Literature DB >> 34897227

Brief Report: Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Efficacy in Participants With Preexisting Primary Integrase Inhibitor Resistance Through 48 Weeks of Phase 3 Clinical Trials.

Michelle L D'Antoni1, Kristen Andreatta, Rima Acosta, Hal Martin, Silvia Chang, Ross Martin, Kirsten L White.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preexisting drug resistance limits the utility of HIV antiretroviral therapy. Studies have demonstrated safety and efficacy of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), including in patients with M184V/I substitutions.
SETTING: We investigated virologic outcomes through 48 weeks of B/F/TAF treatment in individuals with preexisting primary integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance (INSTI-R).
METHODS: Preexisting INSTI-R was retrospectively evaluated from 7 B/F/TAF studies. INSTI-R was assessed by historical genotypes and/or baseline RNA or DNA sequencing. Viral loads were measured at all visits.
RESULTS: Preexisting primary INSTI-R substitutions were detected in 20 of the 1907 participants (1.0%). The 20 participants were predominantly male (75%), were Black (65%), had HIV-1 subtype B (85%), and had baseline median CD4 counts of 594 cells/mm3 and median age of 52 years. Most of the participants (n = 19) were virologically suppressed at baseline and had one primary INSTI-R substitution, E92G, Y143C/H, S147G, Q148H/K/R, N155S, or R263K, +/-secondary substitutions. All suppressed participants maintained virologic suppression throughout 48 weeks without any viral blips. One treatment-naive participant had virus with Q148H+G140S that was fully sensitive to bictegravir but only partially to dolutegravir (phenotype <2.5-fold change and >4-fold change, respectively). With a baseline viral load of 30,000 copies/mL, this participant was virologically suppressed by week 4 and maintained <50 copies/mL through week 48.
CONCLUSIONS: This small cohort with primary INSTI-R achieved and/or maintained virologic suppression through 48 weeks of B/F/TAF treatment. Consistent with the potent in vitro activity of bictegravir against most INSTI-R patterns, B/F/TAF may be a potential treatment option for patients with select preexisting INSTI-R, if confirmed by further studies.
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34897227      PMCID: PMC8860220          DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002888

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr        ISSN: 1525-4135            Impact factor:   3.771


INTRODUCTION

Because preexisting drug resistance can limit the use of antiretroviral drugs and render them less effective, genotypic drug resistance testing is recommended before initiating treatment or when switching regimens in a person with a history of virologic failure (VF).[1,2] Integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance (INSTI-R) testing is not recommended unless there is suspicion of transmitted INSTI-R because the prevalence of resistance in this drug class is low (approximately 1%).[3-10] Although high efficacy is observed for INSTI-based triple therapy in clinical trials,[11-15] differences exist among the various regimens, including dosing intervals, boosting requirements, and the risk of emergent resistance in the setting of VF. In clinical trials of raltegravir (RAL)-based and elvitegravir (EVG)-based triple therapy, 21%–60% of participants with VF developed INSTI-R substitutions.[11-15] With dolutegravir (DTG) triple therapy, treatment-emergent INSTI-R in clinical trials was rare.[16,17] By contrast, no treatment-emergent INSTI-R has been documented in clinical studies of bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF).[17-25] Cabotegravir, a long-acting injectable INSTI used as a single agent for PrEP or in combination with rilpivirine for HIV treatment, has demonstrated high efficacy in trials, but INSTI-R substitutions were observed in those with HIV acquisition or treatment failure, occurring in 33% and 67% of those individuals, respectively.[26-30] Although INSTI-R is rare, studying resistance in this drug class remains important and relevant because INSTIs are the backbone of initial regimens for most people with HIV.[1,31] Primary INSTI drug resistance reported in surveillance studies are mainly substitutions that cause resistance to RAL and EVG (T66A/I, E92Q, Y143C/H/R, S147G, Q148H/K/R, and N155H pathways) and R263K, which confers low-level reduced susceptibility to EVG, DTG, and bictegravir (BIC).[4,6,8,10,32-34] BIC and DTG generally have good activity against many RAL-resistant and EVG-resistant variants, but with differences, because studies have found that BIC is more broadly active against INSTI-R variants than DTG.[35] Specifically, compared with DTG, BIC has greater in vitro activity against variants with G140/Q148 mutations accompanied by 1–2 additional substitutions and variants with the E92Q/N155H combination.[36] DTG dosed twice daily has been shown to provide viral suppression in individuals with primary EVG and RAL substitutions, although virologic response has been poor with certain INSTI-R patterns.[37-39] Clinical trials of BIC in viremic individuals failing therapy with INSTI-R have not been conducted. Studies in both treatment-naive and virologically suppressed (VS) participants have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of B/F/TAF, a potent, once-daily, single-tablet regimen for treatment of HIV-1 infection.[22,40-42] This efficacy also extends to VS patients with certain nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) substitutions, including M184V/I and thymidine analog substitutions.[43] However, the impact of INSTI-R substitutions on B/F/TAF efficacy has not been well-documented. The objective of this study was to investigate virologic outcomes after 48 weeks of B/F/TAF treatment in a pooled analysis of individuals with preexisting INSTI-R from clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pooled Analysis Participants

