-
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2019Network meta-analyses (NMAs) provide comparative treatment effects estimates in the absence of head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This NMA compared the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety of dolutegravir relative to common core agents in treatment-naïve patients infected with HIV-1: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Network meta-analyses (NMAs) provide comparative treatment effects estimates in the absence of head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This NMA compared the efficacy and safety of dolutegravir (DTG) with other recommended or commonly used core antiretroviral agents.
METHODS
A systematic review identified phase 3/4 RCTs in treatment-naïve patients with HIV-1 receiving core agents: ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors (PIs), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs), or integrase strand inhibitors (INSTIs). Efficacy (virologic suppression [VS], CD4 cell count change from baseline) and safety (adverse events [AEs], discontinuations, discontinuation due to AEs, lipid changes) were analyzed at Week 48 using Bayesian NMA methodology, which allowed calculation of probabilistic results. Subgroup analyses were conducted for VS (baseline viral load [VL] ≤/> 100,000copies/mL, ≤/> 500,000copies/mL; baseline CD4 ≤/>200cells/μL). Results were adjusted for the nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) combined with the core agent (except subgroup analyses).
RESULTS
The NMA included 36 studies; 2 additional studies were included in subgroup analyses only. Odds of achieving VS with DTG were statistically superior to PIs (odds ratios [ORs] 1.78-2.59) and NNRTIs (ORs 1.51-1.86), and similar but numerically higher than other INSTIs. CD4 count increase was significantly greater with DTG than PIs (difference: 23.63-31.47 cells/μL) and efavirenz (difference: 34.54 cells/μL), and similar to other core agents. INSTIs were more likely to result in patients achieving VS versus PIs (probability: 76-100%) and NNRTIs (probability: 50-100%), and a greater CD4 count increase versus PIs (probability: 72-100%) and NNRTIs (probability: 60-100%). DTG was more likely to result in patients achieving VS (probability: 94-100%), and a greater CD4 count increase (probability: 53-100%) versus other core agents, including INSTIs (probability: 94-97% and 53-93%, respectively). Safety outcomes with DTG were generally similar to other core agents. In patients with baseline VL > 100,000copies/mL or ≤ 200 CD4cells/μL (18 studies), odds of achieving VS with DTG were superior or similar to other core agents.
CONCLUSION
INSTI core agents had superior efficacy and similar safety to PIs and NNRTIs at Week 48 in treatment-naïve patients with HIV-1, with DTG being among the most efficacious, including in patients with baseline VL > 100,000copies/mL or ≤ 200 CD4cells/μL, who can be difficult to treat.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Bayes Theorem; Benzoxazines; CD4 Lymphocyte Count; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase IV as Topic; Cyclopropanes; Female; HIV Infections; HIV-1; Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxazines; Piperazines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors; Ritonavir; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load; Young Adult
PubMed: 31146698
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-3975-6 -
Journal of Ethnopharmacology Feb 2021Atractylodis Rhizoma (AR), mainly includes Atractylodes lancea (Thunb.) DC. (A. lancea) and Atractylodes chinensis (DC.) Koidz. (A. chinensis) is widely used in East...
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE
Atractylodis Rhizoma (AR), mainly includes Atractylodes lancea (Thunb.) DC. (A. lancea) and Atractylodes chinensis (DC.) Koidz. (A. chinensis) is widely used in East Asia as a diuretic and stomachic drug, for the treatment of rheumatic diseases, digestive disorders, night blindness, and influenza as it contains a variety of sesquiterpenoids and other components of medicinal importance.
AIM OF THE REVIEW
A systematic summary on the botany, traditional uses, phytochemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, and quality control of AR was presented to explore the future therapeutic potential and scientific potential of this plant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A review of the literature was performed by consulting scientific databases including Google Scholar, Web of Science, Baidu Scholar, Springer, PubMed, ScienceDirect, CNKI, etc. Plant taxonomy was confirmed to the database "The Plant List".
