IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0068995.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Outcomes for Efavirenz versus Nevirapine-Containing Regimens for Treatment of HIV-1 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Prinitha Pillay
  • Nathan Ford
  • Zara Shubber
  • Rashida A Ferrand

Abstract

Introduction: There is conflicting evidence and practice regarding the use of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP) in first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART). Methods: We systematically reviewed virological outcomes in HIV-1 infected, treatment-naive patients on regimens containing EFV versus NVP from randomised trials and observational cohort studies. Data sources include PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and conference proceedings of the International AIDS Society, Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, between 1996 to May 2013. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic, and subgroup analyses performed to assess the potential influence of study design, duration of follow up, location, and tuberculosis treatment. Sensitivity analyses explored the potential influence of different dosages of NVP and different viral load thresholds. Results: Of 5011 citations retrieved, 38 reports of studies comprising 114 391 patients were included for review. EFV was significantly less likely than NVP to lead to virologic failure in both trials (RR 0.85 [0.73–0.99] I2 = 0%) and observational studies (RR 0.65 [0.59–0.71] I2 = 54%). EFV was more likely to achieve virologic success than NVP, though marginally significant, in both randomised controlled trials (RR 1.04 [1.00–1.08] I2 = 0%) and observational studies (RR 1.06 [1.00–1.12] I2 = 68%). Conclusion: EFV-based first line ART is significantly less likely to lead to virologic failure compared to NVP-based ART. This finding supports the use of EFV as the preferred NNRTI in first-line treatment regimen for HIV treatment, particularly in resource limited settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Prinitha Pillay & Nathan Ford & Zara Shubber & Rashida A Ferrand, 2013. "Outcomes for Efavirenz versus Nevirapine-Containing Regimens for Treatment of HIV-1 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0068995
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068995
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0068995
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0068995&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0068995?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joanna Kryst & Paweł Kawalec & Andrzej Pilc, 2015. "Efavirenz-Based Regimens in Antiretroviral-Naive HIV-Infected Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0068995. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.