Preexisting INSTI-R was determined in adults with a least one visit on study drug from B/F/TAF clinical trials conducted in antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive (GS-US-380-1489/NCT02607930[18,19] and GS-US-380-1490/NCT02607956[19,20]) and ART-experienced VS participants (GS-US-380-1844/NCT02603120[21]; GS-US-380-1878/NCT02603107[22]; GS-US-380-4580/NCT03631732[23]; GS-US-380-4030/NCT03110380;[24] and GS-US-380-4449/NCT03405935[25]).

Baseline Genotypic Analysis

The presence of preexisting resistance-associated substitutions in the protease (PR), reverse transcriptase (RT), and integrase (IN) genes were evaluated by historical genotypes, if available, at or after enrollment and/or by plasma or proviral DNA genotyping of baseline samples using Genosure MG, GenoSure Archive (Monogram Biosciences, South San Francisco, CA) or deepType HIV assay (frequency cutoff ≥15%, Seq-IT GmbH & Co, KG, Kaiserslautern, Germany). Of note, GenoSure Archive analysis uses bioinformatic filters to remove APOBEC-mediated, hypermutated deep-sequence reads and reports consensus sequences based on cutoffs similar to population sequencing. Drug resistance substitutions were adapted from the IAS-USA guidelines.[44]

B/F/TAF Efficacy Analysis

Viral loads were measured using TaqMan v2.0 at all visits. Virologic outcomes were defined by the last on-treatment observation carried forward (LOCF) method with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL (success) or ≥50 copies/mL (failure).

RESULTS

Demographics and Patient Characteristics

Although known primary INSTI-R was exclusionary per study entry criteria if known before randomization, participants with preexisting INSTI-R identified after enrollment remained on study. This pooled analysis included 1906 B/F/TAF participants from studies 380–1489 (n = 315), 380–1490 (n = 320), 380–1844 (n = 282), 380–1878 (n = 290), 380–4580 (n = 330), 380–4030 (n = 284), and 380–4449 (n = 86). Preexisting primary INSTI-R substitutions were detected in 20 (1%) individuals. Of the 20 participants, 15 were male, 11 were Black, and 17 had HIV-1 subtype B. Median baseline CD4 count was 641 cells/mm3 (interquartile range [IQR] 527, 771), and median age was 52 years (IQR 43, 59) (Table 1). Nineteen participants were VS, with a median time on ART of 6.6 years (range 0.4-15.7 years), and prior use of NRTI- (100%), non-NRTI (NNRTI)- (42%), and/or PR-inhibitor (PI)- (47%) based regimens (Tables 1 and 2). Prior INSTI use was allowed in studies 1844, 4030, and 4580 if there had been no VF on the INSTI-based regimen; 14 participants (74%) had prior use of EVG (n = 5), RAL (n = 2), and DTG (n = 9) (Table 2). Inclusion criteria specified that confirmed VF while on an INSTI-containing regimen was not allowed; therefore, preexisting INSTI-R was most likely partly due to transmission. However, lack of full clinical history and of potential documentation of VF for participants who were INSTI-experienced suggests some INSTI-R could have been treatment emergent. One participant was enrolled in the treatment-naive study 1489.
TABLE 1.

