RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Efficacy and safety of Tenofovir-based regimen in elderly people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.11.01.22281791
DO 10.1101/2022.11.01.22281791
A1 Akinsolu, Folahanmi T.
A1 Ekama, Sabdat
A1 Musa, Adesola Z.
A1 Oladele, David
A1 Ohihion, Esther
A1 Ezemelue, Priscilla
A1 Adewale, Osuolale K.
A1 Davies-Bolorunduro, Flora
A1 Chukwu, Emelda
A1 Fowora, Muinah
A1 Ajibaye, Sola
A1 Amoo, Sam
A1 Idigbe, Ifeoma
A1 Raheem, Toyosi
A1 Herbertson, Ebiere
A1 Gambari, Aisha
A1 Salako, Abideen
A1 Olagunju, Mobolaji
A1 Gbaja-biamila, Titi
A1 Odubela, Tosin
A1 Ezeobi, Pascal
A1 Okwuzu, Jane
A1 David, Agatha N.
A1 Odunukwe, Nkiruka
A1 Ezebialu, Ifeanyichukwu
A1 Eleje, George U.
A1 Ezechi, Oliver C.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/02/2022.11.01.22281791.abstract
AB Objective The study examined whether the benefit and adverse effects of the tenofovir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen outweigh the non-tenofovir-based regimen in the elderly population.Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Library, Google Scholar, and some hand searches on September 21, 2021, to identify eligible studies. Only randomized control trials on elderly HIV-positive patients on Tenofovir-based regimens living in sub-Saharan Africa were included. Studies on pregnant women or prophylactic tenofovir were excluded. The primary outcomes are viral suppression, mortality, and anemia. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We analyzed using risk ratio, with 95% confidence intervals. A fixed effect model along with an assessment of heterogeneity was done for meta-analysis.Results Four studies with a total of 263 participants were included. Our meta-analysis shows that there was no difference between participants on a tenofovir-based regimen and the non-tenofovir-based regimen in terms of viral suppression, mortality, anemia, and hypertension.Our meta-analysis shows that there was no difference between participants on tenofovir based regimen and non-tenofovir based regimen in terms of viral suppression (RR=1.96, 95% CI (1.42 -2.70; I2=0%, 4 trials, 263 participants, very low certainty of evidence), mortality (RR = 2.90, 95% CI (0.12 – 69.87, I2=Not estimated, a trial, 120 participants, very low certainty of evidence), anaemia (RR=1.61, 95% CI (1.02-2.90; I2 = 0.16, 2 trials, 154 participants, very low certainty of evidence), hypertension RR = 0.76, 95% CI (0.44-1.31) I2 = Not estimated, a trial, 34 participants, low-certainty of evidence). None of the trials reported the incidence of chronic kidney disease and bone demineralization.Conclusion There was very-low certainty evidence that no difference exists between the tenofovir-based HAART regimen and the non-tenofovir-based regimen in terms of benefits and short-term adverse outcomes. Well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed with a focus on long-term adverse effects.Strengths and limitations of the studyTenofovir-based high-active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is one of the preferred first-line therapies in the management of HIV-1 infection.The study demonstrates evidence and represents the first comprehensive and up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of the tenofovir-based regimen on elderly patients concerning chronic kidney disease, changes in bone mineral density, number of deaths, viral suppression, hypertension, anemia, and adherence levels of ≥ 95%.The clinical implications of the study indicate there is an urgent need for evaluation of the effect of long-term use of tenofovir-based regimens among elderly people living with HIV/AIDS due to the paucity of data on the use of tenofovir-based HAART regimens.The study limitations are the cumulative sample size of the four studies was small with only one study reporting on mortality outcome; there was also a lack of statistical power for the clinical outcomes observed; there was no information on gender disaggregation to consider conducting a sub-group analysis; and there was a great amount of heterogeneity in one of the studies, which was accounted for by using a random effects model but has the same value in a fixed effect model.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe author(s) received no specific funding for this work.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.