4.6 Article

A retrospective analysis of weight changes in HIV-positive patients switching from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)- to a tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF)-containing treatment regimen in one German university hospital in 2015-2017

期刊

INFECTION
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 95-102

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-018-1227-0

关键词

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF); Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF); Weight; Retrospective cohort study

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To determine whether changing from a tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)- to a tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF)-containing regimen is correlated with weight changes in a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive adult cohort. Retrospective analysis was conducted of data gathered from routine care in a university hospital in Munich, Germany, between July 2015 and June 2017. Data from patients' charts were extracted and a two-step approach was applied. First, weight/BMI progression within 1 year after initiation of either TDF or TAF was compared. Subsequently, weight measurements within subjects changing from a TDF- to a TAF-containing antiretroviral regimen were analyzed by means of a repeated measurements general linear model. After 360 days of initiating TAF, patients showed a mean (+/- standard deviation) percentual weight increase of 3.17 +/- 0.21, whereas after 360 days of initiating TDF, patients only showed a mean (+/- standard deviation) percentual weight increase of 0.55 +/- 0.17. The repeated measurements general linear model for within-subjects design showed a statistically significant correlation in weight after changing from a TDF to a TAF containing antiretroviral regimen. The weight difference between the two measurements while on TDF was not statistically significant, but every measure after switching to TAF was significantly higher than the previous. Changing from a TDF- to a TAF-containing regimen is correlated with weight gain in this retrospectively analyzed real-world cohort in Munich, Germany.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据