Baseline Clinical and Demographic Characteristics and Virologic Outcomes of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R

Participant IDStudy*/StatusAge, ySexRaceHIV SubtypeCD4 CountViral Load, Copies/mL
BaselineWeek 48 LOCF
11489/Naive58MBlackB72230,000<20
21878/VS44MWhiteB187No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
34580/VS71MBlackB464No HIV-1 RNA<20
44580/VS37MBlackB701No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
54580/VS52MOtherB74No HIV-1 RNA<20
64580/VS48MBlackB777No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
71844/VS59MWhiteB941No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
84580/VS63FBlackB895No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
94030/VS51MWhiteB507No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
104030/VS35MWhiteB722<20No HIV-1 RNA
111878/VS20MBlackB552<20<20
124030/VS59MWhiteB641No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
131844/VS41FBlackAG124<20<20
144580/VS60FBlackB1394<20No HIV-1 RNA
154030/VS64MBlackB547<20<20
164580/VS44MBlackB465<20No HIV-1 RNA
174580/VS57FBlackB921No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
184030/VS31MWhiteB820No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
194030/VS48MBlackC188No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA
204030/VS53FBlackC588No HIV-1 RNANo HIV-1 RNA

Participants were required to have been suppressed for a minimum of 3–6 months depending on the study.

Participant 12 had viral load measurements until week 12 when they decided to withdraw.

TABLE 2.

Resistance Profiles and ART History of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R

