Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21154355›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three-drug combination therapy with two nucleoside-reverse transcriptase inhibitors for initial treatment of HIV infection in antiretroviral-naïve individuals.

Lawrence Ce Mbuagbaw, James H Irlam, Alicen Spaulding, George W Rutherford, Nandi Siegfried

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Micronutrient supplementation in adults with HIV infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lawrence Ce MbuagbawBafut District Hospital/ Peace Corps Cameroon, Bafut/Yaounde, Cameroon.
James H Irlam
Alicen Spaulding
George W Rutherford
Nandi Siegfried
University of Cape Town · ZAUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Minnesota System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has reduced the morbidity and mortality due to HIV. The World Health Organisation (WHO) antiretroviral treatment (ART) guidelines focus on three classes of antiretroviral drugs, namely: nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) and protease inhibitors (PI). Two of the most common medications given in first-line treatment are the NNRTIs, efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP). It is unclear which NNRTI is more efficacious for initial therapy.

objectivesTo determine which NNRTI, EFV or NVP, is more efficacious when given in combination with two NRTIs as part of initial ART for HIV infection in adults and children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used a comprehensive and exhaustive strategy in an attempt to identify all relevant studies, regardless of language or publication status, in electronic databases and conference proceedings from 1996 to 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing EFV to NVP in HIV-infected individuals without prior exposure to ART, irrespective of the dosage or NRTI backbone.The primary outcome of interest was virologic response to ART. Other primary outcomes included mortality, clinical progression, severe adverse events, and discontinuation of therapy for any reason. Secondary outcomes were immunologic response to ART, treatment failure, development of ART drug resistance, and prevention of sexual transmission of HIV. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed each reference for inclusion and exclusion criteria established a priori. Data were abstracted independently using a standardised abstraction form. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and reported as per dosage of NVP. MAIN

resultsWe identified seven randomised controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria.The trials were pooled as per dosage of NVP. None of these trials included children.The seven trials enrolled 1,688 participants and found no critical differences between EFV and NVP, except for different toxicity profiles. EFV is more likely to cause central nervous system side-effects, while NVP is more likely to result in raised transaminases and neutropoenia. There was a higher mortality rate in the NVP 400mg once daily arm.The quality of literature to support these conclusions is moderate to high. Drug resistance was slightly less common with EFV than NVP, but the quality of this literature is low since only one of the seven studies reported on this outcome. No studies reported on sexual transmission of HIV. The length of follow-up time, study settings, and NRTI backbone varied greatly. AUTHORS'

conclusionsBoth drugs have equivalent efficacies in initial treatment of HIV infection when combined with two NRTIs, but different side effects.

Indexed as

AdultAlkynesAnti-HIV AgentsBenzoxazinesCyclopropanesDrug Therapy, CombinationHIV InfectionsHumansNevirapineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReverse Transcriptase InhibitorsAlkynesAnti-HIV AgentsBenzoxazinesCyclopropanesefavirenzNevirapineReverse Transcriptase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID21154355
OpenAlexW4229548811

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.