OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between HIV-1 drug resistance and adherence and the accumulation rate of resistance mutations in 1191 HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive adults initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: Plasma samples with plasma viral load >1,000 copies per milliliter collected within 30 months of follow-up were genotyped for drug resistance. Adherence was estimated using prescription refills and plasma drug levels. The primary outcome measure was time to detection of drug resistance. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) associated with baseline variables. RESULTS: The accumulation rates of multiple primary and secondary mutations were similar in patients initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy with protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). Rates decreased approximately 50% per additional mutation. At 80%-90% adherence based on refills, there was greater risk of detecting lamivudine (3TC) [HR 3.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9 to 4.7; P < 0.0001] and NNRTI mutations (HR 6.0, 95% CI: 3.3 to 10.9; P < 0.0001) compared with the >or=95% refill reference group. In a multivariate model, individuals with <95% refills and consistently detectable plasma drug levels were at increased risk for 3TC (HR 4.5, 95% CI: 2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.0001) and NNRTI resistance (HR 7.0, 95% CI: 3.4 to 14.5; P = 0.0001) compared with the reference group of >or=95% refills with consistently detectable drug levels. Adherence-resistance relationships were much weaker for protease inhibitors and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as there was little variance in HRs among the different adherence strata compared with 3TC and NNRTIs. CONCLUSION: The relationships between resistance, adherence, and mutation accumulation differ between HIV drug classes.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between HIV-1 drug resistance and adherence and the accumulation rate of resistance mutations in 1191 HIV-infected, antiretroviral-naive adults initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: Plasma samples with plasma viral load >1,000 copies per milliliter collected within 30 months of follow-up were genotyped for drug resistance. Adherence was estimated using prescription refills and plasma drug levels. The primary outcome measure was time to detection of drug resistance. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) associated with baseline variables. RESULTS: The accumulation rates of multiple primary and secondary mutations were similar in patients initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy with protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI). Rates decreased approximately 50% per additional mutation. At 80%-90% adherence based on refills, there was greater risk of detecting lamivudine (3TC) [HR 3.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9 to 4.7; P < 0.0001] and NNRTI mutations (HR 6.0, 95% CI: 3.3 to 10.9; P < 0.0001) compared with the >or=95% refill reference group. In a multivariate model, individuals with <95% refills and consistently detectable plasma drug levels were at increased risk for 3TC (HR 4.5, 95% CI: 2.6 to 7.9; P = 0.0001) and NNRTI resistance (HR 7.0, 95% CI: 3.4 to 14.5; P = 0.0001) compared with the reference group of >or=95% refills with consistently detectable drug levels. Adherence-resistance relationships were much weaker for protease inhibitors and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as there was little variance in HRs among the different adherence strata compared with 3TC and NNRTIs. CONCLUSION: The relationships between resistance, adherence, and mutation accumulation differ between HIV drug classes.
Authors: H Liu; C E Golin; L G Miller; R D Hays; C K Beck; S Sanandaji; J Christian; T Maldonado; D Duran; A H Kaplan; N S Wenger Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: D Descamps; P Flandre; V Calvez; G Peytavin; V Meiffredy; G Collin; C Delaugerre; S Robert-Delmas; B Bazin; J P Aboulker; G Pialoux; F Raffi; F Brun-Vézinet Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-01-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: R S Braithwaite; S Shechter; M S Roberts; A Schaefer; D R Bangsberg; P R Harrigan; A C Justice Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: M S Hirsch; F Brun-Vézinet; R T D'Aquila; S M Hammer; V A Johnson; D R Kuritzkes; C Loveday; J W Mellors; B Clotet; B Conway; L M Demeter; S Vella; D M Jacobsen; D D Richman Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-05-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robert S Hogg; Katherine Heath; David Bangsberg; Benita Yip; Natasha Press; Michael V O'Shaughnessy; Julio S G Montaner Journal: AIDS Date: 2002-05-03 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: James C M Brust; Alain H Litwin; Karina M Berg; Xuan Li; Moonseong Heo; Julia H Arnsten Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2010-11-23 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Cécile L Tremblay; Jean-Guy Baril; David Fletcher; Donald Kilby; Paul Macpherson; Stephen D Shafran; Mark W Tyndall Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.471
Authors: Sophie Patterson; Angela Cescon; Hasina Samji; Zishan Cui; Benita Yip; Katherine J Lepik; David Moore; Viviane D Lima; Bohdan Nosyk; P Richard Harrigan; Julio S G Montaner; Kate Shannon; Evan Wood; Robert S Hogg Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Stephanie Bousheri; Candace Burke; Isaac Ssewanyana; Richard Harrigan; Jeffrey Martin; Peter Hunt; David R Bangsberg; Huyen Cao Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Alexander Hoare; Stephen J Kerr; Kiat Ruxrungtham; Jintanat Ananworanich; Matthew G Law; David A Cooper; Praphan Phanuphak; David P Wilson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Edward M Gardner; Katherine H Hullsiek; Edward E Telzak; Shweta Sharma; Grace Peng; William J Burman; Rodger D MacArthur; Margaret Chesney; Gerald Friedland; Sharon B Mannheimer Journal: AIDS Date: 2010-01-28 Impact factor: 4.177