Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26849060›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Dual Therapy Treatment Strategies for the Management of Patients Infected with HIV: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence in ARV-Naive or ARV-Experienced, Virologically Suppressed Patients.

Jean-Guy Baril, Jonathan B Angel, M John Gill, Joseph Gathe, Pedro Cahn, Jean van Wyk, Sharon Walmsley

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Jean-Guy BarilClinique médicale du Quartier latin, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Jonathan B AngelDivision of Infectious Diseases, University of Ottawa and the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
M John GillDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Joseph GatheTherapeutic Concepts, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Pedro CahnFundación Huesped, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Jean van WykAbbVie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
Sharon WalmsleyToronto General Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
AbbVie (United States) · USFundación Huésped · ARUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe reviewed the current literature regarding antiretroviral (ARV)-sparing therapy strategies to determine whether these novel regimens can be considered appropriate alternatives to standard regimens for the initial treatment of ARV-naive patients or as switch therapy for those patients with virologically suppressed HIV infection.

methodsA search for studies related to HIV dual therapy published from January 2000 through April 2014 was performed using Biosis, Derwent Drug File, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Medline, Pascal, SciSearch, and TOXNET databases; seven major trial registries, and the abstracts of major conferences. Using predetermined criteria for inclusion, an expert review committee critically reviewed and qualitatively evaluated all identified trials for efficacy and safety results and potential limitations.

resultsSixteen studies of dual therapy regimens were critiqued for the ARV-naive population. Studies of a protease inhibitor/ritonavir in combination with the integrase inhibitor raltegravir or the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor lamivudine provided the most definitive evidence supporting a role for dual therapy. In particular, lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir combined with raltegravir and lopinavir/ritonavir combined with lamivudine demonstrated noninferiority to standard of care triple therapy after 48 weeks of treatment. Thirteen trials were critiqued in ARV-experienced, virologically suppressed patients. The virologic efficacy outcomes were mixed. Although overall data regarding toxicity are limited, when compared with standard triple therapy, certain dual therapy regimens may offer advantages in renal function, bone mineral density, and limb fat changes; however, some dual combinations may elevate lipid or bilirubin levels.

conclusionsThe potential benefits of dual therapy regimens include reduced toxicity, improved tolerability and adherence, and reduced cost. Although the data reviewed here provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and tolerability of dual therapy regimens, it remains unclear whether these potential benefits can be maintained long-term. Appropriately powered studies with longer follow-up periods are needed to more definitively assess potential toxicity reduction advantages with dual therapy.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsClinical Trials as TopicDrug CombinationsHIVHIV InfectionsHumansAnti-HIV AgentsDrug Combinations

Identifiers

PMID26849060
PMCPMC4746196
OpenAlexW2260708985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.