SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Ribaudo H, Smith K, Robbins G et al. Race Differences in the efficacy of initial ART on HIV infection in randomized trials undertaken by ACTG. 18th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. Boston, USA, February 2011 [Abstract 50].
  • 2
    Molina J, Diaz-Menendez M, Plana M, Zamora J, Lopez-Velez R, Moreno S. Very Late initiation of HAART impairs treatment response at 48 and 96 weeks: results from a meta-analysis of randomized trials. 13th European AIDS Conference. Belgrade, Serbia, October 2012 [Abstract PE7.9/3].
  • 3
    Wood E, Hogg R, Yip B, Harrigan R, Montaner J. Why are baseline HIV RNA levels 100,000 copies/mL or greater associated with mortality after the initiation of antiretroviral therapy? J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2005; 38: 289295.
  • 4
    King M, Bernstein B, Walmsley S et al. Baseline HIV-1 RNA level and CD4 cell count predict time to loss of virological response to nelfinavir, but not lopinavir/ritonavir, in antiretroviral therapy-naïve patients. J Infect Dis 2004; 190: 280284.
  • 5
    Cohen C, Andrade-Villanueva J, Clotet B et al. Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with two background nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (THRIVE): a phase 3, randomized, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 229237.
  • 6
    Molina J, Cahn P, Grinsztejn B et al. Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naïve adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO): a phase 3 randomised double-blind active controlled trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 238246.
  • 7
    Soriano V, Koppe S, Mingrone H et al. The ARTEN study: 48 week efficacy data stratified by screening viral load and CD4+ cell count. 12th European AIDS Conference. Cologne, Germany, November 2009 [Abstract PE7.3/11].
  • 8
    Ortiz R, DeJesus E, Khanlou H et al. Efficacy and safety of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir versus lopinavir-ritonavir in treatment naïve HIV-1 infected patients at Week 48. AIDS 2008; 22: 13891397.
  • 9
    Moyle G, DeJesus E, Cahn P et al. Abacavir once or twice daily combined with once-daily lamivudine and efavirenz for the treatment of antiretroviral naive HIV-infected patients. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2005; 38: 417425.
  • 10
    Eron J Jr, Yeni P, Gathe J Jr et al. The KLEAN study of fosamprenavir-ritonavir versus lopinavir-ritonavir, each in combination with abacavir-lamivudine, for initial treatment of HIV infection over 48 weeks: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2006; 368: 476482.
  • 11
    Elion R, deJesus E, Sension M et al. Once daily abacavir/lamivudine and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in antiretroviral naïve patients: a 48 Week pilot study. HIV Clin Trials 2008; 9: 152163.
  • 12
    Hill A, Sabin S. Designing and interpreting HIV non-inferiority trials in naïve and experienced patients. AIDS 2008; 22: 913921.
  • 13
    Gupta R, Hill A, Sawyer A, Pillay D. Emergence of Drug resistance in HIV Type 1-infected patients after receipt of first-line highly active antiretroviral therapy: a systematic review of clinical trials. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 712722.
  • 14
    Haubrich R, Riddler S, Ribaudo H et al. Initial viral decay to assess the relative antiretroviral potency of protease inhibitor-sparing, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing, and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-sparing regimens for first-line therapy of HIV infection. AIDS 2011; 25: 22692278.
  • 15
    Moyle G, DeMasi R, Hill A. Does earlier HIV RNA suppression provide long-term benefits? AIDS 2010; 24: 2324.
  • 16
    US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration and Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Guidance for industry: antiretroviral drugs using plasma HIV RNA measurements—clinical considerations for accelerated and traditional approval. Available at www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm070968.pdf (accessed June 2012).
  • 17
    Qaqish R, van Wyk J, King M. A comparison of the FDA TLOVR and FDA Snapshot algorithms based on studies evaluating once-daily vs. twice daily lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) regimens. J Int. AIDS Soc 2010; 13 (Suppl 4): P58.
  • 18
    De Jesus E, McCarty D, Farthing CF et al. Once-daily versus twice-daily lamivudine, in combination with zidovudine and efavirenz, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naive adults with hiv infection: a randomized equivalence trial. Clin Infect Dis (United States) 2004; 39: 411418.
  • 19
    Gathe J, Andrade-Villanueva J, Santiago S et al. Efficacy and safety of nevirapine extended-release once daily versus nevirapine immediate release twice-daily in treatment naïve HIV-1 infected patients. Antivir Ther 2011; 16: 759769.
  • 20
    Gazzard B, Duvivier C, Zagler C et al. Phase 2 double-blind, randomized trial of etravirine versus efavirenz in treatment-naive patients: 48-week results. AIDS 2011; 25: 22492258.
  • 21
    Gonzalez-Garcia J, Cohen D, Johnson M et al. Comparable safety and efficacy with once-daily versus twice-daily dosing of lopinavir/ritonavir tablets with emtricitabine + tenofovir DF in antiretroviral-naïve, HIV type 1-infected subjects: 96 week final results of the randomized trial M05-730. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 2010; 26: 841845.
  • 22
    Smith K, Weinberg W, DeJesus E et al. Fosamprenavir or atazanavir with ritonavir 100mg, plus tenofovir/emticitabine, for the initial treatment of HIV infection: 48 week results of ALERT. AIDS Res Ther 2008; 5: 5.
  • 23
    Malan N, Krantz E, David N et al. Efficacy and safety of atazanavir, with or without ritonavir, each as part of once-daily highly active antiretroviral therapy regimens in antiretroviral naïve patients. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2008; 47: 161167.
  • 24
    Molina JM, Andrade-Vilenueva J, Echevarria J et al. Once-daily atazanavir/ritonavir versus twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir, each in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine, for management of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 infected patients: 48 week efficacy and safety results of the CASTLE study. Lancet 2008; 372: 646655.
  • 25
    Smith K, Patel P, Fine D et al. Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-matched multicenter trial of abacavir/lamivudine or tenofovir/emtricitabine with lopinavir/ritonavir for initial HIV treatment. AIDS 2009; 23: 15471556.
  • 26
    Soriano V, Arasteh K, Migrone H et al. Nevirapine versus atazanavir/ritonavir each combined with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine, in antiretroviral-naive HIV-1 patients: the ARTEN trial. Antivir Ther 2011; 16: 20402058.
  • 27
    Cooper D, Heera J, Goodrich J et al. Maraviroc versus efavirenz, both in combination with zidovudine-lamivudine, for the treatment of antiretroviral-naïve subjects with CCR5 tropic HIV-1 infection. J Infect Dis 2010; 201: 803813.
  • 28
    Lennox J, DeJesus E, Lazzarin A et al. Safety and efficacy of raltegravir-based versus efavirenz-based combination therapy in treatment-naïve patients with HIV-1 infection: a multicentre, double-blind randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2009; 374: 796806.
  • 29
    Sax P, DeJesus E, Mills A et al. Elvitegravir/Cobicistat/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir (Quad) Has Non-inferior Efficacy and Favorable Safety Compared to Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir in Treatment-naïve HIV-1+ Subjects. 19th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. Seattle, USA, March 2012 [Abstract 101].
  • 30
    DeJesus E, Rockstroh J, Henry K et al. Week 48 results of an ongoing global phase 3 study comparing elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir (Quad) with atazanavir/ritonavir plus emtricitabine/tenofovir in treatment-naïve HIV-1+ subjects showing efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics. 19th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. Seattle, USA, March 2012 [Abstract 627].
  • 31
    QDMRK: Eron J, Rockstroh J, Reynes J et al. Raltegravir once daily or twice daily in previously untreated patients with HIV-1: a randomized, active-controlled, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2011; 11: 907915.
  • 32
    Pozniak A, Gallant J, Staszewski S et al. Similar 96-week efficacy profile regardless of patient gender or ethnicity for tenofovir DF vs Stavudine when used in combination with lamivudine and efavirenz in antiretroviral treatment naive patients. 2nd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogensis and Treatment. Paris, France, July 2003 [Abstract 559].
  • 33
    Gallant J, DeJesus E, Arribas J, Pozniak A et al. Tenofovir DF, Emtricitabine and Efavirenz vs Zidovudine, Lamivudine and Efavirenz for HIV. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 251260.
  • 34
    Gilead. data on file, December 2009. Study 934 Efficacy Results Stratified by baseline viral load and CD4.
  • 35
    Clumeck N, Mwamba C, Kabeya K et al. The Lubumbashi trial: week 48 data: comparison between lopinavir/r (LPV/r) versus nevirapine (NVP) based regimens in treatment-naïve patients in a developing country. 13th European AIDS Conference. Belgrade, Serbia, October 2011 [Abstract PS1/3].
  • 36
    Puls R, Srasuebkul P, Petoumenos K et al. Efavirenz versus boosted atazanavir or zidovudine and abacavir in antiretroviral treatment-naïve, HIV-infected subjects: week 48 data from the Altair study. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 51: 855864.
  • 37
    Gulick RM, Ribaudo HJ, Shikuma C et al. Triple-nucleoside regimens versus efavirenz-containing regimens for the initial treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 18501861.
  • 38
    Sax P, Tierney C, Collier A et al. Abacavir/lamivudine versus tenofovir DF/emtricitabine as part of combination regimens for initial treatment of HIV: final results. J Infect Dis 2011; 204: 11911201.
  • 39
    Van Leth F, Andrews S, Grinsztejn B et al. The effect of baseline CD4 cell count and HIV-1 viral load on the efficacy and safety of nevirapine or efavirenz-based first-line HAART. AIDS 2005; 19: 463471.
  • 40
    Post F, Moyle G, Stellbrink H et al. Randomised comparison of renal effects, efficacy, and safety with once-daily abacavir/lamivudine versus tenofovir/emtricitabine, administered with efavirenz, in antiretroviral-naïve HIV-1 infected adults: 48-week results from the ASSERT study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2010; 55: 4957.
  • 41
    British HIV Association. BHIVA Guidelines for the treatment of adult HIV-1 infected adults with antiretroviral therapy 2012. Available at www.bhiva.org/documents/Guidelines/Treatment%20Guidelines/2012/formatted__ART_guidelines_04022012_v3_IW.pdf (accessed 5 April 2012).
  • 42
    European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS). Guidelines for the clinical management of HIV infected adults in Europe. October 2011. Available at www.europeanaidsclinicalsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=59&Itemid=41 (accessed 17 October 2011).
  • 43
    DHHS guidelines. Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents. Department of Health and Human Services. March 2012. Available at http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/html/1/adult-and-adolescent-treatment-guidelines/37/whats-new-in-the-guidelines- (accessed 5 April 2012).
  • 44
    DeJesus E, Herrera G, Teofilo E et al. Abacavir versus zidovudine combined with lamivudine and efavirenz, for the treatment of antiretroviral naïve HIV infected adults. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39: 10381046.