Abstract

BackgroundViral load monitoring is not available for the vast majority of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings. However, the practical utility of CD4 cell count measurements as an alternative monitoring strategy has not been rigorously assessed.MethodsIn this study, we used a novel modelling approach that accounted for all CD4 cell count and VL values measured during follow-up from the first date that VL suppression was achieved. We determined the associations between CD4 counts (absolute values and changes during ART), VL measurements and risk of virological failure (VL > 1,000 copies/ml) following initial VL suppression in 330 patients in South Africa. CD4 count changes were modelled both as the difference from baseline (ΔCD4 count) and the difference between consecutive values (CD4 count slope) using all 3-monthly CD4 count measurements during follow-up.ResultsDuring 7093.2 patient-months of observation 3756 paired CD4 count and VL measurements were made. In patients who developed virological failure (n = 179), VL correlated significantly with absolute CD4 counts (r = - 0.08, P = 0.003), ΔCD4 counts (r = - 0.11, P < 0.01), and most strongly with CD4 count slopes (r = - 0.30, P < 0.001). However, the distributions of the absolute CD4 counts, ΔCD4 counts and CD4 count slopes at the time of virological failure did not differ significantly from the corresponding distributions in those without virological failure (P = 0.99, P = 0.92 and P = 0.75, respectively). Moreover, in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the association between a negative CD4 count slope and virological failure was poor (area under the curve = 0.59; sensitivity = 53.0%; specificity = 63.6%; positive predictive value = 10.9%).ConclusionCD4 count changes correlated significantly with VL at group level but had very limited utility in identifying virological failure in individual patients. CD4 count is an inadequate alternative to VL measurement for early detection of virological failure.

Highlights

  • Viral load monitoring is not available for the vast majority of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings

  • antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve patients were referred to the cohort from a wide range of primary health care facilities in Cape Town to the adult HIV clinics affiliated with the University of Cape Town (UCT)

  • A total of 3756 paired CD4 cell count and viral load (VL) measurements were made during 7093.2 patient-months of observation. 179 (54.2%) patients developed virological failure with an incidence of 30.3 (95%confidence interval (CI) 26.2–34.2) cases per 100 patient-years

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Viral load monitoring is not available for the vast majority of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings. Plasma viral load (VL) monitoring, the gold standard used in high-income countries for diagnosing virological failure, is not available in many resource-limited settings. A single World Health Organisation (WHO)recommended second-line regimen is the only therapeutic option available for HIV-infected patients in sub-Saharan Africa who develop virological failure during their first-line regimen [5]. These regimens are offered free of charge in the national ART programme in some countries, no further treatment options are typically available in the public sector thereafter. Sensitive and specific means for timely identification of treatment failure are greatly needed to maximize the benefits of these limited drug options

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call