ArticleAIDS (London, England)2020
First-line HIV treatment outcomes following the introduction of integrase inhibitors in UK guidelines.
Article in AIDS (London, England), 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence, recurrence, and determinants of sexually transmitted infections among people with HIV: a multicenter cohort study in China, 2010-2024, with implications for integrated HIV-STI prevention across the Western Pacific.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Article
- Pre-conflict prescription patterns and virological effectiveness of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in HIV-1 patients in Tigray, Ethiopia.AIDS research and therapy · 2026Article
- Drug-Drug Interactions Between HIV Antivirals and Concomitant Drugs in HIV Patients: What We Know and What We Need to Know.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
- Factors Associated with Time to Initial Antiretroviral Therapy Discontinuation in the DC Cohort.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2024Observational
- Associations of modern initial antiretroviral drug regimens with all-cause mortality in adults with HIV in Europe and North America: a cohort study.The lancet. HIV · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the characteristics and outcomes of people who initiated different antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens during the era of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs).
designUK-based observational cohort study.
methodsUK Collaborative HIV Cohort study participants were included if they had started ART between 1 January 2012 and 30 June 2017. Virological failure was defined as the first of two consecutive plasma HIV RNA more than 50 copies/ml, at least 6 months after starting ART. Follow-up was censored at ART discontinuation, class switch or death. The risk of virological failure among those on INSTI, protease inhibitor or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) regimens was compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods.
resultsOf 12 585 participants, 45.6% started a NNRTI, 29.0% a protease inhibitor and 25.4% an INSTI regimen. Over a median follow-up of 20.3 months (interquartile range 7.9-38.9), 7.5% of participants experienced virological failure. Compared with those starting an NNRTI regimen, people receiving INSTIs or protease inhibitors were more likely to experience virological failure: INSTI group adjusted hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.19-1.95, P = 0.0009; protease inhibitor group adjusted hazard ratio 2.70, 95% confidence interval 2.27-3.21, P less than 0.0001, likelihood ratio test P less than 0.0001.
conclusionFirst-line INSTI regimens were associated with a lower risk of virological failure than protease inhibitor regimens but both groups were more likely to experience virological failure than those initiating treatment with a NNRTI. There is likely to be residual channelling bias resulting from selected use of INSTIs and protease inhibitors in specific clinical contexts, including in those with a perceived risk of poor adherence.
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.