ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2020
Efficacy and safety of lower dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and efavirenz versus standard dose in HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive adults: a multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial.
Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Project RETAIN: Providing Integrated Care for People With HIV Who Use Cocaine.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- The cost-effectiveness analysis of single-tablet efavirenz-based regimen among HIV-1 infected adults in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Durability of the Efficacy and Safety of Dolutegravir-Based and Low-Dose Efavirenz-Based Regimens for the Initial Treatment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection in Cameroon: Week 192 Data of the NAMSAL-ANRS-12313 Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Circulating (1 → 3)-β-D-Glucan as an immune activation marker decreased after ART in people living with HIV.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events During 12 Months of Treatment With Efavirenz in Treatment-Naïve HIV-Infected Patients in China: A Prospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Antiretroviral Therapy-Associated Metabolic Complications: Review of the Recent Studies.HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reduced doses of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs may lower toxicity while preserving efficacy. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of reduced doses of both tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and efavirenz for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. In this open-label, non-inferiority trial, HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive adults were randomly assigned to receive either a lower dose anti-retroviral regimen comprised of TDF (200 mg), efavirenz (400 mg), and standard dose lamivudine (300 mg) or the standard dose regimen. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA≤ 50 copies/mL at week 48 using a non-inferiority margin of -10%. At week 48, 79 of 92 (85.9%) participants in the lower dose regimen group and 78 of 92 (84.8%) in the standard dose regimen group achieved HIV-1 RNA≤ 50 copies/mL (treatment difference 1.1%, 95% CI -9.1 to 11.3) in the intention-to-treat analysis. Drug-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the participants receiving the standard dose regimen compared with the lower dose one (63.0% vs 80.4%). Changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate and bone mineral density were comparable between the two groups. The non-inferior efficacy and better safety profile of the lower dose ARV regimen support its use as alternative initial therapy for HIV-1 infected patients.
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.