Is There a Need for Viral Load Testing to Assess Treatment Failure in HIV-Infected Patients Who Are about to Change to Tenofovir-Based First-Line Antiretroviral Therapy? Programmatic Findings from Myanmar

Expansion of Viral Load Testing and the Potential Impact on Human Immunodeficiency Virus Drug Resistance

Increasing the volume, strengthening the quality, and proactively using data of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) load testing are pivotal to limiting the threat of HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) accumulation,and allow for optimal case-based HIVDR surveillance. Triangulation of viral load (VL) and HIVDR testing data could be pursued to answer key questions and translate data and results for program and public policy. Identification of virologic failure and early management mitigates the greater risk of HIVDR. Routine VL monitoring and evaluation systems are necessary, and countries should consider reviewing system requirements, structural needs, and procedural and technical factors for the entire VL cascade, with special emphasis on post-test result use.

Occult HIV-1 drug resistance to thymidine analogues following failure of first-line tenofovir combined with a cytosine analogue and nevirapine or efavirenz in sub Saharan Africa: a retrospective multi-centre cohort study

Background

HIV-1 drug resistance to older thymidine analogue nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor drugs has been identified in sub-Saharan Africa in patients with virological failure of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing the modern nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and correlates of thymidine analogue mutations (TAM) in patients with virological failure of first-line tenofovir-containing ART.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed patients from 20 studies within the TenoRes collaboration who had locally defined viral failure on first-line therapy with tenofovir plus a cytosine analogue (lamivudine or emtricitabine) plus a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI; nevirapine or efavirenz) in sub-Saharan Africa. Baseline visits in these studies occurred between 2005 and 2013. To assess between-study and within-study associations, we used meta-regression and meta-analyses to compare patients with and without TAMs for the presence of resistance to tenofovir, cytosine analogue, or NNRTIs.

Findings

Of 712 individuals with failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens, 115 (16%) had at least one TAM. In crude comparisons, patients with TAMs had lower CD4 counts at treatment initiation than did patients without TAMs (60·5 cells per μL [IQR 21·0–128·0] in patients with TAMS vs 95·0 cells per μL [37·0–177·0] in patients without TAMs; p=0·007) and were more likely to have tenofovir resistance (93 [81%] of 115 patients with TAMs vs 352 [59%] of 597 patients without TAMs; p<0·0001), NNRTI resistance (107 [93%] vs 462 [77%]; p<0·0001), and cytosine analogue resistance (100 [87%] vs 378 [63%]; p=0·0002). We detected associations between TAMs and drug resistance mutations both between and within studies; the correlation between the study-level proportion of patients with tenofovir resistance and TAMs was 0·64 (p<0·0001), and the odds ratio for tenofovir resistance comparing patients with and without TAMs was 1·29 (1·13–1·47; p<0·0001)

Interpretation

TAMs are common in patients who have failure of first-line tenofovir-containing regimens in sub-Saharan Africa, and are associated with multidrug resistant HIV-1. Effective viral load monitoring and point-of-care resistance tests could help to mitigate the emergence and spread of such strains.