OBJECTIVES: To test retrospectively the ability of four freely available rules-based expert systems to predict short- and medium-term virological outcome following an antiretroviral treatment switch in pre-treated HIV-1 patients. METHODS: The HIV-1 genotype interpretation systems (GISs) HIVdb, ANRS, Rega and AntiRetroScan were tested for their accuracy in predicting response to highly active antiretroviral therapy using 8 week (n = 765) and 24 week (n = 634) follow-up standardized treatment change episodes extracted from the Italian Antiretroviral Resistance Cohort Analysis (ARCA) database. A genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) was derived for each genotype-treatment pair for the different GISs and tested as a predictor of virological treatment outcome by univariable and multivariable logistic regression as well as by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The two systems implementing drug potency weights (AntiRetroScan and Rega) were evaluated with and without this correction factor. RESULTS: All four GSSs were strong predictors of virological treatment outcome at both 8 and 24 weeks after adjusting for baseline viro-immunological parameters and previous drug exposure (odds ratios ranging from 2.04 to 2.43 per 1 unit GSS increase; P < 0.001 for all the systems). The accuracy of AntiRetroScan and Rega was significantly increased by drug potency weighting with respect to the unweighted versions (P <or= 0.001). HIVdb and ANRS also increased their performance with the same drug potency weighting adopted by AntiRetroScan and Rega, respectively (P < 0.001 for both analyses). CONCLUSIONS: Currently available GISs are valuable tools for assisting antiretroviral treatment choices. Drug potency weighting can increase the accuracy of all systems.
OBJECTIVES: To test retrospectively the ability of four freely available rules-based expert systems to predict short- and medium-term virological outcome following an antiretroviral treatment switch in pre-treated HIV-1patients. METHODS: The HIV-1 genotype interpretation systems (GISs) HIVdb, ANRS, Rega and AntiRetroScan were tested for their accuracy in predicting response to highly active antiretroviral therapy using 8 week (n = 765) and 24 week (n = 634) follow-up standardized treatment change episodes extracted from the Italian Antiretroviral Resistance Cohort Analysis (ARCA) database. A genotypic sensitivity score (GSS) was derived for each genotype-treatment pair for the different GISs and tested as a predictor of virological treatment outcome by univariable and multivariable logistic regression as well as by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The two systems implementing drug potency weights (AntiRetroScan and Rega) were evaluated with and without this correction factor. RESULTS: All four GSSs were strong predictors of virological treatment outcome at both 8 and 24 weeks after adjusting for baseline viro-immunological parameters and previous drug exposure (odds ratios ranging from 2.04 to 2.43 per 1 unit GSS increase; P < 0.001 for all the systems). The accuracy of AntiRetroScan and Rega was significantly increased by drug potency weighting with respect to the unweighted versions (P <or= 0.001). HIVdb and ANRS also increased their performance with the same drug potency weighting adopted by AntiRetroScan and Rega, respectively (P < 0.001 for both analyses). CONCLUSIONS: Currently available GISs are valuable tools for assisting antiretroviral treatment choices. Drug potency weighting can increase the accuracy of all systems.
Authors: Dineke Frentz; Charles A B Boucher; Matthias Assel; Andrea De Luca; Massimiliano Fabbiani; Francesca Incardona; Pieter Libin; Nino Manca; Viktor Müller; Breanndán O Nualláin; Roger Paredes; Mattia Prosperi; Eugenia Quiros-Roldan; Lidia Ruiz; Peter M A Sloot; Carlo Torti; Anne-Mieke Vandamme; Kristel Van Laethem; Maurizio Zazzi; David A M C van de Vijver Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-07-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: A Gonzalez-Serna; J E Min; C Woods; D Chan; V D Lima; J S G Montaner; P R Harrigan; L C Swenson Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Mattia C F Prosperi; Simona Di Giambenedetto; Iuri Fanti; Genny Meini; Bianca Bruzzone; Annapaola Callegaro; Giovanni Penco; Patrizia Bagnarelli; Valeria Micheli; Elisabetta Paolini; Antonio Di Biagio; Valeria Ghisetti; Massimo Di Pietro; Maurizio Zazzi; Andrea De Luca Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Niko Beerenwinkel; Hesam Montazeri; Heike Schuhmacher; Patrick Knupfer; Viktor von Wyl; Hansjakob Furrer; Manuel Battegay; Bernard Hirschel; Matthias Cavassini; Pietro Vernazza; Enos Bernasconi; Sabine Yerly; Jürg Böni; Thomas Klimkait; Cristina Cellerai; Huldrych F Günthard Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Awachana Jiamsakul; Somnuek Sungkanuparph; Matthew Law; Rami Kantor; Jutarat Praparattanapan; Patrick C K Li; Praphan Phanuphak; Tuti Merati; Winai Ratanasuwan; Christopher K C Lee; Rossana Ditangco; Mahiran Mustafa; Thida Singtoroj; Sasisopin Kiertiburanakul Journal: J Int AIDS Soc Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 5.396
Authors: Roberta Gagliardini; Arturo Ciccullo; Alberto Borghetti; Franco Maggiolo; Dario Bartolozzi; Vanni Borghi; Monica Pecorari; Antonio Di Biagio; Anna Paola Callegaro; Bianca Bruzzone; Francesco Saladini; Stefania Paolucci; Renato Maserati; Maurizio Zazzi; Simona Di Giambenedetto; Andrea De Luca Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2018-05-15 Impact factor: 3.835
Authors: Holly E Rawizza; Beth Chaplin; Seema T Meloni; Kristin M Darin; Oluremi Olaitan; Kimberly K Scarsi; Chika K Onwuamah; Rosemary A Audu; Philippe R Chebu; Godwin E Imade; Prosper Okonkwo; Phyllis J Kanki Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 3.240