Frequency and patterns of protease gene resistance mutations in HIV-infected patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir as their first protease inhibitor

Plausible mechanism of drug resistance and side-effects of COVID-19 therapeutics: a bottleneck for its eradication

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 pandemic has turned our world upside down by meddling with our normal lives. While there is no definitive drug against SARS-CoV-2, antiviral drugs that are already in the market, are being repurposed against it, could now complete long-term as well as all age-specific investigations, and they are successful in saving millions of lives. Nevertheless, side-effects are emergingly seen in the patients undergoing treatment, and ineffectiveness is increasingly found due to the emerging notorious variants of the virus. Many of them are also facing serious co-infections including black fungus, Zika, and H1N1 virus to name a few.

OBJECTIVES

Therefore, this review highlights both drug resistance, their side-effects, and the significance for proper and long-term clinical trials of all age groups including children.

METHODS

We have explored and proposed the mechanisms of drug resistance that may arise due to the misuse or overuse of drugs based on available experimental reports.

RESULTS

The review provides solutions to the aforesaid issues of drug-resistance and side-effects by providing combination therapies, ancillary treatments, and other preventive strategies that can be useful in preventing drawbacks thereby curbing COVID-19 or similar future infections to maintain our normal lives.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 and its long-term effects, if any, can be eradicated with strategic and mindful use of related therapeutics in a controlled manner.

HIV and Drug-Resistant Subtypes

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a human viral infectious disease caused by the positive-sense single-stranded (ss) RNA Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) (Retroviridae family, Ortervirales order). HIV-1 can be distinguished into various worldwide spread groups and subtypes. HIV-2 also causes human immunodeficiency, which develops slowly and tends to be less aggressive. HIV-2 only partially homologates to HIV-1 despite the similar derivation. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is the treatment approved to control HIV infection, based on multiple antiretroviral drugs that belong to different classes: (i) NNRTIs, (ii) NRTIs, (iii) PIs, (iv) INSTIs, and (v) entry inhibitors. These drugs, acting on different stages of the HIV life cycle, decrease the patient's total burden of HIV, maintain the function of the immune system, and prevent opportunistic infections. The appearance of several strains resistant to these drugs, however, represents a problem today that needs to be addressed as best as we can. New outbreaks of strains show a widespread geographic distribution and a highly variable mortality rate, even affecting treated patients significantly. Therefore, novel treatment approaches should be explored. The present review discusses updated information on HIV-1- and HIV-2-resistant strains, including details on different mutations responsible for drug resistance.

Spectrum of Atazanavir-Selected Protease Inhibitor-Resistance Mutations

Ritonavir-boosted atazanavir is an option for second-line therapy in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We analyzed publicly available HIV-1 protease sequences from previously PI-naïve patients with virological failure (VF) following treatment with atazanavir. Overall, 1497 patient sequences were identified, including 740 reported in 27 published studies and 757 from datasets assembled for this analysis. A total of 63% of patients received boosted atazanavir. A total of 38% had non-subtype B viruses. A total of 264 (18%) sequences had a PI drug-resistance mutation (DRM) defined as having a Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database mutation penalty score. Among sequences with a DRM, nine major DRMs had a prevalence >5%: I50L (34%), M46I (33%), V82A (22%), L90M (19%), I54V (16%), N88S (10%), M46L (8%), V32I (6%), and I84V (6%). Common accessory DRMs were L33F (21%), Q58E (16%), K20T (14%), G73S (12%), L10F (10%), F53L (10%), K43T (9%), and L24I (6%). A novel nonpolymorphic mutation, L89T occurred in 8.4% of non-subtype B, but in only 0.4% of subtype B sequences. The 264 sequences included 3 (1.1%) interpreted as causing high-level, 14 (5.3%) as causing intermediate, and 27 (10.2%) as causing low-level darunavir resistance. Atazanavir selects for nine major and eight accessory DRMs, and one novel nonpolymorphic mutation occurring primarily in non-B sequences. Atazanavir-selected mutations confer low-levels of darunavir cross resistance. Clinical studies, however, are required to determine the optimal boosted PI to use for second-line and potentially later line therapy in LMICs.

