This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the long-term virological outcomes of a cohort initially showing good responses to first-line highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) with no evidence ofvirological failure during the first year after achieving viral load (VL) undetectability (<50 copies/ml). METHODS: Virological failure was defined as a confirmed VL >400 copies/ml or a single VL >400 copies/ml followed by a treatment change or end of follow-up. Risk factors for low-level VL rebound (50-400 copies/ml) in the first year after achieving undetectability and for virological failure during subsequent follow-up were investigated by logistic and Poisson regression. RESULTS: In the first year after achieving VL undetectability, 354/1386 (25.5%) patients experienced low-level VL rebound, the remaining patients maintained consistent undetectability. Low-level rebound occurred less commonly with non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-based HAART than with other regimens (P = 0.01). Over median 2.2 (range 0.0-7.4) years of subsequent follow-up, 86 (6.2%) patients experienced virological failure, corresponding to 2.30 failures per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.79). Independent predictors of virological failure included low-level rebound during the first year after achieving undetectability relative to consistent undetectability (rate ratio [RR] 2.18, 95%0 CI 1.15-4.10), female gender (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.12-2.85) and receiving a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (Pl/r) relative to NNRTI-based HAART (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.02-3.46). CONCLUSIONS: Patients on first-line HAART who maintain consistent VL undetectability for 1 year have a low risk of subsequent virological failure. A subset might benefit from targeted interventions, including women and patients on Pl/r-based HAART.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geretti et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: