Long Dissociation of Bictegravir from HIV-1 Integrase-DNA Complexes

Comparison of treatment-emergent resistance-associated mutations and discontinuation due to adverse events among integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based single-tablet regimens and cabotegravir + rilpivirine for the treatment of virologically suppressed people with HIV: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated rates of treatment-emergent resistance-associated mutations (TE-RAMs) and discontinuation due to adverse events (DC-AEs) across integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based single-tablet regimens and injectable cabotegravir + rilpivirine (CAB + RPV) in virologically suppressed people with HIV.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted for phase 2-4 randomized controlled trials with ≥48 weeks of follow-up involving virologically suppressed people with HIV aged ≥12 years and published January 2003-March 2024. A random-effects network meta-analysis estimated comparative rates of TE-RAMs and DC-AEs among regimens at 48 weeks. Risk of bias and strength of evidence were assessed using Cochrane RoB and CINeMA, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen (7509 participants) and nine (4656 participants) studies were included in the TE-RAMs and DC-AEs analyses, respectively. No significant differences in rates of TE-RAMs were observed; risk ratios (RRs) for TE-RAMs for bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC) and CAB + RPV every 4 weeks (Q4W) versus CAB + RPV every 8 weeks (Q8W) were 0.22 (95% CI, 0.02-2.04), 0.22 (95% CI, 0.00-19.85) and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.14-1.09). Compared with CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W, DC-AEs were significantly lower with B/F/TAF (RR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03-0.75] and RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.04-0.67], respectively) and DTG/ABC/3TC (RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.48] and RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.46], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In virologically suppressed people with HIV, switching to CAB + RPV Q8W yielded a non-significant increased risk of TE-RAMs compared with INSTI-based 2- and 3-drug regimens and CAB + RPV Q4W. Both CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W had significantly higher risks of DC-AEs than B/F/TAF and DTG/ABC/3TC. Findings highlight the importance of considering both resistance and tolerability when switching regimens.

Efficacy of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir-based three-drug regimens in people with HIV with varying adherence to antiretroviral therapy

OBJECTIVE

Five Phase 3 bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) clinical studies demonstrated that the efficacy of B/F/TAF was non-inferior to dolutegravir (DTG) + 2 NRTIs. We retrospectively assessed drug adherence and effect on virologic outcomes.

METHODS

Studies (NCT02607930, NCT02607956, NCT03547908, NCT02603120 and NCT03110380) were double-blind, placebo-controlled and enrolled treatment-naïve or virologically suppressed adults. Adherence was calculated by pill count from returned pill bottles; virologic outcome was assessed by last on-treatment HIV-1 RNA.

RESULTS

Altogether, 2622 participants (B/F/TAF: n = 1306; DTG + 2 NRTIs: n = 1316) were categorized as having high (≥95%), intermediate (≥85% to <95%) or low (<85%) adherence. Through Week 48, low adherence was observed in 46 (3.5%) participants in the B/F/TAF group (78% median adherence) and 69 (5.2%) in the DTG + 2 NRTI group (80% median adherence). Overall, 1287 (98.5%) participants in the B/F/TAF group and 1292 (98.2%) in the DTG + 2 NRTI group had virologic suppression (VS; HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL) through Week 48. VS in participants with low adherence versus high or intermediate adherence was similar in the B/F/TAF group, but lower in the DTG + 2 NRTI group (P ≤ 0.002). Similar results were observed at Weeks 96 and 144. Two participants (<95% adherence) in the DTG + 2 NRTI group receiving DTG and abacavir/lamivudine developed M184V; there was no treatment-emergent resistance to B/F/TAF.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants with suboptimal (<85%) adherence to B/F/TAF maintained high levels of VS, whereas suboptimal DTG + 2 NRTI adherence was associated with lower VS.