Comparing mutational pathways to lopinavir resistance in HIV-1 subtypes B versus C

Although combination antiretroviral therapies seem to be effective at controlling HIV-1 infections regardless of the viral subtype, there is increasing evidence for subtype-specific drug resistance mutations. The order and rates at which resistance mutations accumulate in different subtypes also remain poorly understood. Most of this knowledge is derived from studies of subtype B genotypes, despite not being the most abundant subtype worldwide. Here, we present a methodology for the comparison of mutational networks in different HIV-1 subtypes, based on Hidden Conjunctive Bayesian Networks (H-CBN), a probabilistic model for inferring mutational networks from cross-sectional genotype data. We introduce a Monte Carlo sampling scheme for learning H-CBN models for a larger number of resistance mutations and develop a statistical test to assess differences in the inferred mutational networks between two groups. We apply this method to infer the temporal progression of mutations conferring resistance to the protease inhibitor lopinavir in a large cross-sectional cohort of HIV-1 subtype C genotypes from South Africa, as well as to a data set of subtype B genotypes obtained from the Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database and the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. We find strong support for different initial mutational events in the protease, namely at residue 46 in subtype B and at residue 82 in subtype C. The inferred mutational networks for subtype B versus C are significantly different sharing only five constraints on the order of accumulating mutations with mutation at residue 54 as the parental event. The results also suggest that mutations can accumulate along various alternative paths within subtypes, as opposed to a unique total temporal ordering. Beyond HIV drug resistance, the statistical methodology is applicable more generally for the comparison of inferred mutational networks between any two groups.

There is a disparity in the distribution of infections by HIV-1 subtype in the world. Subtype B is predominant in America, Australia and western and central Europe, and most therapeutic strategies are based on research and clinical studies on this subtype. However, non-B subtypes represent the majority of global HIV-1 infections; e.g., subtype C alone accounts for nearly half of all HIV-1 infections. We present a statistical framework enabling the comparison of patterns of accumulating mutations in different HIV-1 subtypes. Specifically, we compare the temporal ordering of lopinavir resistance mutations in HIV-1 subtypes B versus C. To this end, we combine the Hidden Conjunctive Bayesian Network (H-CBN) model with an approximate inference scheme enabling comparisons of larger networks. We show that the development of resistance to lopinavir differs significantly between subtypes B and C, such that findings based on subtype B sequences can not always be applied to sybtype C. The described methodology is suitable for comparing different subgroups in the context of other evolutionary processes.

Temporal Trends in HIV-1 Mutations Used for the Surveillance of Transmitted Drug Resistance

In 2009, a list of nonpolymorphic HIV-1 drug resistance mutations (DRMs), called surveillance DRMs (SDRMs), was created to monitor transmitted drug resistance (TDR). Since 2009, TDR increased and antiretroviral therapy (ART) practices changed. We examined the changing prevalence of SDRMs and identified candidate SDRMs defined as nonpolymorphic DRMs present on ≥ 1 expert DRM list and in ≥0.1% of ART-experienced persons. Candidate DRMs were further characterized according to their association with antiretrovirals and changing prevalence. Among NRTI-SDRMs, tenofovir-associated mutations increased in prevalence while thymidine analog mutations decreased in prevalence. Among candidate NRTI-SDRMs, there were six tenofovir-associated mutations including three which increased in prevalence (K65N, T69deletion, K70G/N/Q/T). Among candidate NNRTI-SDRMs, six that increased in prevalence were associated with rilpivirine (E138K/Q, V179L, H221Y) or doravirine (F227C/L) resistance. With the notable exceptions of I47A and I50L, most PI-SDRMs decreased in prevalence. Three candidate PI-SDRMs were accessory darunavir-resistance mutations (L10F, T74P, L89V). Adding the candidate SDRMs listed above was estimated to increase NRTI, NNRTI, and PI TDR prevalence by 0.1%, 0.3%, and 0.3%, respectively. We describe trends in the prevalence of nonpolymorphic HIV-1 DRMs in ART-experienced persons. These data should be considered in decisions regarding SDRM list updates and TDR monitoring.