RESULTS
Over 200 chemical compounds have been isolated from AR, notably sesquiterpenoids and alkynes. Various pharmacological activities have been demonstrated, especially improving gastrointestinal function and thus allowed to assert most of the traditional uses of AR.
CONCLUSIONS
The researches on AR are extensive, but gaps still remain. The molecular mechanism, structure-activity relationship, potential synergistic and antagonistic effects of these components need to be further elucidated. It is suggested that further studies should be carried out in the aspects of comprehensive evaluation of the quality of medicinal materials, understanding of the "effective forms" and "additive effects" of the pharmacodynamic substances based on the same pharmacophore of TCM, and its long-term toxicity in vivo and clinical efficacy.
Topics: Animals; Atractylodes; Ethnopharmacology; Humans; Medicine, Traditional; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Quality Control; Rhizome
PubMed: 32987126
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2020.113415 -
PloS One 2016Dolutegravir (DTG) is a once-daily unboosted second-generation integrase-inhibitor that along with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors is one of several... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Dolutegravir Plus Two Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors versus Efavirenz Plus Two Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors As Initial Antiretroviral Therapy for People with HIV: A Systematic Review.
BACKGROUND
Dolutegravir (DTG) is a once-daily unboosted second-generation integrase-inhibitor that along with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors is one of several regimens recommended by the United States, United Kingdom and European Union for first-line antiretroviral treatment of people with HIV infection. Our objective was to review the evidence for the efficacy and safety of DTG-based first-line regimens compared to efavirenz (EFV)-based regimens.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review. We comprehensively searched a range of databases as well as conference abstracts and a trials registry. We used Cochrane methods in screening and data collection and assessed each study's risk of bias with the Cochrane tool. We meta-analyzed data using a fixed-effects model. We used GRADE to assess evidence quality.
RESULTS
From 492 search results, we identified two randomized controlled trials, reported in five peer-reviewed articles and one conference abstract. One trial tested two DTG-based regimens (DTG + abacavir (ABC) + lamivudine (3TC) or DTG + tenofovir + emtricitabine) against an EFV-based regimen (EFV+ ABC+3TC). The other trial tested DTG+ABC+3TC against EFV+ABC+3TC. In meta-analysis, DTG-containing regimens were superior to EFV-containing regimens at 48 weeks and at 96 weeks (RR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.16; and RR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.04-1.21, respectively). In one trial, the DTG-containing regimen was superior at 144 weeks (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.24). DTG-containing regimens were superior in reducing treatment discontinuation compared to those containing EFV at 96 weeks and at 144 weeks (RR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; and RR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.16-0.48, respectively). Risk of serious adverse events was similar in each regimen at 96 weeks (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.80-1.63) and 144 weeks (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.68-1.29). Risk of bias was moderate overall, as was GRADE evidence quality.
CONCLUSIONS
DTG-based regimens should be considered in future World Health Organization guidelines for initial HIV treatment.
Topics: Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; Benzoxazines; Cyclopropanes; HIV Infections; HIV Integrase Inhibitors; HIV-1; Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring; Humans; Oxazines; Piperazines; Pyridones; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
PubMed: 27736859
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162775 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Oct 2015Abacavir is one of the recommended nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for the treatment of HIV infections among children and adolescents. However, there... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of abacavir-containing combination antiretroviral therapy as first-line treatment of HIV infected children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Abacavir is one of the recommended nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) for the treatment of HIV infections among children and adolescents. However, there are concerns that the antiviral efficacy of abacavir might be low when compared to other NRTIs especially among children. There are also concerns that abacavir use may lead to serious adverse events such as hypersensitivity reactions and has potential predisposition to developing cardiovascular diseases
METHODS
We searched four electronic databases, four conference proceedings and two clinical trial registries in August 2014, without language restrictions. Experimental and observational studies with control groups that examined the efficacy and safety of abacavir-containing regimens in comparison with other NRTIs as first-line treatment for HIV-infected children and adolescents aged between one month and eighteen years were eligible. Two authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies using a pre-specified, standardised data extraction form and validated risk of bias tools. We also assessed the quality of evidence per outcome with the GRADE tool.
