Cross-resistance to elvitegravir and dolutegravir in 502 patients failing on raltegravir: a French national study of raltegravir-experienced HIV-1-infected patients

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence and patterns of resistance to integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in patients experiencing virological failure on raltegravir-based ART and the impact on susceptibility to INSTIs (raltegravir, elvitegravir and dolutegravir). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from 502 treatment-experienced patients failing a raltegravir-containing regimen in a multicentre study. Reverse transcriptase, protease and integrase were sequenced at failure for each patient. INSTI resistance-associated mutations investigated were those included in the last ANRS genotypic algorithm (v23). RESULTS: Among the 502 patients, at failure, median baseline HIV-1 RNA (viral load) was 2.9 log10 copies/mL. Patients had been previously exposed to a median of five NRTIs, one NNRTI and three PIs. Seventy-one percent harboured HIV-1 subtype B and the most frequent non-B subtype was CRF02_AG (13.3%). The most frequent mutations observed were N155H/S (19.1%), Q148G/H/K/R (15.4%) and Y143C/G/H/R/S (6.7%). At failure, viruses were considered as fully susceptible to all INSTIs in 61.0% of cases, whilst 38.6% were considered as resistant to raltegravir, 34.9% to elvitegravir and 13.9% to dolutegravir. In the case of resistance to raltegravir, viruses were considered as susceptible to elvitegravir in 11% and to dolutegravir in 64% of cases. High HIV-1 viral load at failure (P < 0.001) and low genotypic sensitivity score of the associated treatment with raltegravir (P < 0.001) were associated with the presence of raltegravir-associated mutations at failure. Q148 mutations were selected more frequently in B subtypes versus non-B subtypes (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a high proportion of viruses remain susceptible to dolutegravir in the case of failure on a raltegravir-containing regimen

Impact of lopinavir/ritonavir use on antiretroviral resistance in recent clinical practice

Objectives This observational study was requested by French health authorities to determine the impact of lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra®) on antiretroviral resistance in clinical practice. Virological failures of lopinavir/ritonavir and their effects on the resistance to protease inhibitors and reverse transcriptase inhibitors were evaluated in protease inhibitor-experienced patients.Patients and methods Virological failure was defined as an HIV-1 plasma viral load >50 copies/mL after at least 3 months of lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy. For all patients, a resistance genotypic test was available at failure and before lopinavir/ritonavir treatment. Data from 72 patients with inclusion criteria were studied. Results The mean viral load at baseline was 4 log10 copies/mL (1.6–6.5). Mutations in the protease gene significantly selected between baseline and failure were L10V, K20R, L33F, M36I, I47V, I54V, A71V and I85V (P < 0.05). Patients who had more than seven protease inhibitor mutations at baseline showed a significantly increased risk of occurrence of protease inhibitor mutations. The proportion of viruses susceptible to atazanavir, fosamprenavir and darunavir decreased significantly between baseline and failure (P < 0.05). Among patients with a virus susceptible to atazanavir at day 0, 26% (n = 14) exhibited a virus resistant or possibly resistant at the time of failure. This proportion was 32% (n = 16) for fosamprenavir and 16% (n = 7) for darunavir. Conclusions A darunavir-based regimen appears to be a sequential option in the case of lopinavir/ritonavir failure. To compare and determine the best treatment sequencing, similar studies should be performed for darunavir/ritonavir and atazanavir/ritonavir

Antiretroviral-naive and -treated HIV-1 patients can harbour more resistant viruses in CSF than in plasma

Objectives The neurological disorders in HIV-1-infected patients remain prevalent. The HIV-1 resistance in plasma and CSF was compared in patients with neurological disorders in a multicentre study. Methods Blood and CSF samples were collected at time of neurological disorders for 244 patients. The viral loads were >50 copies/mL in both compartments and bulk genotypic tests were realized. Results On 244 patients, 89 and 155 were antiretroviral (ARV) naive and ARV treated, respectively. In ARV-naive patients, detection of mutations in CSF and not in plasma were reported for the reverse transcriptase (RT) gene in 2/89 patients (2.2%) and for the protease gene in 1/89 patients (1.1%). In ARV-treated patients, 19/152 (12.5%) patients had HIV-1 mutations only in the CSF for the RT gene and 30/151 (19.8%) for the protease gene. Two mutations appeared statistically more prevalent in the CSF than in plasma: M41L (P = 0.0455) and T215Y (P = 0.0455). Conclusions In most cases, resistance mutations were present and similar in both studied compartments. However, in 3.4% of ARV-naive and 8.8% of ARV-treated patients, the virus was more resistant in CSF than in plasma. These results support the need for genotypic resistance testing when lumbar puncture is performe

COPEDOL: A Two-Year Observational Study in Pretreated HIV-1-infected Patients Switching to a Dolutegravir-Based Regimen

International audienc

Two Different Patterns of Mutations are Involved in the Genotypic Resistance Score for Atazanavir Boosted Versus Unboosted by Ritonavir in Multiple Failing Patients

The protease inhibitor atazanavir (ATV) can be used either boosted by ritonavir (ATV300/r) or unboosted (ATV400). To date, however, genotypic resistance scores (GRSs) have been developed only for boosted-ATV. We have determined GRS associated with virologic response (VR) for both ATV300/r and ATV400 in highly pre-treated HIV-1 infected patients

Long COVID-19 Symptoms: Clinical Characteristics and Recovery Rate among Non-Severe Outpatients over a Six-Month Follow-Up

BACKGROUND: To describe persistent symptoms in long COVID-19 non-severe outpatients and report the 6-month clinical recovery (CR) rate. METHODS: Observational study enrolling outpatients (≥ 18 years) with confirmed non-severe COVID-19 (positive nasopharyngeal RT-PCR or presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies) who consulted for persistent symptoms after the first pandemic wave (March-May 2020). CR was assessed at the 6-month visit and defined as complete (no symptom), partial (persistent symptoms of lower intensity) or lack of recovery (no improvement). RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (79% women, mean age: 48 years) enrolled; main symptoms (mean 81 days after acute infection): asthenia/myalgia (77%), dyspnea (51%), headaches (35%), cough (33%). At 6 months (n = 56), 30% had complete, 57% partial, and 13% lack of recovery. The proportion of patients with > 2 persistent symptoms was 26% at 6 months (main symptoms: dyspnea [54%] and asthenia/myalgia [46%]). CONCLUSION: We observed a slow but high recovery rate at 6 months among these outpatients