Need assessment for HIV drug resistance testing and landscape of current and future technologies in low- and middle-income countries.

Resistance to antiretroviral drugs used to treat HIV is an important and evolving concern, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have been impacted to the greatest extent by the HIV pandemic. Efforts to monitor the emergence and transmission of resistance over the past decade have shown that drug resistance-especially to the nucleoside analogue and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors-can (and have) increased to levels that can jeopardize the efficacy of available treatment options at the population level. The global shift to integrase-based regimens as the preferred first-line therapy as well as technological advancements in the methods for detecting resistance have had an impact in broadening and diversifying the landscape of and use case for HIV drug resistance testing. This review estimates the potential demand for HIV drug resistance tests, and surveys current testing methodologies, with a focus on their application in LMICs.

Predicted effects of the introduction of long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended by WHO as an additional option for HIV prevention in sub-Saharan Africa, but there is concern that its introduction could lead to an increase in integrase-inhibitor resistance undermining treatment programmes that rely on dolutegravir. We aimed to project the health benefits and risks of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in settings in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: With HIV Synthesis, an individual-based HIV model, we simulated 1000 setting-scenarios reflecting both variability and uncertainty about HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa and compared outcomes for each with and without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction. PrEP use is assumed to be risk-informed and to be used only in 3-month periods (the time step for the model) when having condomless sex. We consider three groups at risk of integrase-inhibitor resistance emergence: people who start cabotegravir-PrEP after (unknowingly) being infected with HIV, those who seroconvert while on PrEP, and those with HIV who have residual cabotegravir drugs concentrations during the early tail period after recently stopping PrEP. We projected the outcomes of policies of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction and of no introduction in 2022 across 50 years. In 50% of setting-scenarios we considered that more sensitive nucleic-acid-based HIV diagnostic testing (NAT), rather than regular antibody-based HIV rapid testing, might be used to reduce resistance risk. For cost-effectiveness analysis we assumed in our base case a cost of cabotegravir-PrEP drug to be similar to oral PrEP, resulting in a total annual cost of USD$144 per year ($114 per year and $264 per year considered in sensitivity analyses), a cost-effectiveness threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life years averted, and a discount rate of 3% per year. FINDINGS: Reflecting our assumptions on the appeal of cabotegravir-PrEP, its introduction is predicted to lead to a substantial increase in PrEP use with approximately 2·6% of the adult population (and 46% of those with a current indication for PrEP) receiving PrEP compared with 1·5% (28%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction across 20 years. As a result, HIV incidence is expected to be lower by 29% (90% range across setting-scenarios 6-52%) across the same period compared with no introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP. In people initiating antiretroviral therapy, the proportion with integrase-inhibitor resistance after 20 years is projected to be 1·7% (0-6·4%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction but 13·1% (4·1-30·9%) with. Cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is predicted to lower the proportion of all people on antiretroviral therapy with viral loads less than 1000 copies per mL by 0·9% (-2·5% to 0·3%) at 20 years. For an adult population of 10 million an overall decrease in number of AIDS deaths of about 4540 per year (-13 000 to -300) across 50 years is predicted, with little discernible benefit with NAT when compared with standard antibody-based rapid testing. AIDS deaths are predicted to be averted with cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in 99% of setting-scenarios. Across the 50-year time horizon, overall HIV programme costs are predicted to be similar regardless of whether cabotegravir-PrEP is introduced (total mean discounted annual HIV programme costs per year across 50 years is $151·3 million vs $150·7 million), assuming the use of standard antibody testing. With antibody-based rapid HIV testing, the introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective under an assumed threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life year averted in 82% of setting-scenarios at the cost of $144 per year, in 52% at $264, and in 87% at $114. INTERPRETATION: Despite leading to increases in integrase-inhibitor drug resistance, cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is likely to reduce AIDS deaths in addition to HIV incidence. Long-acting cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective if delivered at similar cost to oral PrEP with antibody-based rapid HIV testing. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Epidemiology of HIV drug resistance in low- and middle-income countries and WHO global strategy to monitor its emergence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarises the latest information of the epidemiology of HIV drug resistance (HIVDR) in low- and middle-income countries and the updated WHO global strategy for HIVDR surveillance and monitoring. RECENT FINDINGS: Finding from recent national-representative surveys show a rise in pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) to reverse transcriptase inhibitors and especially to the class of nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Levels of PDR are especially high in infants <18 months and adults reporting prior exposure to antiretrovirals. Although viral suppression rates are generally high and increasing among adults on antiretroviral therapy, those with unsuppressed viremia have high levels of acquired drug resistance (ADR). Programmatic data on HIVDR to integrase-transfer-inhibitor resistance is scarce, highlighting the need to increase integrase-inhibitors resistance surveillance. As the landscape of HIV prevention, treatment and monitoring evolves, WHO has also adapted its strategy to effectively support countries in preventing and monitoring the emergence of HIVDR. This includes new survey methods for monitoring resistance emerging from patients diagnosed with HIV while on preexposure prophylaxis, and a laboratory-based ADR survey leveraging on remnant viral load specimens which are expected to strengthen dolutegravir-resistance surveillance. SUMMARY: Monitoring HIVDR remains pivotal to ensure countries attain and sustain the global goals for ending HIV as a public health threat by 2030.

