| Title |
Effectiveness, durability, and safety of darunavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected patients in routine clinical practice in Italy: a postauthorization noninterventional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s104875 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea Antinori, Paola Meraviglia, Antonella d’Arminio Monforte, Antonella Castagna, Cristina Mussini, Teresa Bini, Nicola Gianotti, Stefano Rusconi, Elisa Colella, Giuseppe Airoldi, Daniela Mancusi, Roberta Termini |
| Abstract |
Current antiretroviral (ARV) therapy for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1)-infected patients provides long-term control of viral load (VL). Darunavir (DRV) is a nonpeptidomimetic protease inhibitor approved for use with a ritonavir booster (DRV/r). This study evaluated the effectiveness of DRV/r in combination with other ARV agents in routine clinical practice in Italy. In this descriptive observational study, data on utilization of DRV/r, under the conditions described in the marketing authorization, were collected from June 2009 to December 2012. Effectiveness (VL <50 copies/mL), tolerability, and durability in four patient groups (two DRV/r-experienced, one ARV-experienced DRV/r-naïve, and one ARV-naïve) were analyzed. Secondary objectives included immunological response, safety, and persistence/discontinuation rates. In total, 875 of 883 enrolled patients were included in the analysis: of these, 662 (75.7%) completed the follow-up until the end of 2012 and 213 (24.3%) withdrew from the study earlier. Initial DRV dose was 600 mg twice daily (67.1%) or 800 mg once daily (32.9%). Only 16 patients (1.8%) withdrew from the study due to virological failure. Virological response proportions were higher in patients virologically suppressed at study entry versus patients with baseline VL ≥50 copies/mL in each ARV-experienced group, while there was no consistent difference across study groups and baseline VL strata according to baseline CD4(+) cell count. CD4(+) cell count increased from study entry to last study visit in all the four groups. DRV/r was well tolerated, with few discontinuations due to study-emergent nonfatal adverse events (3.0% overall, including 2.1% drug-related) or deaths (3.0% overall, all non-drug-related); 35.3% of patients reported ≥1 adverse events. These observational data show that DRV/r was effective and well tolerated in the whole patient population described here. The DRV/r-containing regimen provided viral suppression in a high percentage of patients in all groups, with low rates of discontinuation due to virological failure. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#3,705,505
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#228
of 2,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,840
of 312,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#5
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.