Participant IDPrimary INSTI-RSecondary INSTI-RNRTI-RNNRTI-RPI-RART HistoryTime on ART, y
Drug ClassReported Drug NameStart DateEnd Date
1Q148HM50I, G140SK70RK103NNoneN/A
2E92GS119TNoneK103NNoneNRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DRV + RTV11/20085/22/20167.5
3E92GNoneK70R, M184VNoneNoneNRTI/INSTIGENVOYA (EVG + COBI + FTC + TAF)1/31/201710/4/20181.7
4E92GNoneNoneE138ANoneNRTI/NNRTICOMPLERA/EVIPLERA (FTC + RPV + TDF)09/201310/25/20185.1
5Y143CNoneNoneH221YNoneNRTI/NNRTICOMPLERA/EVIPLERA (FTC + RPV + TDF)03/20179/25/20181.5
6Y143CM50INoneNoneNoneNRTI/NNRTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + EFV1/17/20058/6/200613.7
NRTI/NNRTIATRIPLA (EFV + FTC + TDF)8/7/200610/14/2017
NRTI/NNRTIODEFSEY (FTC + RPV + TAF)10/15/201710/9/2018
7Y143HS119RNoneNoneNoneNRTI/INSTISTRIBILD (EVG + COBI + FTC + TDF)12/11/20131/29/20152.0
NRTI/INSTITRIUMEQ (ABC + DTG + 3TC)1/30/201512/28/2015
8Y143HNoneNoneNoneNoneNRTI/INSTIGENVOYA (EVG + COBI + FTC + TAF)11/28/201712/7/20181.0
9Y143HNoneD67N, K70E/G/R, L74V, M184V, K219QL100I, K103NM46I, N88SNRTI/NNRTICOMPLERA/EVIPLERA (FTC + RPV + TDF)201102/20146.6
NRTI/INSTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DTG02/20148/14/2017
10Y143HNoneNoneK103NNoneNRTI/INSTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DTG4/20/201710/16/20170.4
11S147GNoneNoneNoneV82ANRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DRV + RTV5/9/20155/4/20160.9
12S147GNoneNoneNoneM46INRTITRIZIVIR (ABC + AZT + 3TC)1/17/20051/29/200512.6
NRTI/PI3TC + TDF + ATV + RTV4/4/20053/13/2006
NRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + ATV + RTV3/13/200610/7/2013
NRTI/NNRTICOMPLERA/EVIPLERA (FTC + RPV + TDF)10/7/20135/12/2014
NRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + ATV + RTV5/12/201410/5/2015
NRTI/INSTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DTG10/5/201511/5/2017
13Q148HNoneNoneNoneNoneNRTI/NNRTI3TC + TDF + EFV11/14/20066/15/20079.6
NRTI/PICOMBIVIR (AZT + 3TC) + KALETRA (LPV + RTV)6/16/20073/30/2008
NRTI/PIEPZICOM/KIVEXA (ABC + 3TC) + KALETRA (LPV + RTV)4/1/200811/17/2015
NRTI/INSTITRIUMEQ (ABC + DTG + 3TC)11/18/20157/4/2016
14Q148HS119PNoneNoneNoneNRTI/NNRTIATRIPLA (EFV + FTC + TDF)200711/17/20098.9
NRTI/PI/INSTITDF + RAL + ATV+RTV11/18/200912/2/2009
NRTI/PI/INSTITDF + RAL + KALETRA (LPV + RTV)12/3/200912/27/2015
NRTI/INSTISTRIBILD (EVG + COBI + FTC + TDF)12/28/20159/4/2016
NRTI/INSTIGENVOYA (EVG + COBI + FTC + TAF)9/5/20169/30/2018
15Q148HG140SM184VK101P/Q/T, Y181C, H221YNoneNRTI/INSTICOMBIVIR (AZT + 3TC) + RAL200920118.1
NRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + RTV + DRV20112/13/2017
NRTI/INSTIDESCOVY 200/25 MG (FTC + TAF) + DTG2/13/20179/6/2017
16Q148KL74I/M, M50I, S119PNoneNoneD30D/NNRTI/INSTIGENVOYA (EVG + COBI + FTC + TAF)01/201711/17/20181.8
17Q148RS119TNoneK103N G190EQ58ENRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + KALETRA (LPV + RTV)20032/24/201315.7
NRTI/INSTISTRIBILD (EVG + COBI + FTC + TDF)2/25/20132/26/2017
OTHERPRO 140 (LERONLIMAB)2/20/20174/28/2017
NRTI/INSTIGENVOYA (EVG + COBI + FTC + TAF)5/1/20179/24/2018
18N155SS119RNoneNoneNoneNRTI/INSTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DTG20119/11/20166.6
NRTI/INSTIDESCOVY 200/25 MG (FTC + TAF) + DTG9/12/20168/4/2017
19R263KM50I L68VNoneNoneNoneNRTI/NNRTI3TC + TDF + EFV7/8/20034/11/200414.2
NRTITRIZIVIR (ABC + AZT + 3TC)4/12/20049/19/2004
NRTI/NNRTI3TC + ABC + EFV9/20/20041/23/2005
NRTI/NNRTIEPZICOM/KIVEXA (ABC + 3TC) + EFV1/24/200510/30/2005
NRTI/PIEPZICOM/KIVEXA (ABC + 3TC) + ATV + RTV10/31/200510/8/2007
NRTI/NNRTIEPZICOM/KIVEXA (ABC + 3TC) + EFV10/9/200711/9/2008
NRTI/NNRTIATRIPLA (EFV + FTC + TDF)11/10/20082/13/2014
NRTI/INSTITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + DTG2/14/201410/5/2016
NRTI/INSTIDESCOVY 200/25 MG (FTC + TAF) + DTG10/6/20169/13/2017
20R263KNoneNoneNoneNoneNRTI/PITRUVADA (FTC + TDF) + KALETRA (LPV + RTV)1/6/20098/6/20148.7
NRTI/INSTIEPZICOM/KIVEXA (ABC + 3TC) + DTG8/6/201410/27/2016
NRTI/INSTITRIUMEQ (ABC + DTG + 3TC)10/28/20163/1/2017
NRTI/INSTIDESCOVY 200/25 MG (FTC + TAF) + DTG3/1/201710/3/2017

