ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2005
Steady-state pharmacokinetics of atazanavir given alone or in combination with saquinavir hard-gel capsules or amprenavir in HIV-1-infected patients.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simultaneous population pharmacokinetic modelling of atazanavir and ritonavir in HIV-infected adults and assessment of different dose reduction strategies.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2013Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of atazanavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected children and adolescents.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2011Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in HIV-infected patients and healthy volunteers.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2009Article
- Review
- Atazanavir: its role in HIV treatment.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2008Review
- Decrease of atazanavir and lopinavir plasma concentrations in a boosted double human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitor salvage regimen.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2008Article
- Pharmacokinetics of saquinavir, atazanavir, and ritonavir in a twice-daily boosted double-protease inhibitor regimen.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2007Article
- A single centre cohort experience with a new once daily antiretroviral drug.Postgraduate medical journal · 2006Article
- Clinical pharmacokinetics and summary of efficacy and tolerability of atazanavir.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2005Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this pilot study was to examine the pharmacokinetics of atazanavir (ATV) when given in combination with amprenavir (APV) or saquinavir hard-gel capsules (SQV) to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients.
methodsIncluded in the study were 34 HIV-infected patients enrolled in the ATV Early Access Program, who were treated with unboosted ATV alone (group 1) or with the double protease inhibitor combinations, ATV plus APV (group 2) or ATV plus SQV (group 3). ATV was given at a daily dose of 400 mg q.d. with the morning meal with SQV 1200 mg per day or APV 1200 mg per day. Serial blood samples for steady-state ATV pharmacokinetics were collected before the morning dose and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 8 and 24 h post-dosing. ATV plasma concentrations were measured using a high-performance liquid chromatography method with ultraviolet detection.
resultsOf the patients, 12 received ATV as a single protease inhibitor; 12 received ATV in combination with APV; and 10 in combination with SQV. Geometric mean (coefficient of variation) ATV C(trough) was 110 ng/ml (2.38), 86 ng/ml (0.84) and 149 ng/ml (2.01) in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. ATV C(trough) in both double protease inhibitor combination regimens was not significantly different from that as a single protease inhibitor [geometric mean ratio (GMR): 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-1.58, P=not significant for group 2 versus group 1 and 1.34, 0.40-4.49, P=not significant, for group 3 versus group 1). Patients treated with ATV plus APV had a 40.2% lower ATV C(max) and a 30.8% smaller ATV AUC than the reference group treated with unboosted ATV alone: both these differences were statistically significant (GMR, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.41-0.85, P=0.005 and 0.69, 0.48-0.99, P=0.056, respectively). No difference was observed for either C(max) or AUC between the group treated with ATV plus SQV and the reference group (GMR, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.47-1.30, P=not significant and 1.24, 0.73-2.10, P=not significant, respectively).
conclusionATV pharmacokinetics does not seem to be influenced by the concomitant administration of SQV, whereas APV significantly lowers plasma ATV levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.