↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of cardiovascular biomarkers in a randomized trial of fosamprenavir/ritonavir vs. efavirenz with abacavir/lamivudine in underrepresented, antiretroviral-naïve, HIV-infected patients (SUPPORT…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of cardiovascular biomarkers in a randomized trial of fosamprenavir/ritonavir vs. efavirenz with abacavir/lamivudine in underrepresented, antiretroviral-naïve, HIV-infected patients (SUPPORT): 96-week results
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-13-269
Pubmed ID
Authors

Princy Kumar, Edwin DeJesus, Gregory Huhn, Louis Sloan, Catherine Butkus Small, Howard Edelstein, Franco Felizarta, Ritche Hao, Lisa Ross, Britt Stancil, Keith Pappa, Belinda Ha

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rates of cardiovascular disease are higher among HIV-infected patients as a result of the complex interplay between traditional risk factors, HIV-related inflammatory and immunologic changes, and effects of antiretroviral therapy (ART). This study prospectively evaluated changes in cardiovascular biomarkers in an underrepresented, racially diverse, HIV-1-infected population receiving abacavir/lamivudine as backbone therapy. METHODS: This 96-week, open-label, randomized, multicenter study compared once-daily fosamprenavir/ritonavir 1400/100 mg and efavirenz 600 mg, both with ABC/3TC 600 mg/300 mg, in antiretroviral-naive, HLA-B*5701-negative adults without major resistance mutations to study drugs. We evaluated changes from baseline to weeks 4, 12, 24, 48, and 96 in interleukin-6 (IL-6), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), soluble vascular adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1), d-dimer, plasminogen, and fibrinogen. Biomarker data were log-transformed before analysis, and changes from baseline were described using geometric mean ratios. RESULTS: This study enrolled 101 patients (51 receiving fosamprenavir/ritonavir; 50 receiving efavirenz): 32% female, 60% African American, and 38% Hispanic/Latino; 66% (67/101) completed 96 weeks on study. At week 96, levels of IL-6, sVCAM-1, d-dimer, fibrinogen, and plasminogen were lower than baseline in both treatment groups, and the decrease was statistically significant for sVCAM-1 (fosamprenavir/ritonavir and efavirenz), d-dimer (fosamprenavir/ritonavir and efavirenz), fibrinogen (efavirenz), and plasminogen (efavirenz). Values of hs-CRP varied over time in both groups, with a significant increase over baseline at Weeks 4 and 24 in the efavirenz group. At week 96, there was no difference between the groups in the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (fosamprenavir/ritonavir 63%; efavirenz 66%) by ITT missing-equals-failure analysis. Treatment-related grade 2--4 adverse events were more common with efavirenz (32%) compared with fosamprenavir/ritonavir (20%), and median lipid concentrations increased in both groups over 96 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of underrepresented patients, treatment with abacavir/lamivudine combined with either fosamprenavir/ritonavir or efavirenz over 96 weeks, produced stable or declining biomarker levels except for hs-CRP, including significant and favorable decreases in thrombotic activity (reflected by d-dimer) and endothelial activation (reflected by sVCAM-1). Our study adds to the emerging data that some cardiovascular biomarkers are decreased with initiation of ART and control of HIV viremia.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00727597.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 87 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 23 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 27 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2013.
All research outputs
#14,171,074
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,751
of 7,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,208
of 197,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#81
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,657 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,464 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.