Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19451297›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2009

Protease inhibitor resistance analysis in the MONARK trial comparing first-line lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy to lopinavir-ritonavir plus zidovudine and lamivudine triple therapy.

Constance Delaugerre, Philippe Flandre, Marie Laure Chaix, Jade Ghosn, François Raffi, Pierre Dellamonica, H Jaeger, D Shürmann, Isabelle Cohen-Codar, Philippe Ngo Van and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. mBio · 2020
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Constance DelaugerreUniversity Paris Descartes, EA 3620, Virology Department, Necker Hospital AP-HP, Paris, France. constance.delaugerre@sls.aphp.fr
Philippe Flandre
Marie Laure Chaix
Jade Ghosn
François Raffi
Pierre Dellamonica
H Jaeger
D Shürmann
Isabelle Cohen-Codar
Philippe Ngo Van
Michael Norton
Anne-Marie Taburet
Jean-François Delfraissy
Christine Rouzioux
MONARK Study Group
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRAbbott (France) · FRAbbott Fund · USBicêtre Hospital · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The MONARK study was a pilot randomized trial comparing the safety and efficacy of lopinavir-ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy to those of LPV/r-zidovudine-lamivudine triple therapy for antiretroviral-naïve human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected patients. Resistance testing was performed at the time of initial screening and at the time of virological failure (defined to include low-level viremia with >50 and <400 HIV-1 virus RNA copies/ml of plasma). Changes from the baseline sequences, including mutations noted on the 2008 International AIDS Society-USA list of resistance-associated protease mutations, were considered. Drug resistance testing was performed for 38 patients (5 of 53 on triple therapy and 33 of 83 on monotherapy). By week 96 (W96), virus samples from 18 of 33 patients in the monotherapy arm showed changes from baseline sequences, and 5 of these patients had viruses with major protease inhibitor (PI) resistance-associated mutations (M46I at W40, L76V at W48, M46I and L76V at W48, L10F and V82A at W72, and L76V at W84). Data on virus phenotypes detected at the time of initial screening and the time of virological failure were available for four patients in whom major PI resistance mutations developed, and these data revealed a mean increase of 2.2-fold (range, 0.75- to 4.6-fold) in the LPV 50% inhibitory concentration. All three patients in whom the L76V PI resistance mutation developed were infected with HIV-1 subtype CRF02_AG. In the triple-therapy group, no major PI resistance mutation was selected among the three patients with protease changes by W48. No association between the baseline CD4 cell count and the viral load, the W4 and final viral loads, or the final LPV trough concentration and the emergence of a major PI resistance mutation was found. Major PI resistance-associated mutations were detected in 5 (6%) of 83 patients treated with LPV/r monotherapy, suggesting that LPV/r monotherapy is an inappropriate first option. The mutation L76V may be considered in further studies of lopinavir resistance.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, ViralHIV InfectionsHIV Protease InhibitorsHumansLamivudineLopinavirPyrimidinonesRitonavirTreatment OutcomeZidovudineHIV Protease InhibitorsLamivudineLopinavirPyrimidinonesRitonavirZidovudine

Identifiers

PMID19451297
PMCPMC2704639
OpenAlexW2080773184

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.