Determinants of response to first HAART regimen in antiretroviral‐naïve patients with an estimated time since HIV seroconversion
Thiébaut R., Jacqmin‐Gadda H., Walker S., Sabin C., Prins M., Del Amo J., Porter K., Dabis F., Chêne G.
ObjectiveTo study the determinants of immunological and virological response to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in naïve patients, adjusting for time since HIV‐1 seroconversion.DesignData from HIV‐cohort studies where dates of seroconversion have been reliably estimated.MethodsIn previously untreated patients, short‐ and long‐term marker responses from HAART initiation (three or more antiretroviral drugs) to the end of follow‐up or any treatment modification were considered using mixed effects models accounting for undetectable HIV viral load and informative dropout.ResultsIn total, 943 patients were treated with a first HAART regimen for a median of 29 months. In adjusted analyses, compared with a reference group of homosexual men without AIDS initiating treatment 4 years after seroconversion, injecting drug users (IDUs) were treated at similar CD4 and HIV RNA levels but had poorer short‐term virological response (2.54 vs 2.13 log10 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL at 1.5 months, P=0.03) and poorer long‐term immunological response (522 vs 631 cells/μL at 24 months, P<0.0001). Although individuals with AIDS at HAART initiation had lower CD4 counts (206 vs 382 cells/μL, P<0.0001), their immunological responses were similar to those of individuals without AIDS. Similarly, individuals further from seroconversion started HAART at lower CD4 counts (e.g. 311 vs 382 cells/μL at vs before 9 years from seroconversion, P<0.0001), but had similar CD4 responses. However, they experienced poorer long‐term virological response (0.67 log10 copies/mL/year smaller decline, P<0.0001) compared to those treated before 9 years from seroconversion.ConclusionTaking into account the time elapsed since seroconversion, this study suggests that careful choices of initial treatment should be made and intensive follow‐up carried out in high‐risk subgroups such as IDUs who have poorer responses.