Background: Among HIV-1 infected patients who achieved virologic suppression, the use of atazanavir without pharmacologic boosting is debated. We evaluated the efficacy and tolerance of maintenance therapy with unboosted atazanavir in clinical practice.
Methods and results: This multicenter retrospective cohort study evaluated the efficacy of switching HIV-1-infected patients controlled on triple therapy to unboosted (ATV(0), n = 98) versus ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r, n = 254) +2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was time to virologic failure (VF, >200 copies/mL). ATV groups were compared controlling for potential confounding bias by inverse probability weighted Cox analysis and propensity-score matching. Overall and adjusted VF rates were similar for both strategies. Both strategies improved dyslipidemia and creatininemia, with less jaundice in the ATV(0) group.
Conclusion: In previously well-suppressed patients, within an observational cohort setting, ATV(0)-based triple-therapy appeared as effective as ATV/r- based triple-therapy to maintain virologic suppression, even if co-administered with TDF, but was better tolerated.