Biomedical subjects

Philippe Flandre

Publications and source records attributed to Philippe Flandre.

22 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2002

Efficacy of zidovudine compared to stavudine, both in combination with lamivudine and indinavir, in human immunodeficiency virus-infected nucleoside-experienced patients with no prior exposure to lamivudine, stavudine, or protease inhibitors (novavir trial).

We compared the efficacy and the toxicity of zidovudine (AZT) versus stavudine (d4T), in combination with lamivudine (3TC) and indinavir, in AZT-, dideoxyinosine (ddI)-, and/or dideoxycytosine (ddC)-experienced patients in a randomized comparative multicenter trial. One hundred seventy human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected patients, who had received AZT, ddI, and/or ddC for at least 6 months but were naive for d4T, 3TC, and protease inhibitors, were randomized to AZT at 250 to 300 mg twice daily, 3TC at 150 mg twice daily, and indinavir at 800 mg every 8 h or to d4T at 40 mg twice daily, 3TC at 150 mg twice daily, and indinavir at 800 mg every 8 h. The primary endpoint was time to virological failure, defined as plasma HIV-1 RNA levels of >5,000 copies/ml after at least 8 weeks of antiretroviral therapy. Additional endpoints were change from baseline in CD4 cell counts, AIDS-defining events and adverse events, and proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA levels of <500 copies/ml and HIV-1 RNA levels of <50 copies/ml. At week 80, 15 patients in the AZT arm and 14 patients in the d4T arm had reached the primary endpoint, and time to virological failure did not differ between the two arms (P = 0.98). In the d4T and in the AZT arms, 67 and 73% of patients, respectively, had HIV-1 RNA levels of <500 copies/ml (P = 0.50). The median change from baseline in CD4 cell count was 195 x 10(6) and 175 x 10(6)/liter for the d4T- and AZT-containing arms, respectively. The proportions of patients with HIV-1 RNA levels of <50 copies/ml at weeks 8, 16, and 24 were similar in the two arms. The occurrence of serious adverse events was not significantly different between arms. In conclusion, in these patients heavily pretreated with AZT, switching from AZT to d4T when initiating indinavir and 3TC did not bring any additional benefit compared to maintaining AZT.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Adherence to antiretroviral therapy and outcomes in HIV-infected patients enrolled in an induction/maintenance randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of adherence to therapy on early virological response, later virological failure, and occurrence of adverse events in HIV-infected patients. DESIGN: A randomized trial of 3-month induction period of zidovudine/lamivudine/indinavir followed by a maintenance phase of zidovudine/lamivudine/indinavir, zidovudine/lamivudine or zidovudine/indinavir. MAIN OUTCOMES: Adherence was assessed by pill count. In the induction phase, early virological response was defined as plasma HIV-RNA<500 copies/ml at month 2 and in the maintenance phase, virological failure was defined as plasma HIV-RNA >500 copies/ml in two consecutive specimens. RESULTS: The median adherence rate was 97% in both induction (n=366) and maintenance phase (n=237). In the maintenance phase, pairwise comparisons showed a lower adherence rate in zidovudine/lamivudine/indinavir versus zidovudine/lamivudine (P=0.03), or versus zidovudine/indinavir (P=0.05). Only 13% of patients had an adherence over the maintenance phase of 80% or lower, while 40% of patients occasionally had an adherence rate of 80% or lower during this phase. Among the 362 patients with documented HIV-RNA at month 2, 86% had an early virological response. Adherence of 80% or greater was the only variable statistically predictive to early virological response (P<0.001), while baseline CD4, baseline HIV-RNA, and adherence of 95% or greater were not associated to virological response. In the maintenance phase, adherence, baseline HIV-RNA, HIV-RNA at month 3 and treatment groups were independently predictive to time to virological failure. Analysis by randomized groups indicated that difficulty in adherence (<80%) was predictive to time to failure (P<0.001) only in both indinavir-containing regimens. Occurrence of two or more severe adverse events (grade 3 and 4) was higher in patients with poor adherence although not statistically associated (P=0.12), while no association was found with minor adverse events. CONCLUSION: Adherence rate was globally lower in patients maintaining the original triple-drug therapy compared with those receiving less intensive regimens. Adherence rate was a time-dependent variable. Adherence to antiviral regimen of 80% or greater was predictive to early virological response, and adherence rate lower than 80% or 95% was predictive to virological failure, especially in indinavir-containing regimens. Occurrence of adverse events was not clearly associated to adherence.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Analyzing plasma HIV-1 RNA measurements as multiple recurrent events in clinical trials.

Primary endpoints based on levels of HIV-1 RNA are currently used to evaluate efficacy of antiretroviral therapy in AIDS/HIV clinical trials. These endpoints, however, are generally based on few HIV-1 RNA measurements. More specifically, when the endpoint is the time to virologic failure (usually defined as two consecutive HIV-1 RNA levels above a threshold value), viral load measurements recorded after failure are simply ignored in the analysis. Instead of one virologic failure used in a classical survival analysis, we suggest that a failure be defined as any plasma HIV-1 RNA level above a predefined threshold value. This then becomes an analysis of multiple events of the same type, that is, recurrent virologic failures. Many survival models based on the Cox proportional hazards model have been proposed to handle multiple event data. The two distinct classes of models (marginal and conditional) answer two distinct types of clinical question and should be considered as complementary rather than competing models. We applied the different models to data from a clinical trial in HIV-1-infected patients.

Anti-HIV Agents↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Predictors of virologic response to ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors.

The primary mechanism of resistance to protease inhibitors involves the stepwise accumulation of mutations that alter and block the substrate binding site of HIV protease. The large degree of cross-resistance among the different protease inhibitors is a source of considerable concern for the management of patients after treatment failure. Although the output of HIV-resistance tests has been based on therapeutically arbitrary criteria, there is now an ongoing move towards correlating test interpretation with virologic outcomes on treatment. This approach is undeniably superior, in principle, for tests intended to guide drug choices. However, the predictive accuracy of a given stratagem that links genotype or phenotype to drug response is strongly influenced by the study design, data capture and the analytical methodology used to derive it. There is no definitively superior methodology for generating a genotype-response association for use in interpreting a resistance test, and the various approaches used to date all have their strengths and weaknesses. Combining the information of therapeutic drug monitoring and resistance tests is likely to be of greatest clinical utility in antiretroviral-experienced patients harboring HIV strains with reduced susceptibility. The combination of pharmacologic and virologic parameters as a predictor of the virologic response has been merged into the parameter known as "inhibitory quotient". This article discusses the potential interest of the use of inhibitory quotients as an approach for enhancing the potency and durability of boosted protease inhibitors against protease inhibitor-resistant viruses.

Anti-HIV Agents↗