Search

Background: Investigating the role of late presenters (LPs) in HIV-1 transmission is important, as they can contribute to the onward spread of HIV-1 virus before diagnosis, when they are not aware of their HIV status. Objective: To characterize individuals living with HIV-1 followed up in Europe infected with subtypes A, B, and G and to compare transmission clusters (TC) in LP vs. non-late presenter (NLP) populations. Methods: Information from a convenience sample of 2679 individuals living with HIV-1 was collected from the EuResist Integrated Database between 2008 and 2019. Maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenies were constructed using FastTree. Transmission clusters were identified using Cluster Picker. Statistical analyses were performed using R. Results: 2437 (91.0%) sequences were from subtype B, 168 (6.3%) from subtype A, and 74 (2.8%) from subtype G. The median age was 39 y/o (IQR: 31.0–47.0) and 85.2% of individuals were males. The main transmission route was via homosexual (MSM) contact (60.1%) and 85.0% originated from Western Europe. In total, 54.7% of individuals were classified as LPs and 41.7% of individuals were inside TCs. In subtype A, individuals in TCs were more frequently males and natives with a recent infection. For subtype B, individuals in TCs were more frequently individuals with MSM transmission route and with a recent infection. For subtype G, individuals in TCs were those with a recent infection. When analyzing cluster size, we found that LPs more frequently belonged to small clusters (<8 individuals), particularly dual clusters (2 individuals). Conclusion: LP individuals are more present either outside or in small clusters, indicating a limited role of late presentation to HIV-1 transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increased use of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has decreased mortality and morbidity of HIV-1 infected people but increasing levels of HIV drug resistance threatens the success of ART regimens. Conversely, late presentation can impact treatment outcomes, health costs, and potential transmission of HIV. Objective: To describe the patterns of transmitted drug resistance (TDR) and acquired drug resistance (ADR) in HIV-1 infected patients followed in Europe, to compare its patterns in late presenters (LP) vs non-late presenters (NLP), and to analyze the most prevalent drug resistance mutations among HIV-1 subtypes. Methods: Our study included clinical, socio-demographic, and genotypic information from 26,973 HIV-1 infected patients from the EuResist Integrated Database (EIDB) between 1981 and 2019. Results: Among the 26,973 HIV-1 infected patients in the analysis, 11,581 (42.9%) were ART-naïve patients and 15,392 (57.1%) were ART-experienced. The median age was 37 (IQR: 27.0–45.0) years old and 72.6% were males. The main transmission route was through heterosexual contact (34.9%) and 81.7% of patients originated from Western Europe. 71.9% of patients were infected by subtype B and 54.8% of patients were classified as LP. The overall prevalence of TDR was 12.8% and presented an overall decreasing trend (p for trend < 0.001), the ADR prevalence was 68.5% also with a decreasing trend (p for trend < 0.001). For LP and NLP, the TDR prevalence was 12.3 and 12.6%, respectively, while for ADR, 69.9 and 68.2%, respectively. The most prevalent TDR drug resistance mutations, in both LP and NLP, were K103N/S, T215rev, T215FY, M184I/V, M41I/L, M46I/L, and L90M. Conclusion: Our study showed that the overall TDR (12.8%) and ADR (68.5%) presented decreasing trends during the study time period. For LP, the overall TDR was slightly lower than for NLP (12.3 vs 12.6%, respectively); while this pattern was opposite for ADR (LP slightly higher than NLP). We suggest that these differences, in the case of TDR, can be related to the dynamics of fixation of drug resistance mutations; and in the case of ADR with the more frequent therapeutic failure in LPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]