New antiretroviral inhibitors and HIV-1 drug resistance: more focus on 90% HIV-1 isolates?

Combined HIV antiretroviral therapy (cART) has been effective except if drug resistance emerges. As cART has been rolled out in low-income countries, drug resistance has emerged at higher rates than observed in high income countries due to factors including initial use of these less tolerated cART regimens, intermittent disruptions in drug supply, and insufficient treatment monitoring. These socioeconomic factors impacting drug resistance are compounded by viral mechanistic differences by divergent HIV-1 non-B subtypes compared to HIV-1 subtype B that largely infects the high-income countries (just 10% of 37 million infected). This review compares the inhibition and resistance of diverse HIV-1 subtypes and strains to the various approved drugs as well as novel inhibitors in clinical trials. Initial sequence variations and differences in replicative fitness between HIV-1 subtypes pushes strains through different fitness landscapes to escape from drug selective pressure. The discussions here provide insight to patient care givers and policy makers on how best to use currently approved ART options and reduce the emergence of drug resistance in ∼33 million individuals infected with HIV-1 subtype A, C, D, G, and recombinants forms. Unfortunately, over 98% of the literature on cART resistance relates to HIV-1 subtype B.

High-level resistance to bictegravir and cabotegravir in subtype A- and D-infected HIV-1 patients failing raltegravir with multiple resistance mutations.

OBJECTIVES: The second-generation integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) bictegravir is becoming accessible in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and another INSTI, cabotegravir, has recently been approved as a long-acting injectable. Data on bictegravir and cabotegravir susceptibility in raltegravir-experienced HIV-1 subtype A- and D-infected patients carrying drug resistance mutations (DRMs) remain very scarce in LMICs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HIV-1 integrase (IN)-recombinant viruses from eight patients failing raltegravir-based third-line therapy in Uganda were genotypically and phenotypically tested for susceptibility to bictegravir and cabotegravir. Ability of these viruses to integrate into human genomes was assessed in MT-4 cells. RESULTS: HIV-1 IN-recombinant viruses harbouring single primary mutations (N155H or Y143R/S) or in combination with secondary INSTI mutations (T97A, M50I, L74IM, E157Q, G163R or V151I) were susceptible to both bictegravir and cabotegravir. However, combinations of primary INSTI-resistance mutations such as E138A/G140A/G163R/Q148R or E138K/G140A/S147G/Q148K led to decreased susceptibility to both cabotegravir (fold change in EC50 values from 429 to 1000×) and bictegravir (60 to 100×), exhibiting a high degree of cross-resistance. However, these same IN-recombinant viruses showed impaired integration capacity (14% to 48%) relative to the WT HIV-1 NL4-3 strain in the absence of drug. CONCLUSIONS: Though not currently widely accessible in most LMICs, bictegravir and cabotegravir offer a valid alternative to HIV-infected individuals harbouring subtype A and D HIV-1 variants with reduced susceptibility to first-generation INSTIs but previous exposure to raltegravir may reduce efficacy, more so with cabotegravir.

Accumulation of integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance mutations confers high-level resistance to dolutegravir in non-B subtype HIV-1 strains from patients failing raltegravir in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Increasing first-line treatment failures in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have led to increased use of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) such as dolutegravir. However, HIV-1 susceptibility to INSTIs in LMICs, especially with previous raltegravir exposure, is poorly understood due to infrequent reporting of INSTI failures and testing for INSTI drug resistance mutations (DRMs). METHODS: A total of 51 non-subtype B HIV-1 infected patients failing third-line (raltegravir-based) therapy in Uganda were initially selected for the study. DRMs were detected using Sanger and deep sequencing. HIV integrase genes of 13 patients were cloned and replication capacities (RCs) and phenotypic susceptibilities to dolutegravir, raltegravir and elvitegravir were determined with TZM-bl cells. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to determine cross-resistance between INSTIs. RESULTS: INSTI DRMs were detected in 47% of patients. HIV integrase-recombinant virus carrying one primary INSTI DRM (N155H or Y143R/S) was susceptible to dolutegravir but highly resistant to raltegravir and elvitegravir (>50-fold change). Two patients, one with E138A/G140A/Q148R/G163R and one with E138K/G140A/S147G/Q148K, displayed the highest reported resistance to raltegravir, elvitegravir and even dolutegravir. The former multi-DRM virus had WT RC whereas the latter had lower RCs than WT. CONCLUSIONS: In HIV-1 subtype A- and D-infected patients failing raltegravir and harbouring INSTI DRMs, there is high-level resistance to elvitegravir and raltegravir. More routine monitoring of INSTI treatment may be advised in LMICs, considering that multiple INSTI DRMs may have accumulated during prolonged exposure to raltegravir during virological failure, leading to high-level INSTI resistance, including dolutegravir resistance.