Predictors of Viremia in Postpartum Women on Antiretroviral Therapy

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

HIV-infected, postpartum women on antiretroviral therapy (ART) have high rates of viremia. We examined predictors of postpartum viremia in the PROMISE study.

Gag-protease coevolution shapes the outcome of lopinavir-inclusive treatment regimens in chronically infected HIV-1 subtype C patients

MOTIVATION

Commonly, protease inhibitor failure is characterized by the development of multiple protease resistance mutations (PRMs). While the impact of PRMs on therapy failure are understood, the introduction of Gag mutations with protease remains largely unclear.

RESULTS

Here, we utilized phylogenetic analyses and Bayesian network learning as tools to understand Gag-protease coevolution and elucidate the pathways leading to Lopinavir failure in HIV-1 subtype C infected patients. Our analyses indicate that while PRMs coevolve in response to drug selection pressure within protease, the Gag mutations added to the existing network while specifically interacting with known Lopinavir failure PRMs. Additionally, the selection of mutations at specific positions in Gag-protease suggests that these coevolving mutational changes occurs to maintain structural integrity during Gag cleavage.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Evolution of Protease Inhibitor Resistance in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infected Patients Failing Protease Inhibitor Monotherapy as Second-line Therapy in Low-income Countries: An Observational Analysis Within the EARNEST Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Limited viral load (VL) testing in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment programs in low-income countries often delays detection of treatment failure. The impact of remaining on failing protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimens is unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively tested VL in 2164 stored plasma samples from 386 patients randomized to receive lopinavir monotherapy (after initial raltegravir induction) in the Europe-Africa Research Network for Evaluation of Second-line Therapy (EARNEST) trial. Protease genotypic resistance testing was performed when VL >1000 copies/mL. We assessed evolution of PI resistance mutations from virological failure (confirmed VL >1000 copies/mL) until PI monotherapy discontinuation and examined associations using mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Median post-failure follow-up (in 118 patients) was 68 (interquartile range, 48-88) weeks. At failure, 20% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir. At 40-48 weeks post-failure, 68% and 51% had intermediate/high-level resistance to lopinavir and atazanavir; 17% had intermediate-level resistance (none high) to darunavir. Common PI mutations were M46I, I54V, and V82A. On average, 1.7 (95% confidence interval 1.5-2.0) PI mutations developed per year; increasing after the first mutation; decreasing with subsequent mutations (P < .0001). VL changes were modest, mainly driven by nonadherence (P = .006) and PI mutation development (P = .0002); I47A was associated with a larger increase in VL than other mutations (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients develop intermediate/high-level lopinavir resistance within 1 year of ongoing viral replication on monotherapy but retain susceptibility to darunavir. Viral load increased slowly after failure, driven by non-adherence and PI mutation development.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT00988039.

Protease Inhibitors for the Treatment of HIV/AIDS: Recent Advances and Future Challenges

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a chronic disease characterized by multiple life-threatening illnesses caused by a retro-virus, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). HIV infection slowly destroys the immune system and increases the risk of various other infections and diseases. Although, there is no immediate cure for HIV infection/AIDS, several drugs targeting various cruxes of HIV infection are used to slow down the progress of the disease and to boost the immune system. One of the key therapeutic strategies is Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) or ' AIDS cocktail' in a general sense, which is a customized combination of anti-retroviral drugs designed to combat the HIV infection. Since HAART's inception in 1995, this treatment was found to be effective in improving the life expectancy of HIV patients over two decades. Among various classes of HAART treatment regimen, Protease Inhibitors (PIs) are known to be widely used as a major component and found to be effective in treating HIV infection/AIDS. For the past several years, a variety of protease inhibitors have been reported. This review outlines the drug design strategies of PIs, chemical and pharmacological characteristics of some mechanism-based inhibitors, summarizes the recent developments in small molecule based drug discovery with HIV protease as a drug target. Further discussed are the pharmacology, PI drug resistance on HIV PR, adverse effects of HIV PIs and challenges/impediments in the successful application of HIV PIs as an important class of drugs in HAART regimen for the effective treatment of AIDS.