High efficacy of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) in Black adults in the United States, including those with pre-existing HIV resistance and suboptimal adherence

BRAAVE (NCT03631732), a Phase 3b, multicenter, open-label US study, demonstrated the efficacy of switching to bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) among Black individuals with suppressed HIV through 48 weeks. Here, 72-week resistance, adherence, and virologic outcomes are presented. Enrollment criteria permitted nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-resistance (R), protease inhibitor (PI)-R, and certain nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-R (M184V/I allowed; ≥3 thymidine analog mutations [TAMs] excluded); but excluded primary integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-R. Pre-existing resistance was determined using historical genotypes and retrospective baseline proviral DNA genotyping. Adherence, virologic outcomes, and viral blips were assessed. Of 489 participants receiving B/F/TAF with ≥1 post-switch HIV-1 RNA measurement: pre-existing NRTI-R (15% of participants), M184V/I (11%), ≥1 TAMs (8%), NNRTI-R (22%), and PI-R (13%) were observed; pre-existing INSTI-R substitutions (2%) were detected post-randomization; mean viral blip frequency was 0.9% across all timepoints (unassociated with virologic failure); 24% of participants had <95% adherence (98% of whom had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at last visit); none had treatment-emergent study-drug resistance. Overall, 99% of participants, including all with baseline NRTI-R/INSTI-R, had HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at the last visit, demonstrating that B/F/TAF maintained virologic suppression through 72 weeks regardless of pre-existing resistance, viral blips, and suboptimal adherence.

New Therapies and Strategies to Curb HIV Infections with a Focus on Macrophages and Reservoirs

More than 80 million people worldwide have been infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). There are now approximately 39 million individuals living with HIV/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Although treatments against HIV infection are available, AIDS remains a serious disease. Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), also known as highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), consists of treatment with a combination of several antiretroviral drugs that block multiple stages in the virus replication cycle. However, the increasing usage of cART is inevitably associated with the emergence of HIV drug resistance. In addition, the development of persistent cellular reservoirs of latent HIV is a critical obstacle to viral eradication since viral rebound takes place once anti-retroviral therapy (ART) is interrupted. Thus, several efforts are being applied to new generations of drugs, vaccines and new types of cART. In this review, we summarize the antiviral therapies used for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, both as individual agents and as combination therapies, and highlight the role of both macrophages and HIV cellular reservoirs and the most recent clinical studies related to this disease.

Plasma concentrations of antiretroviral drugs in a successful 4-days-a-week maintenance treatment strategy in HIV-1 patients (ANRS 170-Quatuor trial)

OBJECTIVES

Charaterization of the plasma concentrations of antiretrovirals in a 4-days-a-week maintenance treatment strategy in the ANRS-170-QUATUOR study.

METHODS

Patients were randomized in two groups receiving triple therapy taken 4-days-ON and 3-days-OFF (4/7) or continuous therapy (7/7). Plasma antiretroviral concentrations were monitored during the 'ON-treatment period' (Day 3 or 4 of the 4-day treatment block) and the 'OFF-treatment period' (Day 3 of the 3-day drug cessation) for the 4/7 group, or before the daily drug intake for the 7/7 group, until week-48 (W48). After W48, all patients switched to the 4/7 strategy and were followed until W96.

RESULTS

W0 measured concentrations were comparable in both groups, except for raltegravir, concentrations of which were higher in the 4/7 group, and were all above the values usually recommended to be effective in therapeutic drug monitoring. Comparison of ON-period median concentrations between the two groups showed a statistical difference for rilpivirine [88 ng/mL (interquartile range (IQR) = 64-112) for 4/7 arm versus 130 ng/mL (82-160) for 7/7 arm, P < 0.001] and tenofovir [tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: 93 ng/mL (73-135) for 4/7 arm versus 117 ng/mL (83-160) for 7/7 arm, P < 0.001; tenofovir alafenamide: 11 ng/mL (7-15) for 4/7 arm versus 14 ng/mL (11-18) for 7/7 arm, P = 0.001]. Median OFF concentrations were significantly lower (P < 0.001) at the 48 week analysis for all medications except for raltegravir (P = 0.493) and atazanavir (P = 0.105), for which the numbers of patients were very small.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4/7-day treatment option led to antiretroviral blood levels close to continuous treatment after the four consecutive days of medication, and to low levels at the end of the non-treatment period.

