Lack of a Clinically Significant Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Etravirine and Raltegravir Using an Original Approach Based on Drug Metabolism, Protein Binding, and Penetration in Seminal Fluid: A Pharmacokinetic Substudy of the ANRS-163 ETRAL Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The ANRS163-ETRAL study showed that etravirine 200 mg/raltegravir 400 mg twice-daily dual therapy was highly effective in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients older than 45 years, with virologic and therapeutic success rates at week 48 of 99.4% and 94.5%, respectively. The objective of this study was to determine whether a clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir exists by assessing steady-state total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and inactive raltegravir-glucuronide concentrations 12 hours after last intake (C12h ) in blood plasma (BP) and seminal plasma (SP). DESIGN: Pharmacokinetic analysis of data from the ANRS163-ETRAL study. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-six HIV-1-infected patients (of the 165 patients included in the ANRS-163 ETRAL study) who were receiving etravirine 200 mg and raltegravir 400 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood was collected from all 146 patients at weeks 2-4, 12, 24, and 48, and semen was collected from 21 patients at week 48. The extent of BP and SP protein binding was determined by using ultrafiltration assay. Total and unbound etravirine, raltegravir, and raltegravir-glucuronide C12h were determined by ultra high performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry and interpreted by using the in vitro calculated protein-bound 95% inhibitory concentration (PBIC95 ) for wild-type (WT) HIV: etravirine (116 ng/ml) and raltegravir (15 ng/ml). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) total BP etravirine C12h (536 ng/ml [376-719]) and raltegravir (278 ng/ml [97-690]) were adequate in 99% and 96% of patients, respectively. Median (IQR) SP:BP C12h ratio and BP unbound fraction were etravirine 0.3 (0.2-0.5) and < 1%, respectively, raltegravir 1.8 (1.3-3.3) and 12%, respectively, and raltegravir-glucuronide 12.0 (6.5-17.7) and > 99%, respectively. The BP raltegravir metabolic ratio (raltegravir glucuronide:raltegravir ratio) was 1.7, suggesting only weak induction of raltegravir glucuronidation by etravirine. Only three patients had etravirine and raltegravir C12h < PBIC95 simultaneously. CONCLUSION: No clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between etravirine and raltegravir was detected. Total etravirine and raltegravir BP concentrations were adequate in most patients, favoring virologic efficacy and confirming good treatment adherence (> 95%), despite twice-daily administration. The long half-life of etravirine and higher unbound fraction SP of raltegravir (57%) ensured adequate concentrations of dual therapy in genital compartments. Our results indicate that etravirine and raltegravir have good, complementary pharmacokinetic profiles, suggesting that they could be used in a dual-treatment strategy.

Impact of Next-generation Sequencing Defined Human Immunodeficiency Virus Pretreatment Drug Resistance on Virological Outcomes in the ANRS 12249 Treatment-as-Prevention Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive individuals on thymidine analogue backbone antiretroviral therapy (ART) with either nevirapine or efavirenz have suggested poorer virological outcomes in the presence of pretreatment drug resistance (PDR). We assessed the impact of PDR on virological suppression (VS; <50 copies/mL) in individuals prescribed primarily tenofovir/emtricitabine/efavirenz in rural KwaZulu-Natal within a treatment-as-prevention trial. METHODS: Among 1557 HIV-positive individuals who reported no prior ART at study entry and provided plasma samples, 1328 individuals with entry viral load (VL) >1000 copies/mL had next-generation sequencing (NGS) of the HIV pol gene with MiSeq technology. Results were obtained for 1148 individuals, and the presence of PDR was assessed at 5% and 20% detection thresholds. Virological outcome was assessed using Cox regression in 837 of 920 ART initiators with at least 1 follow-up VL after ART initiation. RESULTS: PDR prevalence was 9.5% (109/1148) and 12.8% (147/1148) at 20% and 5% thresholds, respectively. After a median of 1.36 years (interquartile range, 0.91-2.13), mostly on fixed-dose combination tenofovir/emtricitabine/efavirenz, presence of both nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)/nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor PDR vs no PDR was associated with longer time to VS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12-0.86), while there was no difference between those with only NNRTI PDR vs no PDR (aHR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82-1.34) at the 5% threshold. Similar differences were observed for mutations detected at the 20% threshold, although without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: NGS uncovered a high prevalence of PDR among participants enrolled in trial clinics in rural KwaZulu-Natal. Dual-class PDR to a mainly tenofovir/emtricitabine/efavirenz regimen was associated with poorer VS. However, there was no impact of NNRTI PDR alone. CLINICAL TRIALS TEGISTRATION: NCT01509508; South African National Clinical Trials Register: DOH-27-0512-3974.

Evaluation of different analysis pipelines for the detection of HIV-1 minority resistant variants.

