Effectiveness of Protease Inhibitor Monotherapy versus Combination Antiretroviral Maintenance Therapy: A Meta-Analysis

The unparalleled success of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) is based on the combination of three drugs from two classes. There is insufficient evidence whether simplification to ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor (PI/r) monotherapy in virologically suppressed HIV-infected patients is effective and safe to reduce cART side effects and costs

Baseline natural killer and T cell populations correlation with virologic outcome after regimen simplification to atazanavir/ritonavir alone (ACTG 5201)

Objectives: Simplified maintenance therapy with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) provides an alternative treatment option for HIV-1 infection that spares nucleoside analogs (NRTI) for future use and decreased toxicity. We hypothesized that the level of immune activation (IA) and recovery of lymphocyte populations could influence virologic outcomes after regimen simplification. Methods: Thirty-four participants with virologic suppression ≥48 weeks on antiretroviral therapy (2 NRTI plus protease inhibitor) were switched to ATV/r alone in the context of the ACTG 5201 clinical trial. Flow cytometric analyses were performed on PBMC isolated from 25 patients with available samples, of which 24 had lymphocyte recovery sufficient for this study. Assessments included enumeration of T-cells (CD4/CD8), natural killer (NK) (CD3+CD56 +CD16+) cells and cell-associated markers (HLA-DR, CD's 38/69/94/95/158/279). Results: Eight of the 24 patients had at least one plasma HIV-1 RNA level (VL) <50 copies/mL during the study. NK cell levels below the group median of 7.1% at study entry were associated with development of VL <50 copies/mL following simplification by regression and survival analyses (p = 0.043 and 0.023), with an odds ratio of 10.3 (95% CI: 1.92-55.3). Simplification was associated with transient increases in naïve and CD25+ CD4+ T-cells, and had no impact on IA levels. Conclusions: Lower NK cell levels prior to regimen simplification were predictive of virologic rebound after discontinuation of nucleoside analogs. Regimen simplification did not have a sustained impact on markers of IA or T lymphocyte populations in 48 weeks of clinical monitoring. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00084019

Evidence for Reduced Drug Susceptibility without Emergence of Major Protease Mutations following Protease Inhibitor Monotherapy Failure in the SARA Trial

Background Major protease mutations are rarely observed following failure with protease inhibitors (PI), and other viral determinants of failure to PI are poorly understood. We therefore characterized Gag-Protease phenotypic susceptibility in subtype A and D viruses circulating in East Africa following viral rebound on PIs. Methods Samples from baseline and treatment failure in patients enrolled in the second line LPV/r trial SARA underwent phenotypic susceptibility testing. Data were expressed as fold-change in susceptibility relative to a LPV-susceptible reference strain. Results We cloned 48 Gag-Protease containing sequences from seven individuals and performed drug resistance phenotyping from pre-PI and treatment failure timepoints in seven patients. For the six patients where major protease inhibitor resistance mutations did not emerge, mean fold-change EC50 to LPV was 4.07 fold (95% CI, 2.08–6.07) at the pre-PI timepoint. Following viral failure the mean fold-change in EC50 to LPV was 4.25 fold (95% CI, 1.39–7.11, p = 0.91). All viruses remained susceptible to DRV. In our assay system, the major PI resistance mutation I84V, which emerged in one individual, conferred a 10.5-fold reduction in LPV susceptibility. One of the six patients exhibited a significant reduction in susceptibility between pre-PI and failure timepoints (from 4.7 fold to 9.6 fold) in the absence of known major mutations in protease, but associated with changes in Gag: V7I, G49D, R69Q, A120D, Q127K, N375S and I462S. Phylogenetic analysis provided evidence of the emergence of genetically distinct viruses at the time of treatment failure, indicating ongoing viral evolution in Gag-protease under PI pressure. Conclusions Here we observe in one patient the development of significantly reduced susceptibility conferred by changes in Gag which may have contributed to treatment failure on a protease inhibitor containing regimen. Further phenotype-genotype studies are required to elucidate genetic determinants of protease inhibitor failure in those who fail without traditional resistance mutations whilst PI use is being scaled up globally