Résumé : Background Increases in the prevalence of resistance to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) have been observed among previously untreated individuals in all areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to examine whether first-line use of 2 NRTIs plus a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) could protect against emergence of NRTI resistance mutations, compared to the use of 2 NRTIs plus 1 NNRTI.MethodsWe carried out a weighted meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing bPI- with NNRTI-based first-line antiretroviral therapy regimens using random effects modeling.ResultsIn intention to treat analyses, there was no difference in the risk of viral failure at week 48 between NNRTI and bPI (P =. 19). At week 48, the overall difference between NNRTI- and PI-based regimens in selection of any major NRTI resistance mutation (crude unweighted prevalence 3.3% vs 1.6%) was 1.7% (95% confidence interval [CI],. 4-3.0; P =. 00927). There was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of K65R when comparing NNRTI (1.3%) with PI (0.67%); absolute weighted difference 1.0% (95% CI,. 3-1.7; P =. 00447). There was also a significant difference in prevalence of M184V/I between NNRTI and PI (crude unweighted prevalence 3.2% vs 1.4%); difference 1.6% (95% CI 0.1-3.1; P =. 0368).ConclusionsDespite the equivalent efficacy and more favorable resistance implications of PI- versus NNRTI-based first line therapy, widespread use of PI-based first-line therapy is not warranted at this time, due to resource limitations and predicted increased risk of resistance-related failure of NNRTI/NRTI second-line regimens. PI-based first-line therapy could be reconsidered when antiretroviral agents from other classes become available for second-line regimens in resource-limited settings. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved.