Higher Rates of Viral Suppression with Nonnucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors Compared to Single Protease Inhibitors Are Not Explained by Better Adherence
- 1 October 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in HIV Research & Clinical Practice
- Vol. 5 (5) , 278-287
- https://doi.org/10.1310/lnhd-k1r7-hqp5-hjcq
Abstract
Background: Although evidence suggests that antiretroviral (ARV) regimens containing nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) are superior to single-protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens at suppressing viral load, it is unclear how much of the improved viral suppression is due to intrinsic drug potency versus higher levels of adherence to simpler regimens. We therefore examined adherence and viral suppression in NNRTI and single-PI regimens in a cohort of largely ARV-experienced participants by using objective measures of adherence. Method: Participants were recruited from the Research on Access to Care in the Homeless (REACH) Cohort and were included in the study if they were on single-PI-based or NNRTI-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimens for at least 3 months prior to study entry. Adherence was measured by unannounced pill counts at the participant's usual place of residence. The primary outcome was suppression of HIV viral RNA to p < .01) for participants on NNRTI-based regimens (n = 53) compared with those using single-PI-based regimens (n = 56) when controlling for adherence, as well as other potential confounders in a multivariable analysis. The only other independent predictors of viral suppression in multivariable modeling were ARV adherence (p < .01), CD4 nadir (p = .02), and continuous months on current regimen prior to the start of adherence monitoring (p < .01). There was no significant difference in adherence by unannounced pill counts in participants receiving NNRTI- versus single-PI-containing regimens. Conclusion: A higher proportion of individuals using NNRTI-based regimens had viral suppression when compared to those taking single-PI-containing regimens, and this association was not confounded by higher levels of adherence. These results suggest that improved viral suppression on NNRTI regimens compared to single-PI regimens is more closely associated with regimen potency than higher levels of adherence.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of Sequential Three-Drug Regimens as Initial Therapy for HIV-1 InfectionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- Provider bias in the selection of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy and HIV treatment outcomes in observational studiesAIDS, 2003
- High levels of adherence do not prevent accumulation of HIV drug resistance mutationsAIDS, 2003
- Adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy is better in patients receiving non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-containing regimens than in those receiving protease inhibitor-containing regimensAIDS, 2003
- A randomized trial to study first-line combination therapy with or without a protease inhibitor in HIV-1-infected patientsAIDS, 2003
- Lopinavir–Ritonavir versus Nelfinavir for the Initial Treatment of HIV InfectionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- The Consistency of Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy Predicts Biologic Outcomes for Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Infected Persons in Clinical TrialsClinical Infectious Diseases, 2002
- A computer-based assessment detects regimen misunderstandings and nonadherence for patients on HIV antiretroviral therapyAIDS Care, 2002
- Factors Affecting Adherence to Antiretroviral TherapyClinical Infectious Diseases, 2000
- Efavirenz plus Zidovudine and Lamivudine, Efavirenz plus Indinavir, and Indinavir plus Zidovudine and Lamivudine in the Treatment of HIV-1 Infection in AdultsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999