Efficacy and Tolerability of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Based Regimen as Compared to Zidovudine Based Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.1 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES AIDS Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-05-30 DOI:10.1155/2017/5792925
Tegene Legese Dadi, Adane Teshome Kefale, Teshale Ayele Mega, Muktar Sano Kedir, Habtamu Acho Addo, Tessema Tsehay Biru
{"title":"Efficacy and Tolerability of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Based Regimen as Compared to Zidovudine Based Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Tegene Legese Dadi,&nbsp;Adane Teshome Kefale,&nbsp;Teshale Ayele Mega,&nbsp;Muktar Sano Kedir,&nbsp;Habtamu Acho Addo,&nbsp;Tessema Tsehay Biru","doi":"10.1155/2017/5792925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC)/efavirenz (EFV) and zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine (3TC)/efavirenz (EFV) are used as preferred first line regimen, their head-to-head comparison in terms of their efficacy and tolerability was limited. This review aimed to synthesize the best available evidence on the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the two regimens.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven sites and databases in addition to Google search until August 20, 2016, were searched. Only randomized clinical trials conducted on adult population were included in this study. Our primary outcome was viral load suppression while secondary outcomes were death and tolerability. Undetectable viral load is defined as <50 Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies/ml. Joanna Briggs institute meta-analysis of statistics assessment and review instrument (JBI-MAStARI) and critical appraisal and data extraction tool were applied for critical assessment and data extraction, respectively. We performed a random effect meta-analysis to pool the relative risk (RR) for viral load suppression (<50 HIV RNA copies/ml and <400 HIV RNA copies/ml), tolerability, and death.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Data was extracted from four articles, which included a total of 2381 participants. We found superior viral load suppression among tenofovir (TDF) arm compared to zidovudine (ZDV) arm. Tenofovir arm achieves viral load <50 HIV RNA copies/ml (RR = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 1.21], <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) higher than zidovudine arm. Similarly TDF arm is superior in viral load suppression to <400 HIV RNA copies/ml (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.11, 1.27], <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). Moreover, TDF based regimens were more likely to be tolerated than ZDV based regimens (4 trials, 2381 participants (RR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.10], <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 51%)). However, forest plot of death shows that it was not significant (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.51, 1.62]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of TDF/FTC/EFV as first line regimen for naïve HIV-1 infected adult patient showed superior viral load suppression and tolerability as compared to ZDV/3TC/EFV. In order to compare the death outcome of both ZDV/3TC/EFV and TDF/FTC/EFV further research is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":46303,"journal":{"name":"AIDS Research and Treatment","volume":"2017 ","pages":"5792925"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/5792925","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIDS Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5792925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Background: Although tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC)/efavirenz (EFV) and zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine (3TC)/efavirenz (EFV) are used as preferred first line regimen, their head-to-head comparison in terms of their efficacy and tolerability was limited. This review aimed to synthesize the best available evidence on the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the two regimens.

Methods: Seven sites and databases in addition to Google search until August 20, 2016, were searched. Only randomized clinical trials conducted on adult population were included in this study. Our primary outcome was viral load suppression while secondary outcomes were death and tolerability. Undetectable viral load is defined as <50 Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) ribonucleic acid (RNA) copies/ml. Joanna Briggs institute meta-analysis of statistics assessment and review instrument (JBI-MAStARI) and critical appraisal and data extraction tool were applied for critical assessment and data extraction, respectively. We performed a random effect meta-analysis to pool the relative risk (RR) for viral load suppression (<50 HIV RNA copies/ml and <400 HIV RNA copies/ml), tolerability, and death.

Result: Data was extracted from four articles, which included a total of 2381 participants. We found superior viral load suppression among tenofovir (TDF) arm compared to zidovudine (ZDV) arm. Tenofovir arm achieves viral load <50 HIV RNA copies/ml (RR = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 1.21], I2 = 0%) higher than zidovudine arm. Similarly TDF arm is superior in viral load suppression to <400 HIV RNA copies/ml (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.11, 1.27], I2 = 0%). Moreover, TDF based regimens were more likely to be tolerated than ZDV based regimens (4 trials, 2381 participants (RR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.10], I2 = 51%)). However, forest plot of death shows that it was not significant (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.51, 1.62]).

Conclusion: The use of TDF/FTC/EFV as first line regimen for naïve HIV-1 infected adult patient showed superior viral load suppression and tolerability as compared to ZDV/3TC/EFV. In order to compare the death outcome of both ZDV/3TC/EFV and TDF/FTC/EFV further research is needed.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以富马酸替诺福韦二氧吡酯为基础的方案与以齐多夫定为基础的方案的疗效和耐受性比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
背景:虽然替诺福韦(TDF)/恩曲他滨(FTC)/依非韦伦(EFV)和齐多夫定(ZDV)/拉米夫定(3TC)/依非韦伦(EFV)作为首选一线方案,但它们在疗效和耐受性方面的正面比较有限。本综述旨在综合两种方案的比较疗效和耐受性的最佳证据。方法:检索截至2016年8月20日的7个网站和数据库以及谷歌搜索。本研究仅纳入在成人人群中进行的随机临床试验。我们的主要结局是病毒载量抑制,次要结局是死亡和耐受性。无法检测到的病毒载量定义为:结果:数据来自四篇文章,共包括2381名参与者。我们发现替诺福韦(TDF)组的病毒载量抑制优于齐多夫定(ZDV)组。替诺福韦组的病毒载量(2 = 0%)高于齐多夫定组。同样,TDF组在抑制病毒载量方面优于I2 = 0%)。此外,基于TDF的方案比基于ZDV的方案更容易耐受(4项试验,2381名参与者(RR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.10], I2 = 51%))。然而,森林死亡图显示其不显著(RR = 0.91, 95% CI[0.51, 1.62])。结论:与ZDV/3TC/EFV相比,TDF/FTC/EFV作为治疗naïve HIV-1成年患者的一线方案,具有更好的病毒载量抑制和耐受性。为了比较ZDV/3TC/EFV和TDF/FTC/EFV的死亡结果,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
AIDS Research and Treatment
AIDS Research and Treatment INFECTIOUS DISEASES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: AIDS Research and Treatment is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies focused on all aspects of HIV and AIDS, from the molecular basis of disease to translational and clinical research. In addition, articles relating to prevention, education, and behavior change will be considered
期刊最新文献
Overweight and Obesity Among People Living With HIV on Dolutegravir- and Efavirenz-Based Therapies: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study. Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes Among Individuals on Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Weight and Lipid Levels in People Living With HIV and Initiating a Dolutegravir-Based Regimen in a Resource Limited Setting: A Prospective Study. A Characterization of Women Living with HIV in Belgium. Relationship between Stress and Neuroimmunological Responses and Health Literacy in Newly Diagnosed HIV-Infected Patients: An Exploratory Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1