A retrospective evaluation of anti-retroviral therapy regimen modifications due to adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care hospital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20262855Keywords:
Adverse drug reactions, Antiretroviral therapy, HIV, Pharmacovigilance, Renal toxicity, TenofovirAbstract
Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has transformed HIV infection into a chronic manageable disease and substantially improved survival among people living with HIV. Despite these advances, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain a major cause of treatment modification, potentially affecting adherence, treatment continuity, and long-term outcomes. Real-world pharmacovigilance data describing ADR-driven ART regimen changes in Indian settings remain limited. Aim was to evaluate the frequency and pattern of ART regimen modifications attributable to ADRs reported to the adverse drug reaction monitoring centre (AMC) of a tertiary care teaching hospital.
Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted using suspected ADR reporting forms received at the AMC, department of pharmacology, Mysore Medical College and Research Institute between January 2022 and December 2024. Data regarding patient demographics, ADR characteristics, suspected antiretroviral agents, and regimen modifications were extracted and analysed using descriptive statistics. The association between ADR type and regimen modification was assessed using the Chi-square test.
Results: A total of 93 ART-related ADR reports were analysed. Among them, 67 patients (72.0%) required modification of their ART regimen following an ADR. Renal ADRs were the most frequently reported reactions (67.7%), with tenofovir-based regimens accounting for the largest proportion of implicated drugs. Patients experiencing renal toxicity were significantly more likely to undergo regimen modification compared with those experiencing non-renal ADRs (χ2=24.45, p<0.001). Substitution from tenofovir-containing regimens to alternative regimens, particularly abacavir-based combinations, represented the most common modification pattern.
Conclusions: ADRs continue to be an important determinant of ART regimen modification in routine clinical practice. Renal toxicity, predominantly associated with tenofovir-containing regimens, emerged as the leading reason for treatment substitution. These findings highlight the importance of vigilant pharmacovigilance, timely recognition of drug-related toxicity, and routine renal function monitoring to support safer and more sustainable ART use.
References
Consolidated Guidelines on HIV Prevention, Testing, Treatment, Service Delivery and Monitoring: Recommendations for a Public Health Approach. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
Patil PT, Pawar MP, Halasawadekar NR, Shinde MP, Kumbhar AV, Rathod MS. Current pattern of adverse drug reactions to anti-retroviral therapy in an antiretroviral therapy centre attached to a government medical college of Maharashtra, India: a retrospective study. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2016;5(6):2438-43.
Shet A, Antony J, Arumugam K, Kumar Dodderi S, Rodrigues R, DeCosta A. Influence of adverse drug reactions on treatment success: prospective cohort analysis of HIV-infected individuals initiating first-line antiretroviral therapy in India. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e91028.
Meeyannoor K, Bhuvana K. A prospective observational study of adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy: type and risk factors in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2014;3(2):380.
Gungam P, Yadav YSK, Junapudi S. A study on adverse drug reactions in patients on antiretroviral therapy in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2018;7(10):1882-8.
Martínez E, Blanco JL, Arnaiz JA, Pérez-Cuevas JB, Mocroft A, Cruceta A, et al. Hepatotoxicity in HIV-1-infected patients receiving nevirapine-containing antiretroviral therapy. AIDS. 2001;15(10):1261-8.
Fumaz CR, Tuldrà A, Ferrer MJ, Paredes R, Bonjoch A, Jou T, et al. Quality of life, emotional status, and adherence of HIV-1-infected patients treated with efavirenz versus protease inhibitor-containing regimens. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002;29(3):244-53.
Jafari A, Khalili H, Dashti-Khavidaki S. Tenofovir-induced nephrotoxicity: incidence, mechanism, risk factors, prognosis and proposed agents for prevention. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;70(9):1029-40.
Lee DH, Malat GE, Bias TE, Harhay MN, Ranganna K, Doyle AM. Serum creatinine elevation after switch to dolutegravir in a human immunodeficiency virus-positive kidney transplant recipient. Transpl Infect Dis. 2016;18(4):625-7.
Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI). Ghaziabad: Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission; 2011. Available from: https://www.ipc.gov.in. Accessed on 12 April 2026.
Rukmangathen R, Brahmanapalli VD, Thammisetty DP, Pemmasani D, Gali SD, Atmakuru RB. Study of adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy in a tertiary care hospital, Tirupati. Perspect Clin Res. 2020;11(4):158-63.
Reddy TM, T SDP, Reddy SG, Dudu S, Mohan R, Punnamaraju KP, et al. A pharmacovigilance study of antiretroviral therapy in HIV positive out patients at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2018;7(12):2419-23.
Patel NM, Vaniya HV, Agrawal JM, Balat JD, Singh AP, Trivedi HR. Adverse drug reaction monitoring on antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus patients in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2016;4(5):907-11.
Shenoy S, Shrivastava D, Malalur C, Varma M, Kunder SK, Arivazhahan A, et al. Modification of first-line antiretroviral therapy in treatment-naive, HIV positive patients. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(10):FC01-5.
Venter WDF, Moorhouse M, Sokhela S, Fairlie L, Mashabane N, Masenya M, et al. Dolutegravir plus Two Different Prodrugs of Tenofovir to Treat HIV. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(9):803-15.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
