Jennifer Chiarella

Prevalence and Clinical Significance of HIV Drug Resistance Mutations by Ultra-Deep Sequencing in Antiretroviral-Naive Subjects in the CASTLE Study

Background CASTLE compared the efficacy of atazanavir/ritonavir with lopinavir/ritonavir, each in combination with tenofovir-emtricitabine in ARV-naïve subjects from 5 continents. Objectives Determine the baseline rate and clinical significance of TDR mutations using ultra-deep sequencing (UDS) in ARV-naïve subjects in CASTLE. Methods A case control study was performed on baseline samples for all 53 subjects with virologic failures (VF) at Week 48 and 95 subjects with virologic successes (VS) randomly selected and matched by CD4 count and viral load. UDS was performed using 454 Life Sciences/Roche technology. Results Of 148 samples, 141 had successful UDS (86 subtype B, 55 non-B subtypes). Overall, 30.5% of subjects had a TDR mutation at baseline; 15.6% only had TDR(s) at <20% of the viral population. There was no difference in the rate of TDRs by B (30.2%) or non-B subtypes (30.9%). VF (51) and VS (90) had similar rates of any TDRs (25.5% vs. 33.3%), NNRTI TDRs (11.1% vs.11.8%) and NRTI TDRs (24.4% vs. 25.5%). Of 9 (6.4%) subjects with M184V/I (7 at <20% levels), 6 experienced VF. 16 (11.3%) subjects had multiple TAMs, and 7 experienced VF. 3 (2.1%) subjects had both multiple TAMs+M184V, and all experienced VF. Of 14 (9.9%) subjects with PI TDRs (11 at <20% levels): only 1 experienced virologic failure. The majority of PI TDRs were found in isolation (e.g. 46I) at <20% levels, and had low resistance algorithm scores. Conclusion Among a representative sample of ARV-naïve subjects in CASTLE, TDR mutations were common (30.5%); B and non-B subtypes had similar rates of TDRs. Subjects with multiple PI TDRs were infrequent. Overall, TDRs did not affect virologic response for subjects on a boosted PI by week 48; however, a small subset of subjects with extensive NRTI backbone TDR patterns experienced virologic failure.

Antiretroviral resistance and high-risk transmission behavior among HIV-positive patients in clinical care.

Background: HIV-positive patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) who engage in HIV transmission behaviors may harbor and transmit drug-resistant HIV. However, little is known about the risk behaviors of these patients, potential partners exposed and the relationship of these to ART resistance. Objective: To determine the relationship of HIV drug resistance and continuing HIV transmission risk behavior among HIV-positive patients in care. Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional study of HIV transmission risk behavior and HIV drug resistance data from 333 HIV-positive patients. Results: Among a diverse population of 333 HIV-positive patients, 75 (23%) had unprotected sex during the previous 3-months, resulting in 1126 unprotected sexual events with 191 partners of whom 155 were believed by patients to be HIV-negative or of unknown status. Eighteen of the 75 (24%) had resistant HIV and 207 unprotected sexual events, exposing 18% of the HIV- or status unknown partners. There was no difference in the proportion of patients engaging in unprotected sex who had undetectable viral load (VL) (22%): VL > 400 copies/ml without resistance (20%) and VL > 400copies/ml with resistance (26%). Resistance and risk behavior was predicted only by lower mental health scores (odds ratio, 10.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.7–18.6). Conclusion: A substantial minority (23%) of patients in clinical care engaged in HIV sexual transmission risk behavior. A small subset of these also had ART-resistant HIV. However, this core group (approximately 5% of all patients) accounted for a large number of high-risk HIV transmission events with resistant virus, exposing a substantial number of partners.

HIV drug resistance and HIV transmission risk behaviors among active injection drug users.

HIV+ injection drug users in clinical care may harbor and transmit drug-resistant HIV. We performed a retrospective study of HIV drug resistance and risk behavior among HIV+ injection drug users in care to determine the number of needle-sharing events that involved and the proportion of sharing partners exposed to drug-resistant HIV. Among 180 HIV+ injection drug users, 55 (31%) reported injecting drugs in the previous month, and 22 of these (40%) shared needles and/or works 148 times with 296 partners, of whom 271 (92%) were thought to be HIV− or status unknown. Further, 55 (31%) drug users harbored resistant HIV, including 5 (3% of total) who also shared needles and/or works a total of 27 times with 44 partners (18% of all sharing events and 15% of all exposed partners). A small proportion of injection drug users receiving clinical care engage in injection risk behavior and carry resistant HIV; however, because of multiple partners and needle-sharing events, they expose a substantial number of individuals to drug-resistant HIV. Strategies to reduce injection drug use risk behaviors among patients in clinical care are needed to reduce the transmission of sensitive and resistant HIV.

