Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Infect Dis. 2014 Aug;25:130-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2014.04.020. Epub 2014 Jun 6.

Nevirapine versus efavirenz for patients co-infected with HIV and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author information

1
State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University.
2
Department of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine, Cancer Hospital of Hangzhou, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
3
Department of Infectious Diseases, Jinhua Central Hospital, Jinhua, Zhejiang, China.
4
State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University. Electronic address: hzruanbing@gmail.com.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces the morbidity and mortality of patients infected with HIV. Standard ART includes either nevirapine or efavirenz, however the efficacy of these drugs is limited in patients receiving rifampin treatment for tuberculosis (TB). We compared the efficacy and safety of nevirapine- and efavirenz-based ART regimens in patients co-infected with both HIV and TB through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS:

A comprehensive search of the literature was carried out to identify clinical trials comparing the efficacy and safety of nevirapine- and efavirenz-based ART regimens in HIV-associated TB. Eligible clinical studies included at least one primary or secondary event; the primary event was virological response and secondary events were TB treatment outcomes, mortality, and safety profile.

RESULTS:

This meta-analysis compared five randomized clinical trials and four retrospective clinical trials. Both included patients co-infected with HIV and TB; 833 received nevirapine, while 1424 received efavirenz. The proportion of patients achieving a virological response by the end of the follow-up was higher in the efavirenz group: plasma viral load <400 copies/ml, risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.17 (p = 0.004); plasma viral load<50 copies/ml, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.98-1.16 (p = 0.146). No significant differences were found in either mortality (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44-1.13, p = 0.142) or TB treatment outcomes (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06, p = 0.766). Due to adverse advents, nevirapine-based regimens significantly increased the risk of discontinuation of assigned ART (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.81, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS:

Although efavirenz-based ART was associated with more satisfactory virological outcomes, nevirapine-based ART could be considered an acceptable alternative for patients for whom efavirenz cannot be administered.

KEYWORDS:

Efavirenz; HIV; Nevirapine; Rifampin; Tuberculosis

PMID:
24911886
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijid.2014.04.020
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center