OBJECTIVE: Reliable detection of HIV minority resistant variants (MRVs) requires bioinformatics analysis with specific algorithms to obtain good quality alignments. The aim of this study was to analyze ultra-deep sequencing (UDS) data using different analysis pipelines. METHODS: HIV-1 protease, reverse transcriptase (RT) and integrase sequences from antiretroviral-naïve patients were obtained using GS-Junior® (Roche) and MiSeq® (Illumina) platforms. MRVs were defined as variants harbouring resistance-mutation present at a frequency of 1%-20%. Reads were analyzed using different alignment algorithms: Amplicon Variant Analyzer®, Geneious® compared to SmartGene® NGS HIV-1 module. RESULTS: 101 protease and 51 RT MRVs identified in 139 protease and 124 RT sequences generated with a GS-Junior® platform were analyzed using AVA® and SmartGene® software. The correlation coefficients for the MRVs were R2 = 0.974 for protease and R2 = 0.972 for RT. Discordances (n = 13 in protease and n = 15 in RT) mainly concerned low-level MRVs (i.e., with frequencies of 1%-2%, n = 18/28) and they were located in homopolymeric regions (n = 10/15). Geneious® and SmartGene® software were used to analyze 143 protease, 45 RT and 26 integrase MRVs identified in 172 protease, 69 RT, and 72 integrase sequences generated with a MiSeq® platform. The correlation coefficients for the MRVs were R2 = 0.987 for protease, R2 = 0.995 for RT and R2 = 0.993 for integrase. Discordances (n = 9 in protease, n = 3 in RT, and n = 3 in integrase) mainly concerned low-level MRVs (n = 13/15). CONCLUSION: We found an excellent correlation between the various UDS analysis pipelines that we tested. However, our results indicate that specific attention should be paid to low-level MRVs, for which the use of two different analysis pipelines and visual inspection of sequences alignments might be beneficial. Thus, our results argue for use of a 2% threshold for MRV detection, rather than the 1% threshold, to minimize misalignments and time-consuming sight reading steps essential to ensure accurate results for MRV frequencies below 2%.

Antiretroviral-treated HIV-1 patients can harbour resistant viruses in CSF despite an undetectable viral load in plasma.

Background: HIV therapy reduces the CSF HIV RNA viral load (VL) and prevents disorders related to HIV encephalitis. However, these brain disorders may persist in some cases. A large population of antiretroviral-treated patients who had a VL > 1.7 log 10 copies/mL in CSF with detectable or undetectable VL in plasma associated with cognitive impairment was studied, in order to characterize discriminatory factors of these two patient populations. Methods: Blood and CSF samples were collected at the time of neurological disorders for 227 patients in 22 centres in France and 1 centre in Switzerland. Genotypic HIV resistance tests were performed on CSF. The genotypic susceptibility score was calculated according to the last Agence Nationale de Recherche sur le Sida et les hépatites virales Action Coordonnée 11 (ANRS AC11) genotype interpretation algorithm. Results: Among the 227 studied patients with VL > 1.7 log 10 copies/mL in CSF, 195 had VL detectable in plasma [median (IQR) HIV RNA was 3.7 (2.7-4.7) log 10 copies/mL] and 32 had discordant VL in plasma (VL < 1.7 log 10 copies/mL). The CSF VL was lower (median 2.8 versus 4.0 log 10 copies/mL; P < 0.001) and the CD4 cell count was higher (median 476 versus 214 cells/mm 3 ; P < 0.001) in the group of patients with VL < 1.7 log 10 copies/mL in plasma compared with patients with plasma VL > 1.7 log 10 copies/mL. Resistance to antiretrovirals was observed in CSF for the two groups of patients. Conclusions: Fourteen percent of this population of patients with cognitive impairment and detectable VL in CSF had well controlled VL in plasma. Thus, it is important to explore CSF HIV (VL and genotype) even if the HIV VL is controlled in plasma because HIV resistance may be observed.

Highly multidrug-resistant HIV: clonal analysis and therapeutic strategies.

OBJECTIVES: There are today HIV-infected patients in therapeutic impasses because of highly multidrug-resistant (HMDR) viruses. We studied the distribution of resistance mutations at clonal level, and we analysed the therapeutic strategies used in such cases to achieve undetectable viraemia. METHODS: The HMDR profile was defined as a genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) ≤ 1.5 for etravirine and raltegravir with full resistance to darunavir. About 30 clones per gene and per patient were sequenced. Virtual phenotypes were determined. Efficacy of therapeutic strategies was evaluated by follow-up of viral loads, CD4 cell counts and trough concentrations of drugs. RESULTS: Among 1310 patients on treatment and with genotypic resistance testing, 25 (2%) were resistant to darunavir and 11 (0.8%) had an HMDR profile. Five-hundred clones could be analysed for four of them. HMDR profiles were harboured by the great majority of clones and all resistance mutations were located on the same strains for all genes. Despite this and a regimen with a GSS <2.0 in three patients, they achieved a viraemia <20 copies/mL. These results were obtained using different strategies: high doses of drugs; combination of antiretrovirals with full or intermediate susceptibility, such as tipranavir, etravirine or maraviroc; and use of alternative compounds, such as foscarnet or interferon. CONCLUSION: Patients with HMDR HIV were uncommon, but, in such cases, all resistance mutations were borne on the same majority strains. In this study, tipranavir was the only protease inhibitor with full or intermediate susceptibility. Despite very limited therapeutic options, an undetectable viraemia can be achieved by combining different strategies.