RESULTS
We included two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and two analytical cohort studies with a total of 10,595 participants. Among the RCTs we detected no difference in virologic suppression after a mean duration of 48 weeks between abacavir- and stavudine-containing regimens (2 trials; n = 326: RR 1.28; 95 % CI 0.67-2.42) with significant heterogeneity (P = 0.02; I(2) = 81 %). We also found no significant differences between the two groups for adverse events and death. After five years of follow-up, virologic suppression improved with abacavir (1 trial; n = 69: RR 1.96; 95 % CI 1.11-3.44). For cohort studies, we detected that the virologic suppression activity of abacavir was less effective than stavudine in both the lopinavir/ritonavir (1 study, n = 2165: RR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.67-0.92) and efavirenz sub-groups (1 study, n = 3204: RR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.67-0.92) respectively. The quality of evidence from RCTs was moderate for virologic suppression but low for death and adverse events, while that of cohort studies was low for all three these outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence showed little or no difference between abacavir-containing regimen and other NRTIs regarding efficacy and safety when given to children and adolescents as a first-line antiretroviral therapy.
Topics: Adolescent; Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; Benzoxazines; Child; Child, Preschool; Cohort Studies; Cyclopropanes; Dideoxynucleosides; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; HIV Infections; Humans; Infant; Lopinavir; Male; Ritonavir; Stavudine
PubMed: 26502899
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-1183-6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2013UNAIDS estimates that 34 million people are currently living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) worldwide. Currently recommended regimens for initiating HIV... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
UNAIDS estimates that 34 million people are currently living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) worldwide. Currently recommended regimens for initiating HIV treatment consist of either a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) or ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) combined with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). However, there may be some patients for whom NNRTIs and PIs may not be appropriate. This is an update of the review published in the Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2009.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of any fixed-dose combination of three NRTIs (co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine) for initial treatment of HIV infection.
SEARCH METHODS
Between December 2010 and July 2011, we used standard Cochrane methods to search electronic databases and conference proceedings with relevant search terms without limits to language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum follow-up time of six months which compared co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine with either PI-based or NNRTI-based therapy among antiretroviral-naive HIV-infected patients aged at least 13 years.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three authors independently selected eligible studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data; resolving discrepancies by consensus. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), as appropriate, with its 95% confidence interval (CI) and conducted meta-analysis using the random-effects method because of significant statistical heterogeneity (P<0.1).
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 15 potentially eligible RCTs, four of which met our inclusion criteria. The four included RCTs were conducted in the United States of America (USA); USA, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, and Panama; USA and Mexico; and Botswana, respectively. The RCTs compared co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine to treatment based on efavirenz (NNRTI), nelfinavir (PI), atazanavir (PI), and co-formulated lopinavir-ritonavir (PI), respectively. Overall, there was no significant difference in virological suppression between co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine and NNRTI- or PI-based therapy (4 trials; 2247 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.36). However, the results showed significant heterogeneity (I(2)=79%); with co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine inferior to NNRTI (1 trial, 1147 participants: RR 0.35, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.49) but with a trend towards co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine being superior to PI (3 trials, 1110 participants: RR 1.07, 95%CI 1.00 to 1.16; I(2)=0%). We found no significant differences between co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine and either PI or NNRTI on CD4+ cell counts (3 trials, 1687 participants: MD -0.01, 95%CI -0.11 to 0.09; I(2)=0%), severe adverse events (4 trials: RR 1.22, 95%CI 0.78 to 1.92; I(2)=62%) and hypersensitivity reactions (4 trials: RR 4.04, 95% CI 0.41 to 40.02; I(2)=72%). Only two studies involving PIs reported data on the lipid profile. One study found that the mean increase in total cholesterol from baseline to 96 weeks was significantly lower with co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine than with nelfinavir, but there were no differences with triglyceride levels. The second study found the fasting lipid profile to be comparable in both co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine and atazanavir arms at 48 weeks.The significant heterogeneity of effects for most outcomes evaluated was largely due to differences in the control therapy used in the included trials (i.e. NNRTIs or PIs). Using the GRADE approach, we rated the overall quality of the evidence on the relative effects of co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine for initial treatment of HIV infection as moderate. The main reason for downgrading the quality of the evidence was imprecision of the findings. The estimate of the treatment effect for each outcome has wide confidence intervals, which extend from the fixed-dose NRTI combination regimen being appreciably better to the regimen being appreciably worse than PI- or NNRTI-based regimens.