| Literature DB >> 28750647 |
Elizabeth M Etta1, Lufuno Mavhandu1, Cecile Manhaeve2, Keanan McGonigle3, Patrick Jackson3, David Rekosh1,3, Marie-Louise Hammarskjold1,3, Pascal O Bessong4, Denis M Tebit5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) has significantly reduced HIV morbidity and mortality in both developed and developing countries. However, the sustainability of cART may be compromised by the emergence of viral drug resistance mutations (DRM) and the cellular persistence of proviruses carrying these DRM. This is potentially a more serious problem in resource limited settings.Entities:
Keywords: Antiretroviral therapy; HIV drug resistance; Peripheral blood mononuclear cells; Plasma; Rural South Africa
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28750647 PMCID: PMC5531022 DOI: 10.1186/s12981-017-0161-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AIDS Res Ther ISSN: 1742-6405 Impact factor: 2.250
Demographic, clinical and virological characteristics of 72 patients on ART experiencing an unsuppressed viral load
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Number of patients | 72 |
| Female | 41 (56.9) |
| Male | 31 (43.1) |
| Median age (range) in years | 37 (5–64) |
| Median CD4 count (range) in cells/mm3 | 293 (6–196) |
| Median plasma viral load (range) in copies/ml | 15,548 (50–73,389) |
| ART regimen at time of genotyping | |
| TDF/FTC/EFV | 22 (29.3) |
| TDF/3TC/EFV | 13 (18.1) |
| TDF/3TC/LPV/r | 9 (12.5) |
| ABC/3TC/EFV | 7 (9.7) |
| AZT/3TC/LPV/r | 5 (6.9) |
| TDF/3TC/NVP | 3 (4.2) |
| Othersa | 13 (18.1) |
| Time on ART (months) | |
| <24 | 20 (27.8) |
| 25–60 | 25 (34.7) |
| >60 | 27 (37.5) |
| Clinical stage (CDC) (%) | |
| A: >500 | 14 (19.4) |
| B: 200–500 | 36 (50) |
| C: <200 | 22 (30.6) |
| Amplified Genotypes (%) | |
| Subtype C | 65 (94.2) |
| Subtype B | 1 (1.4) |
| Others (K/C, C/B and unclassified) | 3 (4.4) |
aOther regimen combinations included AZT/DDI/EFV, TDF/DDI/3TC, AZT/DDI/LPV/r, AZT/3TC/EFV, ABC/3TC/LPV/r, AZT/3TC/NVP
Fig. 1Prevalence and pattern of HIV drug resistance mutations from two treatment centers in rural Limpopo Province. NRTI nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor
Fig. 2Prevalence of genotypic drug resistance to various antiretroviral drugs. NRTI, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, 3TC Lamivudine, ABC Abacavir, AZT Zidovudine, d4T Stavudine, ddI didanosine, FTC, Emtricitabine, TDF Tenofovir, EFV Efavirenz, ETR Etravirine, NVP Nevirapine, RPV Rilpivirine, L Low, I Intermediate, H High level resistance
Fig. 3Comparing the frequency of NRTI versus NNRTI drug resistance mutations over time. NRTI nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, NNRTI non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor
Comparison of the NRTI and NNRTI DRM prevalence from Limpopo (rural), KwaZulu-Natal (rural) and urban (Pretoria)
| Mutation | Limpopo | Kwazulu-Natal (rural)a | Pretoria (urban)a | p-value (Limpopo vs. Pretoria)b |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M41L | 5.2 | 7.1 | 5.8 | 1 |
| A62V | 5.2 | 2.6 | 1 | 0.89 |
| K65R | 12.1 | 13.1 | 1.9 | < |
| D67N | 13.8 | 16.8 | 5.8 |
|
| K70R | 12.1 | 14.3 | 7.8 |
|
| L74V | 6.9 | 2.6 | 1 |
|
| V75I/S | 3.4 | 3.8 | 0 | 0.089 |
| Y115F | 6.9 | 5.3 | 0 |
|
| Q151M | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 0.91 |
| M184V | 51.7 | 79.8 | 51.7 | 1 |
| T215Y | 6.9 | 12.5 | 8.7 | 0.5 |
| K219Q/E | 12.1 | 13.3 | 5.8 | < |
| L100I | 5.2 | 3 | 2.9 | 0.09 |
| K101EPH | 8.6 | 1.8 | 1 | < |
| K103N | 50.0 | 44.5 | 34 | < |
| V106AM | 20.7 | 28.9 | 34 | < |
| V108I | 1.7 | 10.5 | 3.9 | 0.17 |
| Y181C | 6.9 | 12.5 | 11.7 |
|
| Y188L/H | 8.6 | 10.1 | 2.9 |
|
| G190A | 13.8 | 15.8 | 9.7 | 0.05 |
aData obtained from study by Rossouw et al. [26]
bThe p-values represent significance (in itatlics) of comparisons between the rural sites from this study (Limpopo) and the urban site (Pretoria) from the study by Rossouw et al. [26]
Fig. 4Comparing the DRM in RNA (plasma) and DNA (peripheral blood mononuclear cells). a NRTI. b NNRTI