HIV-1 second-line failure and drug resistance at high-level and low-level viremia in Western Kenya

OBJECTIVE

Characterize failure and resistance above and below guidelines-recommended 1000 copies/ml virologic threshold, upon second-line failure.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Kenyan adults on lopinavir/ritonavir-based second-line were enrolled at AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare). Charts were reviewed for demographic/clinical characteristics and CD4/viral load were obtained. Participants with detectable viral load had a second visit and pol genotyping was attempted in both visits. Accumulated resistance was defined as mutations in the second, not the first visit. Low-level viremia (LLV) was detectable viral load less than 1000 copies/ml. Failure and resistance associations were evaluated using logistic and Poisson regression, Fisher Exact and t-tests.

RESULTS

Of 394 participants (median age 42, 60% women, median 1.9 years on second-line) 48% had detectable viral load; 21% had viral load more than 1000 copies/ml, associated with younger age, tuberculosis treatment, shorter time on second-line, lower CD4count/percentage, longer first-line treatment interruption and pregnancy. In 105 sequences from the first visit (35 with LLV), 79% had resistance (57% dual-class, 7% triple-class; 46% with intermediate-to-high-level resistance to ≥1 future drug option). LLV was associated with more overall and NRTI-associated mutations and with predicted resistance to more next-regimen drugs. In 48 second-visit sequences (after median 55 days; IQR 28-33), 40% accumulated resistance and LLV was associated with more mutation accumulation.

CONCLUSION

High resistance upon second-line failure exists at levels above and below guideline-recommended virologic-failure threshold, impacting future treatment options. Optimization of care should include increased viral load monitoring, resistance testing and third-line ART access, and consideration of lowering the virologic failure threshold, though this demands further investigation.

Selection analyses of paired HIV-1 gag and gp41 sequences obtained before and after antiretroviral therapy

Most HIV-1-infected individuals with virological failure on a pharmacologically-boosted protease inhibitor (PI) regimen do not develop PI-resistance protease mutations. One proposed explanation is that HIV-1 gag or gp41 cytoplasmic domain mutations might also reduce PI susceptibility. In a recent study of paired gag and gp41 sequences from individuals with virological failure on a PI regimen, we did not identify PI-selected mutations and concluded that if such mutations existed, larger numbers of paired sequences from multiple studies would be needed for their identification. In this study, we generated site-specific amino acid profiles using gag and gp41 published sequences from 5,338 and 4,242 ART-naïve individuals, respectively, to assist researchers identify unusual mutations arising during therapy and to provide scripts for performing established and novel maximal likelihood estimates of dN/dS substitution rates in paired sequences. The pipelines used to generate the curated sequences, amino acid profiles, and dN/dS analyses will facilitate the application of consistent methods to paired gag and gp41 sequence datasets and expedite the identification of potential sites under PI-selection pressure.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Drug Resistance Mutations Update

As treatment options coalesce around a smaller number of antiretroviral drugs (ARVs), data are emerging on the drug resistance mutations (DRMs) selected by the most widely used ARVs and on the impact of these DRMs on ARV susceptibility and virological response to first- and later-line treatment regimens. Recent studies have described the DRMs that emerge in patients receiving tenofovir prodrugs, the nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors efavirenz and rilpivirine, ritonavir-boosted lopinavir, and the integrase inhibitors raltegravir and elvitegravir. Several small studies have described DRMs that emerge in patients receiving dolutegravir.

