The publication detail shows the title, authors (with indicators showing other profiled authors), information on the publishing organization, abstract and a link to the article in PubMed. This abstract is what is used to create the fingerprint of the publication. If any grants are referenced by the publication, they will be listed here as well.
Comparison of once-daily versus twice-daily combination antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naive patients: results of AIDS clinical trials group (ACTG) A5073, a 48-week randomized controlled trial.
Charles Flexner; Camlin Tierney; Robert Gross; Adriana Andrade; Christina Lalama; Susan H Eshleman; Judith Aberg; Ian Sanne; Teresa Parsons; Angela Kashuba; et al. (Profiled Authors: Charles Flexner; Susan Eshleman; Adriana Andrade; Teresa Parsons)
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. email@example.com
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2010;50(7):1041-52.
BACKGROUND: Dosing frequency is an important determinant of regimen effectiveness. Methods. To compare efficacy of once-daily (QD) versus twice-daily (BID) antiretroviral therapy, we randomized human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive, treatment-naive patients to lopinavir-ritonavir (LPV/r) administered at a dosage of 400 mg of lopinavir and 100 mg of ritonavir BID (n = 160) or 800 mg of lopinavir and 200 mg of ritonavir QD (n = 161), plus either emtricitabine 200 mg QD and extended-release stavudine at a dosage of 100 mg QD or tenofovir at a dosage of 300 mg QD. Randomization was stratified by screening HIV RNA level <100,000 copies/mL versus > or = 100,000 copies/mL. The primary efficacy end point was sustained virologic response (SVR; defined as reaching and maintaining an HIV RNA level <200 copies/mL) through week 48. RESULTS: Subjects were 78% male, 33% Hispanic, and 34% black. A total of 82% of subjects completed the study, and 71% continued to receive the initially assigned dosage schedule. The probability of SVR did not differ significantly for the BID versus QD comparison, with an absolute proportional difference of 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.07 to 0.12). The comparison depended on the screening RNA stratum (P=.038); in the higher RNA stratum, the probability of SVR was significantly better in the BID arm than in the QD arm: 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94) versus 0.76 (95% CI, 0.64-0.84), a difference of 0.13 (95% CI, 0.01-0.25). Lopinavir trough plasma concentrations were higher with BID dosing. Adherence to prescribed doses of LPV/r was 90.6% in the QD arm versus 79.9% in the BID arm (P<.001). Conclusions. Although subjects assigned to QD regimens had better adherence, overall treatment outcomes were similar in the QD and BID arms. Subjects with HIV RNA levels > or =100,000 copies/mL had better SVR with BID regimens at 48 weeks, which suggests a possible advantage in this setting for more frequent dosing. Clinical trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00036452.
This section shows information related to the publication - computed using the fingerprint of the publication - including related publications, related experts and related grants with fingerprints representing significant amounts of overlap between their fingerprint and this publication. The red dots indicate whether those experts or terms appear within the publication, thereby showing potential and actual connections.
Barbara Castelnuovo; Laurence John; Fred Lutwama; Allan Ronald; Lisa A Spacek; Michael Bates; Moses R Kamya; Robert ColebundersJournal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care (Chicago, Ill. : 2002) 2009;8(1):52-9.
Daniel Podzamczer; Martin S King; Cheri E Klein; Charles Flexner; Christine Katlama; Diane V Havlir; Scott L Letendre; Joseph J Eron; Scott C Brun; Barry BernsteinHIV clinical trials 2007;8(4):193-204.
Paul Palumbo; Jane C Lindsey; Michael D Hughes; Mark F Cotton; Raziya Bobat; Tammy Meyers; Mutsawashe Bwakura-Dangarembizi; Benjamin H Chi; Philippa Musoke; Portia Kamthunzi; et al.The New England journal of medicine 2010;363(16):1510-20.
Appears in this Publication
Author of this Publication