February 9, 2004
ACTG 388 was a randomized phase III clinical trial of mainly antiretroviral-naive subjects with advanced HIV disease. In it, patients were randomized to receive zidovudine (ZDV, Retrovir) and lamivudine (3TC, Epivir) in combination with indinavir (IDV, Crixivan), indinavir/efavirenz (EFV, Sustiva) or indinavir/nelfinavir (NFV, Viracept). The results of this study, published several years ago, showed that the combination of zidovudine/lamivudine plus indinavir/efavirenz offered a superior virological response to the combination of zidovudine/lamivudine plus indinavir. Zidovudine/lamivudine plus indinavir/nelfinavir resulted in an inferior virologic response. In that initial study report, a subgroup of patients was identified as having an increased risk of virologic failure; this group included patients who had poor adherence, were female and were younger.
In the poster presented at this conference, Dr. Ribaudo and colleagues analyzed baseline and on-treatment factors associated with virologic failure in the 517 initial ACTG 388 patients, who were followed for up to 108 weeks. A multivariate analysis was then conducted on the 172 patients who experienced virologic failure. This analysis revealed that the following factors increased the risk for virologic failure:
What is the importance of this study in today's practice? Although the drug combinations used in this study are not commonly used in practice today, it is possible that some of the factors identified in this analysis may still explain the virologic failure that we currently observe in some of our patients. After all, even with the simplified treatment combinations used today, poor virologic response is still observed in approximately 10% of the treatment-naive population.
By understanding the factors associated with an increased risk for virologic failure, we can improve the outcome for those subjects. We could potentially develop strategies to help, for example, younger patients as well as non-white and female patients. These data also reinforce the concept that interruption of treatment can increase the risk of virologic failure. On the other hand, these data again support what has been presented in many other studies regarding the presence of intermittent viral load blips, and the assertion that intermittent viremia may not be a big deal.
Abstract: Factors Associated With Virologic Failure and Their Impact on Treatment Outcomes: An Analysis of Virologic Failure in ACTG 388 (Poster 553)
Authored by: H. Ribaudo, G. Downey, M. Fischl, J. Feinberg, A. Erice, A. Collier
Affiliations: Harvard Sch. of Publ. Hlth., Boston, MA; Univ. of Miami, FL; Univ. of Cincinnati, OH; Hosp. Asepeyo, Madrid, Spain; Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA
|Please note: Knowledge about HIV changes rapidly. Note the date of this summary's publication, and before treating patients or employing any therapies described in these materials, verify all information independently. If you are a patient, please consult a doctor or other medical professional before acting on any of the information presented in this summary. For a complete listing of our most recent conference coverage, click here.|
The content on this page is free of advertiser influence and was produced by our editorial team. See our content and advertising policies.