|
From
•>>July 2003
Nina Singh answers
a few questions about this month's fast moving front in the
field of Immunology.
Field: Immunology
Article: "Adherence to protease inhibitor therapy and outcomes in patients with HIV infection"
Authors: Paterson, DL;Swindells, S;Mohr, J;Brester, M;Vergis, EN;Squier, C;Wagener,
MM;Singh, N
Journal: ANN INTERN MED, 133: (1) 21-30, JUL 4 2000
Addresses:
Univ Pittsburgh, Med Ctr, European Med Div, 10th Floor, Forbes Tower, 200 Lothrop St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA.
Univ Pittsburgh, Med Ctr, European Med Div, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA.
Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Univ Nebraska, Med Ctr, Omaha, NE USA. |
|

Why
do you think your paper is highly cited?
|

|
|
...Our
approach to research, in general, has been to
identify unresolved problems that we encounter
in our patients and then seek solutions or
devise strategies to resolve them...
|
|
Conventional wisdom has held that adherence with the
therapeutic regimen is associated with an improved outcome in
patients with chronic medical conditions. While this would also
appear to be intuitively true in HIV-infected patients treated
with the protease-inhibitor agents, the precise impact of
suboptimal adherence on virologic and clinical outcome in these
patients had not been defined. We showed that adherence was a
key determinant of successful virologic and immunologic
response, and defined the optimal level of adherence with
protease-inhibitor therapy that was necessary to achieve these
outcomes. The paper has become widely cited because of the
immediate relevance of these findings in the management of HIV
infected patients. Indeed, the reviewer for the Annals of
Internal Medicine had predicted that "this important
study will have significant implications for HIV medical
practice."
Does
it describe a new discovery or new methodology that’s useful to
others?
Conventionally, consumption of greater than 80% of the
prescribed doses has been considered an acceptable level of
adherence to therapy in chronic illnesses. This breakpoint,
however, was largely derived from studies of antihypertensive
and diabetic medications. We documented a linear association
between the degree of adherence and the risk of virologic
failure, and showed that adherence with protease-inhibitors had
to reach 95% or greater to optimize virologic outcome.
How
did you become involved in this research?
Our approach to research, in general, has been to identify
unresolved problems that we encounter in our patients and then
seek solutions or devise strategies to resolve them. As HIV care
providers, we recognized the critical importance of suboptimal
adherence on limiting the efficacy of therapy in our patients.
We believed that interventions to enhance adherence must first
document how adherence affected outcome, and then what
modifiable conditions could improve nonadherence. Given the
implications for our patients, we conducted this study even
though there was no source of funding or support for it.
Could
you summarize the significance of your paper in layman’s terms?
Patients with HIV infection who took 95% or greater of the
prescribed doses of protease-inhibitor therapy were much less
likely to have detectable HIV in their blood. Therefore, this is
the level of adherence with medication that patients and care
providers should strive to achieve. We also showed that patients
with > 95% adherence to their protease-inhibitor
medication had significantly greater increase in CD4 lymphocytes
and fewer days of hospitalization during the study period.
Finally, we showed that active psychiatric illness was an
independent risk factor that undermined adherence, and therefore
efforts to diagnose and treat psychiatric problems may be a
means to improve adherence, and perhaps outcome in patients with
HIV infection.
Nina Singh, M.D.
David L. Patterson, M.D.
Associate Professors of Medicine
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
|
Return to Fast Moving Fronts |
Return to Special Topics main menu
|