglected issue. , 1996, AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education.

[5]  R. Biggar.  AIDS incubation in 1891 HIV seroconverters from different exposure groups. International Registry of Seroconverters. , 1990, AIDS.

[6]  R. Chaisson,et al.  Race, sex, drug use, and progression of human immunodeficiency virus disease. , 1995, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  P. Massip,et al.  Impact of protease inhibitors on AIDS‐defining events and hospitalizations in 10 French AIDS reference centres , 1997, AIDS.

[8]  JD Lundgren,et al.  Changing patterns of mortality across Europe in patients infected with HIV-1 , 1998, The Lancet.

[9]  J. Margolick,et al.  Changes in T-lymphocyte subsets in intravenous drug users with HIV-1 infection. , 1992, JAMA.

[10]  G. Satten,et al.  Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  J. Nielsen,et al.  Survival differences in European patients with AIDS, 1979–89 , 1994, BMJ.

[12]  A. Phillips,et al.  Antiretroviral treatment and progression to AIDS in HIV seroconverters from different risk groups , 1997, AIDS.

[13]  J A Fleishman,et al.  Variations in the care of HIV-infected adults in the United States: results from the HIV Cost and Services Utilization Study. , 1999, JAMA.

[14]  B. Gazzard,et al.  1998 revision to the British HIV Association guidelines for antiretroviral treatment of HIV seropositive individuals , 1998, The Lancet.

[15]  J. Margolick,et al.  Direct comparison of the relationship between clinical outcome and change in CD4+ lymphocytes in human immunodeficiency virus-positive homosexual men and injecting drug users. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[16]  B. Truman,et al.  Survival with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Experience with 5833 cases in New York City. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  M. Egger,et al.  Survival in HIV infection: do sex and category of transmission matter? , 1994, AIDS.

[18]  M A Fischl,et al.  A controlled trial of two nucleoside analogues plus indinavir in persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection and CD4 cell counts of 200 per cubic millimeter or less. AIDS Clinical Trials Group 320 Study Team. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  J. Nielsen,et al.  Regional differences in use of antiretroviral agents and primary prophylaxis in 3122 European HIV-infected patients. EuroSIDA Study Group. , 1997, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes and human retrovirology : official publication of the International Retrovirology Association.

[20]  E A Emini,et al.  Treatment with indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine in adults with human immunodeficiency virus infection and prior antiretroviral therapy. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  B. Yip,et al.  Barriers to use of free antiretroviral therapy in injection drug users. , 1998, JAMA.

[22]  N. Graham,et al.  Potential factors affecting adherence with HIV therapy , 1997, AIDS.

[23]  J. Phair,et al.  Prognostic factors in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients with a CD4+ lymphocyte count < 50/microL. , 1995, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[24]  Julio S. G. Montaner,et al.  Lower socioeconomic status and shorter survival following HIV infection , 1994, The Lancet.

[25]  A. Mocroft,et al.  Changes in use of antiretroviral therapy in regions of Europe over time , 1998, AIDS.

[26]  F. Hecht,et al.  Protease inhibitors in the homeless. , 1997, JAMA.

[27]  A. Lazzarin,et al.  Influence of gender, age, and transmission category on the progression from HIV seroconversion to AIDS. , 1992, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[28]  R. Chaisson,et al.  Zidovudine and the natural history of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  A. Telenti,et al.  Clinical progression and virological failure on highly active antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 patients: a prospective cohort study , 1999, The Lancet.

[30]  J. Garber,et al.  Development of AIDS, HIV seroconversion, and potential co-factors for T4 cell loss in a cohort of intravenous drug users. , 1987, AIDS.

[31]  Giovanni Rezza,et al.  HIV disease progression in 854 women and men infected through injecting drug use and heterosexual sex and followed for up to nine years from seroconversion , 1994, BMJ.

[32]  F. Dabis,et al.  Rapid Change in the Use of Antiretroviral Agents and Improvement in a Population of HIV-Infected Patients: France, 1995 to 1997 , 1998 .