eISSN : 2146-9369
Creative Commons Lisansı
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Investigations is licenced under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
Abstract - Boosted- lopinavir versus boosted- atazanavir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in second- line antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 infected patients in Abidjan (Ivory Coast)
Ehui Eboi, Kassi Indouba Alain, Kouakou Affoue Gisele, Mossou Melaine Chrysostome, Doumbia Adama, Ello Nogbou Frederic, Kamagate Sinaly, Koffi Tanon Aristophane, Eholie Serge Paul

Boosted- lopinavir versus boosted- atazanavir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in second- line antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 infected patients in Abidjan, Ivory Coast

Eboi Ehui, Alain N’douba Kassi, Gisèle Affoué Kouakou, Adama Doumbia, Chrysostome Melaine Mossou, Sinaly Kamagaté, Aristophane Koffi Tanon, Fréderic Nogbou Ello, Serge Eholié

Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Treichville University Hospital, 01 BP V 3 Abidjan 01- Côte d’Ivoire.

The authors have contributed equally to the work.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Atazanavir is a protease inhibitor recently introduce in the therapeutic arsenal for second-line antiretroviral therapy in Ivory Coast. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a second-line treatment with 2 NRTIs + boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) versus 2 NRTIs + boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) in HIV-1 positive patients in Abidjan.

Patients and Methods: Retrospective, comparative, single-center study, in 194 HIV-1 positive patients (143 with LPV/r, 51 with ATV/r), failed a first-line treatment, followed in Abidjan on 1 May 2009 to 30 June 2010. The analysis focused on clinical parameters and immuno-virological data. The principal judgement criterion was the proportion of patients with undetectable viral load in both groups after 12 months of HAART. Tolerance was found on the frequency of adverse events grade 3-4 during follow-up.

Results: Clinically, improvement of the general condition and regression of opportunistic infections was similar in both groups. The average gain of CD4 after 12 months of follow-up was +357/mm3 in the LPV/r group versus +278 mm3 for ATV/r group (p = 0.012). The percentage of patients with undetectable viral load was similar in both groups (92% vs. 96% ; p = 0.535). The frequency of grade 3-4 adverse events was similar in both groups.

Conclusion: HAART with LPV/r is at least as efficient as with ATV/r in second-line treatment, in terms of viral load reduction, with better recovery of CD4. LPV/r is an excellent second-line treatment in resource-limited countries. J Microbiol Infect Dis 2016;6(4): 149-156

Keywords: Abidjan; Atazanavir; HIV; Lopinavir; Second-line; Sub-Saharan Africa

Volume 06, Number 04 (2016)