Dataset Information

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

South Africa's national antiretroviral (ARV) treatment program expanded in 2010 to include the nucleoside reverse transcriptase (RT) inhibitors (NRTI) tenofovir (TDF) for adults and abacavir (ABC) for children. We investigated the associated changes in genotypic drug resistance patterns in patients with first-line ARV treatment failure since the introduction of these drugs, and protease inhibitor (PI) resistance patterns in patients who received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r)-containing therapy.

Methods

We analysed ARV treatment histories and HIV-1 RT and protease mutations in plasma samples submitted to the Tygerberg Academic Hospital National Health Service Laboratory.

Results

Between 2006 and 2012, 1,667 plasma samples from 1,416 ARV-treated patients, including 588 children and infants, were submitted for genotypic resistance testing. Compared with 720 recipients of a d4T or AZT-containing first-line regimen, the 153 recipients of a TDF-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have the RT mutations K65R (46% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (10% vs. 0.6%; p<0.001), L74VI (8.5% vs. 1.8%; p<0.001), and K70EGQ (7.8% vs. 0.4%) and recipients of an ABC-containing first-line regimen were more likely to have K65R (17% vs 4.0%; p<0.001), Y115F (30% vs 0.6%; p<0.001), and L74VI (56% vs 1.8%; p<0.001). Among the 490 LPV/r recipients, 55 (11%) had ?1 LPV-resistance mutations including 45 (9.6%) with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance. Low (20 patients) and intermediate (3 patients) darunavir (DRV) cross resistance was present in 23 (4.6%) patients.

Conclusions

Among patients experiencing virological failure on a first-line regimen containing two NRTI plus one NNRTI, the use of TDF in adults and ABC in children was associated with an increase in four major non- thymidine analogue mutations. In a minority of patients, LPV/r-use was associated with intermediate or high-level LPV resistance with predominantly low-level DRV cross-resistance.

SUBMITTER: Van Zyl GU

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3694021 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens.

Van Zyl Gert U GU Liu Tommy F TF Claassen Mathilda M Engelbrecht Susan S de Oliveira Tulio T Preiser Wolfgang W Wood Natasha T NT Travers Simon S Shafer Robert W RW

PloS one 20130626 6

<h4>Objectives</h4>South Africa's national antiretroviral (ARV) treatment program expanded in 2010 to include the nucleoside reverse transcriptase (RT) inhibitors (NRTI) tenofovir (TDF) for adults and abacavir (ABC) for children. We investigated the associated changes in genotypic drug resistance patterns in patients with first-line ARV treatment failure since the introduction of these drugs, and protease inhibitor (PI) resistance patterns in patients who received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LP ...[more]

PMID: 23840622

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study described the demographics, treatment information and identified characteristics associated with virological failure and being lost to follow-up (LTFU) for patients with HIV on first-line and second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens in a large South African cohort.DesignA quantitative retrospective cohort study using secondary data analysis.SettingSeven Johannesburg inner city facilities.ParticipantsUnique records of 123 002 people with HIV receiving ART at any point in the period 1 April 2004 to 29 February 2020 were included.MeasuresDemographic characteristics, ART status, CD4 count information and retention status were collected and analysed as covariates of outcomes (viral load (VL) and LTFU).ResultsOf the total study patients, 95% (n=1 17 260) were on a first-line regimen and 5% (n=5742) were on a second-line regimen. Almost two-thirds were female (64%, n=79 226). Most patients (60%, n=72 430) were initiated on an efavirenz-based, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based and emtricitabine-based regimen (fixed-dose combination). 91% (n=76 737) achieved viral suppression at least once since initiating on ART and 60% (n=57 981) remained in care as at the end of February 2020. Patients from the community health centre and primary healthcare clinics were not only more likely to be virally suppressed but also more likely to be LTFU. Patients on second-line regimens were less likely to reach viral suppression (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.26, CI=0.23 to 0.28) and more likely to be LTFU (aOR=1.21, CI=1.09 to 1.35). Being older (≥25 years) and having a recent CD4 cell count≥100 cells/µL were predictors of viral suppression and retention in patients on ART.ConclusionPatients on first-line regimens had higher VL suppression rates and were more likely to remain in care than those on a second-line regimen. Being younger and having low CD4 cell counts were associated with poor outcomes, suggesting priority groups for ART adherence support.

