ライフサイエンスコーパス: virologic failure

1 patients who withdrew for reasons other than virologic failure).

2 ion of antiretroviral therapy and to prevent virologic failure.

3 mL were associated with an increased risk of virologic failure.

4 alf (19 of 32) had resistance at the time of virologic failure.

5 tricitabine resistance in most patients with virologic failure.

6 .15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.28) were associated with virologic failure.

7 in a subset of patients treated with SOF at virologic failure.

8 27 of the remaining subjects who experienced virologic failure.

9 iscontinued treatment for reasons other than virologic failure.

10 patients who withdrew for reasons other than virologic failure.

11 was not detected among subjects experiencing virologic failure.

12 but did increase 4-12 weeks before confirmed virologic failure.

13 subjects in the random cohort, 57 (26%) had virologic failure.

14 cts plus unselected subjects who experienced virologic failure.

15 reappeared at relapse in all 3 patients with virologic failure.

16 was associated with decreased likelihood of virologic failure.

17 evirapine were independently associated with virologic failure.

18 0.98; 95% CI, .97-.99) decreased the risk of virologic failure.

19 sed before study treatment (baseline) and at virologic failure.

20 oviral therapy (baseline) and at the time of virologic failure.

21 ce of L159F or V321A to 2% (1 of 50 each) at virologic failure.

22 tly at baseline but were not associated with virologic failure.

23 1 subtype were independently associated with virologic failure.

24 Relapse accounted for all cases of virologic failure.

25 l, Mozambique, were previously evaluated for virologic failure.

26 No patient had virologic failure.

27 an independent risk factor for clinical and virologic failure.

28 pleted treatment in either study experienced virologic failure.

29 higher probability of Y181C detection after virologic failure.

30 ed with a higher risk of NNRTI resistance at virologic failure.

31 d during 1998-2006 with a primary outcome of virologic failure.

32 s; 2) for treatment changes, and 3) for each virologic failure.

33 type of resistance mutations detected after virologic failure.

34 nd types of resistance mutations detected at virologic failure.

35 after 5 months of treatment, in a context of virologic failure.

36 virologic suppression (88%-93%), subsequent virologic failure (0.1%-0.6%/month), and Medicaid-discou

37 rologic failures (hazard ratio for the first virologic failure, 0.39; hazard ratio for the second vir

38 c failure, 0.39; hazard ratio for the second virologic failure, 0.47), as well as the failure of the

39 The cumulative incidence of virologic failure 1 year after having maintained a LLV f

40 Intermittent viremia did not predict virologic failure: 10 (10.4%) of 96 patients with and 20

41 Three participants experienced virologic failure 12, 14, and 20 weeks after simplificat

42 ce interval, 1.46 to 3.72; P<0.001), with 57 virologic failures (14%) in the abacavir-lamivudine grou

43 rom the randomly selected subcohort (51 with virologic failure, 144 without virologic failure), plus

44 d lopinavir group), and 5 died without prior virologic failure (4 in the nevirapine group and 1 in th

45 t LLV (GSS <3) had a 2.1-fold higher risk of virologic failure (95% confidence interval, 1.2- to 3.7-

46 were maintained on their study regimen after virologic failure accumulated additional Nvp and 3TC mut

47 Predictors for shorter time to virologic failure after initial suppression in multivari

48 fected with hepatitis C virus who experience virologic failure after treatment with direct-acting ant

49 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-4.18) and virologic failure (aHR 2.42; 95% CI, 1.33-4.41).

50 After virologic failure, all Envs acquired resistance to ENF b

51 cipients satisfied prespecified criteria for virologic failure, all with genotype 1a infection.

52 vents among white participants and decreased virologic failure among black participants.

