ArticleThe Pediatric infectious disease journal2016
Effect of Lopinavir and Nevirapine Concentrations on Viral Outcomes in Protease Inhibitor-experienced HIV-infected Children.
Article in The Pediatric infectious disease journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determining Targets for Antiretroviral Drug Concentrations: A Causal Framework Illustrated With Pediatric Efavirenz Data From the CHAPAS-3 Trial.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2024Article
- Tenofovir diphosphate levels in dried blood spots are associated with virologic failure and resistance to first-line therapy in South Africa: a case-control cohort study.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Article
- Cumulative Antiretroviral Exposure Measured in Hair Is Not Associated With Measures of HIV Persistence or Inflammation Among Individuals on Suppressive ART.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2018Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdequate exposure to antiretroviral drugs is necessary to achieve and sustain viral suppression. However, the target antiretroviral concentrations associated with long-term viral suppression have not been adequately defined in children. We assessed the relationship between plasma lopinavir or nevirapine concentrations and the risk of subsequent viremia in children initially suppressed on antiretroviral therapy.
methodsAfter an induction phase of antiretroviral treatment, 195 children with viral suppression (viral load ≤400 copies/mL) were randomized to continue a lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimen or to switch to a nevirapine-based regimen (together with lamivudine and stavudine). Viral load and lopinavir or nevirapine concentrations were measured at clinic visits 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 52, 64 and 76 weeks post randomization. Cox multiple failure event models were used to estimate the effects of drug concentrations on the hazard of viremia (viral load >50 copies/mL)
results: At randomization, the median (interquartile range) age, CD4 T-Lymphocyte percentage, weight-for-age and weight-for-height z scores were 19 (16-24) months, 29% (23-37), -0.6 (-1.3 to 0.2) and -3.2 (-4.1 to -2.1), respectively. The proportion of children with viral load 51-400 copies/mL at randomization was 43%. The hazard of subsequent viremia during follow-up was increased for lopinavir concentrations <1 versus ≥1 mg/L [adjusted hazard ratio 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.94)] and for children with viral loads 51-400 copies/mL at randomization. Nevirapine concentrations were not significantly associated with subsequent viremia.
conclusionsPlasma lopinavir concentrations predicted viral outcomes in children receiving lopinavir-based antiretroviral therapy. Our findings support a minimum target concentration of ≥1 mg/L of lopinavir to ensure sustained viral suppression.
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.