Primary INSTI-R substitutions were T66I/A/K, E92Q/G, F121Y, Y143R/H/C, S147G, Q148H/K/R, N155H/S, and R263K in IN. Secondary INSTI-R substitutions were M50I, H51Y, L68V/I, V72A/N/T, L74M, Q95K/R, T97A, G118R, S119P/R/T, F121C, A128T, E138K/A, G140A/C/S, P145S, Q146R/I/K/L/P, V151L/A, S153A/F/Y, E157K/Q, G163K/R, and E170A in IN. Primary nucleos(t)ide RT inhibitor (NRTI)-R substitutions were K65R/E/N, T69 insertions, K70E, L74V/I, Y115F, Q151M, M184V/I, and TAMs (M41L, D67N, K70R, L210W, T215F/Y, K219E/N/Q/R) in RT. Primary non-NRTI (NNRTI)-R substitutions were L100I, K101E/P, K103N/S, V106A/M, V108I, E138A/G/K/Q/R, V179L, Y181C/I/V, Y188C/H/L, G190A/E/Q/S, H221Y, P225H, F227C, and M230I/L in RT. Primary PR inhibitor (PI)-R substitutions were D30N, V32I, M46I/L, I47A/V, G48V, I50L/V, I54M/L, Q58E, T74P, L76V, V82A/F/L/S/T, N83D, I84V, N88S, and L90M in PR.

3TC, lamivudine; ABC, abacavir; ATV, atazanavir; AZT, zidovudine; COBI, cobicistat; DRV, darunavir; DTG, dolutegravir; EFV, efavirenz; EVG, elvitegravir; FTC, emtricitabine; INSTI, integrase strand transfer inhibitor; LPV, lopinavir; NRTI, nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI, non-NRTI; PI, protease inhibitor; RAL, raltegravir; RPV, rilpivirine; RTV, ritonavir; TAF, tenofovir alafenamide; TDF, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

Baseline Clinical and Demographic Characteristics and Virologic Outcomes of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R Participants were required to have been suppressed for a minimum of 3–6 months depending on the study. Participant 12 had viral load measurements until week 12 when they decided to withdraw. Resistance Profiles and ART History of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R Primary INSTI-R substitutions were T66I/A/K, E92Q/G, F121Y, Y143R/H/C, S147G, Q148H/K/R, N155H/S, and R263K in IN. Secondary INSTI-R substitutions were M50I, H51Y, L68V/I, V72A/N/T, L74M, Q95K/R, T97A, G118R, S119P/R/T, F121C, A128T, E138K/A, G140A/C/S, P145S, Q146R/I/K/L/P, V151L/A, S153A/F/Y, E157K/Q, G163K/R, and E170A in IN. Primary nucleos(t)ide RT inhibitor (NRTI)-R substitutions were K65R/E/N, T69 insertions, K70E, L74V/I, Y115F, Q151M, M184V/I, and TAMs (M41L, D67N, K70R, L210W, T215F/Y, K219E/N/Q/R) in RT. Primary non-NRTI (NNRTI)-R substitutions were L100I, K101E/P, K103N/S, V106A/M, V108I, E138A/G/K/Q/R, V179L, Y181C/I/V, Y188C/H/L, G190A/E/Q/S, H221Y, P225H, F227C, and M230I/L in RT. Primary PR inhibitor (PI)-R substitutions were D30N, V32I, M46I/L, I47A/V, G48V, I50L/V, I54M/L, Q58E, T74P, L76V, V82A/F/L/S/T, N83D, I84V, N88S, and L90M in PR. 3TC, lamivudine; ABC, abacavir; ATV, atazanavir; AZT, zidovudine; COBI, cobicistat; DRV, darunavir; DTG, dolutegravir; EFV, efavirenz; EVG, elvitegravir; FTC, emtricitabine; INSTI, integrase strand transfer inhibitor; LPV, lopinavir; NRTI, nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor; NNRTI, non-NRTI; PI, protease inhibitor; RAL, raltegravir; RPV, rilpivirine; RTV, ritonavir; TAF, tenofovir alafenamide; TDF, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

