English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The World Health Organization recommends non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) for children three years and older. In younger children, starting ART with lopinavir boosted with ritonavir (LPVr) results in lower risk of virological failure, but data in children three years and older are scarce, and long-term ART with LPVr is problematic in resource-poor settings.    Methodology  Retrospective cohort of children three years and older who started triple ART including LPVr or a NNRTI between 2007 and 2013 in a rural setting in India. Children who started LPVr were switched to nevirapine-based ART after virological suppression. We analysed two outcomes, virological suppression (HIV-RNA <400 copies/ml) within one year of ART using logistic regression, and time to virological failure (HIV-RNA >1000 copies/ml) after virological suppression using Cox proportional hazard regression. A sensitivity analysis was performed using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based of propensity score methods.    Findings  Of 325 children having a viral load during the first year of ART, 74/83 (89.2%) in the LPVr group achieved virological suppression  versus  185/242 (76.5%) in the NNRTI group. In a multivariable analysis, the use of LPVr-based ART was associated with higher probability of virological suppression (adjusted odds ratio 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–9.13). After IPTW, the estimated risk difference was 12.2% (95% CI, 2.9–21.5). In a multivariable analysis including 292 children who had virological suppression and available viral loads after one year of ART, children switched from LPVr to nevirapine did not have significant higher risk of virological failure (adjusted hazard ratio 1.18, 95% CI 0.36–3.81).    Conclusions  In a cohort of HIV infected children three years and older in a resource-limited setting, an LPVr induction- nevirapine maintenance strategy resulted in more initial virological suppression and similar incidence of virological failure after initial virological suppression than NNRTI-based regimens.

plos one

Induction with Lopinavir-Based Treatment Followed by Switch to Nevirapine-Based Regimen versus Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors-Based Treatment for First Line Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV Infected Children Three Years and Older