Improving the prediction of virological response to tipranavir: the development and validation of a tipranavir-weighted mutation score

Developing and Validating an Individual-Level Deprivation Index for Children's Health in France

BACKGROUND

Deprivation generates many health inequalities. This has to be taken in account to enhance appropriate access to care. This study aimed to develop and validate a pediatric individual-level index measuring deprivation, usable in clinical practice and in public health.

METHODS

The French Individual Child Deprivation Index (FrenChILD-Index) was designed in four phases: item generation then reduction using the literature review and expert opinions, and index derivation then validation using a cross-sectional study in two emergency departments. During these last two phases, concordance with a blinded evaluation by an expert enabled us to determine thresholds for two levels of moderate and severe deprivation.

RESULTS

The generation and reduction phases retained 13 items. These were administered to 986 children for the derivation and validation phases. In the validation phase, the final 12 items of the FrenChILD-Index showed for moderate deprivation (requiring single specific care for deprived children) a sensitivity of 96.0% [92.6; 98.7] and specificity of 68.3% [65.2; 71.4]. For severe deprivation (requiring a multidisciplinary level of care), the sensitivity was 96.3% [92.7; 100] and specificity was 91.1% [89.2; 92.9].

CONCLUSIONS

The FrenChILD-Index is the first pediatric individual-level index of deprivation validated in Europe. It enables clinical practice to address the social determinants of health and meet public health goals.

FDA-Approved Drugs Efavirenz, Tipranavir, and Dasabuvir Inhibit Replication of Multiple Flaviviruses in Vero Cells

Vector-borne flaviviruses (VBFs) affect human health worldwide, but no approved drugs are available specifically to treat VBF-associated infections. Here, we performed in silico screening of a library of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved antiviral drugs for their interaction with Zika virus proteins. Twelve hit drugs were identified by the docking experiments and tested in cell-based antiviral assay systems. Efavirenz, tipranavir, and dasabuvir at micromolar concentrations were identified to inhibit all VBFs tested; i.e., two representatives of mosquito-borne flaviviruses (Zika and West Nile viruses) and one representative of flaviviruses transmitted by ticks (tick-borne encephalitis virus). The results warrant further research into these drugs, either individually or in combination, as possible pan-flavivirus inhibitors.

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.

Unique Flap Conformation in an HIV-1 Protease with High-Level Darunavir Resistance

Darunavir (DRV) is one of the most powerful protease inhibitors (PIs) for treating human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) infection and presents a high genetic barrier to the generation of resistant viruses. However, DRV-resistant HIV-1 infrequently emerges from viruses exhibiting resistance to other protease inhibitors. To address this resistance, researchers have gathered genetic information on DRV resistance. In contrast, few structural insights into the mechanism underlying DRV resistance are available. To elucidate this mechanism, we determined the crystal structure of the ligand-free state of a protease with high-level DRV resistance and six DRV resistance-associated mutations (including I47V and I50V), which we generated by in vitro selection. This crystal structure showed a unique curling conformation at the flap regions that was not found in the previously reported ligand-free protease structures. Molecular dynamics simulations indicated that the curled flap conformation altered the flap dynamics. These results suggest that the preference for a unique flap conformation influences DRV binding. These results provide new structural insights into elucidating the molecular mechanism of DRV resistance and aid to develop PIs effective against DRV-resistant viruses.

[Consensus Statement by GeSIDA/National AIDS Plan Secretariat on antiretroviral treatment in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (Updated January 2013)]

OBJECTIVE

This consensus document is an update of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) guidelines for HIV-1 infected adult patients.

METHODS

To formulate these recommendations a panel composed of members of the GeSIDA/National AIDS Plan Secretariat (Grupo de Estudio de Sida and the Secretaría del Plan Nacional sobre el Sida) reviewed the efficacy and safety advances in clinical trials, cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in medical journals (PubMed and Embase) or presented in medical scientific meetings. The strength of the recommendations and the evidence which support them are based on a modification of the criteria of Infectious Diseases Society of America.

RESULTS

cART is recommended in patients with symptoms of HIV infection, in pregnant women, in serodiscordant couples with high risk of transmission, in hepatitisB co-infection requiring treatment, and in HIV nephropathy. cART is recommended in asymptomatic patients if CD4 is <500cells/μl. If CD4 are >500cells/μl cART should be considered in the case of chronic hepatitisC, cirrhosis, high cardiovascular risk, plasma viral load >100.000 copies/ml, proportion of CD4 cells <14%, neurocognitive deficits, and in people aged >55years. The objective of cART is to achieve an undetectable viral load. The first cART should include 2 reverse transcriptase inhibitors (RTI) nucleoside analogs and a third drug (a non-analog RTI, a ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor, or an integrase inhibitor). The panel has consensually selected some drug combinations, for the first cART and specific criteria for cART in acute HIV infection, in tuberculosis and other HIV related opportunistic infections, for the women and in pregnancy, in hepatitisB or C co-infection, in HIV-2 infection, and in post-exposure prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

These new guidelines update previous recommendations related to first cART (when to begin and what drugs should be used), how to monitor, and what to do in case of viral failure or adverse drug reactions. cART specific criteria in comorbid patients and special situations are similarly updated.

