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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Â | Â | Â | (HIV-1, HIV-2, dual seropositive) | Â | Â | Â | Median log 10 copies* | Â |
Adje-Touré, 2003 [34] | Côte D’Ivoire | 18 | Cohort study | HIV-2 (n = 18) | 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) | 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) | 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) | 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) | 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) | 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) | 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) | 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 |