Efavirenz versus boosted atazanavir or zidovudine and abacavir in antiretroviral treatment - naive, HIV-infected subjects: week 48 data from the Altair study

Puls, Rebekah L., Srasuebkul, Preeyaporn, Petoumenos, Kathy, Boesecke, Christoph, Duncombe, Chris, Belloso, Waldo H., Molina, Jean-Michel, Li, Lin, Avihingsanon, Anchalee, Gazzard, Brian, Cooper, David A. and Emery, Sean (2010) Efavirenz versus boosted atazanavir or zidovudine and abacavir in antiretroviral treatment - naive, HIV-infected subjects: week 48 data from the Altair study. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 51 7: 855-864. doi:10.1086/656363


Author Puls, Rebekah L.
Srasuebkul, Preeyaporn
Petoumenos, Kathy
Boesecke, Christoph
Duncombe, Chris
Belloso, Waldo H.
Molina, Jean-Michel
Li, Lin
Avihingsanon, Anchalee
Gazzard, Brian
Cooper, David A.
Emery, Sean
Title Efavirenz versus boosted atazanavir or zidovudine and abacavir in antiretroviral treatment - naive, HIV-infected subjects: week 48 data from the Altair study
Journal name Clinical Infectious Diseases   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1058-4838
1537-6591
Publication date 2010-10-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1086/656363
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 51
Issue 7
Start page 855
End page 864
Total pages 10
Place of publication Cary, NC, United States
Publisher Oxford University Press
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Background: Antiretroviral therapy is complicated by drug interactions and contraindications. Novel regimens are needed.

Methods: This open label study randomly assigned treatment-naive, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)—infected subjects to receive tenofovir-emtricitabine with efavirenz (Arm I), with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (Arm II), or with zidovudine/abacavir (Arm III). Pair-wise comparisons of differences in time-weighted mean change from baseline plasma HIV-RNA to week 48 formed the primary analysis. Treatment arms were noninferior if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) was <0.5 log10 copies/mL. Secondary objectives included virologic, immunologic and safety end points.

Results: The intention-to-treat population comprised 322 patients (Arm I, n = 114; Arm II, n = 105; and Arm III, n = 103). Noninferiority for the primary end point was established. Analysis for superiority showed that Arm III was significantly less potent than Arm I (−0.20 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, −0.39 to −0.01 log10 copies/mL; P = .038). The proportions of patients on each of Arm I (95%) and Arm II (96%) with <200 copies/mL were not different (P = .75), but the percentage of patients in Arm III with <200 copies/mL (82%) was significantly lower (P = .005). CD4+ cell counts did not differ. Serious adverse events were more frequent in Arm III (n = 30) than in Arm I or Arm II (n = 15 for each; P = .062).

Conclusions: A novel quadruple nucleo(t)side combination demonstrated significantly less suppression of HIV replication, compared with the suppression demonstrated by standard antiretroviral therapy regimens, although it did meet the predetermined formal definition of noninferiority. Secondary analyses indicated statistically inferior virologic and safety performance. Efavirenz and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir arms were equivalent in viral suppression and safety.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 42 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 41 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sat, 18 Mar 2017, 01:00:47 EST by Web Cron on behalf of Learning and Research Services (UQ Library)