This study evaluates the added benefit when estimating antiretroviral drug resistance of combining all available resistance test results in a cumulative genotype relative to using the latest genotype alone.
Methods
The prevalence of resistance and genotypic sensitivity scores (GSS) predicted by the latest and the cumulative genotype, together with virological outcomes after the latest genotype, were measured in treatment-experienced patients who underwent ≥2 resistance tests in 1999–2008.
Results
Comparing the latest with the cumulative genotype in 227 patients, 4 (1.7%) versus 0 (0.0%) showed no major resistance mutations, whereas 74 (32.6%) versus 46 (20.3%), 88 (38.8%) versus 76 (33.5%) and 61 (26.9%) versus 105 (46.3%) showed single-class, dual-class and triple-class resistance mutations, respectively. The median (IQR) number of fully or partially active drugs was 6 (5–6) versus 5 (4–6) for the nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 3 (1–3) versus 1 (1–3) for the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and 7 (7–7) versus 7 (7–7) for the protease inhibitors, respectively. Among 163 patients who started a new regimen after the latest genotype, both the latest and the cumulative GSS were predictive of early (≤24 weeks) virological responses. The GSS decreased by median 1 unit (IQR 0.5–1.0) in the cumulative genotype and larger differences relative to the latest genotype corresponded to smaller decreases in viral load.
Conclusions
The cumulative genotype offers a more comprehensive evaluation of the burden of resistance. This approach can guide small but appreciable improvements in the selection of antiretroviral regimens for treatment-experienced patients.
References
1.
GazzardB.G., AndersonJ., BabikerA.British HIV Association guidelines for the treatment of HIV-1-infected adults with antiretroviral therapy 2008. HIV Med2008; 9: 563–608.
2.
HammerS.M., EronJ.J.Jr., ReissP.Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2008 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel. JAMA2008; 300: 555–570.
3.
The Department of Health and Human Sciences Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents.Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1 infected adults and adolescents. (Updated 10 January 2011. Accessed 7 March 2011.) Available from http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/contentfiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf.
4.
GerettiA.M.Epidemiology of antiretroviral drug resistance in drug-naive persons. Curr Opin Infect Dis2007; 20: 22–32.
5.
PhillipsA.N., DunnD., SabinC.Long term probability of detection of HIV-1 drug resistance after starting antiretroviral therapy in routine clinical practice. AIDS2005; 19: 487–494.
6.
FoxZ.V., GerettiA.M., KjaerJ.The ability of four genotypic interpretation systems to predict virological response to ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors. AIDS2007; 21: 2033–2042.
7.
JohnsonJ., GerettiA.M.Low-frequency HIV-1 drug resistance mutations can be clinically significant but must be interpreted with caution. J Antimicrob Chemother2010; 65: 1322–1326.
8.
GrantP.M., ZolopaA.R.The use of resistance testing in the management of HIV-1-infected patients. Curr Opin HIV AIDS2009; 4: 474–480.
9.
YahiN., TourresC., TivoliN.Evolution of HIV-1 multidrug-resistant genotypes during combination therapy and after the cessation of antiretroviral drugs. AIDS2000; 14: 2943–2945.
10.
PalmerS., KearneyM., MaldarelliF.Multiple, linked human immunodeficiency virus type 1 drug resistance mutations in treatment-experienced patients are missed by standard genotype analysis. J Clin Microbiol2005; 43: 406–413.
11.
GerettiA.M., FoxZ.V., BoothC.L.Low-frequency K103N strengthens the impact of transmitted drug resistance on virologic responses to first-line efavirenz or nevirapine-based highly active antiretroviral therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2009; 52: 569–573.
12.
HalvasE.K., WiegandA., BoltzV.F.Low frequency nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-resistant variants contribute to failure of efavirenz-containing regimens in treatment- experienced patients. J Infect Dis2010; 201: 672–680.
13.
