Background It is unknown whether HIV-positive patients experiencing virologic failure (VF) on boosted-PI (PI/r) regimens without drug resistant mutations (DRM) by standard genotyping harbor low-level PI resistant variants. CASTLE compared the efficacy of atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) with lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), each in combination with TVD in ARV-na？ve subjects. Objective To determine if VF on an initial PI/r-based regimen possess low-level resistant variants that may affect a subsequent PI-containing regimen. Methods/Results Patients experiencing VF on a Tenofovir/Emtricitabine+PI/r regimen were evaluated by ultra deep sequencing (UDS) for mutations classified/weighted by Stanford HIVdb. Samples were evaluated for variants to 0.4% levels. 36 VF subjects were evaluated by UDS; 24 had UDS for PI and RT DRMs. Of these 24, 19 (79.2%) had any DRM by UDS. The most common UDS-detected DRM were NRTI in 18 subjects: M184V/I (11), TAMs(7) & K65R(4); PI DRMs were detected in 9 subjects: M46I/V(5), F53L(2), I50V(1), D30N(1), and N88S(1). The remaining 12 subjects, all with VLs<10,000, had protease gene UDS, and 4 had low-level PI DRMs: F53L(2), L76V(1), I54S(1), G73S(1). Overall, 3/36(8.3%) subjects had DRMs identified with Stanford-HIVdb weights >12 for ATV or LPV: N88S (at 0.43% level-mutational load 1,828) in 1 subject on ATV; I50V (0.44%-mutational load 110) and L76V (0.52%-mutational load 20) in 1 subject each, both on LPV. All VF samples remained phenotypically susceptible to the treatment PI/r. Conclusion Among persons experiencing VF without PI DRMs with standard genotyping on an initial PI/r regimen, low-level variants possessing major PI DRMs were present in a minority of cases, occurred in isolation, and did not result in phenotypic resistance. NRTI DRMs were detected in a high proportion of subjects. These data suggest that PIs may remain effective in subjects experiencing VF on a PI/r-based regimen when PI DRMs are not detected by standard or UDS genotyping.
References
[1]
Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adult and Adolescents (2008) Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1 infected adults and adolescents. Department of Health and Human Services. January 29, 2008; 1–128. Available: http://www.aidsinfo.nih.gov/ContentFiles？/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf. Accessed 2010 Aug 22.
[2]
Synovate HIV Market Research (2009) all rights reserved.
[3]
MacArthur RD, Novak RM, Peng G, Xiang Y, Huppler Hullsiek K, et al. (2006) Long-Term Clinical and Immunologic Outcomes Are Similar in HIV-Infected Persons Randomized to NNRTI versus PI versus NNRTI+PI-based Antiretroviral Regimens as Initial Therapy: Results of the CPCRA 058 FIRST Study. LANCET 368: 2125–2135.
[4]
Kozal MJ, Hullsiek KHuppler, Macarthur RD, Berg-Wolf M, Peng G, et al. (2007) The Incidence of HIV Drug Resistance and Its Impact on Progression of HIV Disease Among Antiretroviral Na？ve Participants Started on Three Different Antiretroviral Therapy Strategies. HIV ClinTrials 6(6): 357–370. PMID: 18042501.
[5]
Molina JM, Andrade-Villanueva J, Echevarria J, Ploenchan C, Corral J, et al. (2008) Once-daily atazanavir/ritonavir versus twice-daily lopinavir/ritonavir, each in combination with tenofovir and emtricitabine, for management of antiretroviral-naive HIV-1-infected patients: 48 week efficacy and safety results of the CASTLE study. LANCET 372(9639): 646–655.
[6]
Molina JM, Andrade-Villanueva J, Echevarria J, Chetchotisakd P, Corral J, et al. (2008) Atazanavir/Ritonavir vs. Lopinavir/Ritonavir in Antiretroviral-Na？ve HIV-1–Infected Patients: CASTLE 96 Week Efficacy and Safety, 48th Annual ICAAC/IDSA 46th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
[7]
Lataillade M, Yang R, Mancini MD, McGrath D, et al. (2008) Impact of HIV viral diversity and baseline resistance on treatment outcomes and the emergence of resistance: The CASTLE study 48-week results. Journal of the International AIDS Society - 11: suppl 1P180.
[8]
Rhee SY, Gonzales MJ, Shafer RW (2003) Human immunodeficiency virus reverse transcriptase and protease sequence database. Nucleic Acids Res - 31: 298–303. Available: http://hivdb.stanford.edu.
[9]
Simen BB, Simons JF, Hullsiek KH, Novak RM, Macarthur RD, et al. (2009) Low Abundance Drug Resistant Viral Variants in Chronically HIV-infected Antiretroviral-Na？ve Patients Significantly Impact Treatment. Journal of Infectious Diseases 199(5): 693–701.
[10]
Le T, Chiarella J, Simen BB, Hanczaruk B, Egholm M, et al. (2009) Low-abundance HIV drug-resistant viral variants in treatment-experienced persons correlate with historical antiretroviral use. PLoS One- 4(6): e6079.
[11]
Stenman J, Lintula S, Rissanen O (2003) Quantitative detection of low-copy-number mRNAs differing at single nucleotide positions. Biotechniques 34: 172–7.
[12]
Shafer RW (2009) Low-Abundance Drug-Resistant HIV-1 Variants: Finding Significance in an Era of Abundant Diagnostic and Therapeutic Options. Journal of Infectious Diseases: 199: 610–612.
[13]
Underwood MR, Ross LL, Irlbeck DM, Gerondelis P, Rouse E, et al. (2009) Sensitivity of phenotypic susceptibility analyses for nonthymidine nucleoside analogues conferred by K65R or M184V in mixtures with wild-type HIV-1. J Infect Dis 199(1): 84–8.
[14]
Lataillade M, Chiarella J, Yang R, Schnittman S, Wirtz M, et al. (2010) Prevalence and Clinical Significance of HIV Drug Resistance Mutations by Ultra-deep Sequencing in Antiretroviral-na？ve Subjects in the CASTLE Study. PLoS ONE 5(6): e10952.