Virologic Failures on Initial Boosted-PI Regimen Infrequently Possess Low-Level Variants with Major PI Resistance Mutations by Ultra-Deep Sequencing

Background It is unknown whether HIV-positive patients experiencing virologic failure (VF) on boosted-PI (PI/r) regimens without drug resistant mutations (DRM) by standard genotyping harbor low-level PI resistant variants. CASTLE compared the efficacy of atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) with lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), each in combination with TVD in ARV-naïve subjects. Objective To determine if VF on an initial PI/r-based regimen possess low-level resistant variants that may affect a subsequent PI-containing regimen. Methods/Results Patients experiencing VF on a Tenofovir/Emtricitabine+PI/r regimen were evaluated by ultra deep sequencing (UDS) for mutations classified/weighted by Stanford HIVdb. Samples were evaluated for variants to 0.4% levels. 36 VF subjects were evaluated by UDS; 24 had UDS for PI and RT DRMs. Of these 24, 19 (79.2%) had any DRM by UDS. The most common UDS-detected DRM were NRTI in 18 subjects: M184V/I (11), TAMs(7) & K65R(4); PI DRMs were detected in 9 subjects: M46I/V(5), F53L(2), I50V(1), D30N(1), and N88S(1). The remaining 12 subjects, all with VLs<10,000, had protease gene UDS, and 4 had low-level PI DRMs: F53L(2), L76V(1), I54S(1), G73S(1). Overall, 3/36(8.3%) subjects had DRMs identified with Stanford-HIVdb weights >12 for ATV or LPV: N88S (at 0.43% level-mutational load 1,828) in 1 subject on ATV; I50V (0.44%-mutational load 110) and L76V (0.52%-mutational load 20) in 1 subject each, both on LPV. All VF samples remained phenotypically susceptible to the treatment PI/r. Conclusion Among persons experiencing VF without PI DRMs with standard genotyping on an initial PI/r regimen, low-level variants possessing major PI DRMs were present in a minority of cases, occurred in isolation, and did not result in phenotypic resistance. NRTI DRMs were detected in a high proportion of subjects. These data suggest that PIs may remain effective in subjects experiencing VF on a PI/r-based regimen when PI DRMs are not detected by standard or UDS genotyping.

Prevalence of low-level HIV-1 variants with reverse transcriptase mutation K65R and the effect of antiretroviral drug exposure on variant levels.

BACKGROUND 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. METHODS 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. RESULTS 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. CONCLUSIONS 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.

Prevalence of WHO Transmitted Drug Resistance Mutations by Deep Sequencing in Antiretroviral-Naïve Subjects in Hunan Province, China

Background There are few data on the prevalence of WHO transmitted drug resistance mutations (TDRs) that could affect treatment responses to first line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Hunan Province, China. Objective Determine the prevalence of WHO NRTI/NNRTI/PI TDRs in ART-naïve subjects in Hunan Province by deep sequencing. Methods ART-naïve subjects diagnosed in Hunan between 2010–2011 were evaluated by deep sequencing for low-frequency HIV variants possessing WHO TDRs to 1% levels. Mutations were scored using the HIVdb.stanford.edu algorithm to infer drug susceptibility. Results Deep sequencing was performed on samples from 90 ART-naïve subjects; 83.3% were AE subtype. All subjects had advanced disease (average CD4 count 134 cells/mm3). Overall 25.6%(23/90) of subjects had HIV with major WHO NRTI/NNRTI TDRs by deep sequencing at a variant frequency level ≥1%; 16.7%(15/90) had NRTI TDR and 12.2%(11/90) had a major NNRTI TDR. The majority of NRTI/NNRTI mutations were identified at variant levels <5%. Mutations were analyzed by HIVdb.stanford.edu and 7.8% of subjects had variants with high-level nevirapine resistance; 4.4% had high-level NRTI resistance. Deep sequencing identified 24(27.6%) subjects with variants possessing either a PI TDR or hivdb.stanford.edu PI mutation (algorithm value≥15). 17(19.5%) had PI TDRs at levels >1%. Conclusions ART-naïve subjects from Hunan Province China infected predominantly with subtype AE frequently possessed HIV variants with WHO NRTI/NNRTI TDRs by deep sequencing that would affect the first line ART used in the region. Specific mutations conferring nevirapine high-level resistance were identified in 7.8% of subjects. The majority of TDRs detected were at variant levels <5% likely due to subjects having advanced chronic disease at the time of testing. PI TDRs were identified frequently, but were found in isolation and at low variant frequency. As PI/r use is infrequent in Hunan, the existence of PI mutations likely represent AE subtype natural polymorphism at low variant level frequency.