BrionesC., DomingoE.Minority report: hidden memory genomes in HIV-1 quasispecies and possible clinical implications. AIDS Rev2008; 10: 93–109.
14.
WainbergM.A.The impact of the M184V substitution on drug resistance and viral fitness. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther2004; 2: 147–151.
15.
KolberM.A.Development of drug resistance mutations in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy: Does competitive advantage drive evolution. AIDS Rev2007; 9: 68–74.
16.
JohnsonV.A., Brun-VezinetF., ClotetB.Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: spring 2008. Top HIV Med2008; 16: 62–68.
17.
PetrellaM., OliveiraM., MoisiD., DetorioM., BrennerB.G., WainbergM.A.Differential maintenance of the M184V substitution in the reverse transcriptase of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by various nucleoside antiretroviral agents in tissue culture. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2004; 48: 4189–4194.
18.
GerettiA.M.Clinical implications of HIV drug resistance to nucleoside and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. AIDS Rev2006; 8: 210–220.
19.
MarcelinA.G., FlandreP., PavieJ.Clinically relevant genotype interpretation of resistance to didanosine. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2005; 49: 1739–1744.
20.
McCollD.J., MargotN.A., WulfsohnM., CoakleyD.F., ChengA.K., MillerM.D.Patterns of resistance emerging in HIV-1 from antiretroviral-experienced patients undergoing intensification therapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2004; 37: 1340–1350.
21.
MargotN.A., EnejosaJ., ChengA.K., MillerM.D., McCollD.J.Development of HIV-1 drug resistance through 144 weeks in antiretroviral-naïve subjects on emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, and efavirenz compared with lamivudine/zidovudine and efavirenz in study GS-01-934. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2009; 52: 209–221.
22.
GerettiA.M.Shifting paradigms: the resistance profile of etravirine. J Antimicrob Chemother2008; 62: 643–647.
23.
VingerhoetsJ., TambuyzerL., AzijnH.Resistance profile of etravirine: combined analysis of baseline genotypic and phenotypic data from the randomized, controlled Phase III clinical studies. AIDS2010; 24: 503–514.
24.
VargheseV., ShahriarR., RheeS.Y.Minority variants associated with transmitted and acquired HIV-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance: implications for the use of second-generation nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2009; 52: 309–315.
25.
RuxrungthamK., PedroR.J., LatiffG.H.Impact of reverse transcriptase resistance on the efficacy of TMC125 (etravirine) with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in protease inhibitor-naive, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-experienced patients: study TMC125-C227. HIV Med2008; 9: 883–896.
26.
TalbotA., GrantP., TaylorJ.Predicting tipranavir and darunavir resistance using genotypic, phenotypic and virtual phenotypic resistance patterns: an independent cohort analysis of clinical isolates highly resistant to all other protease inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2010; 54: 2473–2479.
27.
HarriganP.R., WynhovenB., BrummeZ.L.HIV-1 drug resistance: degree of underestimation by a cross-sectional versus a longitudinal testing approach. J Infect Dis2005; 191: 1325–1330.
ZazziM., ProsperiM., VicentiI.Rules-based HIV-1 genotypic resistance interpretation systems predict 8 week and 24 week virological antiretroviral treatment outcome and benefit from drug potency weighting. J Antimicrob Chemother2009; 64: 616–624.
30.
De LucaA., Cozzi-LepriA., PernoC.F.Variability in the interpretation of transmitted genotypic HIV-1 drug resistance and prediction of virological outcomes of the initial HAART by distinct systems. Antivir Ther2004; 9: 743–752.
31.
SteigbigelR.T., CooperD.A., TepplerH.Long-term efficacy and safety of Raltegravir combined with optimized background therapy in treatment-experienced patients with drug-resistant HIV infection: week 96 results of the BENCHMRK 1 and 2 Phase III trials. Clin Infect Dis2010; 50: 605–612.
32.
GulickR.M., LalezariJ., GoodrichJ.Maraviroc for previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med2008; 359: 1429–1441.
