Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics of patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in 17 studies

From: Antiretroviral therapy response among HIV-2 infected patients: a systematic review

Study (Author, year) Country Sample size Design Population studied Age* Median (IQR) years % Male* CD4 count at baseline* Viral Load ARV therapy* regimens
     (HIV-1, HIV-2, dual seropositive)     Median log 10 copies*  
Adje-Touré, 2003 [34] Côte D’Ivoire 18 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 18) 41 [3647] 78% 82 [52–188] 4.5 [4.1-5.2] 83% PI-based regimen (80% Nelfinavir)
Van Der Ende, 2003 [29] The Netherlands 20 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 20) 50 62% 90 [10–360] NR >5 log10 copies (38%) 80% on PI-based regimen
Mullins 2004 [39] USA 10 Case series HIV-2 (n = 9) 43 [3544] 78% 134 [93–205] NR 44% on PI-based regimen; 22% on PI-boosted regimen and 11% on NNRTIs
Matheron, 2006 [40] France 61 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 61) NR NR 136 [57–244] 36 patients
3.1 [1.7-4.2]
77% PI-based regimen 23% 3NRTIs
Ndour, 2006 [41] Senegal 188 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 35) 41 [29–61] 46% 204 [12–1029] NR 100% on PI-based regimen (100% on Indinavir)
HIV-1 (n = 153)
Drylewicz, 2008 [12] France 122 Cohort study HIV-1 (n = 59) NR 44% 267 [163–381] 34%, VL <2.7 58% on PI-based therapy 35% on LPV-r
HIV-2 (n = 63) 2.9 [2.4-3.7]
Ruelle, 2008 [42] Belgium Luxembourg 22 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 20) 42 52% 226 [124–359] 4.1 [3.4-4.8] 68% on PI-based regimen 32% on 3 NRTIs-
Benard, 2009 [28] France 29 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 29) 48 [43–55] 52% 142 [59–259] 3.3 [3.0-3.8] 96% PI-based regimen (100% on LPV-r) 4% 3 NRTIs
Jallow, 2009 [31] Gambia 20 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 12) Dual (n = 8) 41 [3147] 35% 145 [65–210] 4.9 [4.6-5.2] 100% PI-based regimen (100% on LPV/r)
Gottlieb, 2009 [23] Senegal 23 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 23) 49 [31–60] 48% 200 [12–562] 30% VL <1.4 2.0 [<1.4-4.3] 96% on PI-based regimen (100% on Indinavir)
Harries, 2010 [17] Burkina-Faso 4255 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 91) HIV-1 (n = 4043) Dual (n = 121) 44 [3750] 39% 208 [103–459] Not available 70% on PI-based regimen (27% LPV-r), 1% on 3NRTIS 29% on NNRTI-based regimen
Drylewicz, 2010 [30] West Africa 5 countries 9482 (270 HIV-2) Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 270) HIV-1 (n = 9482) Dual (n = 321) 43 [3650] 46% 148 [77–232] Not available 71% PI-based regimen (31% on boosted PI)
Smith 2010 [43] Senegal 74 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 74) 46 [21–64] 32% 202 [2–1124] 2.5 [1.6 – 4.3] AZT 3TC IDV 62% AZT ATC LPV/r 12%; 3TC D4T IDV 9%; 3TC D4T LPV/Ir 5%; 3TC TDF LPV/Ir 3% 2–3 NRTI 2%; 2 NRTI 1 NNRTI 3%
Chiara, 2010 [44] India 443 Cohort study Dual (n = 4) HIV-2 (n = 25) HIV- (n = 414) 45 [4149] 66% 95 [73–111] NR 3 NRTIs (40%) PI-based regimen (60%)
Study (Author, year) Country Sample size Design Population studied (HIV-1, HIV-2, dual seropositive) Age* Median (IQR) years % Male* CD4 count at baseline* Viral Load (undetectable) Median log 10 copies* Regimens ARV therapy*
Peterson, 2011 [18] Gambia 352 (51 HIV-2) Cohort study HIV-1 (n = 308) HIV-2 (n = 51) 42 [3248] 37% 140 [50–310] 4.9 [4.2-5.4] 88% PI-based regimen (100% LVP-r) 5% on NNRTI-based regimen 6% on 3 NRTIs
Benard, 2011 [15] Europe 6 countries 170 Cohort study HIV-2 (n = 170) 46 [3952] 51% N = 134 191 [90–275] N = 110 39% VL <2.7 4.0 [3.4-4.6] 74% PI-based (61% on LPV-r) 26% 3NRTIs
Peterson, 2012 [45] NR 5 Case series HIV-2 (n = 5) 50 [41–55] 20% 181 [96–200] NR 5 patients on raltegravir
  1. *For HIV-2 infected patients only, NR: not reported, NA: not available.