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 log(10) 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.

Historical HIV-RNA resistance test results are more informative than proviral DNA genotyping in cases of suppressed or residual viraemia.

BACKGROUND: Resistance genotyping is often requested due to residual HIV viraemia or for treatment optimization, but may be unsuccessful if plasma RNA levels are too low or undetectable. Analyses of proviral HIV-DNA can provide information about the viral reservoir, because integrated DNA reflects both actively and latently infected cells. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether proviral DNA is a potential relevant alternative to HIV-RNA for resistance genotyping in this context. METHODS: The resistance mutations harboured by the proviral DNA were compared with the cumulative data for all plasma RNA genotypes previously obtained for the patient concerned. We also investigated whether various parameters, such as CD4 count, level of viraemia or drug pressure, affected the results. RESULTS: We collected 134 and 141 DNA genotypes with 443 and 462 corresponding RNA sequences for the reverse transcriptase and protease genes, respectively. The mean rates of concordance between DNA and RNA genotypes were 46.7% for nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), 26.3% for non-NRTIs and 43.7% for protease inhibitors (PIs). Mixtures were detected for most DNA mutations. The rate of concordant PI mutations was significantly higher for patients taking PIs at the time of DNA genotyping (48% versus 26%; P=0.004). The other factors studied had no impact. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of low or undetectable viraemia, it is difficult to reach the archived mutated DNA. Classical RNA genotyping during previous periods of virological failure remains the gold standard for documenting resistance mutations and for the monitoring of future treatments.

Quasispecies variant dynamics during emergence of resistance to raltegravir in HIV-1-infected patients.

OBJECTIVES: Raltegravir is the first approved inhibitor of HIV-1 integrase (IN). In most patients, raltegravir failure is associated with mutations in the IN gene, through two different genetic pathways: 155 (N155H) or 148 (Q148K/R/H). The objective of this study was to characterize the dynamics of HIV-1 quasispecies variant populations in patients who failed to respond to raltegravir treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Bulk genotyping and clonal analysis were performed during the follow-up of 10 patients who failed to respond to raltegravir treatment. RESULTS: Treatment failed through the 155 pathway in six patients and through the 148 pathway in two patients; two further patients switched from the 155 to the 148 pathway. In the two patients switching from the 155 to the 148 pathway, clonal analysis showed that Q148R/H and N155H mutations were present on different strands, suggesting that these two pathways are independent. This was consistent with our finding that each genetic profile was associated with different secondary mutations. We observed a greater variability among quasispecies associated with the 155 pathway, and IC(50) determinations showed that the fold resistance to raltegravir, relative to wild-type, was 10 for the N155H mutant and 50 for the G140S+Q148H mutant. CONCLUSIONS: Clonal analysis strongly suggests that the two main genetic pathways, 155 and 148, involved in the development of resistance to raltegravir are independent and exclusive. Moreover, the switch of the resistance profile from 155 to 148 may be related to the higher level of resistance to raltegravir conferred by the 148 pathway and also to the higher instability of the 155 pathway.

Mutations associated with failure of raltegravir treatment affect integrase sensitivity to the inhibitor in vitro.

Raltegravir (MK-0518) is a potent inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) integrase and is clinically effective against viruses resistant to other classes of antiretroviral agents. However, it can select mutations in the HIV integrase gene. Nine heavily pretreated patients who received salvage therapy including raltegravir and who subsequently developed virological failure under raltegravir therapy were studied. For each patient, the sequences of the integrase-coding region were determined and compared to that at the beginning of the treatment. Four different mutation profiles were identified in these nine patients: E92Q, G140S Q148H, N155H, and E157Q mutations. For four patients, each harboring a different profile, the wild-type and mutated integrases were produced, purified, and assayed in vitro. All the mutations identified altered the activities of integrase protein: both 3' processing and strand transfer activities were moderately affected in the E92Q mutant; strand transfer was markedly impaired in the N155H mutant; both activities were strongly impaired in the G140S Q148H mutant; and the E157Q mutant was almost completely inactive. The sensitivities of wild-type and mutant integrases to raltegravir were compared. The E92Q and G140S Q148H profiles were each associated with a 7- to 8-fold decrease in sensitivity, and the N155H mutant was more than 14-fold less sensitive to raltegravir. At least four genetic profiles (E92Q, G140S Q148H, N155H, and E157Q) can be associated with in vivo treatment failure and resistance to raltegravir. These mutations led to strong impairment of enzymes in vitro in the absence of raltegravir: strand transfer activity was affected, and in some cases 3' processing was also impaired.