Evolution of gag and gp41 in Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors

Several groups have proposed that genotypic determinants in gag and the gp41 cytoplasmic domain (gp41-CD) reduce protease inhibitor (PI) susceptibility without PI-resistance mutations in protease. However, no gag and gp41-CD mutations definitively responsible for reduced PI susceptibility have been identified in individuals with virological failure (VF) while receiving a boosted PI (PI/r)-containing regimen. To identify gag and gp41 mutations under selective PI pressure, we sequenced gag and/or gp41 in 61 individuals with VF on a PI/r (n = 40) or NNRTI (n = 20) containing regimen. We quantified nonsynonymous and synonymous changes in both genes and identified sites exhibiting signal for directional or diversifying selection. We also used published gag and gp41 polymorphism data to highlight mutations displaying a high selection index, defined as changing from a conserved to an uncommon amino acid. Many amino acid mutations developed in gag and in gp41-CD in both the PI- and NNRTI-treated groups. However, in neither gene, were there discernable differences between the two groups in overall numbers of mutations, mutations displaying evidence of diversifying or directional selection, or mutations with a high selection index. If gag and/or gp41 encode PI-resistance mutations, they may not be confined to consistent mutations at a few sites.

HIV-1 drug resistance mutations emerging on darunavir therapy in PI-naive and -experienced patients in the UK

BACKGROUND

Darunavir is considered to have a high genetic barrier to resistance. Most darunavir-associated drug resistance mutations (DRMs) have been identified through correlation of baseline genotype with virological response in clinical trials. However, there is little information on DRMs that are directly selected by darunavir in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVES

We examined darunavir DRMs emerging in clinical practice in the UK.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Baseline and post-exposure protease genotypes were compared for individuals in the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort Study who had received darunavir; analyses were stratified for PI history. A selection analysis was used to compare the evolution of subtype B proteases in darunavir recipients and matched PI-naive controls.

RESULTS

Of 6918 people who had received darunavir, 386 had resistance tests pre- and post-exposure. Overall, 2.8% (11/386) of these participants developed emergent darunavir DRMs. The prevalence of baseline DRMs was 1.0% (2/198) among PI-naive participants and 13.8% (26/188) among PI-experienced participants. Emergent DRMs developed in 2.0% of the PI-naive group (4 mutations) and 3.7% of the PI-experienced group (12 mutations). Codon 77 was positively selected in the PI-naive darunavir cases, but not in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that although emergent darunavir resistance is rare, it may be more common among PI-experienced patients than those who are PI-naive. Further investigation is required to explore whether codon 77 is a novel site involved in darunavir susceptibility.

HIV-1 drug resistance and resistance testing

The global scale-up of antiretroviral (ARV) therapy (ART) has led to dramatic reductions in HIV-1 mortality and incidence. However, HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) poses a potential threat to the long-term success of ART and is emerging as a threat to the elimination of AIDS as a public health problem by 2030. In this review we describe the genetic mechanisms, epidemiology, and management of HIVDR at both individual and population levels across diverse economic and geographic settings. To describe the genetic mechanisms of HIVDR, we review the genetic barriers to resistance for the most commonly used ARVs and describe the extent of cross-resistance between them. To describe the epidemiology of HIVDR, we summarize the prevalence and patterns of transmitted drug resistance (TDR) and acquired drug resistance (ADR) in both high-income and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We also review to two categories of HIVDR with important public health relevance: (i) pre-treatment drug resistance (PDR), a World Health Organization-recommended HIVDR surveillance metric and (ii) and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)-related drug resistance, a type of ADR that can impact clinical outcomes if present at the time of treatment initiation. To summarize the implications of HIVDR for patient management, we review the role of genotypic resistance testing and treatment practices in both high-income and LMIC settings. In high-income countries where drug resistance testing is part of routine care, such an understanding can help clinicians prevent virological failure and accumulation of further HIVDR on an individual level by selecting the most efficacious regimens for their patients. Although there is reduced access to diagnostic testing and to many ARVs in LMIC, understanding the scientific basis and clinical implications of HIVDR is useful in all regions in order to shape appropriate surveillance, inform treatment algorithms, and manage difficult cases.

