4.8 Article

CD4-guided scheduled treatment interruptions compared with continuous therapy for patients infected with HIV-1:: results of the Staccato randomised trial

Journal

LANCET
Volume 368, Issue 9534, Pages 459-465

Publisher

LANCET LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69153-8

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Stopping antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV-1 infection can reduce costs and side-effects, but carries the risk of increased immune suppression and emergence of resistance. Methods 430 patients with CD4-positive T-lymphocyte (CD4) counts greater than 350 cells per mu L, and viral load less than 50 copies per mL were randomised to continued therapy (n=146) or scheduled treatment interruptions (n=284). Median time on randomised treatment was 21.9 months (range 16.4-25.3). Primary endpoints were proportion of patients with viral load less than 50 copies per mL at the end of the trial, and amount of drugs used. Analysis was intention-to-treat. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT00113126. Findings Drug savings in the scheduled treatment interruption group, compared with continuous treatment, amounted to 61.5%. 257 of 284 (90.5%) patients in the scheduled treatment interruption group reached a viral load less than 50 copies per mL, compared with 134 of 146 (91.8%) in the continued treatment group (difference 1.3%, 95% CI-4.3 to 6.9, p=0.90). No AIDS-defining events occurred. Diarrhoea and neuropathy were more frequent with continuous treatment; candidiasis was more frequent with scheduled treatment interruption. Ten patients (2.3%) had resistance mutations, with no significant differences between groups. Interpretation Drug savings with scheduled treatment interruption were substantial, and no evidence of increased treatment resistance emerged. Treatment-related adverse events were more frequent with continuous treatment, but low CD4 counts and minor manifestations of HIV infection were more frequent with scheduled treatment interruption.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available