Durability of Stavudine, Lamivudine and Nevirapine among Advanced HIV-1 Infected Patients with/without Prior Co-administration of Rifampicin: A 144-week Prospective Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To date, data on the durability of a regimen of stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine are very limited, particularly from the resource-limited settings.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective cohort study was conducted among 140 antiretroviral-naïve patients who were enrolled to initiate d4T, 3TC and NVP between November 2004 and March 2005. The objectives were to determine immunological and virological responses after 144 weeks of antiretroviral therapy. Seventy patients with tuberculosis also received rifampicin during the early period of antiviral treatment (TB group).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of all, median (IQR) baseline CD4 cell count was 31 (14–79) cells/mm³; median (IQR) baseline HIV-1 RNA was 433,500 (169,000–750,000) copies/mL. The average body weight was 55 kilograms. By intention-to-treat analysis at 144 weeks, the overall percentage of patients who achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was 59.3% (83/140). In subgroup analysis, 61.4% (43/70) patients in TB group and 57.1% (40/70) patients in control group achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (RR = 1.194, 95%CI = 0.608–2.346, <it>P </it>= 0.731). Eight (5.8%) patients discontinued d4T due to neuropathy and/or symptomatic lactic acidosis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The overall durability and efficacy of antiviral response of d4T, 3TC and NVP are satisfied and they are not different between HIV-1 infected patients with and without co-administration of rifampicin due to tuberculosis. However, stavudine-related adverse effects are concerns.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00703898</p

Economic Returns to Investment in AIDS Treatment in Low and Middle Income Countries

Since the early 2000s, aid organizations and developing country governments have invested heavily in AIDS treatment. By 2010, more than five million people began receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) – yet each year, 2.7 million people are becoming newly infected and another two million are dying without ever having received treatment. As the need for treatment grows without commensurate increase in the amount of available resources, it is critical to assess the health and economic gains being realized from increasingly large investments in ART. This study estimates total program costs and compares them with selected economic benefits of ART, for the current cohort of patients whose treatment is cofinanced by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. At end 2011, 3.5 million patients in low and middle income countries will be receiving ART through treatment programs cofinanced by the Global Fund. Using 2009 ART prices and program costs, we estimate that the discounted resource needs required for maintaining this cohort are $14.2 billion for the period 2011–2020. This investment is expected to save 18.5 million life-years and return$12 to $34 billion through increased labor productivity, averted orphan care, and deferred medical treatment for opportunistic infections and end-of-life care. Under alternative assumptions regarding the labor productivity effects of HIV infection, AIDS disease, and ART, the monetary benefits range from 81 percent to 287 percent of program costs over the same period. These results suggest that, in addition to the large health gains generated, the economic benefits of treatment will substantially offset, and likely exceed, program costs within 10 years of investment

Protease inhibitor-containing antiretroviral treatment and tuberculosis: can rifabutin fill the breach?

OBJECTIVE: To assess how to best manage co-administration of rifabutin (RFB) and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) protease inhibitor (PI) containing antiretroviral treatment (ART). Recommended for initial anti-tuberculosis treatment, rifampicin (RMP) lowers PI concentrations below therapeutic levels, posing significant challenges for ART. As RFB has little effect on PI concentrations, it could be an alternative to RMP. METHODS: A review of the scientific literature on the safety and efficacy of RFB for adult tuberculosis (TB) treatment was conducted, focusing on ART-TB co-therapy. A cost comparison was performed between treatment regimens, and estimates of the burden of TB disease in patients on ART were used to model RFB demand in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). RESULTS: Eleven clinical studies were identified, comprising 1543 TB patients treated with RFB; 980 (64%) were living with HIV. RFB was as safe and effective as RMP, including in 313 patients receiving co-administered ART (unboosted PIs included indinavir, nelfinavir or saquinavir; a minority received ritonavir [RTV] boosted amprenavir or saquinavir). The total cost for 6 months of all HIV and TB treatment containing RTV-boosted lopinavir (LPV) and RFB is US$410, compared to US$455 if RMP is used with LPV super-boosted with RTV. Our model suggests that demand for RFB in LMICs could be between 10 000 and 18 000 courses by 2012. CONCLUSION: RFB is effective and safe in combination with the PIs studied, cost-saving for co-therapy with currently recommended boosted PIs, and may have a pivotal role in the roll-out of ART. Further research into a daily dose of RFB to simplify dosing regimens and developing fixed-dose combinations can enhance the public sector roll-out of ART