Trial reportJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2011
Genotypic resistance at viral rebound among patients who received lopinavir/ritonavir-based or efavirenz-based first antiretroviral therapy in South Africa.
Trial report in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-line antiretroviral therapy with nevirapine versus lopinavir-ritonavir based regimens in a resource-limited setting.AIDS (London, England) · 2014Trial
- Six-Year Immunologic Recovery and Virological Suppression of HIV Patients on LPV/r-Based Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment: A Multi-Center Real-World Cohort Study in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Brief Report: Assessing the Association Between Changing NRTIs When Initiating Second-Line ART and Treatment Outcomes.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2018Article
- Article
- Virological failure rates and HIV-1 drug resistance patterns in patients on first-line antiretroviral treatment in semirural and rural Gabon.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-drug resistance mutations (DRM) are increasingly reported in Africans failing their first antiretroviral regimen. The Phidisa II trial randomized treatment-naive participants to lopinavir/ritonavir or efavirenz with stavudine + lamivudine or zidovudine + didanosine. We report the prevalence of DRM in subjects who achieved HIV RNA <400 copies per milliliter at 6 months, but subsequently had 2 consecutive HIV RNA >1000 copies per milliliter. Sixty-eight participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-DRM were found in 17 of 36 (47.2%) efavirenz recipients, and M184V/I mutation in 14 of 40 (35.0%) lamivudine recipients. No protease inhibitor mutation was identified in 38 lopinavir/ritonavir recipients. This is one of the first studies in Africa confirming the paucity of protease inhibitor-associated DRM despite virologic failure.
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.