AI Article Synopsis

  • The text talks about when to change treatments in people with HIV, comparing two different strategies: one that reacts quickly (tight-control) and one that is more relaxed (loose-control).
  • Researchers studied real-life data to see how these two strategies affected survival and health outcomes in patients.
  • The results showed that there were slightly more deaths and health issues in the loose-control group, but the numbers were small, so more research is needed to draw strong conclusions.

Article Abstract

Background: When a clinical treatment fails or shows suboptimal results, the question of when to switch to another treatment arises. Treatment switching strategies are often dynamic because the time of switching depends on the evolution of an individual's time-varying covariates. Dynamic strategies can be directly compared in randomized trials. For example, HIV-infected individuals receiving antiretroviral therapy could be randomized to switching therapy within 90 days of HIV-1 RNA crossing above a threshold of either 400 copies/ml (tight-control strategy) or 1000 copies/ml (loose-control strategy).

Methods: We review an approach to emulate a randomized trial of dynamic switching strategies using observational data from the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration, the Centers for AIDS Research Network of Integrated Clinical Systems and the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration. We estimated the comparative effect of tight-control vs. loose-control strategies on death and AIDS or death via inverse-probability weighting.

Results: Of 43 803 individuals who initiated an eligible antiretroviral therapy regimen in 2002 or later, 2001 met the baseline inclusion criteria for the mortality analysis and 1641 for the AIDS or death analysis. There were 21 deaths and 33 AIDS or death events in the tight-control group, and 28 deaths and 41 AIDS or death events in the loose-control group. Compared with tight control, the adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for loose control were 1.10 (0.73, 1.66) for death, and 1.04 (0.86, 1.27) for AIDS or death.

Conclusions: Although our effective sample sizes were small and our estimates imprecise, the described methodological approach can serve as an example for future analyses.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841611PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyv295DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

antiretroviral therapy
16
aids death
16
observational data
8
emulate randomized
8
randomized trial
8
trial dynamic
8
switching strategies
8
deaths aids
8
death events
8
aids
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!