Tracing the origin of a singular HIV-1 CRF45_cpx clade identified in Brazil

The HIV-1 epidemiology has changed over the past decade toward a marked increase in the circulation of strains previously restricted to local epidemics. Recent molecular epidemiological surveys identified some HIV-1 strains of probable African origin circulating in Brazil, including the Circulating Recombinant Form (CRF) 45_cpx, a complex A1/K/U recombinant that circulates in Central Africa. Here, we characterize partial genomic sequences and reconstruct the evolutionary history of HIV-1 CRF45_cpx-related recombinant samples identified in independent studies carried out with HIV+ individuals in Brazil. The sequences were obtained by overlapping PCR amplifications followed by direct sequencing. Recombination profiles were determined by phylogenetic and bootscaning analyses. The evolutionary history was estimated by a Bayesian coalescent-based method using datasets representing the gag, pol and env gene fragments. Six of the 10 samples isolated in Rio de Janeiro showed a CRF45_cpx-like pattern throughout the sequenced genome. The remaining were classified as second-generation recombinants, showing the mosaic patterns: CRF45_cpx/B/D/F1/U, CRF45_cpx/B/F1/U, CRF45_cpx/B/U and CRF45_cpx/F1. All Brazilian CRF45_cpx sequences, except one, formed a monophyletic clade (CRF45-BR), which seems to be the result of a single introduction event that has spread to the Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Minas Gerais states and is related to sequences from Argentina, Italy and Belgium. The Bayesian analyses pointed out quite consistent onset dates for CRF45-BR clade (~1984: 1976-1996) in the three gene datasets. These results indicate that the CRF45-BR clade has been circulating in the Southeastern Brazilian region for about 30years, although its presence was not detected until recently due to its very low prevalence. This reinforces the relevance of large-scale molecular surveillance data to identify the emergence of new HIV variants and their impact on local epidemics.

HIV-1 Drug Resistance Mutations: Potential Applications for Point-of-Care Genotypic Resistance Testing

The increasing prevalence of acquired and transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance is an obstacle to successful antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) hardest hit by the HIV-1 pandemic. Genotypic drug resistance testing could facilitate the choice of initial ART in areas with rising transmitted drug resistance (TDR) and enable care-providers to determine which individuals with virological failure (VF) on a first- or second-line ART regimen require a change in treatment. An inexpensive near point-of-care (POC) genotypic resistance test would be useful in settings where the resources, capacity, and infrastructure to perform standard genotypic drug resistance testing are limited. Such a test would be particularly useful in conjunction with the POC HIV-1 viral load tests that are currently being introduced in LMICs. A POC genotypic resistance test is likely to involve the use of allele-specific point mutation assays for detecting drug-resistance mutations (DRMs). This study proposes that two major nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-associated DRMs (M184V and K65R) and four major NNRTI-associated DRMs (K103N, Y181C, G190A, and V106M) would be the most useful for POC genotypic resistance testing in LMIC settings. One or more of these six DRMs was present in 61.2% of analyzed virus sequences from ART-naïve individuals with intermediate or high-level TDR and 98.8% of analyzed virus sequences from individuals on a first-line NRTI/NNRTI-containing regimen with intermediate or high-level acquired drug resistance. The detection of one or more of these DRMs in an ART-naïve individual or in a individual with VF on a first-line NRTI/NNRTI-containing regimen may be considered an indication for a protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimen or closer virological monitoring based on cost-effectiveness or country policy.

Comparable long-term efficacy of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and similar drug-resistance profiles in different HIV-1 subtypes

BACKGROUND

Analysis of potentially different impact of Lopinavir/Ritonavir (LPV/r) on non-B subtypes is confounded by dissimilarities in the conditions existing in different countries. We retrospectively compared its impact on populations infected with subtypes B and C in Israel, where patients infected with different subtypes receive the same treatment.

METHODS

Clinical and demographic data were reported by physicians. Resistance was tested after treatment failure. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS.