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides evidence that co-formulated abacavir-lamivudine-zidovudine remains a viable option for initiating antiretroviral therapy, especially in HIV-infected patients with pre-existing hyperlipidaemia. The varied geographical locations of the included trials augment the external validity of these findings. We are moderately confident in our estimate of the treatment effects of the triple NRTI regimen as initial therapy for HIV infection. In the context of the GRADE approach, such moderate quality of evidence implies that the true effects of the regimen are likely to be close to the estimate of effects found in this review; but there is a possibility that they could be substantially different. Further research should be geared towards defining the subgroup of HIV patients for whom this regimen will be most beneficial.
Topics: Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome; Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Atazanavir Sulfate; Benzoxazines; Cyclopropanes; Dideoxynucleosides; Drug Combinations; HIV Infections; Humans; Lamivudine; Nelfinavir; Oligopeptides; Pyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zidovudine
PubMed: 23543540
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005481.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2016The advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) has reduced the morbidity and mortality due to HIV infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) ART guidelines... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efavirenz or nevirapine in three-drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide-reverse transcriptase inhibitors for initial treatment of HIV infection in antiretroviral-naïve individuals.
BACKGROUND
The advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) has reduced the morbidity and mortality due to HIV infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) ART guidelines focus on three classes of antiretroviral drugs, namely nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) and protease inhibitors. Two of the most common medications given as first-line treatment are the NNRTIs, efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP). It is unclear which NNRTI is more efficacious for initial therapy. This systematic review was first published in 2010.
OBJECTIVES
To determine which non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, either EFV or NVP, is more effective in suppressing viral load when given in combination with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as part of initial antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We attempted to identify all relevant studies, regardless of language or publication status, in electronic databases and conference proceedings up to 12 August 2016. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to 12 August 2016. We searched LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature) and the Web of Science from 1996 to 12 August 2016. We checked the National Library of Medicine (NLM) Gateway from 1996 to 2009, as it was no longer available after 2009.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EFV to NVP in people with HIV without prior exposure to ART, irrespective of the dosage or NRTI's given in combination.The primary outcome of interest was virological success. Other primary outcomes included mortality, clinical progression to AIDS, severe adverse events, and discontinuation of therapy for any reason. Secondary outcomes were change in CD4 count, treatment failure, development of ART drug resistance, and prevention of sexual transmission of HIV.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed each reference for inclusion using exclusion criteria that we had established a priori. Two review authors independently extracted data from each included trial using a standardized data extraction form. We analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We performed subgroup analyses for concurrent treatment for tuberculosis and dosage of NVP. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve RCTs, which included 3278 participants, met our inclusion criteria. None of these trials included children. The length of follow-up time, study settings, and NRTI combination drugs varied greatly. In five included trials, participants were receiving concurrent treatment for tuberculosis.There was little or no difference between EFV and NVP in virological success (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.09; 10 trials, 2438 participants; high quality evidence), probably little or no difference in mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.19; 8 trials, 2317 participants; moderate quality evidence) and progression to AIDS (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.11; 5 trials, 2005 participants; moderate quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all severe adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.18; 8 trials, 2329 participants; very low quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in