Resistance Profile of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R

Of the 8 amino acid positions listed with primary INSTI-R substitutions, 6 were detected in these participants: E92G (n = 3; 15%), Y143C/H (n = 6; 30%), S147G (n = 2; 10%), Q148H/K/R (n = 6; 30%), N155S (n = 1; 5%), and R263K (n = 2; 10%) (Table 2). Secondary INSTI-R substitutions included M50I (n = 4; 20%), L68V (n = 1; 5%), L74I/M (n = 1; 5%), S119P/R/T (n = 6; 30%), and G140S (n = 2; 10%). Additional NRTI-R, NNRTI-R, and PI-R substitutions were detected in 4 (20%), 8 (40%), and 5 (25%) participants, respectively (Table 2). All substitutions were present at baseline (n = 1, RNA, and n = 18, proviral DNA) except for participant #5, who had Y143C detected historically in plasma only. Of the 18 with baseline proviral DNA genotyping, 15 had no historical data, and for participants with multiple reports, substitutions were detected in both RNA and DNA (n = 1) or DNA only (n = 2). Drug resistance substitutions in multiple drug classes were observed in some participants. Notably, 4 had INSTI-R combined with NRTI-R substitutions relevant to the emtricitabine (FTC) or TAF components of the B/F/TAF regimen (M184V and/or K70E). The treatment-naive participant had K103N and K70R in RT and Q148H and G140S in IN genes. This clinical isolate with Q148H+G140S was phenotypically susceptible to BIC (2.14-fold change, less than the cutoff of 2.5-fold), partially susceptible to DTG (4.45-fold change, greater than the cutoff of 4-fold), and resistant to EVG and RAL (PhenoSense® Integrase assay, Monogram Biosciences).[45]

Viral Loads and Virologic Outcome of Participants With Preexisting INSTI-R

The treatment-naive participant with preexisting Q148H and G140S had a viral load of 30,000 copies/mL at baseline and was suppressed by week 4, maintaining viral loads of <50 copies/mL through week 48, and even week 216, without blips. The ART-experienced participants (n = 19) maintained HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at all study visits through week 48 without blips. All study participants achieved virologic success by week 48 (Table 1), which was similar to that observed in the overall study population from the 7 clinical trials.[18,20-25]

