Persistent opioid use in patients with multiple myeloma post-ASCT.

PURPOSE: Bone pain is a common presenting symptom of multiple myeloma (MM) and is frequently treated with opioids in addition to myeloma directed therapy. With improved response and survival with modern myeloma therapy, it is important to re-examine the role of opioids in managing symptomatic myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with myeloma at Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey (RCINJ) who received an ASCT between January 1, 2012, and December 30, 2017, and who had subsequent follow-up (a total of 138 patients). We sought information specifically from the visits after induction therapy but prior to ASCT, at 100 days and 1-year post-ASCT follow-up visits. We compared opioid users and non-users in relation to treatment response, co-morbid conditions, and symptoms. We also examined amounts, duration, and odds of continued opioid use. RESULTS: At the time of the first analysis (before transplant), 34.8% of patients were using opioids and opioid use was more frequent in younger patients and, as expected, in patients with bone lesions. At 1 year, 31.9% of patients were still using opioids and continued opioid use was not correlated with disease response. Of the patients using opioids at the time of transplant, 58% either maintained their opioid dose or increased it at 1-year post-transplant. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis shows that despite a small decrease in opioid use over time, opioid use remains frequent in MM patients and is correlated with younger age and bone involvement but not with response to therapy. Over half the patients using opioids at the time of transplant continued or increased opioid use over the following year. With increasing survival in myeloma patients, further attention is required to distinguish cancer pain from chronic pain in cancer patients.

Loss of the protease dimerization inhibition activity of tipranavir (TPV) and its association with the acquisition of resistance to TPV by HIV-1.

Tipranavir (TPV), a protease inhibitor (PI) inhibiting the enzymatic activity and dimerization of HIV-1 protease, exerts potent activity against multi-PI-resistant HIV-1 isolates. When a mixture of 11 multi-PI-resistant (but TPV-sensitive) clinical isolates (HIV(11MIX)), which included HIV(B) and HIV(C), was selected against TPV, HIV(11MIX) rapidly (by 10 passages [HIV(11MIX)(P10)]) acquired high-level TPV resistance and replicated at high concentrations of TPV. HIV(11MIX)(P10) contained various amino acid substitutions, including I54V and V82T. The intermolecular FRET-based HIV-1 expression assay revealed that TPV's dimerization inhibition activity against cloned HIV(B) (cHIV(B)) was substantially compromised. The introduction of I54V/V82T into wild-type cHIV(NL4-3) (cHIV(NL4-3(I54V/V82T))) did not block TPV's dimerization inhibition or confer TPV resistance. However, the introduction of I54V/V82T into cHIV(B) (cHIV(B)(I54V/V82T)) compromised TPV's dimerization inhibition and cHIV(B)(I54V/V82T) proved to be significantly TPV resistant. L24M was responsible for TPV resistance with the cHIV(C) genetic background. The introduction of L24M into cHIV(NL4-3) (cHIV(NL4-3(L24M))) interfered with TPV's dimerization inhibition, while L24M increased HIV-1's susceptibility to TPV with the HIV(NL4-3) genetic background. When selected with TPV, cHIV(NL4-3(I54V/V82T)) most readily developed TPV resistance and acquired E34D, which compromised TPV's dimerization inhibition with the HIV(NL4-3) genetic background. The present data demonstrate that certain amino acid substitutions compromise TPV's dimerization inhibition and confer TPV resistance, although the loss of TPV's dimerization inhibition is not always associated with significantly increased TPV resistance. The findings that TPV's dimerization inhibition is compromised with one or two amino acid substitutions may explain at least in part why the genetic barrier of TPV against HIV-1's development of TPV resistance is relatively low compared to that of darunavir.

Loss of protease dimerization inhibition activity of darunavir is associated with the acquisition of resistance to darunavir by HIV-1.

Dimerization of HIV protease is essential for the acquisition of protease's proteolytic activity. We previously identified a group of HIV protease dimerization inhibitors, including darunavir (DRV). In the present work, we examine whether loss of DRV's protease dimerization inhibition activity is associated with HIV development of DRV resistance. Single amino acid substitutions, including I3A, L5A, R8A/Q, L24A, T26A, D29N, R87K, T96A, L97A, and F99A, disrupted protease dimerization, as examined using an intermolecular fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET)-based HIV expression assay. All recombinant HIV(NL4-3)-based clones with such a protease dimerization-disrupting substitution failed to replicate. A highly DRV-resistant in vitro-selected HIV variant and clinical HIV strains isolated from AIDS patients failing to respond to DRV-containing antiviral regimens typically had the V32I, L33F, I54M, and I84V substitutions in common in protease. None of up to 3 of the 4 substitutions affected DRV's protease dimerization inhibition, which was significantly compromised by the four combined substitutions. Recombinant infectious clones containing up to 3 of the 4 substitutions remained sensitive to DRV, while a clonal HIV variant with all 4 substitutions proved highly resistant to DRV with a 205-fold 50% effective concentration (EC(50)) difference compared to HIV(NL4-3). The present data suggest that the loss of DRV activity to inhibit protease dimerization represents a novel mechanism contributing to HIV resistance to DRV. The finding that 4 substitutions in PR are required for significant loss of DRV's protease dimerization inhibition should at least partially explain the reason DRV has a high genetic barrier against HIV's acquisition of DRV resistance.