Search

• Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) drug resistance has implications for antiretroviral treatment strategies and for containing the HIV pandemic because the development of HIV drug resistance leads to the requirement for antiretroviral drugs that may be less effective, less well-tolerated, and more expensive than those used in first-line regimens.  • HIV drug resistance studies are designed to determine which HIV mutations are selected by antiretroviral drugs and, in turn, how these mutations affect antiretroviral drug susceptibility and response to future antiretroviral treatment regimens.  • Such studies collectively form a vital knowledge base essential for monitoring global HIV drug resistance trends, interpreting HIV genotypic tests, and updating HIV treatment guidelines.  • Although HIV drug resistance data are collected in many studies, such data are often not publicly shared, prompting the need to recommend best practices to encourage and standardize HIV drug resistance data sharing.  • In contrast to other viruses, sharing HIV sequences from phylogenetic studies of transmission dynamics requires additional precautions as HIV transmission is criminalized in many countries and regions.  • Our recommendations are designed to ensure that the data that contribute to HIV drug resistance knowledge will be available without undue hardship to those publishing HIV drug resistance studies and without risk to people living with HIV.

1 | INTRODUCTION Antiretroviral treatment (ART) programmes are expanding rapidly to people living with HIV in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in an effort to control the HIV epidemic. First-line [...], Introduction: When protease inhibitor (PI)-based second-line ART fails, guidelines recommend drug resistance testing and individualized third-line treatment. However, PI-resistant viral strains are rare and drug resistance testing is costly. We investigated whether less costly PI-exposure testing can be used to select those patients who would benefit most from drug resistance testing. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of South African adults living with HIV experiencing failure of ritonavir-boosted-lopinavi (LPV/r)-based second-line ART for whom drug resistance testing results were available. We included patients who received plasma-based drug resistance testing at a central South African reference laboratory in 2017 and patients who received dried blood spots (DBS)-based drug resistance testing at a rural South African clinic between 2009 and 2017. PI-exposure testing was performed on remnant plasma or DBS using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LCMS). Additionally, a low-cost immunoassay was used on plasma. Population genotypic drug resistance testing of the pol region was performed on plasma and DBS using standard clinical protocols. Results: Samples from 544 patients (494 plasma samples and 50 DBS) were included. Median age was 41.0 years (IQR: 33.3 to 48.5) and 58.6% were women. Median HIV-RNA load was 4.9 log10 copies/mL (4.3 to 5.4). Prevalence of resistance to the NRTI-backbone was 70.6% (349/494) in plasma samples and 56.0% (28/50) in DBS. Major PI-resistance mutations conferring high-level resistance to LPV/r were observed in 26.7% (132/494) of plasma samples and 12% (6/50) of DBS. PI-exposure testing revealed undetectable LPV levels in 47.0% (232/494) of plasma samples and in 60.0% (30/50) of DBS. In pooled analysis of plasma and DBS samples, detectable LPV levels had a sensitivity of 90% (84% to 94%) and a negative predictive failure of 95% (91% to 97%) for the presence of major LPV/r resistance. Conclusions: PI-exposure testing revealed non-adherence in half of patients experiencing failure on second-line ART and accurately predicted the presence or absence of clinically relevant PI resistance. PI-exposure testing constitutes a novel screening strategy in patients with virological failure of ART that can differentiate between different underlying causes of therapy failure and may allow for more effective use of limited resources available for drug resistance testing. Keywords: antiretroviral treatment; treatment failure; HIV drug resistance; adherence; drug level testing; low- and middle-income countries

