Prevalence of low-level HIV-1 variants with reverse transcriptase mutation K65R and the effect of antiretroviral drug exposure on variant levels
ABSTRACT It has been reported that treatment-naive individuals infected with HIV-1 subtype C may be more likely to harbour viral variants possessing a K65R reverse transcriptase gene mutation. The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of low-level K65R variants within different HIV-1 subtypes and to assess the effects of antiretroviral exposure on K65R variant levels.
Treatment-naive individuals infected with different HIV-1 subtypes were genotyped by ultra-deep sequencing. Samples were evaluated for low-level variants to 0.4% or 1% levels depending upon viral load. Estimated mutational load was calculated by multiplying the percentage of the variant by the plasma viral load.
A total of 411 treatment-naive individuals were evaluated by ultra-deep sequencing to 1% levels; 4 subjects (0.97%) had K65R variants at ≥1% or had a very high mutation load. All four subjects had variants with linked drug resistance mutations suggesting transmitted resistant variants. 147 ARV-naive subjects were sequenced to 0.4% levels; 8.8% (13/147) had K65R low-level variants identified: 2.2% (2/92) in subtype B, 35.7% (10/28) in subtype C (P<0.001 for B versus C) and 3.7% (1/27) in non-B/C subtypes. The 13 ARV-naive subjects with K65R variants at <1% received tenofovir plus emtricitabine plus a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (TDF+FTC+PI/r) and 5 subsequently experienced virological failure. There was no enhancement in K65R levels by percentage or mutational load compared to pre-therapy levels.
Low-level K65R variants were more frequently identified in subtype C. K65R variants at >1% levels likely represent transmitted resistant variants. The clinical implication of low-level K65R variants below 1% in treatment-naive subjects who receive TDF+FTC+PI/r remains to be determined as the majority are very low-level and did not increase after antiretroviral exposure.
- SourceAvailable from: Patricia Recordon-Pinson
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Although UDPS has limitations particularly with regard to polymerization and pyrosequencing errors , , recent studies with different methods (UDPS, allele specific PCR) have shown that K65R is identified more frequently in subtype C HIV-1 from naïve patients , . In our naïve patients, there was a clear difference between K70R (mean 0%) and K65R (mean 0.66%) (Table 2). "
ABSTRACT: We and others have shown that subtype C HIV-1 isolates from patients failing on a regimen containing stavudine (d4T) or zidovudine (AZT) exhibit thymidine-associated mutations (TAMs) and K65R which can impair the efficacy of Tenofovir (TDF) at second line. Depending on the various studies, the prevalence of K65R substitution as determined by the Sanger method ranges from 4 to 30%. Our aim was to determine whether ultra-deep pyrosequencing (UDPS) could provide more information than the Sanger method about selection of K65R in this population of patients. 27 subtype C HIV-1 isolates from treated patients failing on a regimen with d4T or AZT plus lamivudine (3TC) plus nevirapine (NVP) or efavirenz (EFV) and who had been sequenced by Sanger were investigated by UDPS at codon 65 of the reverse transcriptase (RT). 18 isolates from naïve patients and dilutions of a control K65R plasmid were analysed by Sanger plus UDPS. Analysis of Sanger sequences of subtype C HIV-1 isolates from naïve patients exhibited expected polymorphic substitutions compared to subtype B but no drug resistance mutations (DRMs). Quantitation of K65R variants by UDPS ranged from <0.4% to 3.08%. Sanger sequences of viral isolates from patients at failure of d4T or AZT plus 3TC plus NVP or EFV showed numerous DRMs to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) including M184V, thymidine-associated mutations (TAMs) plus DRMs to non- nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). Two K65R were observed by Sanger in this series of 27 samples with UDPS percentages of 27 and 87%. Other samples without K65R by Sanger exhibited quantities of K65R variants ranging from <0.4% to 0.80%, which were below the values observed in isolates from naïve patients. While Sanger sequencing of subtype C isolates from treated patients at failure of d4T or AZT plus 3TC plus NVP or EFV exhibited numerous mutations including TAMs and 8% K65R, UDPS quantitation of K65R variants in the same series did not provide any more information than Sanger.PLoS ONE 05/2012; 7(5):e36549. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0036549 · 3.23 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) drug resistance may limit the benefits of antiretroviral therapy (ART). This cohort study examined patterns of drug-resistance mutations (DRMs) in individuals with virological failure on first-line ART at 13 clinical sites in 6 African countries and predicted their impact on second-line drug susceptibility. A total of 2588 antiretroviral-naive individuals initiated ART consisting of different nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) backbones (zidovudine, stavudine, tenofovir, or abacavir, plus lamivudine or emtricitabine) with either efavirenz or nevirapine. Population sequencing after 12 months of ART was retrospectively performed if HIV RNA was >1000 copies/mL. The 2010 International Antiviral Society-USA list was used to score major DRMs. The Stanford algorithm was used to predict drug susceptibility. HIV-1 sequences were generated for 142 participants who virologically failed ART, of whom 70% carried ≥1 DRM and 49% had dual-class resistance, with an average of 2.4 DRMs per sequence (range, 1-8). The most common DRMs were M184V (53.5%), K103N (28.9%), Y181C (15.5%), and G190A (14.1%). Thymidine analogue mutations were present in 8.5%. K65R was frequently selected by stavudine (15.0%) or tenofovir (27.7%). Among participants with ≥1 DRM, HIV-1 susceptibility was reduced in 93% for efavirenz/nevirapine, in 81% for lamivudine/emtricitabine, in 59% for etravirine/rilpivirine, in 27% for tenofovir, in 18% for stavudine, and in 10% for zidovudine. Early failure detection limited the accumulation of resistance. After stavudine failure in African populations, zidovudine rather than tenofovir may be preferred in second-line ART. Strategies to prevent HIV-1 resistance are a global priority.Clinical Infectious Diseases 04/2012; 54(11):1660-9. DOI:10.1093/cid/cis254 · 8.89 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Twenty years after its original discovery, tenofovir has acquired a crucial position in the fight against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). First, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is not only efficacious against, and has been licensed for the treatment of HIV (AIDS), but also HBV (hepatitis B). Second, for the treatment of HIV infections, TDF can be used in combination with other anti-HIV drugs, such as emtricitabine (combination termed Truvada(®)) and Truvada can be further combined with efavirenz, rilpivirine, elvitegravir, atazanavir, or darunavir, as a single once-daily oral pill. Third, Truvada can be used prophylactically to prevent transmission of HIV infection. And fourth, to prevent sexual HIV transmission, tenofovir could also be used topically (i.e., as a vaginal gel).Medicinal Research Reviews 07/2012; 32(4):765-85. DOI:10.1002/med.21267 · 8.43 Impact Factor