53 Virologic failure and changes in CD4 count in relation t

54 was associated with decreased likelihood of virologic failure and decreased emergence of efavirenz-r

55 Identification of virologic failure and early management mitigates the gre

56 The association between subsequent virologic failure and persistence status were estimated

57 Associations between selected covariates and virologic failure and resistance were evaluated using ge

58 copies per milliliter or more, the times to virologic failure and the first adverse event were both

59 tical or behavioral interventions to prevent virologic failure and to stimulate complete recovery of

60 avirenz and nelfinavir, and they may predict virologic failure and/or emergence of drug-resistant vir

61 Fifty-four children (49%) experienced virologic failure, and 2 (2%) died.

62 f patients with genotype 1b infection, 1 had virologic failure, and 2 did not have data available at

63 nd 3TC mutations were detected frequently at virologic failure, and Nvp mutations were more common am

64 At virologic failure, antiretroviral resistance mutations w

65 0% of the women who had received placebo had virologic failure, as compared with 18.4% of those who h

66 In contrast, participants with virologic failure assigned EFV had more RT changes, incl

67 ase in CD4 cell count, and a smaller risk of virologic failure at 12 months for atazanavir compared w

68 ess or death, and 0.91 (95% CI, .84-.99) for virologic failure at 12 months.

69 s associated with 2.5 to 3 times the risk of virologic failure at either 95% or greater or less than

70 level data were used to estimate the risk of virologic failure based on a Prentice weighted case-coho

71 ter NRTI discontinuation among those without virologic failure but did increase 4-12 weeks before con

72 V alone, of whom 30 (88%) did not experience virologic failure by 48 weeks after simplification.

73 r PI-resistance mutations were identified at virologic failure by standard genotyping or SGS.

74 rimary end point for mothers and infants was virologic failure by the 6-month visit after initiation

75 Virologic failure by the 6-month visit occurred in signi

76 ART is significantly less likely to lead to virologic failure compared to NVP-based ART.

77 HLA class I alleles subsequently experienced virologic failure compared to those without protective a

78 ith detectable minority variants experienced virologic failure compared with 15% of those without min

79 with HIV-1 infection had increased rates of virologic failure, compared with efavirenz plus dual NRT

80 The primary end point was time to virologic failure (confirmed HIV-1 RNA level > or = 200

81 use of CCR5 antagonists even in the face of virologic failure could provide a relative degree of pro

82 By TaqMan 2.0, virologic failure defined as HIV-1 RNA >/= 50 copies/mL

83 end point was the time from randomization to virologic failure (defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA leve

84 pared the cumulative incidence of subsequent virologic failure (defined as an HIV RNA viral load of >

85 Virologic failure, defined as a confirmed HIV-1 RNA leve

86 remained; however, VL monitoring and earlier virologic failure detection may result in lower NRTI res

87 une activation, indicating that a history of virologic failure does not inexorably lead to increased

88 s after NNRTI monotherapy and contributed to virologic failure during ART in 1/3 animals.

89 tly associated with higher-level resistance; virologic failure during the peginterferon/ribavirin-tre

90 Virologic failure during the telaprevir-treatment phase

91 Virologic failure during treatment and relapse after tre

92 No patients had virologic failure during treatment, and no patients had

93 Virologic failure following EFV-containing treatment was

94 Virologic failure following treatment of hepatitis C vir

95 In the low HIV RNA stratum, times to virologic failure for ABC/3TC or TDF/FTC were not differ

96 IV-1) minority variants increase the risk of virologic failure for first-line nonnucleoside reverse t

97 The adjusted relative hazard of virologic failure for patients who started nevirapine, c

98 The risk of virologic failure for subjects with baseline NNRTI resis

99 Among the nevirapine-treated children with virologic failure for whom data on resistance were avail

100 We studied 29 subjects with virologic failure from a phase IIb study of the CCR5 ant

101 Plasma samples at entry and at time of virologic failure from patients enrolled in the AIDS Cli

102 iral load suppression and time to subsequent virologic failure (>400 copies/mL).