RESULTS

607 LPV/r treated patients (365 male) were included. 139 had HIV subtype B, 391 C, and 77 other subtypes. At study end 429 (71%) were receiving LPV/r. No significant differences in PI treatment history and in median viral-load (VL) at treatment initiation and termination existed between subtypes. MSM discontinued LPV/r more often than others even when the virologic outcome was good (p = 0.001). VL was below detection level in 81% of patients for whom LPV/r was first PI and in 67% when it was second (P = 0.001). Median VL decrease from baseline was 1.9±0.1 logs and was not significantly associated with subtype. Median CD4 increase was: 162 and 92cells/µl, respectively, for patients receiving LPV/r as first and second PI (P = 0.001), and 175 and 98, respectively, for subtypes B and C (P<0.001). Only 52 (22%) of 237 patients genotyped while under LPV/r were fully resistant to the drug; 12(5%) were partially resistant. In48%, population sequencing did not reveal resistance to any drug notwithstanding the virologic failure. No difference was found in the rates of resistance development between B and C (p = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with LPV/r appeared efficient and tolerable in both subtypes, B and C, but CD4 recovery was significantly better in virologically suppressed subtype-B patients. In both subtypes, LPV/r was more beneficial when given as first PI. Mostly, reasons other than resistance development caused discontinuation of treatment.

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens

Objectives

South Africa’s national antiretroviral (ARV) treatment program expanded in 2010 to include the nucleoside reverse transcriptase (RT) inhibitors (NRTI) tenofovir (TDF) for adults and abacavir (ABC) for children. We investigated the associated changes in genotypic drug resistance patterns in patients with first-line ARV treatment failure since the introduction of these drugs, and protease inhibitor (PI) resistance patterns in patients who received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-containing therapy.

Methods

We analysed ARV treatment histories and HIV-1 RT and protease mutations in plasma samples submitted to the Tygerberg Academic Hospital National Health Service Laboratory.

Results

Between 2006 and 2012, 1,667 plasma samples from 1,416 ARV-treated patients, including 588 children and infants, were submitted for genotypic resistance testing. Compared with 720 recipients of a d4T or AZT-containing first-line regimen, the 153 recipients of a TDF-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have the RT mutations K65R (46% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (10% vs. 0.6%; p<0.001), L74VI (8.5% vs. 1.8%; p<0.001), and K70EGQ (7.8% vs. 0.4%) and recipients of an ABC-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have K65R (17% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (30% vs 0.6%; p<0.001), and L74VI (56% vs 1.8%; p<0.001). Among the 490 LPV/r recipients, 55 (11%) had ≥1 LPV-resistance mutations including 45 (9.6%) with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance. Low (20 patients) and intermediate (3 patients) darunavir (DRV) cross resistance was present in 23 (4.6%) patients.

Conclusions

Among patients experiencing virological failure on a first-line regimen containing two NRTI plus one NNRTI, the use of TDF in adults and ABC in children was associated with an increase in four major non- thymidine analogue mutations. In a minority of patients, LPV/r-use was associated with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance with predominantly low-level DRV cross-resistance.