DISCUSSION

In this pooled analysis, high rates of virologic suppression without VF or treatment-emergent resistance were achieved/maintained in both ART-naive and ART-experienced individuals with a broad range of primary INSTI-R, demonstrating the efficacy of B/F/TAF. Successful virologic outcomes in the presence of select INSTI-R substitution patterns conferring predominantly RAL and/or EVG resistance are consistent with previous phenotypic analyses of clinical isolates demonstrating the activity of BIC against virus with primary INSTI-R substitutions, such as E92Q, Y143C/H, S147G, N155H, and Q148H/K/R.[36,46-48] In addition, virologic suppression was attained in one treatment-naive individual with Q148H and G140S IN substitutions, demonstrating BIC's favorable resistance profile. As observed in the viremic individual in this study, BIC has broader phenotypic activity than other INSTIs, including DTG, against clinical isolates with Q148H + G140S combinations.[36,47,48] Substitutions associated with BIC, which have been selected in vivo and in vitro, can lead to a range of phenotypic changes. For example, the combination of Q148H/K/R and G140A/C/S in the presence of additional substitutions can cause high-level resistance to BIC (>10-fold change in phenotype compared with wild type) but as was seen with the naive case presented in this study, the Q148H+G140S pattern can also be susceptible to BIC.[36,46-48] Examining the 3 real-world cases in which treatment-emergent resistance on B/F/TAF occurred can also help in understanding the activity of BIC against INSTI-R virus. Potential causes of VF in those cases included advanced disease (high viral load and low CD4 count), previous failure on an INSTI-based regimen, poor adherence, and nonstandard administration of B/F/TAF. All 3 individuals developed the R263K substitution.[49-51] R263K on its own causes small increases in fold change that may not be clinically relevant, but when it is selected in vitro along with secondary mutations such as M50I, the fold change increases.[36] In the 3 real-world cases, other INSTI-R substitutions were also noted, including L74I, E138K, S147G, and H51Y, along with M184V in RT.[49-51] The accumulation of multiple INSTI-R mutations, along with M184V, which confers resistance to FTC, may have contributed to VF. Interestingly, in this study, suppressed participants with R263K (alone or in combination with M50I and L68V) maintained viral loads of <50 copies/mL. In B/F/TAF study participants, preexisting primary INSTI-R was rare (1%) and reflects real-world surveillance data. Demonstrating viral suppression in the presence of single INSTI-R substitutions in predominantly VS individuals is a step toward determining the ability of BIC to inhibit viral replication in persons with INSTI-R substitutions and understanding who can be treated with B/F/TAF. Along with resistance profile, other factors should be considered when choosing treatment regimens. In the VIKING trial, treatment-emergent resistance occurred as early as 11 days after DTG initiation, perhaps indicating the presence of additional preexisting resistance mutations below population sequencing thresholds that rapidly predominated with selective pressure by DTG.[39] The requirement of a fully active agent in the optimized background regimen also potentially affected the VIKING study outcomes.[37] History of ART failure was hypothesized to be a contributing factor to the increased risk of VF among participants in the SWITCHMRK studies.[52] Moreover, resistance to the nucleoside components of the regimen and the lower barrier to resistance of RAL versus lopinavir/ritonavir may have influenced virologic suppression in the SWITCHMRK studies.[52] Taken together, these data highlight the complexity of evaluating the impact of INSTI-R substitutions on treatment efficacy, where resistance patterns have a range of phenotypic resistance, some substitutions may be present below the detection limit, and drug resistance from other regimen components may also contribute to loss of susceptibility to the regimen. Limitations of this study include that in B/F/TAF clinical trials, INSTI-R was exclusionary and allowed only if identified after enrollment; therefore, the number of participants was low. As a result, this analysis had only statistical power to detect a VF rate of ≥16% (https://epitools.ausvet.com.au/ciproportion?page=CIProportion&SampleSize=21&Positive=1&Conf=0.95&method=2&Digits=4). In addition, our population consisted primarily of stably suppressed clinical trial participants. Most INSTI-R substitutions were detected by proviral DNA genotyping, which is unable to determine whether reported drug resistance substitutions occur on intact, potentially reactivatable HIV genomes. This is partially mitigated by the GenoSure Archive assay, amplifying a large portion of the polymerase gene, sequencing full-length amplification products, and removing hypermutated variants, which enhance the reporting of substitutions found on intact virus.[53] In addition, phenotypes of proviral HIV DNA cannot be determined. Resistance guidance in the prescribing information for B/F/TAF differs by geographical location. Currently, in the Unites States, there can be no known substitutions associated with resistance to the individual components of B/F/TAF, whereas in Europe, B/F/TAF is indicated for patients who have no resistance to INSTIs. Although the use of BIC in individuals with INSTI-R is off-label in some regions, the results presented in this study are reassuring for situations where patients with unmeasured or undetected resistance are treated with B/F/TAF. Although patients with complex patterns of INSTI-R substitutions and predicted high-level resistance should be treated with multiple fully active agents, these results support further study of B/F/TAF in those who have INSTI-R virus predicted to be susceptible to BIC.
  44 in total

1.  Comparison of the Antiviral Activity of Bictegravir against HIV-1 and HIV-2 Isolates and Integrase Inhibitor-Resistant HIV-2 Mutants.

Authors:  Robert A Smith; Dana N Raugi; Vincent H Wu; Christopher G Zavala; Jennifer Song; Khardiata Mbaye Diallo; Moussa Seydi; Geoffrey S Gottlieb
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  2019 update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1.