103 ns were associated with an increased risk of virologic failure (hazard ratio (HR], 2.3 [95% confidenc

104 ignificantly associated with shorter time to virologic failure (hazard ratio [HR], 2.03; P = .035), a

105 to whites, blacks had an increased hazard of virologic failure (hazard ratio [HR]; 1.7; 95% confidenc

106 t regimen (hazard ratio, 0.39) and the first virologic failure (hazard ratio, 0.34).

107 .48 to 1.06), as well as to delay the second virologic failure (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confid

108 9 copies/mL for 6 months doubled the risk of virologic failure (hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.60-3.09

109 cantly delayed both the first and the second virologic failures (hazard ratio for the first virologic

110 Computer alerts were generated for virologic failure (HIV RNA level >400 copies/mL after a

111 A testing of virus from the first episode of virologic failure identified protease resistance mutatio

112 of persistent LLV on the subsequent risk of virologic failure in a cohort of people living with HIV

113 (baseline) drug resistance and subtype with virologic failure in a multinational, randomized clinica

114 ignificantly less likely than NVP to lead to virologic failure in both trials (RR 0.85 [0.73-0.99] I(

115 nd levels of susceptibility after first-line virologic failure in individuals from Thailand, South Af

116 on with nevirapine was a strong predictor of virologic failure in our cohort, which was not explained

117 ion (Merck 035), but was not associated with virologic failure in patients receiving initial combinat

118 (1%) and was only associated with increased virologic failure in patients treated for short duration

119 Virologic failure in subtype C is characterized by high

120 sequencing were performed at baseline and at virologic failure in the 4 MK-5172 dosing arms.

121 d in two of these four animals, resulting in virologic failure in the animal with the highest level o

122 mutations were detected in participants with virologic failure in the EFV-TDF-FTC group.

123 ent adherence estimated the relative risk of virologic failure in the presence of NNRTI-resistant min

124 nts was associated with an increased risk of virologic failure in the setting of recent treatment adh

125 and V321A in 5% (17 of 353) of patients with virologic failure in the SOF studies.

126 dy was stopped because of increased rates of virologic failure in the VCV 25 mg/day arm (relative haz

127 to identify a significantly earlier time to virologic failure in women randomized to ATV/r compared

128 Three patients had D168 variants at virologic failure, including 2 with the D168A variant as

129 identify high-risk individuals and to detect virologic failure may limit the effectiveness of antiret

130 high rates of sustained virologic response, virologic failure may still occur, potentially leading t

131 Of 44 ART-experienced children, 57% had virologic failure, most never virologically suppressed.

132 No virologic failure occurred during the study.

133 Virologic failure occurred in 13 (33%) of 39 and relapse

134 Virologic failure occurred in 13 patients (4%), includin

135 On-treatment virologic failure occurred in 3 patients with HCV genoty

136 Virologic failure occurred in 34 patients (8%) overall.

137 Virologic failure occurred in 37 (28 in the nevirapine g

138 Virologic failure occurred in 97 (34%) subjects: 52 (37%

139 Virologic failure occurred in no patients in arm A and i

140 Virologic failure occurred uncommonly (6/266 [2.3%]) in

141 iciency virus-infected patients experiencing virologic failure of an indinavir- or ritonavir-containi

142 iation between detected minority DRM and the virologic failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy (

143 N348I emerges frequently with virologic failure of first-line ART in subtype C HIV-1 i

144 Y181C mutants more than tripled the risk of virologic failure of first-line efavirenz-based antiretr

145 LLV has been associated with virologic failure of HAART in some studies, while in oth

146 resistant viruses from patients experiencing virologic failure of indinavir and/or nelfinavir.

147 ces in plasma obtained before therapy and at virologic failure of initial ART among 63 participants w

148 frequent occurrence of E138K/M184I after the virologic failure of rilpivirine-, lamivudine-, and emtr

149 ress viral replication even after short-term virologic failure of three-drug HAART and despite ongoin

150 erall, one-third of patients who experienced virologic failure on an indinavir-containing regimen sup

151 tonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy after first-line virologic failure on an NNRTI regimen.