HIV-1 antiretroviral resistance: scientific principles and clinical applications

The efficacy of an antiretroviral (ARV) treatment regimen depends on the activity of the regimen's individual ARV drugs and the number of HIV-1 mutations required for the development of resistance to each ARV - the genetic barrier to resistance. ARV resistance impairs the response to therapy in patients with transmitted resistance, unsuccessful initial ARV therapy and multiple virological failures. Genotypic resistance testing is used to identify transmitted drug resistance, provide insight into the reasons for virological failure in treated patients, and help guide second-line and salvage therapies. In patients with transmitted drug resistance, the virological response to a regimen selected on the basis of standard genotypic testing approaches the responses observed in patients with wild-type viruses. However, because such patients are at a higher risk of harbouring minority drug-resistant variants, initial ARV therapy in this population should contain a boosted protease inhibitor (PI) - the drug class with the highest genetic barrier to resistance. In patients receiving an initial ARV regimen with a high genetic barrier to resistance, the most common reasons for virological failure are nonadherence and, potentially, pharmacokinetic factors or minority transmitted drug-resistant variants. Among patients in whom first-line ARVs have failed, the patterns of drug-resistance mutations and cross-resistance are often predictable. However, the extent of drug resistance correlates with the duration of uncontrolled virological replication. Second-line therapy should include the continued use of a dual nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-containing backbone, together with a change in the non-NRTI component, most often to an ARV belonging to a new drug class. The number of available fully active ARVs is often diminished with each successive treatment failure. Therefore, a salvage regimen is likely to be more complicated in that it may require multiple ARVs with partial residual activity and compromised genetic barriers of resistance to attain complete virological suppression. A thorough examination of the patient's ARV history and prior resistance tests should be performed because genotypic and/or phenotypic susceptibility testing is often not sufficient to identify drug-resistant variants that emerged during past therapies and may still pose a threat to a new regimen. Phenotypic testing is also often helpful in this subset of patients. ARVs used for salvage therapy can be placed into the following hierarchy: (i) ARVs belonging to a previously unused drug class; (ii) ARVs belonging to a previously used drug class that maintain significant residual antiviral activity; (iii) NRTI combinations, as these often appear to retain in vivo virological activity, even in the presence of reduced in vitro NRTI susceptibility; and rarely (iv) ARVs associated with previous virological failure and drug resistance that appear to have possibly regained their activity as a result of viral reversion to wild type. Understanding the basic principles of HIV drug resistance is helpful in guiding individual clinical decisions and the development of ARV treatment guidelines.

Lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy after 24 weeks of second-line antiretroviral therapy in Africa: a randomized controlled trial (SARA)

BACKGROUND

Boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) monotherapy (bPImono) potentially has substantial cost, safety and operational benefits. It has never been evaluated as second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Africa.

METHODS

After 24 weeks of lopinavir/ritonavir-containing second-line therapy, DART participants were randomized to remain on combination therapy (CT), or change to bPImono maintenance (SARA trial; ISRCTN53817258). Joint primary end points were CD4(+) T-cell changes 24 weeks later and serious adverse events (SAEs); retrospectively assayed viral load (VL) was a secondary end point. Analyses were intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

A total of 192 participants were randomized to CT (n=95) or bPImono (n=97) and followed for median 60 weeks (IQR 45-84). Participants received median 4.0 years (IQR 3.5-4.4) first-line ART. Median CD4(+) T-cell count at first-line failure was 86 cells/mm(3) (47-136), increasing to 245 cells/mm(3) (173-325) after 24-week induction when 77% had VL<50 copies/ml. Overall, 44 (23%) were receiving second-line therapy with bPI and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) only, and 148 (77%) with bPI plus non-NRTI (NNRTI) with or without NRTI. At 24 weeks after randomization to CT versus bPImono, mean CD4(+) T-cell increase was 42 (CT, n=85) versus 49 cells/mm(3) (bPImono, n=88; adjusted difference 13 [95% CI -15, 43], P=0.37; non-inferior compared with predetermined non-inferiority margin [-33]). Virological suppression was greater for CT versus bPImono (trend P=0.009): 77% (70/91) versus 60% (56/94) were <50 copies/ml, and 5% (5) versus 14% (13) were ≥1,000 copies/ml, respectively. A total of 0 (0%) versus 5 (5%) participants had major protease inhibitor mutations and 3 (3%) versus 0 (0%) new NNRTI/NRTI mutations were detected during follow-up. Two participants (1 CT and 1 bPImono) died >24 weeks after randomization, and 5 (2 CT and 3 bPImono) experienced SAEs (P=0.51).

CONCLUSIONS

bPImono following a 24-week second-line induction was associated with similar CD4(+) T-cell response, but increased low-level viraemia, generally without protease inhibitor resistance. Longer-term trials are needed to provide definitive evidence about effectiveness in Africa.