Authors:  Annemarie M Wensing; Vincent Calvez; Francesca Ceccherini-Silberstein; Charlotte Charpentier; Huldrych F Günthard; Roger Paredes; Robert W Shafer; Douglas D Richman
Journal:  Top Antivir Med       Date:  2019-09

3.  Susceptibility to HIV-1 integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in highly treatment-experienced patients who failed an INSTI-based regimen.

Authors:  Maria M Santoro; Chiara Fornabaio; Marina Malena; Laura Galli; Andrea Poli; Marianna Menozzi; Maurizio Zazzi; Kirsten L White; Antonella Castagna
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2020-05-23       Impact factor: 5.283

4.  Week 144 resistance analysis of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF versus atazanavir+ritonavir+emtricitabine/tenofovir DF in antiretroviral-naïve patients.

Authors:  Rima Kulkarni; Michael E Abram; Damian J McColl; Tiffany Barnes; Marshall W Fordyce; Javier Szwarcberg; Andrew K Cheng; Michael D Miller; Kirsten L White
Journal:  HIV Clin Trials       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct

5.  Co-formulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Hans-Jürgen Stellbrink; José R Arribas; Jeffrey L Stephens; Helmut Albrecht; Paul E Sax; Franco Maggiolo; Catherine Creticos; Claudia T Martorell; Xuelian Wei; Rima Acosta; Sean E Collins; Diana Brainard; Hal Martin
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2019-05-05       Impact factor: 12.767

6.  Resistance to HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors among clinical specimens in the United States, 2009-2012.

Authors:  Christopher B Hurt; Joseph Sebastian; Charles B Hicks; Joseph J Eron
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2013-10-21       Impact factor: 9.079

7.  Efficacy and safety of raltegravir for treatment of HIV for 5 years in the BENCHMRK studies: final results of two randomised, placebo-controlled trials.

Authors:  Joseph J Eron; David A Cooper; Roy T Steigbigel; Bonaventura Clotet; Jose M Gatell; Princy N Kumar; Jurgen K Rockstroh; Mauro Schechter; Martin Markowitz; Patrick Yeni; Mona R Loutfy; Adriano Lazzarin; Jeffrey L Lennox; Kim M Strohmaier; Hong Wan; Richard J O Barnard; Bach-Yen T Nguyen; Hedy Teppler
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 25.071

8.  Bictegravir combined with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  David A Wohl; Yazdan Yazdanpanah; Axel Baumgarten; Amanda Clarke; Melanie A Thompson; Cynthia Brinson; Debbie Hagins; Moti N Ramgopal; Andrea Antinori; Xuelian Wei; Rima Acosta; Sean E Collins; Diana Brainard; Hal Martin
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2019-05-05       Impact factor: 12.767

9.  Long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 2 months in adults with HIV-1 infection (ATLAS-2M), 48-week results: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study.

Authors:  Edgar T Overton; Gary Richmond; Giuliano Rizzardini; Hans Jaeger; Catherine Orrell; Firaya Nagimova; Fritz Bredeek; Miguel García Deltoro; Susan Swindells; Jaime Federico Andrade-Villanueva; Alexander Wong; Marie-Aude Khuong-Josses; Rodica Van Solingen-Ristea; Veerle van Eygen; Herta Crauwels; Susan Ford; Christine Talarico; Paul Benn; Yuanyuan Wang; Krischan J Hudson; Vasiliki Chounta; Amy Cutrell; Parul Patel; Mark Shaefer; David A Margolis; Kimberly Y Smith; Simon Vanveggel; William Spreen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Therapy-Emergent Drug Resistance to Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors in HIV-1 Patients: A Subgroup Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Jiangzhou You; Hongren Wang; Xiaojun Huang; Zhen Qin; Zhaomin Deng; Jun Luo; Baoning Wang; Mingyuan Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Long-term outcome of lamivudine/dolutegravir dual therapy in HIV-infected, virologically suppressed patients.

Authors:  Franco Maggiolo; Roberto Gulminetti; Layla Pagnucco; Margherita Digaetano; Adriana Cervo; Daniela Valenti; Annapaola Callegaro; Cristina Mussini
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 3.667

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.