Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

 

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Pillay, Prinitha en_ZA
dc.contributor.author Ford, Nathan en_ZA
dc.contributor.author Shubber, Zara en_ZA
dc.contributor.author Ferrand, Rashida A en_ZA
dc.date.accessioned 2015-11-16T04:09:34Z
dc.date.available 2015-11-16T04:09:34Z
dc.date.issued 2013 en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Pillay, P., Ford, N., Shubber, Z., & Ferrand, R. A. (2012). Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 8(7), e68995. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068995 en_ZA
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14994
dc.identifier.uri http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068995
dc.description.abstract Introduction There is conflicting evidence and practice regarding the use of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP) in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: We systematically reviewed virological outcomes in HIV-1 infected, treatment-naive patients on regimens containing EFV versus NVP from randomised trials and observational cohort studies. Data sources include PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and conference proceedings of the International AIDS Society, Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, between 1996 to May 2013. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic, and subgroup analyses performed to assess the potential influence of study design, duration of follow up, location, and tuberculosis treatment. Sensitivity analyses explored the potential influence of different dosages of NVP and different viral load thresholds. RESULTS: Of 5011 citations retrieved, 38 reports of studies comprising 114 391 patients were included for review. EFV was significantly less likely than NVP to lead to virologic failure in both trials (RR 0.85 [0.73-0.99] I 2  = 0%) and observational studies (RR 0.65 [0.59-0.71] I 2  = 54%). EFV was more likely to achieve virologic success than NVP, though marginally significant, in both randomised controlled trials (RR 1.04 [1.00-1.08] I 2  = 0%) and observational studies (RR 1.06 [1.00-1.12] I 2  = 68%). CONCLUSION: EFV-based first line ART is significantly less likely to lead to virologic failure compared to NVP-based ART. This finding supports the use of EFV as the preferred NNRTI in first-line treatment regimen for HIV treatment, particularly in resource limited settings. en_ZA
dc.language.iso eng en_ZA
dc.publisher Public Library of Science en_ZA
dc.rights This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. en_ZA
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 en_ZA
dc.source PLoS One en_ZA
dc.source.uri http://journals.plos.org/plosone en_ZA
dc.subject.other Observational studies en_ZA
dc.subject.other Antiretroviral therapy en_ZA
dc.subject.other HIV en_ZA
dc.subject.other HIV-1 en_ZA
dc.subject.other Viral load en_ZA
dc.subject.other Meta-analysis en_ZA
dc.subject.other Cohort studies en_ZA
dc.subject.other Database searching en_ZA
dc.title Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis en_ZA
dc.type Journal Article en_ZA
dc.rights.holder © 2013 Pillay et al en_ZA
uct.type.publication Research en_ZA
uct.type.resource Article en_ZA
dc.publisher.institution University of Cape Town
dc.publisher.faculty Faculty of Health Sciences en_ZA
dc.publisher.department Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine en_ZA
uct.type.filetype Text
uct.type.filetype Image
dc.identifier.apacitation Pillay, P., Ford, N., Shubber, Z., & Ferrand, R. A. (2013). Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. <i>PLoS One</i>, http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14994 en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitation Pillay, Prinitha, Nathan Ford, Zara Shubber, and Rashida A Ferrand "Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis." <i>PLoS One</i> (2013) http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14994 en_ZA
dc.identifier.vancouvercitation Pillay P, Ford N, Shubber Z, Ferrand RA. Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013; http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14994. en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Journal Article AU - Pillay, Prinitha AU - Ford, Nathan AU - Shubber, Zara AU - Ferrand, Rashida A AB - Introduction There is conflicting evidence and practice regarding the use of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP) in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: We systematically reviewed virological outcomes in HIV-1 infected, treatment-naive patients on regimens containing EFV versus NVP from randomised trials and observational cohort studies. Data sources include PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and conference proceedings of the International AIDS Society, Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, between 1996 to May 2013. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic, and subgroup analyses performed to assess the potential influence of study design, duration of follow up, location, and tuberculosis treatment. Sensitivity analyses explored the potential influence of different dosages of NVP and different viral load thresholds. RESULTS: Of 5011 citations retrieved, 38 reports of studies comprising 114 391 patients were included for review. EFV was significantly less likely than NVP to lead to virologic failure in both trials (RR 0.85 [0.73-0.99] I 2  = 0%) and observational studies (RR 0.65 [0.59-0.71] I 2  = 54%). EFV was more likely to achieve virologic success than NVP, though marginally significant, in both randomised controlled trials (RR 1.04 [1.00-1.08] I 2  = 0%) and observational studies (RR 1.06 [1.00-1.12] I 2  = 68%). CONCLUSION: EFV-based first line ART is significantly less likely to lead to virologic failure compared to NVP-based ART. This finding supports the use of EFV as the preferred NNRTI in first-line treatment regimen for HIV treatment, particularly in resource limited settings. DA - 2013 DB - OpenUCT DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0068995 DP - University of Cape Town J1 - PLoS One LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2013 T1 - Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis TI - Outcomes for efavirenz versus nevirapine-containing regimens for treatment of HIV-1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14994 ER - en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.