Low-Frequency NNRTI-Resistant HIV-1 Variants and Relationship to Mutational Load in Antiretroviral-Naïve Subjects

Low-frequency HIV variants possessing resistance mutations against non‑nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI), especially at HIV reverse transcriptase (RT) amino acid (aa) positions K103 and Y181, have been shown to adversely affect treatment response. Therapeutic failure correlates with both the mutant viral variant frequency and the mutational load. We determined the prevalence of NNRTI resistance mutations at several RT aa positions in viruses from 204 antiretroviral (ARV)-naïve HIV-infected individuals using deep sequencing, and examined the relationship between mutant variant frequency and mutational load for those variants. Deep sequencing to ≥0.4% levels found variants with major NNRTI-resistance mutations having a Stanford-HIVdb algorithm value ≥30 for efavirenz and/or nevirapine in 52/204 (25.5%) ARV-naïve HIV-infected persons. Eighteen different major NNRTI mutations were identified at 11 different positions, with the majority of variants being at frequency >1%. The frequency of these variants correlated strongly with the mutational load, but this correlation weakened at low frequencies. Deep sequencing detected additional major NNRTI-resistant viral variants in treatment-naïve HIV-infected individuals. Our study suggests the significance of screening for mutations at all RT aa positions (in addition to K103 and Y181) to estimate the true burden of pre-treatment NNRTI-resistance. An important finding was that variants at low frequency had a wide range of mutational loads (>100-fold) suggesting that frequency alone may underestimate the impact of specific NNRTI-resistant variants. We recommend further evaluation of all low-frequency NNRTI-drug resistant variants with special attention given to the impact of mutational loads of these variants on treatment outcomes.

A Population-Based and Longitudinal Study of Sexual Behavior and Multidrug-Resistant HIV Among Patients in Clinical Care

BackgroundPopulation-based and longitudinal information regarding sexual risk behavior among patients with multidrug resistant (MDR) HIV and their sexual partners is of great public health and clinical importance.ObjectiveTo characterize the HIV sexual risk behaviors of patients with and without drug-resistant HIV in the clinical care setting over time.Measurements393 HIV-positive patients completed questionnaires of self-reported sexual risk behaviors at approximate 6-month intervals extending over 24 months. HIV viral load and genotypic drug resistance obtained during the same time points were matched to the behavioral data. Multidrug resistance was defined as having resistance to 2 or 3 antiretroviral (ARV) drug classes.ResultsIn serial cross-sectional analyses, 393 patients (44% female and 79% heterosexual) contributed 919 matched behavioral and virologic results over the 24 months of data collection. Of these, 250 patients (64%) reported having sex during at least 1 survey period resulting in greater than 10,000 sexual events with more than 1000 partners. Unprotected sexual behavior was reported by 45% of sexually active patients, resulting in 34% of all sex events that exposed 29% of all partners. Of these patients with unprotected sexual events, 31% had HIV drug resistance - 11.6% with resistance to 2 classes of ARVs (2-class), and 1.8% with 3-class ARV resistance at the time of a sexual risk event. Close to 1000 or 28% of all unprotected sexual events involved resistant strains (11% of these with resistance to 2 classes and 0.2% with 3-class resistance, exposing 20% of unprotected sexual partners to resistant HIV (8% to 2-class and 0.6% to 3-class resistance).In longitudinal analysis among the 78 patients who reported a cumulative total of 12 months of sexual history and had resistance testing, 38% reported engaging in unprotected sexual behavior. There was substantial and complex variation in the distribution of unprotected sexual events and in the detection of resistance over time.ConclusionIn this study of HIV sexual risk and resistance over time among HIV-infected patients in clinical care, a substantial proportion engaged in unprotected sex and had drug-resistant HIV, frequently exposing partners to 1- or 2-class resistant HIV strains. However, relatively few exposures involved 3-class resistance. The dynamics of sexual risk behavior and HIV drug resistance are complex and vary over time and urgently require both general and targeted interventions to reduce transmission of resistant HIV.