Project description:WHO recommends ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in HIV-infected patients failing non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based first-line treatment. Here, we aimed to provide more evidence for the choice of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and boosted protease inhibitor.ANRS 12169 is a 48-week, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial in three African cities, comparing efficacy and safety of three second-line regimens.Patients failing non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based antiretroviral therapy with confirmed plasma HIV-1 viral load above 1000?copies/ml were randomly assigned to tenofovir/emtricitabine + lopinavir/ritonavir (control group as per WHO recommendations), abacavir + didanosine + lopinavir/ritonavir (ABC/ddI group) or tenofovir/emtricitabine + darunavir/ritonavir (DRV group) regimens. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with plasma vral load below 50?copies/ml at week 48 in the modified intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority was pre-specified with a 15% margin.Of the 454 randomized patients, 451 were included in the analysis. Globally, 294 (65.2%) and 375 (83.2%) patients had viral load below 50 and 200?copies/ml, respectively, at week 48. The primary endpoint was achieved in 105 (69.1%) control group patients versus 92 (63.4%) in the ABC/ddI (difference 5.6%, 95% confidence interval -5.1 to 16.4) and 97 (63.0%) in the DRV (difference 6.1%, 95% confidence interval -4.5 to 16.7) groups (non-inferiority not shown). Overall, less number of patients with baseline viral load at least 100?000?copies/ml (n?=?122) had a viral load below 50?copies/ml at week 48 (37.7 versus 75.4%; P?<?0.001).The three second-line regimens obtained similar and satisfactory virologic control and confirmed the WHO recommendation (TDF/FTC/LPVr) as a valid option. However, the suboptimal response for patients with high viral load warrants research for improved strategies.

Project description:To investigate the responses to switching to second-line regimens among patients who had received a long-term first-line antiretroviral therapy.Patients switching to second-line regimens from June 2008 to June 2015 were enrolled from an observational cohort. In addition, patients continuing first-line therapy and had a viral load <1000?copies/mL were included as controls in July 2012. All these patients were followed-up for 36 months or until June 2016. The virological, immunological outcomes, and drug resistance were evaluated. Virological failure was defined as viral load ?1000?copies/mL after 6 months of treatment since the start of the study.There were 304 patients switching to second-line regimens and 46 patients remaining on first-line therapy enrolled while having received first-line therapy for a median of 7.6 years. Patients with plasma viral load (VL) ?1000?copies/mL before switching to second-line regimens had a sharp decline in the proportion of virological failure with 26.7%, 20.4%, and 17.0% at 12, 24, and 36 months after regimen switch, respectively (trend test, P?<?.001). Among these patients, individuals with drug resistance (DR) had a better virological responses as compared with those without DR after regimen switching. While patients with VL <1000?copies/mL at inclusion remained a high rate of viral suppression after switching to second-line regimens. So did patients continuing first-line therapy. Among patients with VL ?1000?copies/mL before switching to second-line regimens, the rates of drug resistance were decreased from 79.4% at inclusion to 7.5% at 36 months of regimen switch, with the proportion of NRTI- and NNRTI-related drug resistance from 67.2% and 79.4% to 5.4% and 7.5%, respectively. No PI-related resistance was found. Having self-reported missing doses within a month at follow-ups were independently associated with virological failure at 36 months of switching.HIV-infected patients had viral load ?1000?copies/mL at regimen switch after a long duration of first-line therapy had good virological responses to second-line regimens, especially those harbored drug resistant variants at regimen switch. However, patients with suppressive first-line therapy did not appear to benefit virologically from switching to second-line regimens.

Dataset Information

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Trends in Genotypic HIV-1 Antiretroviral Resistance between 2006 and 2012 in South African Patients Receiving First- and Second-Line Antiretroviral Treatment Regimens.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets