BACKGROUND: Raltegravir is the first publicly released HIV integrase inhibitor. In clinical trials, patients on a raltegravir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen were observed to have 70% less viraemia in the second-phase decay of viraemia than patients on an efavirenz-based HAART regimen. Because of this accelerated decay of viraemia, raltegravir has been speculated to have greater antiretroviral activity than efavirenz. Alternative explanations for this phenomenon are also possible. For example, the stage in the viral life cycle at which raltegravir acts might explain the distinct viral dynamics produced by this drug. METHODS: In this report, we use a mathematical model of HIV viral dynamics to explore several hypotheses for why raltegravir causes different viral dynamics than efavirenz. Using the experimentally observed viral dynamics of raltegravir, we calculated constraints on the mechanisms possibly responsible for the unique viral dynamics produced by raltegravir. RESULTS: We predicted that the dominant mechanism for the 70% reduction in the second-phase viraemia is not antiviral efficacy but the stage of the HIV viral life cycle at which raltegravir acts. Furthermore, we found that the kinetic constraints placed on the identity of the virus-producing cells of the second phase were most consistent with monocytes/macrophages. CONCLUSIONS: Our model predictions have important implications for the motivation behind the use of raltegravir and our understanding of the virus-producing cells of the second-phase viraemia. Our results also highlight that the viral dynamics produced by different antiretroviral drugs should not be directly compared with each other.
BACKGROUND:Raltegravir is the first publicly released HIV integrase inhibitor. In clinical trials, patients on a raltegravir-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen were observed to have 70% less viraemia in the second-phase decay of viraemia than patients on an efavirenz-based HAART regimen. Because of this accelerated decay of viraemia, raltegravir has been speculated to have greater antiretroviral activity than efavirenz. Alternative explanations for this phenomenon are also possible. For example, the stage in the viral life cycle at which raltegravir acts might explain the distinct viral dynamics produced by this drug. METHODS: In this report, we use a mathematical model of HIV viral dynamics to explore several hypotheses for why raltegravir causes different viral dynamics than efavirenz. Using the experimentally observed viral dynamics of raltegravir, we calculated constraints on the mechanisms possibly responsible for the unique viral dynamics produced by raltegravir. RESULTS: We predicted that the dominant mechanism for the 70% reduction in the second-phase viraemia is not antiviral efficacy but the stage of the HIV viral life cycle at which raltegravir acts. Furthermore, we found that the kinetic constraints placed on the identity of the virus-producing cells of the second phase were most consistent with monocytes/macrophages. CONCLUSIONS: Our model predictions have important implications for the motivation behind the use of raltegravir and our understanding of the virus-producing cells of the second-phase viraemia. Our results also highlight that the viral dynamics produced by different antiretroviral drugs should not be directly compared with each other.
Authors: Gail V Matthews; Caroline A Sabin; Sundhiya Mandalia; Fiona Lampe; Andrew N Phillips; Mark R Nelson; Mark Bower; Margaret A Johnson; Brian G Gazzard Journal: AIDS Date: 2002-01-04 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: M A Polis; I A Sidorov; C Yoder; S Jankelevich; J Metcalf; B U Mueller; M A Dimitrov; P Pizzo; R Yarchoan; D S Dimitrov Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-11-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Theodore C Pierson; Yan Zhou; Tara L Kieffer; Christian T Ruff; Christopher Buck; Robert F Siliciano Journal: J Virol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Scott M Hammer; Joseph J Eron; Peter Reiss; Robert T Schooley; Melanie A Thompson; Sharon Walmsley; Pedro Cahn; Margaret A Fischl; Jose M Gatell; Martin S Hirsch; Donna M Jacobsen; Julio S G Montaner; Douglas D Richman; Patrick G Yeni; Paul A Volberding Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-08-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ahmad R Sedaghat; Jason B Dinoso; Lin Shen; Claus O Wilke; Robert F Siliciano Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-03-24 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sharon A Riddler; Richard Haubrich; A Gregory DiRienzo; Lynne Peeples; William G Powderly; Karin L Klingman; Kevin W Garren; Tania George; James F Rooney; Barbara Brizz; Umesh G Lalloo; Robert L Murphy; Susan Swindells; Diane Havlir; John W Mellors Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lin Shen; Susan Peterson; Ahmad R Sedaghat; Moira A McMahon; Marc Callender; Haili Zhang; Yan Zhou; Eleanor Pitt; Karen S Anderson; Edward P Acosta; Robert F Siliciano Journal: Nat Med Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Daniel A Donahue; Richard D Sloan; Björn D Kuhl; Tamara Bar-Magen; Susan M Schader; Mark A Wainberg Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2009-12-28 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Adam M Spivak; S Alireza Rabi; Moira A McMahon; Liang Shan; Ahmad R Sedaghat; Claus O Wilke; Robert F Siliciano Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2011-01-15 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Rutao Luo; E Fabian Cardozo; Michael J Piovoso; Hulin Wu; Maria J Buzon; Javier Martinez-Picado; Ryan Zurakowski Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 4.118
Authors: Max von Kleist; Stephan Menz; Hartmut Stocker; Keikawus Arasteh; Christof Schütte; Wilhelm Huisinga Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 3.240