Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Three- vs four-drug antiretroviral regimens for the initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: a randomized controlled trial.

Author: , AcostaEdward P, BastowBarbara, CarlsonMargrit, GulickRoy M, KlingmanKarin L, KoletarSusan L, KuritzkesDaniel R, LalamaChristina, MeyerWilliam A, MurphyRobert L, PilcherChristopher D, ReichmanRichard C, RibaudoHeather J, SchackmanBruce R, SchoutenJeffrey, ShikumaCecilia M, SquiresKathleen E

Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.
Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralResearch funding provided by the NIH to external research institutions and researchers.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch funding provided by government agencies outside the United States.

Overview

A three-drug antiretroviral regimen (zidovudine/lamivudine plus efavirenz) was as effective as a four-drug regimen (zidovudine/lamivudine/abacavir plus efavirenz) in treatment-naive patients with HIV-1 infection. Both regimens resulted in HIV-1 RNA levels less than 50 copies/mL in approximately 80% of patients after three years.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
CONTEXT: Three-drug antiretroviral regimens are standard of care for initial treatment of human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) infection, but a 4-drug regimen could improve antiretroviral activity and be more effective than a 3-drug regimen. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety/efficacy of 3-drug vs ...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.7.769

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

HIV-1 Treatment: Exploring New Routes in the Desert of Infection

The field of [virology] has made significant strides in the treatment of HIV-1 infection, but the battle against this persistent virus is still an ongoing journey through a vast and complex desert of disease. This study, conducted by the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG), delved into the effectiveness of three-drug versus four-drug antiretroviral regimens in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients. The researchers, like intrepid explorers seeking a more sustainable path through the desert of infection, sought to determine if adding a fourth drug would provide any additional benefit in combating HIV-1.

Three-Drug vs. Four-Drug Regimens: Comparing Paths Through the Desert

The researchers found that adding a fourth drug, abacavir, did not provide any significant additional benefit in terms of virologic failure, CD4 cell count changes, or adverse events. This finding suggests that the current standard of care with a three-drug regimen might be sufficient for most patients, offering a potentially more simplified and manageable path through the desert of HIV-1 infection.

Navigating the Desert of HIV-1 Infection: Finding a Sustainable Path

This study provides valuable insights into the management of HIV-1 infection, suggesting that a three-drug regimen might be sufficient for most patients, offering a potentially more sustainable and cost-effective approach to treatment. This is like finding a reliable oasis in the desert, providing a source of sustenance and support for those battling this challenging condition.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

The battle against HIV-1 infection is a long and arduous journey, like traversing a vast and unforgiving desert. This study suggests that a three-drug regimen might be a sufficient and reliable path for most patients, offering a potentially more sustainable and cost-effective approach to treatment, leading to a more comfortable and successful journey through the desert of infection.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 2006-08-18
  2. Date Revised 2020-12-09
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

16905783

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.1001/jama.296.7.769

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.