First-line HIV treatment failures in non-B subtypes and recombinants: a cross-sectional analysis of multiple populations in Uganda

Table 1 Summary table for HIV-1 baseline and treatment failure samples

Variable	Baseline	%	Failure	%	95% CI
	2430	58	1724	42
Gender
Male	n/a		208	43.2
Female	n/a		232	56.8
Age (years)	n/a		19 (13–39)^a
Region
Fort Portal	222	30.5	86	7.5
Gulu	0	0	18	1.6
Kabale	0	0	26	2.3
Kampala	252	34.7	910	79.5
Mbale	253	34.8	82	7.2
Mbarara	0	0	22	1.9
Drug exposures
3TC/AZT/NVP	172	23.8	318	26.0
3TC/AZT/EFV	163	22.6	196	16.0
3TC/d4T/NVP	46	6.4	208	17.0
EFV/FTC/TDF	179	24.8	36	2.9
3TC/EFV/TDF	0		113	9.2
Other	161	22.3	351	28.7
log₁₀ viral load	5.2 (4.7–5.9)^a		4.8 (4.2–5.3)^a		0.35 to 0.54^b
CD4 cell count	n/a		111 (35–232)^a
Subtype predictions
A	1028	42.3	758	44	0.94 to 1.21^c
A/D	217	8.9	85	4.9	0.40 to 0.69
C	60	2.5	56	3.2	0.90 to 1.95
D	751	30.9	503	29.2	0.80 to 1.06
Other	374	15.4	322	18.7	1.06 to 1.49
Recombination breakpoints
0	1634	67.2	1234	71.6	0.02 to 0.31^d
1	124	5.1	84	4.9	(− 0.20) to (− 0.03)^e
2	327	13.5	248	14.4
3	187	7.7	94	5.5
4	158	6.5	64	3.7

Table counts do not include cases with missing data on region, drug exposure, viral load or CD4 cell counts
n/a indicates that no data were available for the variable and group, 3TC lamivudine, AZT zidovudine, NVP nevirapine, EFV efavirenz, d4T stavudine, FTC emtricitabine, TDF tenofovir
^aNumbers correspond to the median and interquartile range (in parentheses). 95% confidence intervals are reported for the following test statistics: ^b the difference between the means of two groups from Student’s t-test. ^c the odds ratio for Fisher’s exact test; ^d the difference in treatment failures in log odds of structural zeroes in a zero-inflated Poisson (ZIP) model, and; ^e the decrease in the log-transformed number of breakpoints among treatment failures under the ZIP model

ISSN: 1742-6405