METHODS: We compared these regimens with respect to clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes using data from prospective studies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals in Europe and the United States in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration, 2004-2013. Antiretroviral therapy-naive and AIDS-free individuals were followed from the time they started a lopinavir or an atazanavir regimen. We estimated the 'intention-to-treat' effect for atazanavir vs lopinavir regimens on each of the outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 6668 individuals started a lopinavir regimen (213 deaths, 457 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths), and 4301 individuals started an atazanavir regimen (83 deaths, 157 AIDS-defining illnesses or deaths). The adjusted intention-to-treat hazard ratios for atazanavir vs lopinavir regimens were 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], .53-.91) for death, 0.67 (95% CI, .55-.82) for AIDS-defining illness or death, and 0.91 (95% CI, .84-.99) for virologic failure at 12 months. The mean 12-month increase in CD4 count was 8.15 (95% CI, -.13 to 16.43) cells/µL higher in the atazanavir group. Estimates differed by NRTI backbone.
CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates are consistent with a lower mortality, a lower incidence of AIDS-defining illness, a greater 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for atazanavir compared with lopinavir regimens.
DESIGN: Prospective studies of HIV-infected individuals in Europe and the US included in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration.
METHODS: Antiretroviral therapy-naive and AIDS-free individuals were followed from the time they started an NRTI, efavirenz or nevirapine, classified as following one or both types of regimens at baseline, and censored when they started an ineligible drug or at 6 months if their regimen was not yet complete. We estimated the 'intention-to-treat' effect for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens on clinical, immunologic, and virologic outcomes. Our models included baseline covariates and adjusted for potential bias introduced by censoring via inverse probability weighting.
RESULTS: A total of 15 336 individuals initiated an efavirenz regimen (274 deaths, 774 AIDS-defining illnesses) and 8129 individuals initiated a nevirapine regimen (203 deaths, 441 AIDS-defining illnesses). The intention-to-treat hazard ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] for nevirapine versus efavirenz regimens were 1.59 (1.27, 1.98) for death and 1.28 (1.09, 1.50) for AIDS-defining illness. Individuals on nevirapine regimens experienced a smaller 12-month increase in CD4 cell count by 11.49 cells/μl and were 52% more likely to have virologic failure at 12 months as those on efavirenz regimens.
CONCLUSIONS: Our intention-to-treat estimates are consistent with a lower mortality, a lower incidence of AIDS-defining illness, a larger 12-month increase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for efavirenz compared with nevirapine.
METHODS: We used data from the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration of cohort studies in Europe and the USA. We included 55,826 individuals aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with HIV-1 infection between January, 2000, and September, 2013, had not started ART, did not have AIDS, and had CD4 count and HIV-RNA viral load measurements within 6 months of HIV diagnosis. We estimated relative risks of death and of death or AIDS-defining illness, mean survival time, the proportion of individuals in need of ART, and the proportion of individuals with HIV-RNA viral load less than 50 copies per mL, as would have been recorded under each ART initiation strategy after 7 years of HIV diagnosis. We used the parametric g-formula to adjust for baseline and time-varying confounders.
FINDINGS: Median CD4 count at diagnosis of HIV infection was 376 cells per μL (IQR 222-551). Compared with immediate initiation, the estimated relative risk of death was 1·02 (95% CI 1·01-1·02) when ART was started at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL, and 1·06 (1·04-1·08) with initiation at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL. Corresponding estimates for death or AIDS-defining illness were 1·06 (1·06-1·07) and 1·20 (1·17-1·23), respectively. Compared with immediate initiation, the mean survival time at 7 years with a strategy of initiation at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL was 2 days shorter (95% CI 1-2) and at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL was 5 days shorter (4-6). 7 years after diagnosis of HIV, 100%, 98·7% (95% CI 98·6-98·7), and 92·6% (92·2-92·9) of individuals would have been in need of ART with immediate initiation, initiation at a CD4 count less than 500 cells per μL, and initiation at a CD4 count less than 350 cells per μL, respectively. Corresponding proportions of individuals with HIV-RNA viral load less than 50 copies per mL at 7 years were 87·3% (87·3-88·6), 87·4% (87·4-88·6), and 83·8% (83·6-84·9).
INTERPRETATION: The benefits of immediate initiation of ART, such as prolonged survival and AIDS-free survival and increased virological suppression, were small in this high-income setting with relatively low CD4 count at HIV diagnosis. The estimated beneficial effect on AIDS is less than in recently reported randomised trials. Increasing rates of HIV testing might be as important as a policy of early initiation of ART.
FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.
METHODS: The Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment (START) trial, as previously reported, randomly assigned 4684 ART-naive HIV-positive adults with CD4+ counts .500 cells/mm3 to immediate treatment initiation after random assignment (n = 2325) or deferred treatment (n= 2359). In 2015, a 57% lower risk of the primary end point (AIDS, SNA, or death) for the immediate group was reported, and the deferred group was offered ART. This article reports the follow-up that continued to December 31, 2021. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to compare hazard ratios for the primary end point from randomization through December 31, 2015, versus January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2021.
RESULTS: Through December 31, 2015, approximately 7 months after the cutoff date from the previous report, the median CD4+ count was 648 and 460 cells/mm3 in the immediate and deferred groups, respectively, at treatment initiation. The percentage of follow-up time spent taking ART was 95% and 36% for the immediate and deferred groups, respectively, and the time-averaged CD4+ difference was 199 cells/mm3. After January 1, 2016, the percentage of follow-up time on treatment was 97.2% and 94.1% for the immediate and deferred groups, respectively, and the CD4+ count difference was 155 cells/mm3. After January 1, 2016, a total of 89 immediate and 113 deferred group participants experienced a primary end point (hazard ratio of 0.79 [95% confidence interval, 0.60 to 1.04] versus hazard ratio of 0.47 [95% confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.65; P<0.001]) before 2016 (P=0.02 for hazard ratio difference).
CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with CD4+ counts >500 cells/mm3, excess risk of AIDS and SNA associated with delaying treatment initiation was diminished after ART initiation, but persistent excess risk remained. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others.).