You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 285 No. 6, February 14, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Special Communication
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (23)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •HIV/AIDS
 •Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Immunology
 •Immunologic Disorders
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Virologic and Regimen Termination Surrogate End Points in AIDS Clinical Trials

Peter B. Gilbert, PhD; Victor DeGruttola, DSc; Scott M. Hammer, MD; Daniel R. Kuritzkes, MD

JAMA. 2001;285:777-784.

Suppression of plasma human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) RNA levels has been widely accepted as an appropriate surrogate end point for HIV disease progression, and it is currently used as the primary end point to determine efficacy in many antiretroviral trials. However, this end point does not always measure other important effects of treatment, such as inducement of multidrug resistance, which depletes future therapy options, and toxic effects. An alternative that directly factors in these treatment costs is a composite regimen termination end point, defined as a protocol-determined change in regimen due to either virologic failure or treatment-related toxic effects. Pros and cons for using purely virologic vs various composite primary end points are discussed. Conclusions include (1) a trial's clinical objective guides the choice of primary end point, (2) a purely virologic end point is often preferable, (3) it may be important to analyze both end point types in interpreting study results, and (4) long-term clinical outcome studies are needed for identifying the most predictive surrogate end points.


Author Affiliations: Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass (Drs Gilbert and DeGruttola); Division of Infectious Diseases, Columbia Presbyterian Center, New York, NY (Dr Hammer); and University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver (Dr Kuritzkes).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Long-Term HIV/AIDS Survival Estimation in the Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Era
King et al.
Med Decis Making 2003;23:9-20.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.