Search

BACKGROUND: Transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance can compromise initial antiretroviral therapy (ART); therefore, its detection is important for patient management. The absence of drug-associated selection pressure in treatment-naïve persons can cause drug-resistant viruses to decline to levels undetectable by conventional bulk sequencing (minority drug-resistant variants). We used sensitive and simple tests to investigate evidence of transmitted drug resistance in antiretroviral drug-naïve persons and assess the clinical implications of minority drug-resistant variants. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance and a case-control study of the impact of minority drug resistance on treatment response. For the cross-sectional analysis, we examined viral RNA from newly diagnosed ART-naïve persons in the US and Canada who had no detectable (wild type, n = 205) or one or more resistance-related mutations (n = 303) by conventional sequencing. Eight validated real-time PCR-based assays were used to test for minority drug resistance mutations (protease L90M and reverse transcriptase M41L, K70R, K103N, Y181C, M184V, and T215F/Y) above naturally occurring frequencies. The sensitive real-time PCR testing identified one to three minority drug resistance mutation(s) in 34/205 (17%) newly diagnosed persons who had wild-type virus by conventional genotyping; four (2%) individuals had mutations associated with resistance to two drug classes. Among 30/303 (10%) samples with bulk genotype resistance mutations we found at least one minority variant with a different drug resistance mutation. For the case-control study, we assessed the impact of three treatment-relevant drug resistance mutations at baseline from a separate group of 316 previously ART-naïve persons with no evidence of drug resistance on bulk genotype testing who were placed on efavirenz-based regimens. We found that 7/95 (7%) persons who experienced virologic failure had minority drug resistance mutations at baseline; however, minority resistance was found in only 2/221 (0.9%) treatment successes (Fisher exact test, p = 0.0038). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that a considerable proportion of transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance is undetected by conventional genotyping and that minority mutations can have clinical consequences. With no treatment history to help guide therapies for drug-naïve persons, the findings suggest an important role for sensitive baseline drug resistance testing.

In the absence of an effective vaccine, HIV continues to spread globally, emphasizing the need for novel strategies to limit its transmission. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with antiretroviral drugs could prove to be an effective intervention strategy if highly efficacious and cost-effective PrEP modalities are identified. We evaluated daily and intermittent PrEP regimens of increasing antiviral activity in a macaque model that closely resembles human transmission.We used a repeat-exposure macaque model with 14 weekly rectal virus challenges. Three drug treatments were given once daily, each to a different group of six rhesus macaques. Group 1 was treated subcutaneously with a human-equivalent dose of emtricitabine (FTC), group 2 received orally the human-equivalent dosing of both FTC and tenofovir-disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and group 3 received subcutaneously a similar dosing of FTC and a higher dose of tenofovir. A fourth group of six rhesus macaques (group 4) received intermittently a PrEP regimen similar to group 3 only 2 h before and 24 h after each weekly virus challenge. Results were compared to 18 control macaques that did not receive any drug treatment. The risk of infection in macaques treated in groups 1 and 2 was 3.8- and 7.8-fold lower than in untreated macaques (p = 0.02 and p = 0.008, respectively). All six macaques in group 3 were protected. Breakthrough infections had blunted acute viremias; drug resistance was seen in two of six animals. All six animals in group 4 that received intermittent PrEP were protected.This model suggests that single drugs for daily PrEP can be protective but a combination of antiretroviral drugs may be required to increase the level of protection. Short but potent intermittent PrEP can provide protection comparable to that of daily PrEP in this SHIV/macaque model. These findings support PrEP trials for HIV prevention in humans and identify promising PrEP modalities.