discontinuation rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.25; 9 trials, 2384 participants; moderate quality evidence) and change in CD4 count (MD -3.03; 95% CI -17.41 to 11.35; 9 trials, 1829 participants; moderate quality evidence). There may be little or no difference in treatment failure (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.24; 5 trials, 737 participants; low quality evidence). Development of drug resistance is probably slightly less in the EFV arms (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.95; 4 trials, 988 participants; moderate quality evidence). No studies were found that looked at sexual transmission of HIV.When we examined the adverse events individually, EFV probably is associated with more people with impaired mental function (7 per 1000) compared to NVP (2 per 1000; RR 4.46, 95% CI 1.65 to 12.03; 6 trials, 2049 participants; moderate quality evidence) but fewer people with elevated transaminases (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.78; 3 trials, 1299 participants; high quality evidence), fewer people with neutropenia (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.82; 3 trials, 1799 participants; high quality evidence), and probably fewer people withrash (229 per 100 with NVP versus 133 per 1000 with EFV; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; 7 trials, 2277 participants; moderate quality evidence). We found that there may be little or no difference in gastrointestinal adverse events (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.21; 6 trials, 2049 participants; low quality evidence), pyrexia (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.73; 3 trials, 1799 participants; low quality evidence), raised alkaline phosphatase (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.50; 1 trial, 1007 participants; low quality evidence), raised amylase (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.73; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence) and raised triglycerides (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.13; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence). There was probably little or no difference in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT; MD 3.3, 95% CI -2.06 to 8.66; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence), serum glutamic- pyruvic transaminase (SGPT; MD 5.7, 95% CI -4.23 to 15.63; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence) and raised cholesterol (RR 6.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 48.78; 1 trial, 64 participants; moderate quality evidence).Our subgroup analyses revealed that NVP slightly increases mortality when given once daily (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.90; 3 trials, 678 participants; high quality evidence). There were little or no differences in the primary outcomes for patients who were concurrently receiving treatment for tuberculosis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Both drugs have similar benefits in initial treatment of HIV infection when combined with two NRTIs. The adverse events encountered affect different systems, with EFV more likely to cause central nervous system adverse events and NVP more likely to raise transaminases, cause neutropenia and rash.
Topics: Adult; Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Benzoxazines; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; HIV Infections; Humans; Nevirapine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors; Viral Load
PubMed: 27943261
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004246.pub4 -
Materials Today. Proceedings 2020N-heterocyclic carbenes are of central importance in many domains of chemistry such as organometallic, catalysis and bioinorganic. Their great importance is due to their...
N-heterocyclic carbenes are of central importance in many domains of chemistry such as organometallic, catalysis and bioinorganic. Their great importance is due to their ability to act as ligands with a large number of transition metals. These Metal-NHCs are used as catalysts in various organic transformations with good biological properties. A wide range of Metals - NHC has been found to be useful as a catalyst in various reactions using Ru, Pd, Ir, Au and Ag. This review examines the different classes of Metal - NHCs and their applications as effective catalysts in several types of organic processes, for example the formation of amide linkage, hydrogenation, isomerization, cycloisomerization, cyclopropanation, hydrosilylation, allylation and desallylation, enol-ester synthesis, heterocycle synthesis, C - C alkyne coupling.
PubMed: 32837919
DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.06.398 -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Oct 2019The HIV type-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, efavirenz, is widely used to treat HIV type-1 infection. Efavirenz is predominantly metabolized into...
The HIV type-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, efavirenz, is widely used to treat HIV type-1 infection. Efavirenz is predominantly metabolized into inactive metabolites by cytochrome P450 (CYP)2B6, and patients with certain CYP2B6 genetic variants may be at increased risk for adverse effects, particularly central nervous system toxicity and treatment discontinuation. We summarize the evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for efavirenz prescribing based on CYP2B6 genotypes.
Topics: Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Benzoxazines; Cyclopropanes; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2B6; HIV Infections; HIV-1; Humans; Pharmacogenetics; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 31006110
DOI: 10.1002/cpt.1477