Modulation of K65R selection by zidovudine inclusion: analysis of HIV resistance selection in subjects with virologic failure receiving once-daily abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine and tenofovir DF (study COL40263)

HIV and Drug-Resistant Subtypes

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a human viral infectious disease caused by the positive-sense single-stranded (ss) RNA Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) (Retroviridae family, Ortervirales order). HIV-1 can be distinguished into various worldwide spread groups and subtypes. HIV-2 also causes human immunodeficiency, which develops slowly and tends to be less aggressive. HIV-2 only partially homologates to HIV-1 despite the similar derivation. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is the treatment approved to control HIV infection, based on multiple antiretroviral drugs that belong to different classes: (i) NNRTIs, (ii) NRTIs, (iii) PIs, (iv) INSTIs, and (v) entry inhibitors. These drugs, acting on different stages of the HIV life cycle, decrease the patient's total burden of HIV, maintain the function of the immune system, and prevent opportunistic infections. The appearance of several strains resistant to these drugs, however, represents a problem today that needs to be addressed as best as we can. New outbreaks of strains show a widespread geographic distribution and a highly variable mortality rate, even affecting treated patients significantly. Therefore, novel treatment approaches should be explored. The present review discusses updated information on HIV-1- and HIV-2-resistant strains, including details on different mutations responsible for drug resistance.

Review of tenofovir use in HIV-infected children

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in children ages 2 years and older and is recommended by the World Health Organization for use as a preferred first-line nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor in adults and adolescents ages 10 years and older. The simplicity of once daily dosing, few metabolic side effects and efficacy against hepatitis B virus make TDF suitable for use in a large scale program. Unlike thymidine analoge nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs); tenofovir does not induce multi-NRTI resistance mutations, so more NRTI options are available for future second-line-regimens. Fixed-dose combinations of TDF with other ARVs as a single tablet regimen are now widely available for adults and adolescents, but none are available for young children. Current information on TDF including the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability in children and adolescents was reviewed. A dosing regimen according to body-weight-band has been established for pediatric use. Safety concerns of TDF mainly relate to its effects on renal function and bone mineral density. Regular monitoring of renal function in high-risk patients, including those on other nephrotoxic drugs, may be warranted to detect adverse renal effects. Long-term-data on renal and bone outcomes among HIV-infected children is needed. Lessons learned from clinical studies will help clinicians balance the risks and benefits of TDF and design appropriate antiretroviral regimens for children in different circumstances.

Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance mutations associated with first-line stavudine-containing antiretroviral therapy: programmatic implications for countries phasing out stavudine

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization Antiretroviral Treatment Guidelines recommend phasing-out stavudine because of its risk of long-term toxicity. There are two mutational pathways of stavudine resistance with different implications for zidovudine and tenofovir cross-resistance, the primary candidates for replacing stavudine. However, because resistance testing is rarely available in resource-limited settings, it is critical to identify the cross-resistance patterns associated with first-line stavudine failure.

METHODS

We analyzed HIV-1 resistance mutations following first-line stavudine failure from 35 publications comprising 1,825 individuals. We also assessed the influence of concomitant nevirapine vs. efavirenz, therapy duration, and HIV-1 subtype on the proportions of mutations associated with zidovudine vs. tenofovir cross-resistance.

RESULTS

Mutations with preferential zidovudine activity, K65R or K70E, occurred in 5.3% of individuals. Mutations with preferential tenofovir activity, ≥ two thymidine analog mutations (TAMs) or Q151M, occurred in 22% of individuals. Nevirapine increased the risk of TAMs, K65R, and Q151M. Longer therapy increased the risk of TAMs and Q151M but not K65R. Subtype C and CRF01_AE increased the risk of K65R, but only CRF01_AE increased the risk of K65R without Q151M.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of concomitant nevirapine vs. efavirenz, therapy duration, or subtype, tenofovir was more likely than zidovudine to retain antiviral activity following first-line d4T therapy.

Resistance patterns selected by nevirapine vs. efavirenz in HIV-infected patients failing first-line antiretroviral treatment: a bayesian analysis

Background

WHO recommends starting therapy with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) and two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), i.e. nevirapine or efavirenz, with lamivudine or emtricitabine, plus zidovudine or tenofovir. Few studies have compared resistance patterns induced by efavirenz and nevirapine in patients infected with the CRF01_AE Southeast Asian HIV-subtype. We compared patterns of NNRTI- and NRTI-associated mutations in Thai adults failing first-line nevirapine- and efavirenz -based combinations, using Bayesian statistics to optimize use of data.