Factors associated with the selection of mutations conferring resistance to protease inhibitors (PIs) in PI-experienced patients displaying treatment failure on darunavir.

The objective of this study was to characterize the mutations selected by darunavir (DRV) use in protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced patients and the associated factors. We analyzed treatment failure in 54 PI-experienced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients on a DRV- and ritonavir-containing regimen. Viral genotyping was carried out at the baseline, at between 1 and 3 months of treatment, and at between 3 and 6 months of treatment to search for the selection of mutations conferring resistance to PIs. The median baseline HIV RNA level was 4.9 log(10) copies/ml, and the median CD4 count was 87 cells/mm(3). At the baseline, the median numbers of resistance mutations were as follows: 3 DRV resistance mutations, 4 major PI resistance mutations, and 10 minor PI resistance mutations. The most common mutations that emerged at rebound included V32I (44%), I54M/L (24%), L33F (25%), I84V (21%), and L89V (12%). Multivariate analysis showed that higher baseline HIV RNA levels and smaller numbers of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor simultaneously used with DRV were associated with a higher risk of DRV resistance mutation selection. By contrast, L76V, a known DRV resistance mutation, was found to decrease the risk of selection of another DRV resistance mutation. The occurrence of virological failure while a patient was on DRV was associated with the selection of mutations that increased the level of DRV resistance without affecting susceptibility to tipranavir (TPV). In these PI-treated patients who displayed treatment failure while they were on a DRV-containing regimen, we confirmed the set of emerging mutations associated with DRV failure and identified the factors associated with the selection of these mutations. TPV susceptibility does not seem to be affected by the selection of a DRV resistance mutation.

Phenotypic susceptibility to didanosine is associated with antiviral activity in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) phenotypic susceptibility to didanosine and the antiviral activity of didanosine (ddI) in the JAGUAR study. METHODS: Baseline plasma HIV phenotypic susceptibility to ddI was assessed using a phenotype assay of patients randomized to receive ddI or placebo for 4 weeks in addition to their current regimen. Phenotypic susceptibility scores (PSSs) were then calculated for each sample. Associations between PSS and week 4 reductions in plasma HIV-1 RNA load or virologic response were assessed using linear regression and Jonckherre's test and the Wilcoxon and Cochran-Armitage tests, respectively. RESULTS: In the ddI arm, a significant association between reduction in viral load and continuous PSS was observed (P<.0001). Using distinct categories, an increasing fold change (FC) in susceptibility to ddI was strongly associated with smaller reductions in plasma HIV-1 RNA load (P<.0001). The proportion of virologic responders was 83% (15/18) for patients with a ddI FC < or =1.3, 50% (33/66) for patients with an FC of 1.3-2.2, and 29% (4/14) for patients with an FC > or =2.2 (P=.0008). After we determined these findings, 3 ddI FC categories were defined using 1.3 and 2.2 as thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between phenotypic susceptibility to ddI and reduction in plasma HIV-1 RNA load describes a continuum. The establishment of a lower clinical cutoff at 1.3 and an upper clinical cutoff at 2.2 are clinically relevant.

Efficacy of interferon-alpha for the treatment of Kaposi's sarcoma herpesvirus-associated uveitis.

PURPOSE: To report cases of uveitis that are associated with human herpesvirus-8 (HHV-8) and the impact of interferon-alpha therapy on their visual outcome. DESIGN: Interventional case reports. METHODS: Extensive examination was performed in patients with chronic and severe uveitis to exclude a viral cause that requires specific therapy. After histopathologic, molecular, and/or serologic confirmation of HHV-8 uveitis, interferon-alpha2a therapy (3 millions IU/d, 3 days per week, subcutaneously) was initiated. RESULTS: Two patients of Mediterranean origin were included. HHV-8 serologic result was positive in both cases. Histopathologic examination of conjunctival biopsy specimens confirmed Kaposi's sarcoma in the second case, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction identified HHV-8 DNA in the biopsy specimen. Disease was controlled by interferon-alpha2a in both cases, but maintenance therapy was mandatory to prevent relapses. CONCLUSION: HHV-8-associated uveitis is a rare condition in immunocompetent hosts. Severe and chronic conditions may require antiviral and immunomodulatory therapies. Interferon alpha seems to be a good candidate and may be proposed in these cases.