152 emerged frequently in patients experiencing virologic failure on antiretroviral combinations that do

153 odeficiency virus (HIV) have higher rates of virologic failure on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and of

154 source-limited settings, genotype testing at virologic failure on first-line antiretroviral therapy (

155 n treatment-naive noncirrhotic patients with virologic failure on MK-5172 (100-800 mg/day) plus pegyl

156 eatment-experienced patients who experienced virologic failure on treatment regimens containing the C

157 .83]) and no difference in the likelihood of virologic failure or CD4 cell gain.

158 primary end point was the time to confirmed virologic failure or death.

159 iated with decreased adherence, but not with virologic failure or development of drug resistance in t

160 ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (14%) had virologic failure or died.

161 The primary end point was virologic failure or discontinuation of treatment by stu

162 The primary end point was virologic failure or discontinuation of treatment by stu

163 e until initiation of ART and the time until virologic failure or initiation of ART were similar in t

164 Blips were not associated with virologic failure or the development of drug resistance.

165 l-determined change in regimen due to either virologic failure or treatment-related toxic effects.

166 pregnancy, elimination of food restrictions, virologic failure, or drug toxicities.

167 state of viral replication (P =.03), but not virologic failure over 4.5 years of observation.

168 ts, all pairwise comparisons of incidence of virologic failure over 96 weeks showed equivalence withi

169 group and 41.7% in the nevirapine group had virologic failure (P<0.001).

170 treatment CD8(+) T cell activation predicted virologic failure (P=.046).

171 Patients experiencing virologic failure (persistent HIV RNA >500 copies RNA/mL

172 During long-term virologic failure, plasma HIV RNA levels often remained

173 hort (51 with virologic failure, 144 without virologic failure), plus 127 of the remaining subjects w

174 cy virus (HIV)-infected women are at risk of virologic failure postpartum.

175 The regimen with the highest virologic failure rate preserved greater future drug opt

176 In the high stratum, virologic failure rate was significantly higher for ABC/

177 In contrast, virologic failure rates did not differ significantly bet

178 linded treatment in the high stratum, higher virologic failure rates were seen with ABC/3TC with EFV

179 t frequently observed resistance mutation at virologic failure regardless of the baseline minority va

180 The primary outcome measure was time to virologic failure, regardless of ART changes.

181 Primary endpoints were times to virologic failure, regimen modification, and safety even

182 45 patients without intermittent viremia had virologic failure (relative risk, 0.76; 95% confidence i

183 Genetic analyses strongly suggest that virologic failure resulted from the reemergence of virus

184 Thirteen of these 23 (56.5%) virologic failures resuppressed after a median of 8.0 mo

185 In this analysis, blacks had a 40% higher virologic failure risk than whites that was not explaine

186 ex with 3 primary study endpoints of time to virologic failure, safety, and tolerability events were

187 given HIV RNA level measured 12 weeks after virologic failure, subsequent CD4+ T cell decline was sl

188 countries (LMICs) experience higher rates of virologic failure than adults.

189 ntiretroviral therapy show a shorter time to virologic failure than patients infected with wild-type

190 ation therapy were more likely to experience virologic failure than those who had taken amprenavir mo

191 e combined efavirenz groups (11 percent) had virologic failure; the time to virologic failure was sig

192 Among 265 participants with virologic failure, those assigned atazanavir plus ritona

193 as performed at baseline and periodically in virologic failures throughout the 24-week posttherapy fo

194 mens, respectively, reached protocol-defined virologic failure; time to virologic failure was not sig

195 HCV genotype 1-infected patients with prior virologic failure to HCV DAA-containing therapy.

196 ith the detection of R155K/D168A in NS3 from virologic failures treated with simeprevir but not grazo

197 uld be the most reliable for predicting true virologic failure using DBS.

198 Calendar trends in virologic failure (VF) among human immunodeficiency viru

199 vel (primary) and determination of confirmed virologic failure (VF) from longitudinal samples.

