Search

Background: Drug resistance is a major barrier to successful antiretroviral treatment (ART). Therefore, it is important to monitor time trends at a population level., Methods: We included 11 084 ART-experienced patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) between 1999 and 2013. The SHCS is highly representative and includes 72% of patients receiving ART in Switzerland. Drug resistance was defined as the presence of ≥1 major mutation in a genotypic resistance test. To estimate the prevalence of drug resistance, data for patients with no resistance test was imputed based on the patient's risk of harboring drug-resistant viruses., Results: The emergence of new drug resistance mutations declined dramatically from 401 to 23 patients between 1999 and 2013. The upper estimated prevalence limit of drug resistance among ART-experienced patients decreased from 57.0% in 1999 to 37.1% in 2013. The prevalence of 3-class resistance decreased from 9.0% to 4.4% and was always <0.4% for patients who initiated ART after 2006. Most patients actively participating in the SHCS in 2013 with drug-resistant viruses initiated ART before 1999 (59.8%). Nevertheless, in 2013, 94.5% of patients who initiated ART before 1999 had good remaining treatment options based on Stanford algorithm., Conclusions: Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 drug resistance among ART-experienced patients in Switzerland is a well-controlled relic from the era before combination ART. Emergence of drug resistance can be virtually stopped with new potent therapies and close monitoring., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) transmitted drug resistance (TDR) can compromise antiretroviral therapy (ART) and thus represents an important public health concern. Typically, sources of TDR remain unknown, but they can be characterized with molecular epidemiologic approaches. We used the highly representative Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS) and linked drug resistance database (SHCS-DRDB) to analyze sources of TDR., Methods: ART-naive men who have sex with men with infection date estimates between 1996 and 2009 were chosen for surveillance of TDR in HIV-1 subtype B (N = 1674), as the SHCS-DRDB contains pre-ART genotypic resistance tests for >69% of this surveillance population. A phylogeny was inferred using pol sequences from surveillance patients and all subtype B sequences from the SHCS-DRDB (6934 additional patients). Potential sources of TDR were identified based on phylogenetic clustering, shared resistance mutations, genetic distance, and estimated infection dates., Results: One hundred forty of 1674 (8.4%) surveillance patients carried virus with TDR; 86 of 140 (61.4%) were assigned to clusters. Potential sources of TDR were found for 50 of 86 (58.1%) of these patients. ART-naive patients constitute 56 of 66 (84.8%) potential sources and were significantly overrepresented among sources (odds ratio, 6.43 [95% confidence interval, 3.22-12.82]; P < .001). Particularly large transmission clusters were observed for the L90M mutation, and the spread of L90M continued even after the near cessation of antiretroviral use selecting for that mutation. Three clusters showed evidence of reversion of K103N or T215Y/F., Conclusions: Many individuals harboring viral TDR belonged to transmission clusters with other Swiss patients, indicating substantial domestic transmission of TDR in Switzerland. Most TDR in clusters could be linked to sources, indicating good surveillance of TDR in the SHCS-DRDB. Most TDR sources were ART naive. This, and the presence of long TDR transmission chains, suggests that resistance mutations are frequently transmitted among untreated individuals, highlighting the importance of early diagnosis and treatment.

Background: Estimates of drug resistance incidence to modern first-line combination antiretroviral therapies against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 are complicated by limited availability of genotypic drug resistance tests (GRTs) and uncertain timing of resistance emergence., Methods: Five first-line combinations were studied (all paired with lamivudine or emtricitabine): efavirenz (EFV) plus zidovudine (AZT) (n = 524); EFV plus tenofovir (TDF) (n = 615); lopinavir (LPV) plus AZT (n = 573); LPV plus TDF (n = 301); and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATZ/r) plus TDF (n = 250). Virological treatment outcomes were classified into 3 risk strata for emergence of resistance, based on whether undetectable HIV RNA levels were maintained during therapy and, if not, whether viral loads were >500 copies/mL during treatment. Probabilities for presence of resistance mutations were estimated from GRTs (n = 2876) according to risk stratum and therapy received at time of testing. On the basis of these data, events of resistance emergence were imputed for each individual and were assessed using survival analysis. Imputation was repeated 100 times, and results were summarized by median values (2.5th-97.5th percentile range)., Results: Six years after treatment initiation, EFV plus AZT showed the highest cumulative resistance incidence (16%) of all regimens (<11%). Confounder-adjusted Cox regression confirmed that first-line EFV plus AZT (reference) was associated with a higher median hazard for resistance emergence, compared with other treatments: EFV plus TDF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; range, 0.42-0.76), LPV plus AZT (HR, 0.63; range, 0.45-0.89), LPV plus TDF (HR, 0.55; range, 0.33-0.83), ATZ/r plus TDF (HR, 0.43; range, 0.17-0.83). Two-thirds of resistance events were associated with detectable HIV RNA level ≤500 copies/mL during treatment, and only one-third with virological failure (HIV RNA level, >500 copies/mL)., Conclusions: The inclusion of TDF instead of AZT and ATZ/r was correlated with lower rates of resistance emergence, most likely because of improved tolerability and pharmacokinetics resulting from a once-daily dosage.

