Thymidine Analogue Mutation Profiles: Factors Associated with Acquiring Specific Profiles and their Impact on the Virological Response to Therapy

Background

Studies have suggested that HIV-1 may develop thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs) by one of two distinct pathways – the TAM1 pathway (including mutations 41L, 210W and 215Y) or the TAM2 pathway (including mutations 67N, 70R and 219E/Q) – under the pressure of a not fully suppressive thymidine-analogue-containing regimen.

Methods

Frozen plasma samples stored in the EuroSIDA repository were selected and sent to two central laboratories for genotypic analysis. We considered 733 patients with at least one genotypic test showing ≥1 TAMs (the first of these tests in chronological order was used). TAM1 and TAM2 genotypic profiles were defined in accordance with previous literature. Statistical modelling involved logistic regression and linear regression analysis for censored data.

Results

The observed frequencies of patterns classifiable as TAM1 or TAM2 profiles were markedly higher than the probabilities of falling into these classifications by chance alone. The chance of detecting a TAM2 profile increased by 25% per additional year of exposure to zidovudine. We found that mutations 67N and 184V were not associated with a particular TAM profile. In the presence of TAM2 profiles, the adjusted mean difference in the 6-month viral reduction was 0.96 log10 copies/ml (95% confidence interval: 0.20; 1.73) higher in patients who started stavudine-containing regimens instead of zidovudine-containing regimens.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that the suggested TAM clustering is a real phenomenon and that it may be driven by which thymidine analogue the patients has used. In patients with TAM2-resistant viruses, stavudine appears to retain greater viral activity than zidovudine.

Are Specific Antiretrovirals associated with an Increased Risk of Discontinuation due to Toxicities or Patient/Physician Choice in patients with Hepatitis C Virus Coinfection?

Background

Liver damage associated with hepatitis C (HCV) may influence the likelihood of experiencing discontinuation due to toxicities or patient/physician choice (TOXPC) in patients taking combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Little information to address this concern is available from clinical trials as patients with HCV are often excluded.

Aims

To compare incidence rates of discontinuation due to TOXPC associated with specific antiretrovial drugs in patients with or without HCV.

Patients/methods

A total of 4929 patients from EuroSIDA under follow-up from January 1999 on a specific nucleoside pair (zidovudine/lamivudine, didanosine/stavudine, stavudine/lamivudine, or other) with a third drug (abacavir, nelfinavir, indinavir, nevirapine, efavirenz, lopinavir/ ritonavir or other boosted-protease inhibitor (PI)-containing regimen) and with known HCV serostatus were studied for the incidence of discontinuation of any nucleoside pair or third drug due to TOXPC. Incidence rate ratios were derived from Poisson regression models.

Results

In total 1358 patients had HCV (27.5%). During 12 799 person-years of follow-up there were 2141 discontinuations due to TOXPC for nucleoside pairs and 2501 for third drugs. The incidence of discontinuation due to TOXPC was consistently higher in patients with HCV after stratification by nucleoside pair or third drug. After adjustment for CD4+ count, gender, exposure group, time on HAART, region and treatment regimen, there were few differences in the rate of discontinuation due to TOXPC in those with HCV compared with those without for any nucleoside pairs or third drugs. Similar results were seen when concentrating on discontinuation due to toxicities alone.

Conclusions

Although patients with HCV generally had higher rates of discontinuation due to TOXPC compared with patients without HCV, there was little evidence to suggest that this was associated with any specific nucleoside pair or third drug used as part of cART. Our results do not suggest that any specific component of cART is more poorly tolerated in patients with HCV or that the presence of HCV should influence the choice between antiretrovirals used as part of a cART regimen.

Response to Antiretroviral Therapy among Patients Exposed to Three Classes of Antiretrovirals: Results from the Eurosida Study

There is an increasing proportion of HIV-positive patients exposed to all licensed classes of antiretrovirals, and the response to salvage regimens may be poor. Among over 8500 patients in EuroSIDA, the proportion of treated patients exposed to nucleosides, protease inhibitors (PIs) and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) increased from 0% in 1996 to 47% in 2001. Four-hundred-and-thirteen patients, who had failed virologically two highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimens and experienced all three main drug classes, started a salvage regimen of at least three drugs, in which at least one new PI or NNRTI was included. Median viral load was 4.7 log copies/ml [Interquartile range (IQR) 4.2–5.2], CD4 lymphocyte count 150/mm3 (IQR 60–274/mm3) and follow-up 14 months. Of these patients, 283 (69%) subsequently experienced at least a 1 log decline in viral load and 202 (49%) achieved a viral load <500 copies/ml. Conversely, the CD4 count halved from the baseline value in 88 (21%), and 45 (11%) experienced a new AIDS-defining disease. In multivariable analyses, a 1 log viral load reduction was related to baseline viral load [relative hazard (RH) 1.27 per 1 log higher; P=0.008], a previous viral load of less than 500 copies/ml (RH 1.69; P=0.002), more recent initiation of the regimen (RH 1.36 per year more recent; P=0.02), number of new drugs in the regimen (RH 1.20 per drug; P=0.02), time since start of antiretroviral therapy (RH 0.94 per extra year; P=0.035) and time spent on HAART with viral load >1000 copies/ml (RH 0.96 per extra month; P=0.0001). Analysis of factors associated with CD4 count decline and new AIDS disease also indicated improved outcomes in more recent times and a tendency for a better response in those starting more new drugs, but no relationship with the total number of drugs. Outcomes in people starting salvage regimens appear to depend on the number of new drugs started but not on the total number of drugs being used.