Biktarvy for the treatment of HIV infection: Progress and prospects

Bictegravir (BIC), a second-generation integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI) with high resilience to INSTI-resistance mutations, is integrated as a key component of Biktarvy® - a fixed-dose once-daily triple-drug regimen of bictegravir (BIC), emtricitabine (FTC) plus tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). Based on the accumulated evidence from HIV clinical trials and real-world studies, the clinical effectiveness of BIC + FTC + TAF has been proven non-inferior to other fixed-dose once-daily combinations such as dolutegravir + FTC + TAF and dolutegravir + abacavir + lamivudine. Biktarvy also shows limited drug-drug interactions and a high barrier to drug resistance. According to recent HIV guidelines, BIC + FTC + TAF is recommended as initial and long-term therapy for the treatment of HIV infection. For the pre-exposure prophylaxis, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) remains advisable, but BIC may be possibly added to TDF or TAF. In the development of a long-acting once-monthly regimen, the novel nano-formulation of BIC + FTC + TAF could be possibly developed in the future.

HIV drug resistance in the era of contemporary antiretroviral therapy: A clinical perspective

Contemporary antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens have high barriers to the development of drug resistance. However, resistance to earlier antiretrovirals and uncommon cases of resistance to contemporary ART illustrate the continued need for good clinical management of HIV drug resistance. Here, we describe HIV drug-resistance mechanisms, the interaction of HIV drug-resistant mutations and the patterns of drug resistance to contemporary ART. We then provide guidance on the management of HIV drug resistance, including how to limit the development of resistance and manage virologic failure that is complicated by resistance. To complement this, links to resources and treatment guidelines are provided that can assist with the interpretation of HIV drug resistance test results and optimal ART selection in the clinic.

Clinical pharmacology of the SingleTablet Regimen (STR) Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide (BIC/FTC/TAF)

In Italy a proportion of HIV patients exceeding 50% are diagnosed at advanced stages of disease. A sizeable proportion of patients under chronic HIV treatment has a story of poor adherence with archived resistance associated mutations, a condition implying some risks in case of treatment with dual regimens. Conventional three-drug regimens will remain necessary in the short-mid term, in order to avoid treatment failure and selection of drug resistance. Efficacy, tolerability, safety, genetic barrier, forgiveness and a good compatibility with concurrent medications are all features that describe the overall quality of BIC/FTC/TAF, a combination whose robustness will remain a point of reference for the next years.

Expanding therapeutic options: lenacapavir + bictegravir as a potential treatment for HIV

INTRODUCTION

Treatment for people with HIV/AIDS has radically evolved since the introduction of the first antiretrovirals. One newly approved antiretroviral is lenacapavir, which targets the viral capsid. Lenacapavir is currently approved as a therapeutic addition for subjects who are treatment-experienced, and who have developed resistance to multiple antiretrovirals. It is available both as a daily oral tablet and a once every 6-month subcutaneous injection. It is currently undergoing clinical trials in combination with the integrase inhibitor bictegravir as a dual therapy option, both for treatment experienced and treatment naïve individuals.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed published articles, conference proceedings, and clinical trial databases to assess the current status of the research into lenacapavir and bictegravir. While the clinical trials are ongoing, with little published data to date, this combination shows promise for the treatment of both treatment experienced and naïve patients. We review the studies relevant to the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of the drugs.

EXPERT OPINION

The new combination with bictegravir will be beneficial for treatment experienced patients, as it represents a dual therapy modality with high barriers of resistance. As a therapy for treatment naïve patients, its use is likely more niche, as other combinations are available.

