Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29082041›Full record

ReviewAIDS research and treatment2017

Ritonavir-Boosted Darunavir Plus Two Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors versus Other Regimens for Initial Antiretroviral Therapy for People with HIV Infection: A Systematic Review.

Tatevik Balayan, Hacsi Horvath, George W Rutherford

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AIDS research and treatment, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Tatevik BalayanGlobal Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4478-4129
Hacsi HorvathGlobal Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7569-3524
George W RutherfordGlobal Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDarunavir is a second-generation protease-inhibitor used with ritonavir (DRV/r) and two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors as an option in first-line antiretroviral treatment (ART).

methodsWe systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DRV/r versus other regimens in patients initiating ART. We searched five bibliographic databases and other key resources. We had no language limitations. We assessed bias risk with the Cochrane tool and used GRADE to assess evidence quality. We report findings in terms of risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

findingsThree RCTs met inclusion criteria. In plasma viral load suppression, DRV/r outperformed ritonavir-boosted lopinavir at 48 weeks (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03-1.25), 96 weeks (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21), and 192 weeks (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.07-1.35). DRV/r was similar to dolutegravir at 48 weeks (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06) but less effective at 96 weeks (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.93). At 96 weeks, DRV/r underperformed raltegravir (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.99) but was similar to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96-1.09). Overall bias risk was moderate. Evidence quality was also moderate.

interpretationInitial ART regimens using DRV/r should be considered in future World Health Organization guidelines.

Identifiers

PMID29082041
PMCPMC5634582
OpenAlexW2757389262

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.