Resistance to the most recent protease and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors across HIV-1 non-B subtypes

OBJECTIVES

Limited data are available on resistance to etravirine, rilpivirine, darunavir and tipranavir in patients infected with HIV-1 non-B subtypes, in which natural polymorphisms at certain positions could influence the barrier and/or pathways to drug resistance.

METHODS

FASTA format sequences from the reverse transcriptase and protease genes recorded within the Spanish Drug Resistance database (ResRIS) were examined.

RESULTS

From 8272 genotypes derived from 5930 different HIV-1 patients included in ResRIS, 5276 genotypes had complete treatment information. Overall, 85% were from antiretroviral-experienced subjects and 7.5% belonged to HIV-1 non-B subtypes: CRF02_AG, C, F and G being the most prevalent variants. For etravirine, only G190A was more prevalent in B than non-B subtypes, whereas V90I and V179E were more frequent in non-B than B subtypes. For rilpivirine, V108I and Y188I were more frequent in B than non-B subtypes, whereas V90I was more prevalent in non-B subtypes. Despite these differences, the overall prevalence of resistance did not differ significantly when comparing etravirine or rilpivirine in B versus non-B subtypes (11.3% versus 7.4%, P = 0.13, and 10.5% versus 7.4%, P = 0.23, respectively). Despite more frequent natural polymorphisms in non-B than B subtypes at tipranavir resistance positions, the prevalence of tipranavir resistance was greater in B than non-B subtypes (11% versus 4.3%, P = 0.004), reflecting a greater antiretroviral exposure in the former. Darunavir resistance did not differ significantly when comparing B and non-B subtypes (5.8% versus 5.5%, P = 0.998).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of resistance to the most recently approved protease and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors is low in antiretroviral-experienced patients, regardless of the HIV-1 subtype.

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.

Loss of the protease dimerization inhibition activity of tipranavir (TPV) and its association with the acquisition of resistance to TPV by HIV-1

Tipranavir (TPV), a protease inhibitor (PI) inhibiting the enzymatic activity and dimerization of HIV-1 protease, exerts potent activity against multi-PI-resistant HIV-1 isolates. When a mixture of 11 multi-PI-resistant (but TPV-sensitive) clinical isolates (HIV(11MIX)), which included HIV(B) and HIV(C), was selected against TPV, HIV(11MIX) rapidly (by 10 passages [HIV(11MIX)(P10)]) acquired high-level TPV resistance and replicated at high concentrations of TPV. HIV(11MIX)(P10) contained various amino acid substitutions, including I54V and V82T. The intermolecular FRET-based HIV-1 expression assay revealed that TPV's dimerization inhibition activity against cloned HIV(B) (cHIV(B)) was substantially compromised. The introduction of I54V/V82T into wild-type cHIV(NL4-3) (cHIV(NL4-3(I54V/V82T))) did not block TPV's dimerization inhibition or confer TPV resistance. However, the introduction of I54V/V82T into cHIV(B) (cHIV(B)(I54V/V82T)) compromised TPV's dimerization inhibition and cHIV(B)(I54V/V82T) proved to be significantly TPV resistant. L24M was responsible for TPV resistance with the cHIV(C) genetic background. The introduction of L24M into cHIV(NL4-3) (cHIV(NL4-3(L24M))) interfered with TPV's dimerization inhibition, while L24M increased HIV-1's susceptibility to TPV with the HIV(NL4-3) genetic background. When selected with TPV, cHIV(NL4-3(I54V/V82T)) most readily developed TPV resistance and acquired E34D, which compromised TPV's dimerization inhibition with the HIV(NL4-3) genetic background. The present data demonstrate that certain amino acid substitutions compromise TPV's dimerization inhibition and confer TPV resistance, although the loss of TPV's dimerization inhibition is not always associated with significantly increased TPV resistance. The findings that TPV's dimerization inhibition is compromised with one or two amino acid substitutions may explain at least in part why the genetic barrier of TPV against HIV-1's development of TPV resistance is relatively low compared to that of darunavir.