Intermittent Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Treatment Maintains High Level of Viral Suppression in Virally Suppressed People Living with HIV

In this observational study, we aimed to evaluate whether bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) administered 5 or 4 days a week is able to maintain viral suppression in people living with HIV (PLHIV). We enrolled 85 patients who initiated intermittent B/F/TAF between 28 November 2018 and 30 July 2020: median (IQR) age 52 years (46–59), duration of virological suppression 9 years (3–13), CD4 633/mm3 (461–781). Median follow-up was 101 weeks (82–111). The virological success rate (no virological failure [VF]: confirmed plasma viral load [pVL] ≥ 50 copies/mL, or single pVL ≥ 200 copies/mL, or ≥50 copies/mL with ART change) was 100% (95%CI 95.8–100) and the strategy success rate (pVL < 50 copies/mL with no ART regimen change) was 92.9% (95%CI 85.3–97.4) at W48. Two VF occurred at W49 and W70, in 2 patients self-reporting poor compliance. No resistance mutation emerged at time of VF. Eight patients presented strategy discontinuation for adverse events. There was no significant change in the CD4 count, residual viraemia rate, neither body weight during follow-up, but a slight increase in CD4/CD8 ratio (p = 0.02). In conclusion, our findings suggest that B/F/TAF administered 5 or 4 days a week could maintain the control of HIV replication in virologically suppressed PLHIV while reducing cumulative exposition of ART.

A computational overview of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) against emerging and evolving drug-resistant HIV-1 integrase mutants

AIDS (Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) is one of the chronic and potentially life-threatening epidemics across the world. Hitherto, the non-existence of definitive drugs that could completely cure the Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) implies an urgent necessity for the discovery of novel anti-HIV agents. Since integration is the most crucial stage in retroviral replication, hindering it can inhibit overall viral transmission. The 5 FDA-approved integrase inhibitors were computationally investigated, especially owing to the rising multiple mutations against their susceptibility. This comparative study will open new possibilities to guide the rational design of novel lead compounds for antiretroviral therapies (ARTs), more specifically the structure-based design of novel Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) that may possess a better resistance profile than present drugs. Further, we have discussed potent anti-HIV natural compounds and their interactions as an alternative approach, recommending the urgent need to tap into the rich vein of indigenous knowledge for reverse pharmacology. Moreover, herein, we discuss existing evidence that might change in the near future.

Antiretroviral Treatment of HIV-2 Infection: Available Drugs, Resistance Pathways, and Promising New Compounds

Currently, it is estimated that 1-2 million people worldwide are infected with HIV-2, accounting for 3-5% of the global burden of HIV. The course of HIV-2 infection is longer compared to HIV-1 infection, but without effective antiretroviral therapy (ART), a substantial proportion of infected patients will progress to AIDS and die. Antiretroviral drugs in clinical use were designed for HIV-1 and, unfortunately, some do not work as well, or do not work at all, for HIV-2. This is the case for non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs), the fusion inhibitor enfuvirtide (T-20), most protease inhibitors (PIs), the attachment inhibitor fostemsavir and most broadly neutralizing antibodies. Integrase inhibitors work well against HIV-2 and are included in first-line therapeutic regimens for HIV-2-infected patients. However, rapid emergence of drug resistance and cross-resistance within each drug class dramatically reduces second-line treatment options. New drugs are needed to treat infection with drug-resistant isolates. Here, we review the therapeutic armamentarium available to treat HIV-2-infected patients, as well as promising drugs in development. We also review HIV-2 drug resistance mutations and resistance pathways that develop in HIV-2-infected patients under treatment.

Different Pathways Conferring Integrase Strand-Transfer Inhibitors Resistance

Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors (INSTIs) are currently used as the most effective therapy in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections. Raltegravir (RAL) and Elvitegravir (EVG), the first generation of INSTIs used successfully in clinical treatment, are susceptible to the emergence of viral resistance and have a high rate of cross-resistance. To counteract these resistant mutants, second-generation INSTI drugs have been developed: Dolutegravir (DTG), Cabotegravir (CAB), and Bictegravir (BIC). However, HIV is also able to develop resistance mechanisms against the second-generation of INSTIs. This review describes the mode of action of INSTIs and then summarizes and evaluates some typical resistance mutations, such as substitution and insertion mutations. The role of unintegrated viral DNA is also discussed as a new pathway involved in conferring resistance to INSTIs. This allows us to have a more detailed understanding of HIV resistance to these inhibitors, which may contribute to the development of new INSTIs in the future.

