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, Graham Smith, Desheng Su, Janet M Raboud, Derek Lee, Colin Kovacs, Jason Brunetta, David Fletcher, Fred Crouzat, 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.