ArticleThe Pediatric infectious disease journal2013
Use of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-only regimens in HIV-infected children and adolescents.
Article in The Pediatric infectious disease journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIn adults, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-only antiretroviral regimens (NOARs) with ≥3 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors are less potent than highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Published pediatric experience with NOARs is limited; thus, we wished to better define the virological, immunological and toxicological effects of NOARs in children and adolescents.
methodsWe analyzed data from NOAR-treated participants in LEGACY, a multicenter observational cohort study of HIV-infected children and adolescents. NOAR-treated case-participants were matched to participants without prior NOAR who initiated HAART during the same year for comparison.
resultsOf 575 participants with data from time of HIV diagnosis through 2006, 67 (12%) received NOARs for at least 24 weeks; most (46%) received the fixed dose combination of zidovudine/lamivudine/abacavir. NOAR use peaked in 2001 to 2002. NOAR-treated participants were significantly older and more treatment experienced than HAART-treated participants. Virologic outcomes, including the percentage of participants with a plasma HIV RNA viral load <400 copies/mL at week 24 (47% versus 34%) and the mean 24-week change in log10 plasma HIV RNA viral load from baseline (-0.63 versus -1.02), were similar between NOAR- and HAART-treated participants, but virologic rebound was more likely in NOAR-treated participants (77% versus 54%, P = 0.02). Increase in CD4 percentage points from baseline to 24 weeks was negligible in NOAR-treated participants compared with HAART-treated participants (0.95% versus 10.1%, P < 0.001). Anemia and leukopenia were more commonly reported with NOARs than HAART. DISCUSSION: Week 24 virologic outcomes were similar between NOAR- and HAART-treated participants, but NOAR durability was poorer and their use was associated with less immunologic reconstitution. NOARs should play a limited role in pediatric and adolescent antiretroviral therapy.
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.