Methods and Findings

In a treatment cohort of HIV-infected adults on NNRTI-based regimens, 119 experienced virologic failure (>500 copies/mL), with resistance mutations detected by consensus sequencing. Mutations were analyzed in relation to demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables at time of genotyping. The Geno2Pheno system was used to evaluate second-line drug options. Eighty-nine subjects were on nevirapine and 30 on efavirenz. The NRTI backbone consisted of lamivudine or emtricitabine plus either zidovudine (37), stavudine (65), or tenofovir (19). The K103N mutation was detected in 83% of patients on efavirenz vs. 28% on nevirapine, whereas Y181C was detected in 56% on nevirapine vs. 20% efavirenz. M184V was more common with nevirapine (87%) than efavirenz (63%). Nevirapine favored TAM-2 resistance pathways whereas efavirenz selected both TAM-2 and TAM-1 pathways. Emergence of TAM-2 mutations increased with the duration of virologic replication (OR 1.25–1.87 per month increment). In zidovudine-containing regimens, the overall risk of resistance across all drugs was lower with nevirapine than with efavirenz, whereas in tenofovir-containing regimen the opposite was true.

Conclusions

TAM-2 was the major NRTI resistance pathway for CRF01_AE, particularly with nevirapine; it appeared late after virological failure. In patients who failed, there appeared to be more second-line drug options when zidovudine was combined with nevirapine or tenofovir with efavirenz than with alternative combinations.

Tenofovir (TDF)-selected or abacavir (ABC)-selected low-frequency HIV type 1 subpopulations during failure with persistent viremia as detected by ultradeep pyrosequencing

Detection of drug resistance is critical for determining antiretroviral treatment options. Ultradeep pyrosequencing (UDPS; 454 Life Sciences) is capable of detecting virus variant subpopulations with much greater sensitivity than population sequencing, which typically has a detection limit around 20%. UDPS of the HIV-1 reverse transcriptase (RT) (amino acids 56-120) was performed to detect the key mutations K65R and L74V associated with tenofovir and abacavir use. Plasma specimens from subjects with persistent rebound viremia following suppression on tenofovir (n = 8) or abacavir (n = 9)-based therapy were studied. Samples from a subject treated with zidovudine/lamivudine/efavirenz with a similar loss of virologic response served as a control. HIV-1 plasma RNA was ≥3.68 log(10) copies/ml at all time points sequenced. The median number of UDPS sequences analyzed/time point was 33,246. Among the eight tenofovir-treated subjects, three showed high-frequency (>20%) RT K65R at the time of failure, whereas one showed low-frequency (<20%) L74V; no low-frequency K65R was detected in these subjects. Among the nine abacavir-treated subjects, three showed low-frequency K65R; no L74V was detected in these patients. No K65R or L74V was detected in the samples from the control subject. At failure, other RT mutations were detected, including low-frequency NNRTI-resistant species detected at ≥1 time point in nine subjects; the key NNRTI mutation K103N, however, was always observed at >20% frequency. Although UDPS is useful in the detection of low-frequency subpopulations with transmitted resistance in antiviral-naive patients, it may have less utility in treatment-experienced patients with persistent viremia on therapy.

Evolution of drug resistance during 48 weeks of zidovudine/lamivudine/tenofovir in the absence of real-time viral load monitoring

OBJECTIVES

To describe the resistance mutations selected by a first-line regimen of zidovudine/lamivudine/tenofovir in the absence of real-time viral load monitoring.

DESIGN

A substudy of 300 participants from the Development of Antiretroviral Therapy in Africa trial in Uganda and Zimbabwe, which compared managing antiretroviral therapy with and without laboratory monitoring.

METHODS

Stored plasma samples from selected time points were assayed retrospectively for HIV-1 RNA. The pol gene in all baseline samples and those with HIV RNA >1000 copies per milliliter at weeks 24 and 48 were sequenced.