Background: Antiretroviral compounds have been predominantly studied in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) subtype B, but only ~10% of infections worldwide are caused by this subtype. The analysis of the impact of different HIV subtypes on treatment outcome is important., Methods: The effect of HIV-1 subtype B and non-B on the time to virological failure while taking combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) was analyzed. Other studies that have addressed this question were limited by the strong correlation between subtype and ethnicity. Our analysis was restricted to white patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study who started cART between 1996 and 2009. Cox regression models were performed; adjusted for age, sex, transmission category, first cART, baseline CD4 cell counts, and HIV RNA levels; and stratified for previous mono/dual nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor treatment., Results: Included in our study were 4729 patients infected with subtype B and 539 with non-B subtypes. The most prevalent non-B subtypes were CRF02&#95;AG (23.8%), A (23.4%), C (12.8%), and CRF01&#95;AE (12.6%). The incidence of virological failure was higher in patients with subtype B (4.3 failures/100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0-4.5]) compared with non-B (1.8 failures/100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.4-2.4). Cox regression models confirmed that patients infected with non-B subtypes had a lower risk of virological failure than those infected with subtype B (univariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.39 [95% CI, .30-.52; P < .001]; multivariable HR, 0.68 [95% CI, .51-.91; P = .009]). In particular, subtypes A and CRF02&#95;AG revealed improved outcomes (multivariable HR, 0.54 [95% CI, .29-.98] and 0.39 [95% CI, .19-.79], respectively)., Conclusions: Improved virological outcomes among patients infected with non-B subtypes invalidate concerns that these individuals are at a disadvantage because drugs have been designed primarily for subtype B infections.

Background: The time passed since the infection of a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individual (the age of infection) is an important but often only poorly known quantity. We assessed whether the fraction of ambiguous nucleotides obtained from bulk sequencing as done for genotypic resistance testing can serve as a proxy of this parameter., Methods: We correlated the age of infection and the fraction of ambiguous nucleotides in partial pol sequences of HIV-1 sampled before initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART). Three groups of Swiss HIV Cohort Study participants were analyzed, for whom the age of infection was estimated on the basis of Bayesian back calculation (n = 3,307), seroconversion (n = 366), or diagnoses of primary HIV infection (n = 130). In addition, we studied 124 patients for whom longitudinal genotypic resistance testing was performed while they were still ART-naïve., Results: We found that the fraction of ambiguous nucleotides increased with the age of infection with a rate of .2% per year within the first 8 years but thereafter with a decreasing rate. We show that this pattern is consistent with population-genetic models for realistic parameters. Finally, we show that, in this highly representative population, a fraction of ambiguous nucleotides of >.5% provides strong evidence against a recent infection event <1 year prior to sampling (negative predictive value, 98.7%)., Conclusions: These findings show that the fraction of ambiguous nucleotides is a useful marker for the age of infection.

Background: Factors promoting the emergence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase (RT) connection domain mutations and their effect on antiretroviral therapy (ART) are still largely undetermined. We investigated this matter by analyzing genotypic resistance tests covering 400 amino acid positions in the RT of HIV-1 subtype B viruses and corresponding treatment histories and laboratory measurements., Methods: The emergence of connection domain mutations was studied in 334 patients receiving monotherapy or dual therapy with thymidine analogues at the time of the genotypic resistance test. Response to subsequent combination ART (cART) was analyzed using Cox regression for 291 patients receiving unboosted protease inhibitors. Response was defined by ever reaching an HIV RNA level <50 copies/mL during the first cART., Results: The connection domain mutations N348I, R356K, R358K, A360V, and A371V were more frequently observed in ART-exposed than ART-naive patients, of which only N348I and A360V were nonpolymorphic (with a prevalence of <1.5% in untreated patients). N348I correlated with M184V and predominantly occurred in patients receiving lamivudine and zidovudine concomitantly. A360V was not associated with specific drug combinations and was found to emerge later than M184V or thymidine analogue mutations. Nonpolymorphic connection domain mutations were rarely detected in the absence of established drug resistance mutations in ART-exposed individuals (prevalence, <1%). None of the 5 connection domain mutations associated with treatment showed a statistically significant effect on response to cART., Conclusions: Despite their frequent emergence, connection domain mutations did not show large detrimental effects on response to cART. Currently, routine implementation of connection domain sequencing seems unnecessary for developed health care settings.

Background: Accurate quantification of the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) drug resistance in patients who are receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) is difficult, and results from previous studies vary. We attempted to assess the prevalence and dynamics of resistance in a highly representative patient cohort from Switzerland., Methods: On the basis of genotypic resistance test results and clinical data, we grouped patients according to their risk of harboring resistant viruses. Estimates of resistance prevalence were calculated on the basis of either the proportion of individuals with a virologic failure or confirmed drug resistance (lower estimate) or the frequency-weighted average of risk group-specific probabilities for the presence of drug resistance mutations (upper estimate)., Results: Lower and upper estimates of drug resistance prevalence in 8064 ART-exposed patients were 50% and 57% in 1999 and 37% and 45% in 2007, respectively. This decrease was driven by 2 mechanisms: loss to follow-up or death of high-risk patients exposed to mono- or dual-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor therapy (lower estimates range from 72% to 75%) and continued enrollment of low-risk patients who were taking combination ART containing boosted protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors as first-line therapy (lower estimates range from 7% to 12%). A subset of 4184 participants (52%) had >or= 1 study visit per year during 2002-2007. In this subset, lower and upper estimates increased from 45% to 49% and from 52% to 55%, respectively. Yearly increases in prevalence were becoming smaller in later years., Conclusions: Contrary to earlier predictions, in situations of free access to drugs, close monitoring, and rapid introduction of new potent therapies, the emergence of drug-resistant viruses can be minimized at the population level. Moreover, this study demonstrates the necessity of interpreting time trends in the context of evolving cohort populations.

Background: The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse-transcriptase mutation K65R is a single-point mutation that has become more frequent after increased use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). We aimed to identify predictors for the emergence of K65R, using clinical data and genotypic resistance tests from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study., Methods: A total of 222 patients with genotypic resistance tests performed while receiving treatment with TDF-containing regimens were stratified by detectability of K65R (K65R group, 42 patients; undetected K65R group, 180 patients). Patient characteristics at start of that treatment were analyzed., Results: In an adjusted logistic regression, TDF treatment with nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors and/or didanosine was associated with the emergence of K65R, whereas the presence of any of the thymidine analogue mutations D67N, K70R, T215F, or K219E/Q was protective. The previously undescribed mutational pattern K65R/G190S/Y181C was observed in 6 of 21 patients treated with efavirenz and TDF. Salvage therapy after TDF treatment was started for 36 patients with K65R and for 118 patients from the wild-type group. Proportions of patients attaining human immunodeficiency virus type 1 loads <50 copies/mL after 24 weeks of continuous treatment were similar for the K65R group (44.1%; 95% confidence interval, 27.2%-62.1%) and the wild-type group (51.9%; 95% confidence interval, 42.0%-61.6%)., Conclusions: In settings where thymidine analogue mutations are less likely to be present, such as at start of first-line therapy or after extended treatment interruptions, combinations of TDF with other K65R-inducing components or with efavirenz or nevirapine may carry an enhanced risk of the emergence of K65R. The finding of a distinct mutational pattern selected by treatment with TDF and efavirenz suggests a potential fitness interaction between K65R and nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor-induced mutations.