Extraordinary heterogeneity of virological outcomes in patients receiving highly antiretroviral therapy and monitored with the World Health Organization public health approach in sub-saharan Africa and southeast Asia.

BACKGROUND: The limited access to virological monitoring in developing countries is a major weakness of the current antiretroviral treatment (ART) strategy in these settings. We conducted a large cross-sectional study in Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, Senegal, Togo, Thailand, and Vietnam to assess virological failure and drug resistance mutations (DRMs) after 12 or 24 months of ART. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2011, we recruited adults attending ART centers 10-14 months (the M12 group) or 22-26 months (M24 group) after initiating ART. Demographic and clinical data were collected on site, and viral load was measured. Samples with a viral load of ≥ 1000 copies/mL, considered as the failure threshold, were genotyped for drug resistance assessment. RESULTS: Overall, 3935 patients were recruited (2060 at M12 and 1875 at M24). Median ages varied from 32 to 42 years. Median CD4(+) T-cell counts at ART initiation were low (99-172 cells/µL). The main ART regimens included stavudine/zidovudine plus lamivudine plus nevirapine/efavirenz. Overall, virological failure frequency was 11.1% for M12 patients and 12.4% for M24 patients, and 71.0% to 86.1% of these patients, respectively, had drug-resistant virus. Across sites, virological failure varied from 2.9% to 20.6% in M12 patients and from 3.7% to 26.0% in M24 patients. Predominant DRMs were associated with ART regimens, but virus in several patients accumulated DRMs to drugs not received, such as abacavir, didanosine, tenofovir, etravirine, and rilpivirine. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show heterogeneous virological failure and illustrate that, in addition to routine access to viral load, good management of ART programs is even more critical to improve treatment outcomes in resource-limited countries.

Field evaluation of dried blood spots for routine HIV-1 viral load and drug resistance monitoring in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in Africa and Asia.

Dried blood spots (DBS) can be used in developing countries to alleviate the logistic constraints of using blood plasma specimens for viral load (VL) and HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) testing, but they should be assessed under field conditions. Between 2009 and 2011, we collected paired plasma-DBS samples from treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected adults in Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Senegal, Togo, Thailand, and Vietnam. The DBS were stored at an ambient temperature for 2 to 4 weeks and subsequently at -20°C before testing. VL testing was performed on the plasma samples and DBS using locally available methods: the Abbott m2000rt HIV-1 test, generic G2 real-time PCR, or the NucliSENS EasyQ version 1.2 test. In the case of virological failure (VF), i.e., a plasma VL of ≥1,000 copies/ml, HIVDR genotyping was performed on paired plasma-DBS samples. Overall, we compared 382 plasma-DBS sample pairs for DBS VL testing accuracy. The sensitivities of the different assays in different laboratories for detecting VF using DBS varied from 75% to 100% for the m2000rt test in labs B, C, and D, 91% to 93% for generic G2 real-time PCR in labs A and F, and 85% for the NucliSENS test in lab E. The specificities varied from 82% to 97% for the m2000rt and NucliSENS tests and reached only 60% for the generic G2 test. The NucliSENS test showed good agreement between plasma and DBS VL but underestimated the DBS VL. The lowest agreement was observed for the generic G2 test. Genotyping was successful for 96/124 (77%) DBS tested, and 75/96 (78%) plasma-DBS pairs had identical HIVDR mutations. Significant discrepancies in resistance interpretations were observed in 9 cases, 6 of which were from the same laboratory. DBS can be successfully used as an alternative to blood plasma samples for routine VL and HIVDR monitoring in African and Asian settings. However, the selection of an adequate VL measurement method and the definition of the VF threshold should be considered, and laboratory performance should be monitored.