A Per-Protocol Analysis Using Inverse-Probability-of-Censoring Weights in a Randomized Trial of Initial Protease Inhibitor Versus Nonnucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor Regimens in Children

被引:1
|
作者
Yin, Dwight E. [1 ]
Cole, Stephen R. [1 ]
Ludema, Christina [1 ]
Brookhart, M. Alan [1 ]
Golin, Carol E. [1 ]
Miller, William C. [1 ]
McKinney, Ross E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Childrens Mercy Kansas City, Div Infect Dis & Clin Pharmacol, Med Toxicol andTherapeut Innovat, 2401 Gillings Rd, Kansas City, MO 64108 USA
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; adherence; antiretroviral therapy; child; compliance; forgiveness of nonadherence; human immunodeficiency virus; pediatrics; IMMUNODEFICIENCY-VIRUS-INFECTION; ANTIRETROVIRAL THERAPY; HIV-1; INFECTION; OPEN-LABEL; 2ND-LINE TREATMENT; DRUG-RESISTANCE; VIRAL LOAD; ADHERENCE; NEVIRAPINE; RITONAVIR;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kwad054
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Protocol adherence may influence measured treatment effectiveness in randomized controlled trials. Using data from a multicenter trial (Europe and the Americas, 2002-2009) of children with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 who had been randomized to receive initial protease inhibitor (PI) versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) antiretroviral therapy regimens, we generated time-to-event intention-to-treat (ITT) estimates of treatment effectiveness, applied inverse-probability-of-censoring weights to generate per-protocol efficacy estimates, and compared shifts from ITT to per-protocol estimates across and within treatment arms. In ITT analyses, 263 participants experienced 4-year treatment failure probabilities of 41.3% for PIs and 39.5% for NNRTIs (risk difference = 1.8% (95% confidence interval (CI): -10.1, 13.7); hazard ratio = 1.09 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.60)). In per-protocol analyses, failure probabilities were 35.6% for PIs and 29.2% for NNRTIs (risk difference = 6.4% (95% CI: -6.7, 19.4); hazard ratio = 1.30 (95% CI: 0.80, 2.12)). Within-arm shifts in failure probabilities from ITT to per-protocol analyses were 5.7% for PIs and 10.3% for NNRTIs. Protocol nonadherence was nondifferential across arms, suggesting that possibly better NNRTI efficacy may have been masked by differences in within-arm shifts deriving from differential regimen forgiveness, residual confounding, or chance. A per-protocol approach using inverse-probability-of-censoring weights facilitated evaluation of relationships among adherence, efficacy, and forgiveness applicable to pediatric oral antiretroviral regimens.
引用
收藏
页码:916 / 928
页数:13
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimen (nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor plus protease inhibitor) was more likely associated with resistance comparing to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor plus nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor in the randomized ANRS 121 trial
    Soulie, Cathia
    Assoumou, Lambert
    Ghosn, Jade
    Duvivier, Claudine
    Peytavin, Gilles
    Ait-Arkoub, Zaina
    Molina, Jean-Michel
    Costagliola, Dominique
    Katlama, Christine
    Calvez, Vincent
    Marcelin, Anne-Genevieve
    AIDS, 2009, 23 (12) : 1605 - 1608
  • [2] Metabolic outcomes in a randomized trial of nucleoside, nonnucleoside and protease inhibitor-sparing regimens for initial HIV treatment
    Haubrich, Richard H.
    Riddler, Sharon A.
    DiRienzo, A. Gregory
    Komarow, Lauren
    Powderly, William G.
    Klingman, Karin
    Garren, Kevin W.
    Butcher, David L.
    Rooney, James F.
    Haas, David W.
    Mellors, John W.
    Havliri, Diane V.
    AIDS, 2009, 23 (09) : 1109 - 1118
  • [3] Nonnucleoside Reverse-transcriptase Inhibitor- vs Ritonavir-boosted Protease Inhibitor-based Regimens for Initial Treatment of HIV Infection: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Randomized Trials
    Borges, Alvaro H.
    Lundh, Andreas
    Tendal, Britta
    Bartlett, John A.
    Clumeck, Nathan
    Costagliola, Dominique
    Daar, Eric S.
    Echeverria, Patricia
    Gisslen, Magnus
    Huedo-Medina, Tania B.
