This observational analysis examined the clinical outcomes of patients receiving etravirine-(ETR-) based therapy, particularly with\nprotease inhibitors (PIs) other than darunavir (DRV) and with raltegravir (RAL). Data included treatment-experienced adults in\nthe HIV ResearchNetworkwho began ETR-containing antiretroviral regimens in 2008ââ?¬â??2010.Theprimary objective was to assess 6-\nmonth outcomes (durability, i.e., still on an ETR-containing regimen; change in CD4+ cell count and HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL).\nThe cohort included 587 patients receiving ETR; 42% of ETR use was in patients not on DRV/ritonavir (r). Patients receiving ETR\nplus DRV/r had longer durability versus those on ETR plus a PI other than DRV/r at months 6 (91.2% versus 85.5%) and 12 (77.4%\nversus 65.2%), respectively. Patients on regimens with a PI other than DRV/r were the least likely to be receiving ETR at month\n6 (85.5%) versus patients on other ETR-based regimens. Patients on regimens without a PI and without RAL had lower virologic\nsuppression (month 6, 54.2%; month 12, 63.2%) versus patients on other ETR-based regimens. In a clinical care, nontrial setting,\nETR was used in regimens without DRV/r. In this population, the 6-month response rates were similar and durable across all\nregimens, except when ETR was used without RAL and without a PI.
Loading....