200 resistant variants have been associated with virologic failure (VF) of initial NVP-based combination

201 Virologic failure (VF) on a first-line ritonavir-boosted

202 avir/ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy following virologic failure (VF) on first-line human immunodeficie

203 Virologic failure (VF) was defined as confirmed rebound

204 ary endpoint: stopping randomized treatment, virologic failure (VF), or death by 6 months.

205 ime from randomization to death or confirmed virologic failure ([VF]) (plasma HIV RNA<1 log(10) below

206 End points included virologic failure (viral load, >/= 400 copies/mL) and ad

207 A clinical history of virologic failure was also not significantly associated

208 Virologic failure was associated most frequently with ef

209 significantly increased independent risk of virologic failure was associated with continuing a 3TC-c

210 f NNRTI and NRTI resistance after first-line virologic failure was associated with higher VL at study

211 finavir recipients, a trend toward decreased virologic failure was associated with the polymorphism C

212 Increased hazard of virologic failure was associated with younger age, highe

213 Virologic failure was defined as 2 consecutive human imm

214 Virologic failure was defined as a plasma HIV RNA level

215 Virologic failure was defined as the first of 2 consecut

216 Virologic failure was documented in 22% of patients with

217 Drug resistance at virologic failure was evaluated by standard genotyping a

218 A dose-dependent increased risk of virologic failure was found in participants with a highe

219 ents with genotype 1a infection, the rate of virologic failure was higher in the ribavirin-free group

220 Virologic failure was less likely in the efavirenz group

221 a median follow-up of 112 weeks, the time to virologic failure was longer in the efavirenz group than

222 Virologic failure was lower in the efavirenz + indinavir

223 Increased risk of virologic failure was most strongly associated with mino

224 5 (32%) of those in the calls group; time to virologic failure was not different (P=.32).

225 protocol-defined virologic failure; time to virologic failure was not significantly different (hazar

226 Over 3 years, the risk of virologic failure was not significantly different among

227 Cox proportional hazards model, the risk for virologic failure was not significantly greater in the A

228 Virologic failure was observed in 60% of cases and was a

229 Antiretroviral resistance at the time of virologic failure was rare but more frequent with ralteg

230 lanned subgroup analyses, increased risk for virologic failure was seen in non-Hispanic black patient

231 therapy was longer (P=0.05), and the time to virologic failure was shorter (P=0.05).

232 0 copies per milliliter or more, the time to virologic failure was significantly shorter in the abaca

233 percent) had virologic failure; the time to virologic failure was significantly shorter in the tripl

234 In the low HIV RNA stratum, time to virologic failure was similar for ABC/3TC vs TDF/FTC wit

235 or (NNRTI)-resistant variants on the risk of virologic failure, we reanalyzed a case-cohort substudy

236 Independent predictors of higher rates of virologic failure were <95% adherence, receiving the 4-d

237 Hazard ratios for time to virologic failure were 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.56) and 1

238 +) T-cell counts obtained after triple-class virologic failure were analyzed using generalized estima

239 RT sequences from participants with N348I at virologic failure were assayed for drug susceptibility.

240 IV-1 amino acid changes from pretreatment to virologic failure were evaluated in protease and reverse

241 Rates of virologic failure were higher without ribavirin than wit

242 Five patients with virologic failure were in the MK-5172 100-mg arm, includ

243 y virus (HIV)-infected subjects experiencing virologic failure while receiving a ritonavir-containing

244 PI-naive patients designated as experiencing virologic failure while receiving ATV-containing regimen

245 Due to higher virologic failure with ABC/3TC in the high HIV RNA strat

246 Women assigned to ATV/r had a higher risk of virologic failure with either nucleoside reverse transcr

247 ated with a dose-dependent increased risk of virologic failure with first-line ART.

248 al transmission of HIV-1 had higher rates of virologic failure with subsequent nevirapine-based antir

249 s) or 24 weeks (41 patients who had previous virologic failure with telaprevir or boceprevir plus peg

250 telaprevir-treated patients had on-treatment virologic failure, with no significant difference with o