The increasing prevalence of acquired and transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance is an obstacle to successful antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) hardest hit by the HIV-1 pandemic. Genotypic drug resistance testing could facilitate the choice of initial ART in areas with rising transmitted drug resistance (TDR) and enable care-providers to determine which individuals with virological failure (VF) on a first- or second-line ART regimen require a change in treatment. An inexpensive near point-of-care (POC) genotypic resistance test would be useful in settings where the resources, capacity, and infrastructure to perform standard genotypic drug resistance testing are limited. Such a test would be particularly useful in conjunction with the POC HIV-1 viral load tests that are currently being introduced in LMICs. A POC genotypic resistance test is likely to involve the use of allele-specific point mutation assays for detecting drug-resistance mutations (DRMs). This study proposes that two major nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-associated DRMs (M184V and K65R) and four major NNRTI-associated DRMs (K103N, Y181C, G190A, and V106M) would be the most useful for POC genotypic resistance testing in LMIC settings. One or more of these six DRMs was present in 61.2% of analyzed virus sequences from ART-naïve individuals with intermediate or high-level TDR and 98.8% of analyzed virus sequences from individuals on a first-line NRTI/NNRTI-containing regimen with intermediate or high-level acquired drug resistance. The detection of one or more of these DRMs in an ART-naïve individual or in a individual with VF on a first-line NRTI/NNRTI-containing regimen may be considered an indication for a protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimen or closer virological monitoring based on cost-effectiveness or country policy.

Background Previously reported post hoc multivariable analyses exploring predictors of confirmed virologic failure (CVF) with cabotegravir + rilpivirine long-acting (CAB + RPV LA) were expanded to include data beyond week 48, additional covariates, and additional participants. Methods Pooled data from 1651 participants were used to explore dosing regimen (every 4 or every 8 weeks), demographic, viral, and pharmacokinetic covariates as potential predictors of CVF. Prior dosing regimen experience was accounted for using 2 populations. Two models were conducted in each population—baseline factor analyses exploring factors known at baseline and multivariable analyses exploring baseline factors plus postbaseline model-predicted CAB/RPV trough concentrations (4 and 44 weeks postinjection). Retained factors were evaluated to understand their contribution to CVF (alone or in combination). Results Overall, 1.4% (n = 23/1651) of participants had CVF through 152 weeks. The presence of RPV resistance-associated mutations, human immunodeficiency virus-1 subtype A6/A1, and body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 were associated with an increased risk of CVF (P <.05 adjusted incidence rate ratio), with participants with ≥2 of these baseline factors having a higher risk of CVF. Lower model-predicted CAB/RPV troughs were additional factors retained for multivariable analyses. Conclusions The presence of ≥2 baseline factors (RPV resistance-associated mutations, A6/A1 subtype, and/or body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) was associated with increased CVF risk, consistent with prior analyses. Inclusion of initial model-predicted CAB/RPV trough concentrations (≤first quartile) did not improve the prediction of CVF beyond the presence of a combination of ≥2 baseline factors, reinforcing the clinical utility of the baseline factors in the appropriate use of CAB + RPV LA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are expected to be widely adopted globally, requiring surveillance of resistance emergence and transmission.Objectives: We therefore sought to develop a standardized list of INSTI-resistance mutations suitable for the surveillance of transmitted INSTI resistance.Methods: To characterize the suitability of the INSTI-resistance mutations for transmitted HIV-1 drug resistance (TDR) surveillance, we classified them according to their presence on published expert lists, conservation in INSTI-naive persons, frequency in INSTI-treated persons and contribution to reduced in vitro susceptibility. Mutation prevalences were determined using integrase sequences from 17302 INSTI-naive and 2450 INSTI-treated persons; 53.3% of the INSTI-naive sequences and 20.0% of INSTI-treated sequences were from non-B subtypes. Approximately 10% of sequences were from persons who received dolutegravir alone or a first-generation INSTI followed by dolutegravir.Results: Fifty-nine previously recognized (or established) INSTI-resistance mutations were present on one or more of four published expert lists. They were classified into three main non-overlapping groups: 29 relatively common non-polymorphic mutations, occurring in five or more individuals and significantly selected by INSTI treatment; 8 polymorphic mutations; and 22 rare mutations. Among the 29 relatively common INSTI-selected mutations, 24 emerged as candidates for inclusion on a list of INSTI surveillance drug-resistance mutations: T66A/I/K, E92G/Q, G118R, F121Y, E138A/K/T, G140A/C/S, Y143C/H/R/S, S147G, Q148H/R/K, N155H, S230R and R263K.Conclusions: A set of 24 non-polymorphic INSTI-selected mutations is likely to be useful for quantifying INSTI-associated TDR. This list may require updating as more sequences become available from INSTI-experienced persons infected with HIV-1 non-subtype B viruses and/or receiving dolutegravir. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]