HIV Drug Resistance Mutations (DRMs) Detected by Deep Sequencing in Virologic Failure Subjects on Therapy from Hunan Province, China.

Objective Determine HIV drug resistance mutations (DRMs) prevalence at low and high levels in ART-experienced patients experiencing virologic failure (VF). Methods 29 subjects from 18 counties in Hunan Province that experienced VF were evaluated for the prevalence of DRMs (Stanford DRMs with an algorithm value ≥15, include low-, intermediate and high-level resistance) by both Sanger sequencing (SS) and deep sequencing (DS) to 1% frequency levels. Results DS was performed on samples from 29 ART-experienced subjects; the median viral load 4.95×104 c/ml; 82.76% subtype CRF01_AE. 58 DRMs were detected by DS. 18 DRMs were detected by SS. Of the 58 mutations detected by DS, 40 were at levels <20% frequency (26 NNRTI, 12 NRTI and 2 PI) and the majority of these 95.00% (38/40) were not detected by standard genotyping. Of these 40 low-level DRMs, 16 (40%) were detected at frequency levels of 1–4% and 24 (60%) at levels of 5–19%. SS detected 15 of 17 (88.24%) DRMs at levels ≥ 20% that were detected by DS. The only variable associated with the detection of DRMs by DS was ART adherence (missed doses in the prior 7 days); all patients that reported missing a dose in the last 7 days had DRMs detected by DS. Conclusions DS of VF samples from treatment experienced subjects infected with primarily AE subtype frequently identified Stanford HIVdb NRTI and NNRTI resistance mutations with an algorithm value 15. Low frequency level resistant variants detected by DS were frequently missed by standard genotyping in VF specimens from antiretroviral-experienced subjects.

Association Between Risk Behaviors and Antiretroviral Resistance in Hiv-infected Patients Receiving Opioid Agonist Treatment

Objectives:Antiretroviral (ARV) resistance is of concern. Opioid agonist treatment (ie, methadone or buprenorphine) is effective and decreases HIV transmission risk behaviors and HIV seroconversion. Despite prevention efforts, injection drug use (IDU) and risky sexual behaviors remain prevalent in patients receiving opioid agonist treatment. The purpose of this study is to determine in HIV-infected patients receiving opioid agonist treatment, the prevalence of HIV transmission risk behaviors, the prevalence of ARV resistance, and the prevalence of ARV resistance among those with risk behaviors. Methods:The design was a cross-sectional study of patients recruited from opioid treatment programs and outpatient practices. We measured demographic, drug treatment, and HIV clinical information (including ARV adherence), self-reported HIV risk behaviors and drug use, urine toxicologies, and genotype testing for ARV resistance (with both standard assays and ultradeep sequencing). Data analysis included descriptive statistics. Results:Fifty-nine subjects were enrolled, 64% were male, 24% were white, and mean age was 46 years. Fifty-three percent were receiving methadone, 47% were receiving buprenorphine, and 80% were receiving opioid agonist treatment for 12 weeks or more. Fourteen percent reported unprotected sex, 7% reported sharing needles or works, and 60% had positive urine toxicology for illicit drug use. Fifteen percent had evidence of HIV resistance by standard genotyping; 7% with single class resistance, 3% with double class resistance, and 5% with triple class resistance. Ultradeep sequencing found additional class resistance in 5 subjects. Twenty-two percent of subjects with evidence of transmission risk behaviors versus 14% of subjects without risk behaviors had evidence of ARV resistance. Conclusions:Improved prevention and treatment efforts may be needed for HIV-infected, opioid dependent individuals receiving opioid agonist treatment to decrease transmission of ARV resistant virus, especially in resource limited settings.