Dataset Information

Evolution of gag and gp41 in Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors.

ABSTRACT: Several groups have proposed that genotypic determinants in gag and the gp41 cytoplasmic domain (gp41-CD) reduce protease inhibitor (PI) susceptibility without PI-resistance mutations in protease. However, no gag and gp41-CD mutations definitively responsible for reduced PI susceptibility have been identified in individuals with virological failure (VF) while receiving a boosted PI (PI/r)-containing regimen. To identify gag and gp41 mutations under selective PI pressure, we sequenced gag and/or gp41 in 61 individuals with VF on a PI/r (n?=?40) or NNRTI (n?=?20) containing regimen. We quantified nonsynonymous and synonymous changes in both genes and identified sites exhibiting signal for directional or diversifying selection. We also used published gag and gp41 polymorphism data to highlight mutations displaying a high selection index, defined as changing from a conserved to an uncommon amino acid. Many amino acid mutations developed in gag and in gp41-CD in both the PI- and NNRTI-treated groups. However, in neither gene, were there discernable differences between the two groups in overall numbers of mutations, mutations displaying evidence of diversifying or directional selection, or mutations with a high selection index. If gag and/or gp41 encode PI-resistance mutations, they may not be confined to consistent mutations at a few sites.

SUBMITTER: Manasa J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5599673 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evolution of gag and gp41 in Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors.

Manasa Justen J Varghese Vici V Pond Sergei L Kosakovsky SLK Rhee Soo-Yon SY Tzou Philip L PL Fessel W Jeffrey WJ Jang Karen S KS White Elizabeth E Rögnvaldsson Thorsteinn T Katzenstein David A DA Shafer Robert W RW

Scientific reports 20170914 1

Several groups have proposed that genotypic determinants in gag and the gp41 cytoplasmic domain (gp41-CD) reduce protease inhibitor (PI) susceptibility without PI-resistance mutations in protease. However, no gag and gp41-CD mutations definitively responsible for reduced PI susceptibility have been identified in individuals with virological failure (VF) while receiving a boosted PI (PI/r)-containing regimen. To identify gag and gp41 mutations under selective PI pressure, we sequenced gag and/or ...[more]

PMID: 28912582

Similar Datasets

Project description:The South African national combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) roll-out program started in 2006, with over 4.4 million people accessing treatment since it was first introduced. HIV-1 drug resistance can hamper the success of cART. This study determined the patterns of HIV-1 drug-resistance associated mutations (RAMs) in People Living with HIV-1 (PLHIV-1). Receiving first (for children below 3 years of age) and second-line (for adults) cART regimens in South Africa. During 2017 and 2018, 110 patients plasma samples were selected, 96 samples including those of 17 children and infants were successfully analyzed. All patients were receiving a boosted protease inhibitor (bPI) as part of their cART regimen. The viral sequences were analyzed for RAMs through genotypic resistance testing. We performed genotypic resistance testing (GRT) for Protease inhibitors (PIs), Reverse transcriptase inhibitors (RTIs) and Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (InSTIs). Viral sequences were subtyped using REGAv3 and COMET. Based on the PR/RT sequences, HIV-1 subtypes were classified as 95 (99%) HIV-1 subtype C (HIV-1C) while one sample as 02_AG. Integrase sequencing was successful for 89 sequences, and all the sequences were classified as HIV-1C (99%, 88/89) except one sequence classified CRF02_AG, as observed in PR/RT. Of the 96 PR/RT sequences analyzed, M184V/I (52/96; 54%) had the most frequent RAM nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI). The most frequent non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) RAM was K103N/S (40/96, 42%). Protease inhibitor (PI) RAMs M46I and V82A were present in 12 (13%) of the sequences analyzed. Among the InSTI major RAM two (2.2%) sequences have Y143R and T97A mutations while one sample had T66I. The accessory RAM E157Q was identified in two (2.2%). The data indicates that the majority of the patients failed on bPIs didn't have any mutation; therefore adherence could be major issue in these groups of individuals. We propose continued viral load monitoring for better management of infected PLHIV.

Project description:Indinavir boosted with ritonavir (IDV/r) dosing with 400/100 mg, twice daily, is preferred in Thai adults, but this dose can lead to concentrations close to the boundaries of its therapeutic window. The objectives of this analysis were to validate a population pharmacokinetic model to describe IDV/r concentrations in HIV-infected Thai patients and to investigate the impact of patient characteristics on achieving adequate IDV concentrations. IDV/r concentration data from 513 plasma samples were available. Population means and variances of pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using a nonlinear mixed effects regression model (NONMEM Version VI). Monte Carlo simulations were performed to estimate the probability of achieving IDV concentrations within its therapeutic window. IDV/r pharmacokinetics were best described by a one-compartment model coupled with a single transit compartment absorption model. Body weight influenced indinavir apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution and allometric scaling significantly reduced the interindividual variability. Final population estimates (interindividual variability in percentage) of indinavir apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution were 21.3 L/h/70 kg (30%) and 90.7 L/70 kg (22%), respectively. Based on model simulations, the probability of achieving an IDV trough concentration greater than 0.1 mg/L was greater than 99% for 600/100 mg and greater than 98% for 400/100 mg, twice daily, in patients weighing 40 to 80 kg. However, the probability of achieving IDV concentrations associated with an increased risk of drug toxicity (greater than 10.0 mg/L) increased from 1% to 10% with 600/100 mg compared with less than 1% with 400/100 mg when body weight decreased from 80 to 40 kg. The validated model developed predicts that 400/100 mg of IDV/r, twice daily, provides indinavir concentrations within the recommended therapeutic window for the majority of patients. The risk of toxic drug concentrations increases rapidly with IDV/r dose of 600/100 mg for patients less than 50 kg and therapeutic drug monitoring of IDV concentrations would help to reduce the risk of IDV-induced nephrotoxicity.

Project description:BackgroundAlbuvirtide (ABT), a fusion inhibitor against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, has good efficacy and tolerability for HIV treatment. However, there is a paucity of data regarding ABT-based regimen as second-line therapy. This current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching to ABT + ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) treatment in a cohort of HIV-infected individuals who failed initial treatment.MethodsThis retrospective comparative cohort study included patients who failed initial treatment and switched to either ABT + LPV/r (the ABT group) or two nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) + LPV/r (the NRTI group) between November 2019 and December 2020 in the People's Hospital of Zhaojue County in Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, China. All individuals were followed up from baseline to 12 weeks after conversion, or until the patient developed unacceptable toxic effects or was loss of follow-up. The proportion of patients who achieved virological suppression (viral load <50 copies/mL) at week 12 was considered a primary efficacy endpoint. Safety outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. All participants underwent resistance testing before regimen conversion. The linear regression model was applied to evaluate the association of CD4+ T cell count with the patient's clinical characteristics.ResultsA total of 71 patients were included in this study, the two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of age, sex, CD4+ T cell count, and viral load. The suppression of HIV-1 RNA to levels <50 copies/mL was achieved in 82.4% (28/31) and 29.7% (11/34) of patients in the ABT group and the NRTI group, respectively (P<0.001). Older age (P=0.016) and higher alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels (P=0.038), but not rescue regimen, were associated with attenuated CD4+ T cell recovery. Most adverse events mild in severity, with abdominal pain as the most reported event in two groups (26.8%, 19/71), and no severe adverse events were detected.ConclusionsConversion to ABT + LPV/r therapy appears to be an effective and safe strategy. This treatment regimen has great potential to be generalized in the HIV-infected population, although further testing in a larger patient population is required to verify these results.

Project description:There are contradictory reports regarding the effects of protease inhibitors on the ECG measures of QT and PR interval durations. The effect of interrupting use of protease inhibitors on QT and PR progression is also unknown.This analysis included 3719 participants from the Strategies for Management of Antiretroviral Therapy (SMART) study, of whom 1879 were randomized to receive intermittent antiretroviral therapy (ART) (drug conservation group), whereas the rest received these drugs continuously (viral suppression group). Linear regression analysis was used to compare four ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (protease inhibitor/r) regimens [saquinavir (SQV/r), lopinavir (LPV/r), atazanavir (ATV/r), and other protease inhibitor/r], and nonboosted protease inhibitor regimens with nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) regimens for Bazett's (QTcB) and Fredericia's (QTcF) heart rate corrected QT and PR. Changes in QTcB, QTcF, and PR after 12 and 24 months of randomization were compared in the drug conservation group and viral suppression group.Average levels of QTcB, QTcF, and PR duration at entry were 415, 406, and 158 ms. At study entry, 49% of participants were taking an NNRTI (no protease inhibitor)-based regimen and 31% were prescribed a boosted protease inhibitor, the most common being LPV/r. After adjustment for baseline factors, QTcB and QTcF levels did not vary by boosted protease inhibitor group (P = 0.26 and P = 0.34, respectively). For those given any of the boosted protease inhibitors, QTcB was 1.5 ms lower than the NNRTI group (P = 0.04). Both boosted and nonboosted protease inhibitor-containing regimens were significantly associated (P < 0.01 for each) with longer PR intervals compared to the NNRTI group. After adjustment, the difference between boosted protease inhibitors and the NNRTI group was 5.11 ms (P < 0.01); for nonboosted protease inhibitors, this difference was 3.00 ms (P < 0.01). Following ART interruption, PR duration declined for both the boosted and nonboosted protease inhibitor groups and compared to the viral suppression group, significant changes in PR interval were observed 24 months after ART interruption of boosted protease inhibitors (P < 0.01).Different protease inhibitor-based regimens have a similar, minimal effect on QT compared to NNRTI-based regimens. All protease inhibitor-based regimens (boosted and nonboosted) were associated with prolongation of PR, and interruption of protease inhibitor regimens reduced the prolonged PR duration. Further research is needed to confirm the findings of this study and assess the clinical relevance of the differences.

Dataset Information

Evolution of gag and gp41 in Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors.

Publications

Evolution of gag and gp41 in Patients Receiving Ritonavir-Boosted Protease Inhibitors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets