Table 2.

Estimated 6-Year Risk Differences and Hazard Ratios for the Composite Outcome in Adults Initiating an Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitor–Based Versus an Efavirenz-based Regimen in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design (July 2009 to December 2016)

Analysis	Participants, no.	Duration, person-years	Outcomes, no.a	6-y Risk, %	6-y RD (95% CI), %	HR (95% CI)
Crudeb
EFV	10 169	38 029.3	1097	14.2	0	1
InSTI	5824	13 240.8	440	13.1	−1.1 (−4.1 to 1.9)	0.99 (.88–1.10)
Intention to treatc
EFV	10 169	38 029.3	1097	14.3	0	1
InSTI	5824	13 240.8	440	14.6	0.3 (−2.7 to 3.3)	1.08 (.97– 1.19)
Per protocold
EFV	10 169	25 100.8	672	11.9	0	1
InSTI	5824	9313.0	325	12.2	0.3 (−3.0 to 3.7)	1.09 (.96 –1.25)

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; EFV, efavirenz; HR, hazard ratio; InSTI, integrase strand transfer inhibitor; RD, risk difference.

^aThe composite outcome included AIDS-defining illnesses, acute myocardial infarction or stroke, end-stage renal disease, end-stage liver disease, or death.

^bCrude analysis did not account for baseline confounding, differential loss to follow-up, or treatment changes (uncensored).

^cIntention-to-treat analyses accounted for baseline confounding and differential loss to follow-up.

^dPer-protocol analyses accounted for baseline confounding, differential loss to follow-up, and treatment changes (ie, treatment discontinuations or switches).