Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of different patterns of nonadherence on treatment outcomes in patients with long-term follow-up. METHODS: This cohort study included patients who began highly active antiretroviral therapy during 1996-1999, with the last follow-up in 2007. Adherence was evaluated every 2 months by monitoring of pharmacy refills and by using self-reports. Patients were considered nonadherent at a specific visit when less than 90% of the prescribed drugs had been taken. Adherence was categorized as follows. (A) Continuous adherence: a patient had to be adherent in all of the evaluations throughout the period of follow-up. (B) Treatment interruption: drugs were not taken for more than 3 days, for any reason. Treatment failure was defined as viral load >500 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL or death. Cox proportional risk models were used to calculate adjusted relative hazards (ARHs) of treatment failure. RESULTS: A total of 540 patients were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 8.3 years. Only 32.78% of patients achieved and maintained continuous adherence, and 42.78% of patients had treatment interruptions. Noncontinuous adherence [ARH 1.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.14] and treatment interruptions (ARH 1.39; 95% CI 1.04-1.85) were associated with treatment failure for the overall cohort; however, for patients with more than 3 years of follow-up, only treatment interruptions were independently associated with treatment failure. CONCLUSIONS: Only one-third of patients managed to achieve continuous adherence, and almost half of the patients had treatment interruptions, which have a particularly marked effect on treatment outcomes over the long term.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Knobel et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: