Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jul 2.
Published in final edited form as: AIDS. 2018 Jan 28;32(3):347–355. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001708

Table 2:

Summary of median durability of ART regimen by regimen class, composition, and year of initiation in treatment naïve HIV patients initiating care in a multi-site cohort

Class of ART backbone Treatment share N (%) Median durability, months (95% CI)
Integrase Inhibitor 1110 (21) 44 (40, 57)
Integrase Inhibitor/Protease Inhibitor 76 (1) 18 (10, 24)
Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor 2637 (49) 61 (56, 65)
Protease Inhibitor 1547 (29) 32 (29, 35)
ART regimen composition Treatment share N (%) Median durability, months (95% CI)
Dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine 106 (2) 9!, *
Atazanavir/ritonavir/emtricitabine/tenofovir/r 665 (12) 36 (31,42)
Darunavir/ritonavir/emtricitabine/tenofovir 546(10) 41 (36, 47)
Dolutegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir 89 (2) 5!, 22!
Efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir 2173 (40) 62 (56,65)
Elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir 571 (11) 33!, *
Raltegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir 286 (5) 43 (36,57)
Rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir 336 (6) 70 (47, *)
Other 601 (11) 18 (15,22)
Year of ART regimen initiation Treatment Share
N (%)
Median durability, months (95% CI)
2007–2009 1882 (35) 56 (51,61)
2010–2012 2135 (40) 44 (42,47)
2013–2015 1356 (25 ) 11!, 31!

Median durability calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves

!

Point estimate not estimable thus 25th and 75th percentile is shown

*

75th percentile is not estimable