    Hughes, Michael D.
    Hullsiek, Katherine Huppler
    Khabo, Paul
    Komati, Stephanus
    Kumar, Princy
    Lockman, Shahin
    MacArthur, Rodger D.
    Maggiolo, Franco
    Matteelli, Alberto
    Miro, Jose M.
    Oka, Shinichi
    Petoumenos, Kathy
    Puls, Rebekah L.
    Riddler, Sharon A.
    Sax, Paul E.
    Sierra-Madero, Juan
    Torti, Carlo
    Lundgren, Jens D.
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2016, 63 (02) : 268 - 280
  • [4] Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection
    Haubrich, Richard H.
    Riddler, Sharon A.
    Ribaudo, Heather
    DiRenzo, Gregory
    Klingman, Karin L.
    Garren, Kevin W.
    Butcher, David L.
    Rooney, James F.
    Havlir, Diane V.
    Mellors, John W.
    AIDS, 2011, 25 (18) : 2269 - 2278
  • [5] Comparison of single and boosted protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-containing cART regimens in anti retroviral-naive patients starting cART after January 1, 2000
    Mocroft, A.
    Horban, A.
    Clumeck, N.
    Stellbrink, H. J.
    Monforte, A. d'Arminio
    Zilmer, K.
    Kirk, O.
    Gatell, J.
    Phillips, A. N.
    Lundgren, J. D.
    HIV CLINICAL TRIALS, 2006, 7 (06): : 271 - 284
  • [6] Interpreting the reasons for the choice and changing of two drug regimens in an observational cohort: comparison of a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor-based versus a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based first-line regimen
    Jarrin, I.
    Hernandez-Novoa, B.
    Alejos, B.
    Santos, I.
    Lopez-Aldeguer, J.
    Riera, M.
    Gutierrez, F.
    Rubio, R.
    Antela, A.
    Blanco, J. R.
    Moreno, S.
    HIV MEDICINE, 2014, 15 (09) : 547 - 556
  • [7] Gastrointestinal-associated lymphoid tissue immune reconstitution in a randomized clinical trial of raltegravir versus non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based regimens
    Asmuth, David M.
    Ma, Zhong-Min
    Mann, Surinder
    Knight, Thomas H.
    Yotter, Tammy
    Albanese, Anthony
    Melcher, Gregory P.
    Troia-Cancio, Paolo
    Hayes, Timothy
    Miller, Chris J.
    Pollard, Richard B.
    AIDS, 2012, 26 (13) : 1625 - 1634
  • [8] Immune Reconstitution in Severely Immunosuppressed Antiretroviral-Naive HIV Type 1-Infected Patients Using a Nonnucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor-Based or a Boosted Protease Inhibitor-Based Antiretroviral Regimen: Three-Year Results (The Advanz Trial): A Randomized, Controlled Trial
    Miro, Jose M.
    Manzardo, Christian
    Pich, Judith
    Domingo, Pere
    Ferrer, Elena
    Arribas, Jose R.
    Ribera, Esteban
    Arrizabalaga, Julio
    Lonca, Montserrat
    Cruceta, Anna
    de lazzari, Elisa
    Fuster, Montserrat
    Podzamczer, Daniel
    Plana, Montserrat
    Gatell, Jose M.
    AIDS RESEARCH AND HUMAN RETROVIRUSES, 2010, 26 (07) : 747 - 757
  • [9] Effects on immunological and virological outcome of patients using one protease inhibitor or one non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor in a triple antiretroviral therapy: Normal clinical practice versus clinical trial findings
    Fethi, T
    Asma, J
    Amine, SM
    Amel, EGA
    Taoufik, BC
    Mohamed, C
    Amel, LO
    Mounira, G
    CURRENT HIV RESEARCH, 2005, 3 (03) : 271 - 276
  • [10] Efficacy and tolerability of 3 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing antiretroviral regimens for treatment-naive volunteers infected with HIV-1. A randomized, controlled equivalence trial (vol 161, pg 461, 2014)
    Lennox, J. L.
    Landovitz, R. J.
    Ribaudo, H. J.
    Ofotokun, I
    Na, L. H.
    Godfrey, C.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2014, 161 (09) : 680 - 680