Short communication: Phenotypic protease inhibitor resistance and cross-resistance in the clinic from 2006 to 2008 and mutational prevalences in HIV from patients with discordant tipranavir and darunavir susceptibility phenotypes

To test tipranavir (TPV) or darunavir (DRV) as treatment options for patients with phenotypic resistance to protease inhibitors (PIs), including lopinavir, saquinavir, atazanavir, and fosamprenavir, the PhenoSense GT database was analyzed for susceptibility to DRV or TPV among PI-resistant isolates. The Monogram Biosciences HIV database (South San Francisco, CA) containing 7775 clinical isolates (2006-2008) not susceptible to at least one first-generation PI was analyzed. Phenotypic responses [resistant (R), partially susceptible (PS), or susceptible (S)] were defined by upper and lower clinical cut-offs to each PI. Genotypes were screened for amino acid substitutions associated with TPV-R/DRV-S and TPV-S/DRV-R phenotypes. In all, 4.9% (378) of isolates were resistant to all six PIs and 31.0% (2407) were resistant to none. Among isolates resistant to all four first-generation PIs, DRV resistance increased from 21.2% to 41.9% from 2006 to 2008, respectively, and resistance to TPV remained steady (53.9 to 57.3%, respectively). Higher prevalence substitutions in DRV-S/TPV-R isolates versus DRV-R/TPV-S isolates, respectively, were 82L/T (44.4% vs. 0%) and 83D (5.8% vs. 0%). Higher prevalence substitutions in DRV-R/TPV-S virus were 50V (0.0% vs. 28.9%), 54L (1.0% vs. 36.1%), and 76V (0.4% vs. 15.5%). Mutations to help predict discordant susceptibility to DRV and TPV in isolates with reduced susceptibility to other PIs were identified. DRV resistance mutations associated with improved virologic response to TPV were more prevalent in DRV-R/TPV-S isolates. TPV resistance mutations were more prevalent in TPV-R and DRV-S isolates. These results confirm the impact of genotype on phenotype, illustrating how HIV genotype and phenotype data assist regimen optimization.

[Consensus document of Gesida and Spanish Secretariat for the National Plan on AIDS (SPNS) regarding combined antiretroviral treatment in adults infected by the human immunodeficiency virus (January 2012)]

This consensus document has been prepared by a panel consisting of members of the AIDS Study Group (Gesida) and the Spanish Secretariat for the National Plan on AIDS (SPNS) after reviewing the efficacy and safety results of clinical trials, cohort and pharmacokinetic studies published in medical journals, or presented in medical scientific meetings. Gesida has prepared an objective and structured method to prioritise combined antiretroviral treatment (cART) in naïve patients. Recommendations strength (A, B, C) and the evidence which supports them (I, II, III) are based on a modification of the Infectious Diseases Society of America criteria. The current antiretroviral treatment (ART) of choice for chronic HIV infection is the combination of three drugs. ART is recommended in patients with symptomatic HIV infection, in pregnancy, in serodiscordant couples with high transmission risk, hepatitis B fulfilling treatment criteria, and HIV nephropathy. Guidelines on ART treatment in patients with concurrent diagnosis of HIV infection and an opportunistic type C infection are included. In asymptomatic patients ART is recommended on the basis of CD4 lymphocyte counts, plasma viral load and patient co-morbidities, as follows: 1) therapy should be started in patients with CD4 counts <350 cells/μL; 2) when CD4 counts are between 350 and 500 cells/μL, therapy will be recommended and only delayed if patient is reluctant to take it, the CD4 are stabilised, and the plasma viral load is low; 3) therapy could be deferred when CD4 counts are above 500 cells/μL, but should be considered in cases of cirrhosis, chronic hepatitis C, high cardiovascular risk, plasma viral load >10(5) copies/mL, proportion of CD4 cells <14%, and in people aged >55 years. ART should include 2 reverse transcriptase inhibitors nucleoside analogues and a third drug (non-analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor, ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor or integrase inhibitor). The panel has consensually selected and given priority to using the Gesida score for some drug combinations, some of them co-formulated. The objective of ART is to achieve an undetectable viral load. Adherence to therapy plays an essential role in maintaining antiviral response. Therapeutic options are limited after ART failures, but an undetectable viral load may be possible nowadays. Adverse events are a fading problem of ART. Guidelines in acute HIV infection, in women, in pregnancy, and to prevent mother-to-child transmission and pre- and post-exposition prophylaxis are commented upon. Management of hepatitis B or C co-infection, other co-morbidities, and the characteristics of ART in HIV-2 infection are included.

The HIVdb system for HIV-1 genotypic resistance interpretation

The Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database hosts a freely available online genotypic resistance interpretation system called HIVdb to help clinicians and laboratories interpret HIV-1 genotypic resistance tests. These tests are designed to assess susceptibility to nucleoside and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI and NNRTI), protease inhibitors and integrase inhibitors. The HIVdb genotypic resistance interpretation system output consists of (1) a list of penalty scores for each antiretroviral (ARV) resistance mutation in a submitted sequence, (2) estimates of decreased NRTI, NNRTI, protease and integrase inhibitor susceptibility, and (3) comments about each ARV resistance mutation in the submitted sequence. The application's strengths are its convenience for submitting sequences, its quality control analysis, its transparency and its extensive comments. The Sierra Web service is an extension that enables laboratories analyzing many sequences to individualize the format of their results. The algorithm specification interface compiler makes it possible for HIVdb to provide results using a variety of different HIV-1 genotypic resistance interpretation algorithms.