Immunologic effectiveness of maraviroc- and raltegravir-containing regimens (R+M+) versus raltegravir-based regimens that do not include maraviroc (R+M-).

Tony Antoniou, Graham Smith, Desheng Su, Janet M Raboud, Derek Lee, Colin Kovacs, Jason Brunetta, David Fletcher, Fred Crouzat, Mona Loutfy
{"title":"Immunologic effectiveness of maraviroc- and raltegravir-containing regimens (R+M+) versus raltegravir-based regimens that do not include maraviroc (R+M-).","authors":"Tony Antoniou,&nbsp;Graham Smith,&nbsp;Desheng Su,&nbsp;Janet M Raboud,&nbsp;Derek Lee,&nbsp;Colin Kovacs,&nbsp;Jason Brunetta,&nbsp;David Fletcher,&nbsp;Fred Crouzat,&nbsp;Mona Loutfy","doi":"10.1177/1545109711424967","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the immunologic effectiveness of raltegravir-maraviroc (R+M+)-based regimens with raltegravir-based regimens that do not include maraviroc (R+M-) in treatment-experienced patients in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study of treatment-experienced HIV-infected adults receiving either R+M+- or R+M--based therapy. Longitudinal CD4 counts were analyzed using a linear mixed model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and fifty-six patients were included in the analysis, of whom 32 were receiving R+M+ and 124 R+M-. Mean baseline CD4 counts in patients on R+M+ and R+M- were 463.8 and 442.3 cells/mm(3), respectively (P = .67). In multivariable mixed models, a baseline viral load ≥50 copies/mL was significantly associated with CD4 change during follow-up (P < .0001). No difference between R+M+ and R+M- was observed during follow-up (P = .81).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CD4 cell recovery was similar among patients receiving either R+M+- or R+M--based therapy during a 24-month period of follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":86092,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care (Chicago, Ill. : 2002)","volume":"11 3","pages":"192-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1545109711424967","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care (Chicago, Ill. : 2002)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1545109711424967","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/1/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Objective: To compare the immunologic effectiveness of raltegravir-maraviroc (R+M+)-based regimens with raltegravir-based regimens that do not include maraviroc (R+M-) in treatment-experienced patients in clinical practice.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of treatment-experienced HIV-infected adults receiving either R+M+- or R+M--based therapy. Longitudinal CD4 counts were analyzed using a linear mixed model.

Results: One hundred and fifty-six patients were included in the analysis, of whom 32 were receiving R+M+ and 124 R+M-. Mean baseline CD4 counts in patients on R+M+ and R+M- were 463.8 and 442.3 cells/mm(3), respectively (P = .67). In multivariable mixed models, a baseline viral load ≥50 copies/mL was significantly associated with CD4 change during follow-up (P < .0001). No difference between R+M+ and R+M- was observed during follow-up (P = .81).

Conclusion: CD4 cell recovery was similar among patients receiving either R+M+- or R+M--based therapy during a 24-month period of follow-up.

含马拉韦洛克和雷替格拉韦方案(R+M+)与不含马拉韦洛克的基于雷替格拉韦方案(R+M-)的免疫有效性比较
目的:比较临床治疗经验丰富的患者中,以雷替格拉韦-马拉威洛克(R+M+)为基础的方案与不含马拉威洛克(R+M-)的雷替格拉韦为基础的方案的免疫效果。方法:我们对接受R+M+或R+M为基础的治疗的hiv感染成人进行了回顾性研究。纵向CD4计数使用线性混合模型进行分析。结果:156例患者纳入分析,其中R+M+ 32例,R+M- 124例。R+M+和R+M-患者的平均基线CD4计数分别为463.8和442.3细胞/mm(3) (P = 0.67)。在多变量混合模型中,基线病毒载量≥50拷贝/mL与随访期间CD4变化显著相关(P < 0.0001)。R+M+与R+M-随访无差异(P = 0.81)。结论:在24个月的随访期间,接受R+M+或R+M治疗的患者CD4细胞恢复相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书