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.
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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Article
- HIV-1 subtype influences susceptibility and response to monotherapy with the protease inhibitor lopinavir/ritonavir.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2015Article
- Phenotypic characterization of virological failure following lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy using full-length Gag-protease genes.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2014Article
- Article
- Article
- Description of the L76V resistance protease mutation in HIV-1 B and "non-B" subtypes.PloS one · 2013Article
- Article
- Characterization of HIV-1 antiretroviral drug resistance after second-line treatment failure in Mali, a limited-resources setting.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2012Article
- Lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy after virologic failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings.AIDS (London, England) · 2012Article
- Protease inhibitor monotherapy: what is its role?Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2012Review
- Low rates of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance in a well-monitored cohort in South Africa on antiretroviral therapy.Antiviral therapy · 2012Article
- Three residues in HIV-1 matrix contribute to protease inhibitor susceptibility and replication capacity.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2011Article
- Article
- Prevalence, mutation patterns, and effects on protease inhibitor susceptibility of the L76V mutation in HIV-1 protease.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2010Article
- Full-length HIV-1 Gag determines protease inhibitor susceptibility within in vitro assays.AIDS (London, England) · 2010Article
- Novel strategies in the use of lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of HIV infection in children.HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.