The Evolving Landscape of HIV Drug Resistance Diagnostics for Expanding Testing in Resource-Limited Settings.

Global scale-up of antiretroviral treatment has dramatically changed the prospects of HIV/AIDS disease, rendering life-long chronic care and treatment a reality for millions of HIV-infected patients. Affordable technologies to monitor antiretroviral treatment are needed to ensure long-term durability of limited available drug regimens. HIV drug resistance tests can complement existing strategies in optimizing clinical decision-making for patients with treatment failure, in addition to facilitating population-based surveillance of HIV drug resistance. This review assesses the current landscape of HIV drug resistance technologies and discusses the strengths and limitations of existing assays available for expanding testing in resource-limited settings. These include sequencing-based assays (Sanger sequencing assays and nextgeneration sequencing), point mutation assays, and genotype-free data-based prediction systems. Sanger assays are currently considered the gold standard genotyping technology, though only available at a limited number of resource-limited setting reference and regional laboratories, but high capital and test costs have limited their wide expansion. Point mutation assays present opportunities for simplified laboratory assays, but HIV genetic variability, extensive codon redundancy at or near the mutation target sites with limited multiplexing capability have restricted their utility. Next-generation sequencing, despite high costs, may have potential to reduce the testing cost significantly through multiplexing in high-throughput facilities, although the level of bioinformatics expertise required for data analysis is currently still complex and expensive and lacks standardization. Web-based genotype-free prediction systems may provide enhanced antiretroviral treatment decision-making without the need for laboratory testing, but require further clinical field evaluation and implementation scientific research in resource-limited settings.

Field evaluation of a broadly sensitive HIV-1 in-house genotyping assay for use with both plasma and dried blood spot specimens in a resource-limited country.

HIV-1 drug resistance (HIVDR) assays are important tools in clinical management of HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and surveillance of drug-resistant variants at population levels. The high cost associated with commercial assays hinders their use in resource-limited settings. We adopted and validated a low-cost in-house assay using 68 matched plasma and dried blood spot (DBS) samples with a median viral load (VL) of 58,187 copies/ml, ranging from 253 to 3,264,850 against the commercial assay ViroSeq. Results indicated that the in-house assay not only had a higher plasma genotyping rate than did ViroSeq (94% versus 78%) but also was able to genotype 89.5% (51/57) of the matched DBS samples with VLs of ≥ 1,000 copies/ml. The sensitivity in detecting DR mutations by the in-house assay was 98.29% (95% confidence interval [CI], 97.86 to 98.72) on plasma and 96.54 (95% CI, 95.93 to 97.15) on DBS, and the specificity was 99.97% (95% CI, 99.91 to 100.00) for both sample types compared to ViroSeq. The minor DR mutation differences detected by the in-house assay against ViroSeq did not result in clinical significance. In addition, cost analysis showed that the in-house assay could reduce the genotyping cost by about 60% for both plasma and DBS compared to ViroSeq. This field condition evaluation highlights the potential utility of a cost-effective, subtype-independent, in-house genotyping assay using both plasma and DBS specimens for HIVDR clinical monitoring and population-based surveillance in resource-limited settings.