BACKGROUND: Minority resistant variants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) could influence the virological response to treatment based on nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). Data on minority rilpivirine-resistant variants are scarce. This study used next-generation sequencing (NGS) to identify patients harboring minority resistant variants to nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and NNRTIs and to assess their influence on the virological response (VR). METHODS: All the subjects, 541 HIV-1-infected patients started a first-line regimen containing rilpivirine. VR was defined as a HIV-1 RNA load <50 copies/mL at month 6 with continued suppression at month 12. NGS was performed at baseline (retrospectively) on the 454 GS-FLX platform (Roche). RESULTS: NGS revealed resistance-associated mutations accounting for 1% to <5% of variants in 17.2% of samples, for 5%-20% in 5.7% of samples, and for >20% in 29% of samples. We identified 43 (8.8%) and 36 (7.4%) patients who harbored rilpivirine-resistant variants with a 1% sensitivity threshold according to the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis and Stanford algorithms, respectively. The VR was 96.9% at month 12. Detection of minority rilpivirine resistant variants was not associated with virological failure (VF). Multivariate analysis indicated that VF at month 12 was associated with a CD4 count <250 cells/µL at baseline, a slower decrease in viral load at month 3, and rilpivirine resistance at baseline using the Stanford algorithm with a 20% threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Minority resistant variants had no impact on the VR of treatment-naive patients to a rilpivirine-based regimen.

Objectives

To determine how the load of rilpivirine-resistant variants (mutational load) influences the virological response (VR) of HIV-1-infected patients to a rilpivirine-based first-line regimen.

Patients and methods

Four hundred and eighty-nine patients infected with HIV-1 whose reverse transcriptase gene had been successfully resistance genotyped using next-generation sequencing were given a first-line regimen containing rilpivirine. Variables associated with the VR at 12 months were identified using a logistic model. The results were used to build a multivariate model for each mutational load threshold and the R2 variations were analysed to identify the mutational load threshold that best predicted the VR.

Results

The mutational load at baseline was the only variable linked to the VR at 12 months (P  < 0.01). The VR at 12 months decreased from 96.9% to 83.4% when the mutational load was >1700 copies/mL and to 50% when the mutational load was > 9000 copies/mL. The threshold of 9000 copies/mL was associated with the VR at 12 months with an OR of 36.7 (95% CI 4.7-285.1). The threshold of 1700 copies/mL was associated with the VR at 12 months with an OR of 7.2 (95% CI 1.4-36.8).

Conclusions

There is quantifiable evidence that determining a mutational load threshold can be used to identify those patients on a first-line regimen containing rilpivirine who are at risk of virological failure. The clinical management of HIV-infected patients can be improved by evaluating the frequency of mutant variants at a threshold of < 20% together with the plasma HIV-1 viral load at the time of resistance genotyping.

Background

Minority resistant variants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) could influence the virological response to treatment based on nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). Data on minority rilpivirine-resistant variants are scarce. This study used next-generation sequencing (NGS) to identify patients harboring minority resistant variants to nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors and NNRTIs and to assess their influence on the virological response (VR).

Methods

All the subjects, 541 HIV-1-infected patients started a first-line regimen containing rilpivirine. VR was defined as a HIV-1 RNA load <50 copies/mL at month 6 with continued suppression at month 12. NGS was performed at baseline (retrospectively) on the 454 GS-FLX platform (Roche).

Results

NGS revealed resistance-associated mutations accounting for 1% to <5% of variants in 17.2% of samples, for 5%-20% in 5.7% of samples, and for >20% in 29% of samples. We identified 43 (8.8%) and 36 (7.4%) patients who harbored rilpivirine-resistant variants with a 1% sensitivity threshold according to the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis and Stanford algorithms, respectively. The VR was 96.9% at month 12. Detection of minority rilpivirine resistant variants was not associated with virological failure (VF). Multivariate analysis indicated that VF at month 12 was associated with a CD4 count <250 cells/µL at baseline, a slower decrease in viral load at month 3, and rilpivirine resistance at baseline using the Stanford algorithm with a 20% threshold.

Conclusions

Minority resistant variants had no impact on the VR of treatment-naive patients to a rilpivirine-based regimen.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence and patterns of resistance to integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in patients experiencing virological failure on raltegravir-based ART and the impact on susceptibility to INSTIs (raltegravir, elvitegravir and dolutegravir).

Patients and methods

Data were collected from 502 treatment-experienced patients failing a raltegravir-containing regimen in a multicentre study. Reverse transcriptase, protease and integrase were sequenced at failure for each patient. INSTI resistance-associated mutations investigated were those included in the last ANRS genotypic algorithm (v23).

Results

Among the 502 patients, at failure, median baseline HIV-1 RNA (viral load) was 2.9 log10 copies/mL. Patients had been previously exposed to a median of five NRTIs, one NNRTI and three PIs. Seventy-one percent harboured HIV-1 subtype B and the most frequent non-B subtype was CRF02_AG (13.3%). The most frequent mutations observed were N155H/S (19.1%), Q148G/H/K/R (15.4%) and Y143C/G/H/R/S (6.7%). At failure, viruses were considered as fully susceptible to all INSTIs in 61.0% of cases, whilst 38.6% were considered as resistant to raltegravir, 34.9% to elvitegravir and 13.9% to dolutegravir. In the case of resistance to raltegravir, viruses were considered as susceptible to elvitegravir in 11% and to dolutegravir in 64% of cases. High HIV-1 viral load at failure (P < 0.001) and low genotypic sensitivity score of the associated treatment with raltegravir (P < 0.001) were associated with the presence of raltegravir-associated mutations at failure. Q148 mutations were selected more frequently in B subtypes versus non-B subtypes (P = 0.004).

Conclusions

This study shows that a high proportion of viruses remain susceptible to dolutegravir in the case of failure on a raltegravir-containing regimen.