Efficacy of Dolutegravir versus Darunavir in Antiretroviral First-Line Regimens According to Resistance Mutations and Viral Subtype.
HIV drug resistance
HIV genotypic resistance testing
HIV viral subtype
antiretroviral therapy
Journal
Viruses
ISSN: 1999-4915
Titre abrégé: Viruses
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101509722
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 03 2023
16 03 2023
Historique:
received:
20
01
2023
revised:
09
03
2023
accepted:
10
03
2023
medline:
31
3
2023
entrez:
30
3
2023
pubmed:
31
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dolutegravir (DTG)-based first-line regimens have shown superior efficacy versus darunavir (DRV)-based ones in randomized trials. We compared these two strategies in clinical practice, particularly considering the role of pre-treatment drug resistance mutations (DRMs) and of the HIV-1 subtype. The multicenter Antiretroviral Resistance Cohort Analysis (ARCA) database was queried to identify HIV-1-positive patients starting a first-line therapy with 2NRTIs plus either DTG or DRV between 2013 and 2019. Only adult (≥18 years) patients with a genotypic resistance test (GRT) prior to therapy and with HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies/mL were selected. Through multivariable Cox regressions, we compared DTG- versus DRV-based regimens in the time to virological failure (VF) stratifying for pre-treatment DRMs and the viral subtype. A total of 649 patients was enrolled, with 359 (55.3%) and 290 (44.7) starting DRV and DTG, respectively. In 11 months of median follow-up time, there were 41 VFs (8.4 in 100 patient-years follow-up, PYFU) and 15 VFs (5.3 per 100 PYFU) in the DRV and DTG groups, respectively. Compared with a fully active DTG-based regimen, the risk of VF was higher with DRV (aHR 2.33; In line with randomized trials, DTG-based first-line regimens showed an overall superior efficacy compared with DRV-based regimens. GRT may still play a role in identifying patients more at risk of VF and in guiding the choice of an antiretroviral backbone.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Dolutegravir (DTG)-based first-line regimens have shown superior efficacy versus darunavir (DRV)-based ones in randomized trials. We compared these two strategies in clinical practice, particularly considering the role of pre-treatment drug resistance mutations (DRMs) and of the HIV-1 subtype.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The multicenter Antiretroviral Resistance Cohort Analysis (ARCA) database was queried to identify HIV-1-positive patients starting a first-line therapy with 2NRTIs plus either DTG or DRV between 2013 and 2019. Only adult (≥18 years) patients with a genotypic resistance test (GRT) prior to therapy and with HIV-1 RNA ≥1000 copies/mL were selected. Through multivariable Cox regressions, we compared DTG- versus DRV-based regimens in the time to virological failure (VF) stratifying for pre-treatment DRMs and the viral subtype.
RESULTS
A total of 649 patients was enrolled, with 359 (55.3%) and 290 (44.7) starting DRV and DTG, respectively. In 11 months of median follow-up time, there were 41 VFs (8.4 in 100 patient-years follow-up, PYFU) and 15 VFs (5.3 per 100 PYFU) in the DRV and DTG groups, respectively. Compared with a fully active DTG-based regimen, the risk of VF was higher with DRV (aHR 2.33;
CONCLUSIONS
In line with randomized trials, DTG-based first-line regimens showed an overall superior efficacy compared with DRV-based regimens. GRT may still play a role in identifying patients more at risk of VF and in guiding the choice of an antiretroviral backbone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36992471
pii: v15030762
doi: 10.3390/v15030762
pmc: PMC10059835
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Darunavir
YO603Y8113
Anti-HIV Agents
0
dolutegravir
DKO1W9H7M1
Anti-Retroviral Agents
0
RNA
63231-63-0
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 30;8(7):e71174
pubmed: 23936260
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Sep 1;72(9):2587-2595
pubmed: 28673027
Lancet HIV. 2016 Apr;3(4):e166-74
pubmed: 27036992
JAMA. 2001 Nov 28;286(20):2560-7
pubmed: 11722270
Top Antivir Med. 2019 Sep/Oct;27(3):111-121
pubmed: 31634862
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2006 Feb;19(1):1-7
pubmed: 16374210
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2015 Jul 07;9:3547-55
pubmed: 26185421
Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2021 Nov;20(11):1351-1366
pubmed: 34047238
AIDS Res Ther. 2020 Jan 31;17(1):2
pubmed: 32005262
Retrovirology. 2022 Oct 22;19(1):22
pubmed: 36273165
Lancet HIV. 2015 Apr;2(4):e127-36
pubmed: 26424673
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 May 1;48(9):1296-305
pubmed: 19331585
AIDS. 2018 Jan 2;32(1):121-125
pubmed: 29112068
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Dec 01;72(12):3425-3434
pubmed: 28961719
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015 Apr 1;68(4):413-9
pubmed: 25559604
AIDS Rev. 2008 Jul-Sep;10(3):131-42
pubmed: 18820715
J Infect Dis. 2016 Nov 1;214(9):1302-1308
pubmed: 27732929
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Mar 1;32(5):774-82
pubmed: 11229846
AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2016 Sep;32(9):841-50
pubmed: 27346600
Lancet HIV. 2022 Jun;9(6):e381-e393
pubmed: 35460601
Lancet Infect Dis. 2012 Apr;12(4):307-17
pubmed: 22036233
HIV Med. 2016 Jan;17(1):18-27
pubmed: 26140659
Elife. 2019 Oct 08;8:
pubmed: 31591964
Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Jun 1;42(11):1608-18
pubmed: 16652319
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018 Jul;19(10):1149-1163
pubmed: 29913082