This is an open access article under the terms of the Creat ive Commo ns Attri bution-NonCo mmercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Objectives
To assess the attitudes and opinions about generic antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) and single-tablet regimen (STR) de-simplification among physicians prescribing HIV treatment in the cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS).
Methods
An online questionnaire with 27 structured questions was sent to all physicians (n = 199) who prescribed ARVs among the 45 centres participating in the cohort.
Results
A total of 169 (84.9%) physicians answered the questionnaire. Only 4.1% of the physicians would never prescribe generic ARVs, but 53.3% would not prescribe them if the number of pills per day increased and 89.3% would not prescribe them if the number of doses per day increased. However, 84.0% of the physicians agreed to prescribe generic ARVs if doing so would decrease costs for the public healthcare system. The percentages of physicians stating that generic ARVs (compared with branded ones) would be associated with worse adherence, more adverse effects or more probability of virological failure, provided that the number of pills and doses per day would not change, were low: 0.6%, 7.7% and 3.6%, respectively. However, these percentages were much higher if the generic ARV entailed breaking an STR: 63.9%, 18.9% and 42.0%, respectively. Most physicians stated that they needed more information about the effectiveness and safety of generic ARVs and the price difference compared with their branded equivalents.
Conclusions
Although most physicians were confident about prescribing generic ARVs, the majority had strong concerns about de-simplifying STR, and they also needed more information about generic drugs.
Objectives
To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of dolutegravir (DTG)/lamivudine (3TC) among treatment-naive and virologically suppressed treatment-experienced individuals in the multicentre cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS) during the years 2018–2021.
Methods
We used multivariable regression models to compare viral suppression (VS) [HIV RNA viral load (VL) <50 copies/mL] and the change in CD4 cell counts at 24 and 48 (±12) weeks after initiation with dolutegravir/lamivudine or other first-line ART regimens.
Results
We included 2160 treatment-naive subjects, among whom 401 (18.6%) started with dolutegravir/lamivudine. The remaining subjects started bictegravir (BIC)/emtricitabine (FTC)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) (n = 949, 43.9%), DTG + FTC/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) (n = 282, 13.1%), DTG/3TC/abacavir (ABC) (n = 255, 11.8%), darunavir (DRV)/cobicistat(COBI)/FTC/TAF (n = 147, 6.8%) and elvitegravir (EVG)/COBI/FTC/TAF (n = 126, 5.8%). At 24 and 48 weeks after starting dolutegravir/lamivudine, 91.4% and 93.8% of the subjects, respectively, achieved VS. The probability of achieving VS with dolutegravir/lamivudine was not significantly different compared with any other regimen at 24 or 48 weeks, with the exception of a lower chance of achieving VS at 24 weeks for DRV/COBI/FTC/TAF (adjusted OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.30–0.74) compared with dolutegravir/lamivudine.
For the analysis of treatment-experienced virally suppressed subjects we included 1456 individuals who switched to dolutegravir/lamivudine, among whom 97.4% and 95.5% maintained VS at 24 and 48 weeks, respectively. During the first 48 weeks after dolutegravir/lamivudine initiation, 1.0% of treatment-naive and 1.5% of treatment-experienced subjects discontinued dolutegravir/lamivudine due to an adverse event.
Conclusions
In this large multicentre cohort, effectiveness and tolerability of dolutegravir/lamivudine were high among treatment-naive and treatment-experienced subjects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.