Article thumbnail

HIV-1 Phenotypic Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor Drug Resistance Test Interpretation Is Not Dependent on the Subtype of the Virus Backbone

By Michelle Bronze, Kim Steegen, Carole L. Wallis, Hans De Wolf, Maria A. Papathanasopoulos, Margriet Van Houtte, Wendy S. Stevens, Tobias Rinke de Wit and Lieven J. Stuyver

Abstract

To date, the majority of HIV-1 phenotypic resistance testing has been performed with subtype B virus backbones (e.g. HXB2). However, the relevance of using this backbone to determine resistance in non-subtype B HIV-1 viruses still needs to be assessed. From 114 HIV-1 subtype C clinical samples (36 ARV-naïve, 78 ARV-exposed), pol amplicons were produced and analyzed for phenotypic resistance using both a subtype B- and C-backbone in which the pol fragment was deleted. Phenotypic resistance was assessed in resulting recombinant virus stocks (RVS) for a series of antiretroviral drugs (ARV's) and expressed as fold change (FC), yielding 1660 FC comparisons. These Antivirogram® derived FC values were categorized as having resistant or sensitive susceptibility based on biological cut-off values (BCOs). The concordance between resistance calls obtained for the same clinical sample but derived from two different backbones (i.e. B and C) accounted for 86.1% (1429/1660) of the FC comparisons. However, when taking the assay variability into account, 95.8% (1590/1660) of the phenotypic data could be considered as being concordant with respect to their resistance call. No difference in the capacity to detect resistance associated with M184V, K103N and V106M mutations was noted between the two backbones. The following was concluded: (i) A high level of concordance was shown between the two backbone phenotypic resistance profiles; (ii) Assay variability is largely responsible for discordant results (i.e. for FC values close to BCO); (iii) Confidence intervals should be given around the BCO's, when assessing resistance in HIV-1 subtype C; (iv) No systematic resistance under- or overcalling of subtype C amplicons in the B-backbone was observed; (v) Virus backbone subtype sequence variability outside the pol region does not contribute to phenotypic FC values. In conclusion the HXB2 virus backbone remains an acceptable vector for phenotyping HIV-1 subtype C pol amplicons

Topics: Research Article
Publisher: Public Library of Science
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:3322145
Provided by: PubMed Central

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2010). (n.d.) Virco Biological Cut-offs. Available:http://www.vircolab.com/ hiv-resistance-products/vircotype-hiv-1/cut-offs-for-vircotype-hiv-1/biologicalcut-offs.
  2. (2010). A comparative analysis of HIV drug resistance interpretation based on short reverse transcriptase sequences versus full sequences.
  3. (2009). A comparison of HIV-1 drug susceptibility as provided by conventional phenotyping and by a phenotype prediction tool based on viral genotype.
  4. (2000). A novel phenotypic drug susceptibility assay for human immunodeficiency virus type 1.
  5. (1998). A rapid method for simultaneous detection of phenotypic resistance to inhibitors of protease and reverse transcriptase in recombinant human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates from patients treated with antiretroviral drugs.
  6. (2011). a Subtype B Backbone in a Recombinant Virus Assay.
  7. (2010). Affordable in-house antiretroviral drug resistance assay with good performance in non-subtype B HIV-1.
  8. (2011). Antiretroviral resistance patterns and factors associated with resistance in adult patients failing NNRTI-based regimens in the western cape, South Africa.
  9. (2004). Antivirogram or PhenoSense: a comparison of their reproducibility and an analysis of their correlation.
  10. (2011). Cohort Profile: The PharmAccess African (PASER-M) and the TREAT Asia (TASER-M) Monitoring Studies to Evaluate Resistance-HIV drug resistance in sub-Saharan Africa and the Asia-Pacific.
  11. (2002). Comparative Analysis of Two Commercial Phenotypic Assays for Drug Susceptibility Testing of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1.
  12. (2005). Comparison of the Precision and Sensitivity of the Antivirogram and PhenoSense HIV Drug Susceptibility Assays.
  13. (2011). Global trends in molecular epidemiology of HIV-1 during 2000–2007.
  14. (2011). HIV-1 drug resistance at antiretroviral treatment initiation in children previously exposed to single-dose nevirapine.
  15. (2011). HIV-1 drug resistance in antiretroviral-naive individuals in sub-Saharan Africa after rollout of antiretroviral therapy: a multicentre observational study. Lancet Infect Dis
  16. (2010). HIV-1 drug resistance mutations are present in six percent of persons initiating antiretroviral therapy in Lusaka, Zambia. Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes
  17. (2003). Human immunodeficiency virus reverse transcriptase and protease sequence database.
  18. (2010). Outcomes after virologic failure of first-line ART in South Africa.
  19. Parkin N (n.d.) Interpretation of Drug Susceptibility and Replication Capacity Results from
  20. (2005). The replicative fitness of primary human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) group M, HIV-1 group O, and HIV-2 isolates.
  21. (2008). The status of HIV-1 resistance to antiretroviral drugs in sub-Saharan Africa.
  22. (2010). Towards universal access. Scaling up priority HIV/AIDS interventions in the health sector. Geneva, World Health Organization. Available:http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/2010progressreport/ full_report_en.pdf.
  23. (2011). Transmitted antiretroviral drug resistance among newly HIV-1 diagnosed young individuals in Kampala.
  24. (2010). Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1:

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.