ArticleThe lancet. HIV2026
Incident diabetes after switching to integrase strand transfer inhibitors in people with HIV in the USA and Canada: a cohort study.
Article in The lancet. HIV, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residual HIV activity and host immunometabolic remodeling during antiretroviral therapy: implications for cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic risk.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntegrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) initiation has been associated with diabetes in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive people with HIV. We aimed to examine the effect of switching to INSTIs on incident diabetes in ART-experienced people with HIV.
methodsIn this target trial emulation, we retrospectively used individual-level data from 27 longitudinal cohorts of people with HIV in the USA and Canada. We included participants aged at least 18 years without diabetes who had used non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) or protease inhibitors for at least 180 days (in 2016-22) but had never used an INSTI. We used data from any clinical encounters in which participants continued an NNRTI or protease inhibitor versus switched to an INSTI, with a follow-up period of up to 5 years. The effect of switching to INSTIs on incident diabetes was estimated with weighted Cox regression with robust variance. We further assessed whether the effect varied by time since the switch and was explained by weight gain in the first year.
findings13 071 participants were followed up from 2702 encounters in which they switched to an INSTI from an NNRTI, 54 766 encounters in which they continued an NNRTI, 1714 encounters in which they switched to an INSTI from a protease inhibitor, and 26 599 encounters in which they continued a protease inhibitor. Switching from protease inhibitors to INSTIs conferred an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1·38 (95% CI 1·06-1·80) for incident diabetes, whereas switching from NNRTIs to INSTIs conferred an adjusted HR of 1·10 (0·87-1·39). The diabetes risk was higher during the first 2 years after switching from protease inhibitors to INSTIs (HR 1·67, 95% CI 1·21-2·30), but not thereafter (1·08, 0·75-1·57; p
interpretationThe increased diabetes risk after switching from protease inhibitors to INSTIs highlights a metabolic implication of regimen change and could warrant close monitoring early after switch, regardless of weight gain.
fundingUS National Institutes of Health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.