RESULTS

The proportion with HIV RNA >1000 copies per milliliter increased from 15% at 24 weeks to 24% at 48 weeks. Eighteen of 31 (58%) genotyped samples at 24 weeks had ≥ 1 major nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-associated mutations compared with 41 of 47 (87%) at 48 weeks. Excluding 1 nonadherent patient, a mean of 2.0 (95% confidence interval: 1.3 to 2.8) thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) developed between weeks 24 and 48 among 14 patients with HIV RNA >1000 copies per milliliter at both time points. K65R was detected in 8 of 63 (13%) patients and was negatively associated with number of TAMs (P = 0.01) but not viral subtype (P = 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

A high rate of acquisition of TAMs, but not of K65R, among patients with prolonged viraemia was observed. However, most patients were virologically suppressed at 48 weeks, and long-term clinical and immunological outcomes in the Development of Antiretroviral Therapy in Africa trial were favorable.

Low-abundance HIV species and their impact on mutational profiles in patients with virological failure on once-daily abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine and tenofovir

Background

HIV clonal genotypic analysis (CG) was used to investigate whether a more sensitive analysis method would detect additional low-abundance mutations compared with population genotyping (PG) in antiretroviral-naive patients who experienced virological failure (VF) during treatment with abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine and tenofovir.

Methods

HIV was analysed by PG and CG (771 baseline and 657 VF clones) from subjects with VF (confirmed HIV RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL at 24–48 weeks).

Results

Fourteen of 123 subjects (11%) met VF criteria; their median baseline HIV RNA was 5.4 log₁₀ copies/mL, and 4.0 log₁₀ copies/mL at VF. By baseline PG, 2/14 had HIV-1 with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) or non-NRTI mutations. By baseline CG, 9/14 had HIV-1 with NNRTI and/or NRTI mutations; 7/9 had study drug-associated mutations. By PG at VF, 10/14 had selected for resistance mutations [2, K65R; 1, M184V; and 7, thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) ± M184V]. By CG at VF, for subjects with TAMs, T215F was more commonly detected (5/14 samples) than T215Y (2/14). For one subject who selected K65R at VF, both K65R-containing clones and TAM-containing clones (both T215A and T215F) were observed independently but not conjunctively in the same clone in a post-VF sample.

Conclusions

The majority of subjects with VF had major and minor mutations detected at VF; CG detected additional low-abundance variants at baseline and VF that could have influenced mutation selection pathways. Both PG and CG data suggest TAMs, not K65R selection, are the preferred resistance route, biased towards 215F selection. No HIV clone contained both K65R and T215F/Y mutations, suggesting in vivo antagonism between the two mutations. The once-daily zidovudine usage and high baseline viraemia may also have contributed to rapid selection of HIV with multiple mutations in VFs.

The K65R mutation in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase: genetic barriers, resistance profile and clinical implications

Resistance to antiviral therapy is the limiting factor in the successful management of HIV. In general, the K65R mutation is rarely selected (1.7-4%) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), abacavir (ABC), didanosine (ddI), and stavudine (d4T), as compared with the high incidence (>40%) of thymidine analog mutations associated with zidovudine and d4T. The high barrier to the development of K65R may reflect a combination of factors, including the high potency of K65R-selecting drugs, including recommended TDF/emtricitabine and ABC/lamivudine (ABC/3TC) combinations; the partial (low-intermediate level) profile of cross-resistance conferred by K65R to TDF, ABC and 3TC; the favorable viral fitness constraint imposed by K65R and the 3TC/emtricitabine-associated M184V mutations; the bidirectional antagonism between the K65R and thymidine analog mutation pathways; and unique RNA structural considerations in the region surrounding codon 65. Nevertheless, surprisingly high levels of treatment failures and K65R resistance may be associated with triple nucleoside analog regimens. The use of TDF + ABC, TDF + ddI and ABC + d4T in combination with 3TC or emtricitabine should be avoided. This selection of K65R may be reduced by the inclusion of zidovudine in two-four nucleoside reverse-transcriptase regimens. Clinical studies have demonstrated an increased frequency of K65R in association with suboptimal d4T and ddI regimens, as well as nevirapine and its resistance mutations Y181C and G190A. The potential for the development of the K65R mutation in subtype C is particularly problematic wherein a signature KKK nucleotide motif, at codons 64, 65 and 66 in reverse transcriptase, appear to lead to template pausing, facilitating the selection of K65R. Optimizing regimens may attenuate the emergence of K65R, leading to better long-term treatment management in different geographic settings. TDF-based regimens are the leading candidates for first- and second-line therapy, microbicides and chemoprophylaxis strategies.