INSTIs for the management of HIV-associated TB (INSIGHT study): a phase 2b study to evaluate the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of a combination of bictegravir, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis on a rifampicin-based treatment regimen: a phase 2b open-label randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Cotreatment of HIV and tuberculosis (TB) reduces morbidity and mortality in coinfected patients. Availability of antiretroviral treatment (ART) drug options, including within drug classes, is important, particularly in high HIV/TB burden low and middle-income countries.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a phase 2b, open-label, non-comparative randomised controlled trial to assess the antiretroviral activity of a fixed-drug, single tablet, combination of bictegravir (BIC) 50 mg/emtricitabine (FTC) 200 mg/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 25 mg (Biktarvy). The primary objective is to determine the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of two times per day, coformulated BIC 50 mg/FTC 200 mg/TAF 25 mg in HIV-positive ART-naïve patients with TB who are receiving a rifampicin-based treatment regimen and to characterise viral suppression rates at week 24 through to week 48 in the BIC/FTC/TAF arm. We will enrol 120 patients randomised in a 2:1 ratio to the intervention or control arm of the study. A non-comparative contemporaneous control arm in which participants receive a dolutegravir-based regimen (standard of care) will also be enrolled.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The University of KwaZulu-Natal Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (BREC) and the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) have granted regulatory approval (trial reference numbers: BREC/00001300/2020 and SAHPRA 20200810). Trial results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and the clinical trial registry.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov; Trial registration number: NCT04734652; South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR DOH-27-012021-6789).

A clinical review of HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) for the prevention and treatment of HIV-1 infection

Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) have improved the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). There are currently four approved for use in treatment-naïve individuals living with HIV; these include first generation raltegravir, elvitegravir, and second generation dolutegravir and bictegravir. The most recent INSTI, cabotegravir, is approved for (1) treatment of HIV infection in adults to replace current antiretroviral therapy in individuals who maintain virologic suppression on a stable antiretroviral regimen without history of treatment failure and no known resistance to its components and (2) pre-exposure prophylaxis in individuals at risk of acquiring HIV-1 infection. Cabotegravir can be administered intramuscularly as a monthly or bi-monthly injection depending on the indication. This long-acting combination has been associated with treatment satisfaction in clinical studies and may be helpful for individuals who have difficulty taking daily oral medications. Worldwide, second generation INSTIs are preferred for treatment-naïve individuals. Advantages of these INSTIs include their high genetic barrier to resistance, limited drug-drug interactions, excellent rates of virologic suppression, and favorable tolerability. Few INSTI resistance-associated mutations have been reported in clinical trials involving dolutegravir, bictegravir and cabotegravir. Other advantages of specific INSTIs include their use in various populations such as infants and children, acute HIV infection, and individuals of childbearing potential. The most common adverse events observed in clinical studies involving INSTIs included diarrhea, nausea, insomnia, fatigue, and headache, with very low rates of treatment discontinuation versus comparator groups. The long-term clinical implications of weight gain associated with second generation INSTIs dolutegravir and bictegravir warrants further study. This review summarizes key clinical considerations of INSTIs in terms of clinical pharmacology, drug-drug interactions, resistance, and provides perspective on clinical decision-making. Additionally, we summarize major clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of INSTIs in treatment-naïve patients living with HIV as well as individuals at risk of acquiring HIV infection.

Forgiveness of INSTI-Containing Regimens at Drug Concentrations Simulating Variable Adherence In Vitro

The integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimens bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (BIC/FTC/TAF), dolutegravir (DTG)+FTC/TAF, DTG/lamivudine (3TC), and DTG/rilpivirine (RPV) are all approved for treatment of HIV-infected patients, with various limitations. Here, time to in vitro viral breakthrough (VB) and resistance barrier using simulated human drug exposures at either full or suboptimal treatment adherence to each regimen were compared. At drug concentrations corresponding to full adherence and 1 missed dose (Cmin and Cmin-1), no VB occurred with any regimen. At Cmin-2, VB occurred only with DTG+3TC, with emergent resistance to both drugs. At Cmin-3, VB occurred with all regimens: 100% of DTG+3TC cultures had VB by day 12, and <15% of BIC+FTC+TAF, DTG+FTC+TAF, and DTG+RPV cultures had VB. Emergent reverse transcriptase (RT) or integrase (IN) resistance was seen with DTG+RPV and DTG+3TC but not with BIC+FTC+TAF or DTG+FTC+TAF. At Cmin-4, 100% VB occurred with DTG+3TC and DTG+FTC+TAF by day 12, while 94% VB occurred with DTG+RPV by day 25 and only 50% VB occurred with BIC+FTC+TAF by day 35. Emergent Cmin-4 drug resistance was seen with all regimens but at differing frequencies; DTG+RPV had the most cultures with resistance. Emergent resistance was consistent with clinical observations. Overall, under high adherence conditions, no in vitro VB or resistance development occurred with these INSTI-based regimens. However, when multiple missed doses were simulated in vitro, BIC+FTC+TAF had the highest forgiveness and barrier to resistance of all tested regimens. Compared to DTG+3TC and DTG+FTC+TAF, DTG+RPV had higher forgiveness but lower resistance barrier after several simulated missed doses.

Structure and function of retroviral integrase

A hallmark of retroviral replication is establishment of the proviral state, wherein a DNA copy of the viral RNA genome is stably incorporated into a host cell chromosome. Integrase is the viral enzyme responsible for the catalytic steps involved in this process, and integrase strand transfer inhibitors are widely used to treat people living with HIV. Over the past decade, a series of X-ray crystallography and cryogenic electron microscopy studies have revealed the structural basis of retroviral DNA integration. A variable number of integrase molecules congregate on viral DNA ends to assemble a conserved intasome core machine that facilitates integration. The structures additionally informed on the modes of integrase inhibitor action and the means by which HIV acquires drug resistance. Recent years have witnessed the development of allosteric integrase inhibitors, a highly promising class of small molecules that antagonize viral morphogenesis. In this Review, we explore recent insights into the organization and mechanism of the retroviral integration machinery and highlight open questions as well as new directions in the field.

Advances in the development of HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors

HIV-1 integrase (IN) is a key enzyme in viral replication that catalyzes the covalent integration of viral cDNA into the host genome. Currently, five HIV-1 IN strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are approved for clinical use. These drugs represent an important addition to the armamentarium for antiretroviral therapy. This review briefly illustrates the development history of INSTIs. The characteristics of the currently approved INSTIs, as well as their future perspectives, are critically discussed.

Retroviral integrase: Structure, mechanism, and inhibition

The retroviral protein Integrase (IN) catalyzes concerted integration of viral DNA into host chromatin to establish a permanent infection in the target cell. We learned a great deal about the mechanism of catalytic integration through structure/function studies over the previous four decades of IN research. As one of three essential retroviral enzymes, IN has also been targeted by antiretroviral drugs to treat HIV-infected individuals. Inhibitors blocking the catalytic integration reaction are now state-of-the-art drugs within the antiretroviral therapy toolkit. HIV-1 IN also performs intriguing non-catalytic functions that are relevant to the late stages of the viral replication cycle, yet this aspect remains poorly understood. There are also novel allosteric inhibitors targeting non-enzymatic functions of IN that induce a block in the late stages of the viral replication cycle. In this chapter, we will discuss the function, structure, and inhibition of retroviral IN proteins, highlighting remaining challenges and outstanding questions.