ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016
Continuous intravenous infusion of enfuvirtide in a patient with a multidrug-resistant HIV strain.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- The Challenge of Adherence to a Complex Antiretroviral Therapy Regimen in an Individual With Multidrug-Resistant HIV.Topics in antiviral medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Case description To evaluate whether continuous intravenous (i.v.) administration of enfuvirtide (T20) could be a suitable alternative to subcutaneous (s.c.) administration of T20 in a patient with extensively drug-resistant HIV experiencing difficulties administering T20 subcutaneously. T20 was administered to a patient through 100 mL cassettes once daily via a CADD. Plasma samples were drawn and the pharmacokinetic profile compared to that of s.c. twice daily administration of T20. Also, viral replication and CD4+ count were monitored over a period of 9 months for this study. Continuous i.v. administration of T20 resulted in significantly higher T20 plasma levels compared to s.c. administration, continued viral suppression, a rise in CD4+ count and strong patient preference over s.c. administration. Conclusion This method of T20 administration may be a suitable alternative for selected patients who are not able to tolerate it when given subcutaneously. It may even be considered a priori in selected patients with extensive viral resistance who are unable or unwilling to inject T20 subcutaneously.
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.