Virological and Immunological Outcomes of an Intensified Four-Drug versus a Standard Three-Drug Antiretroviral Regimen, Both Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitor-Based, in Primary HIV Infection

Abstract

The optimal therapeutic approach for primary HIV infection (PHI) is still debated. We aimed to compare the viroimmunological response to a four- versus a three-drug regimen, both INSTI-based, in patients with PHI. This was a monocentric, prospective, observational study including all patients diagnosed with PHI from December 2014 to April 2018. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) was started, before genotype resistance test results, with tenofovir/emtricitabine and either raltegravir plus boosted darunavir or dolutegravir. Cumulative probability of virological suppression [VS] (HIV-1 RNA6PBMC), and CD4/CD8 ratio ≥1 were estimated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Factors associated with the achievement of VS, LL-HIVDNA, and CD4/CD8 ≥ 1 were assessed by a Cox regression model. We enrolled 144 patients (95.8% male, median age 34 years): 110 (76%) started a four-drug-based therapy, and 34 (24%) a three-drug regimen. Both treatment groups showed a comparable high probability of achieving VS and a similar probability of reaching LL-HIVDNA and a CD4/CD8 ratio ≥1 after 48 weeks from ART initiation. Higher baseline HIV-1 RNA and HIV-1 DNA levels lowered the chance of VS, whereas a better preserved immunocompetence increased that chance. Not statistically significant factors associated with LL-HIVDNA achievement were found, whereas a higher baseline CD4/CD8 ratio predicted the achievement of immune recovery. In PHI patients, the rapid initiation of either an intensified four-drug or a standard three-drug INSTI-based regimen showed comparable responses in terms of VS, viral reservoir size, and immunological recovery.

Keywords

• primary HIV infection
• antiretroviral therapy
• integrase stand transfer inhibitors
• rapid ART