Prevalence of integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance in people living with HIV and virological failure.

Hung-Chin Tsai, I-Tzu Chen, Hui-Min Chang, Yu-Ting Tseng, Ya-Wei Weng, Yao-Shen Chen
{"title":"Prevalence of integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance in people living with HIV and virological failure.","authors":"Hung-Chin Tsai, I-Tzu Chen, Hui-Min Chang, Yu-Ting Tseng, Ya-Wei Weng, Yao-Shen Chen","doi":"10.1097/JCMA.0000000000001152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to delineate the resistance profiles of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) among patients in southern Taiwan who had experienced antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure. We focused on individuals previously treated with highly active ART (HAART) regimens, providing insights into the implications of INSTI resistance in a broader treatment-experienced population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected from patients failing an INSTI-containing regimen in a medical center in southern Taiwan between 2009 and 2022. Virological failure was defined as a plasma viral load >1000 copies/mL. Reverse transcriptase, protease, and integrase coding regions were sequenced at failure. Resistance-associated mutations included in the 2022 International Antiviral Society (IAS)-USA list were used. Drug resistance was analyzed using the HIV Stanford HIVDB 9.4 edition algorithm. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors associated with INSTI failure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 184 patients were enrolled for genotypic drug resistance testing due to virological failure, of whom 104 failed on nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 58 on protease inhibitors (PIs), and 21 on INSTIs. Among 21 patients who failed INSTI therapy, 6 failed raltegravir-based treatment, 3 elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF), 2 bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (BIC/FTC/TAF), and 10 abacavir/dolutegravir/lamivudine (ABC/DTG/3TC). Only 10 patients had INSTI drug resistance testing results available, and 40% (4/10) showed INSTI resistance at failure. Among the seven patients who failed on second-generation INSTIs with drug resistance reports available, one harbored E157Q and another with R263K mutations, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that patients with INSTI failure were less likely to have pol resistance (p = 0.007, adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.176, 95% CI, 0.050-0.618), less previous exposure to NNRTI (p = 0.003, aOR, 0.063, 95% CI, 0.010-0.401), PIs (p = 0.002, aOR, 0.030, 95% CI, 0.003-0.272), and with long duration of HAART (p = 0.018, aOR, 1.02, 95% CI, 1.003-1.037).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>INSTI resistance was uncommon when used as the first-line single tablet regimen in Taiwan. The results confirmed the robustness of ABC/DTG/3TC and BIC/FTC/TAF regarding integrase resistance in cases of virological failure in routine clinical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":94115,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA","volume":"87 11","pages":"1002-1010"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JCMA.0000000000001152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aims to delineate the resistance profiles of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) among patients in southern Taiwan who had experienced antiretroviral therapy (ART) failure. We focused on individuals previously treated with highly active ART (HAART) regimens, providing insights into the implications of INSTI resistance in a broader treatment-experienced population.

Methods: Data were collected from patients failing an INSTI-containing regimen in a medical center in southern Taiwan between 2009 and 2022. Virological failure was defined as a plasma viral load >1000 copies/mL. Reverse transcriptase, protease, and integrase coding regions were sequenced at failure. Resistance-associated mutations included in the 2022 International Antiviral Society (IAS)-USA list were used. Drug resistance was analyzed using the HIV Stanford HIVDB 9.4 edition algorithm. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors associated with INSTI failure.

Results: A total of 184 patients were enrolled for genotypic drug resistance testing due to virological failure, of whom 104 failed on nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 58 on protease inhibitors (PIs), and 21 on INSTIs. Among 21 patients who failed INSTI therapy, 6 failed raltegravir-based treatment, 3 elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF), 2 bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (BIC/FTC/TAF), and 10 abacavir/dolutegravir/lamivudine (ABC/DTG/3TC). Only 10 patients had INSTI drug resistance testing results available, and 40% (4/10) showed INSTI resistance at failure. Among the seven patients who failed on second-generation INSTIs with drug resistance reports available, one harbored E157Q and another with R263K mutations, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that patients with INSTI failure were less likely to have pol resistance (p = 0.007, adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.176, 95% CI, 0.050-0.618), less previous exposure to NNRTI (p = 0.003, aOR, 0.063, 95% CI, 0.010-0.401), PIs (p = 0.002, aOR, 0.030, 95% CI, 0.003-0.272), and with long duration of HAART (p = 0.018, aOR, 1.02, 95% CI, 1.003-1.037).

Conclusion: INSTI resistance was uncommon when used as the first-line single tablet regimen in Taiwan. The results confirmed the robustness of ABC/DTG/3TC and BIC/FTC/TAF regarding integrase resistance in cases of virological failure in routine clinical care.

艾滋病病毒感染者中整合酶链转移抑制剂耐药性的普遍性和病毒学失败。
研究背景本研究旨在了解台湾南部抗逆转录病毒疗法(ART)失败患者对整合酶链转移抑制剂(INSTI)的耐药性情况。我们将重点放在之前接受过高活性抗逆转录病毒疗法(HAART)治疗的患者身上,以便深入了解INSTI耐药性对更广泛的治疗经验人群的影响:2009年至2022年期间,我们在台湾南部的一家医疗中心收集了INSTI治疗方案失败患者的数据。病毒载量>1000拷贝/毫升即为病毒学失败。失败时对逆转录酶、蛋白酶和整合酶编码区进行测序。耐药性相关突变被列入2022年国际抗病毒协会(IAS)-美国名单。耐药性使用 HIV Stanford HIVDB 9.4 版算法进行分析。采用逻辑回归分析法分析 INSTI 失败的相关风险因素:共有184名患者因病毒学检测失败而接受了基因型耐药性检测,其中104人服用非核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂失败,58人服用蛋白酶抑制剂(PI)失败,21人服用INSTI失败。在INSTI治疗失败的21名患者中,有6名患者未接受基于雷特格韦的治疗,3名患者未接受埃替格韦/可比司他/恩曲他滨/替诺福韦-阿拉非酰胺(EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF)治疗,2名患者未接受比特格韦/恩曲他滨/替诺福韦-阿拉非酰胺(BIC/FTC/TAF)治疗,10名患者未接受阿巴卡韦/多曲格韦/拉米夫定(ABC/DTG/3TC)治疗。只有 10 名患者有 INSTI 耐药性检测结果,40%(4/10)的患者在治疗失败时出现 INSTI 耐药性。在7名有耐药性报告的第二代INSTI治疗失败的患者中,一人携带E157Q突变,另一人携带R263K突变。多变量逻辑回归分析表明,INSTI治疗失败的患者出现Pol耐药的可能性较小(P = 0.007,调整后的几率比[OR],0.176,95% CI,0.050-0.618)。618)、较少既往暴露于 NNRTI(p = 0.003,aOR,0.063,95% CI,0.010-0.401)、PIs(p = 0.002,aOR,0.030,95% CI,0.003-0.272)以及较长的 HAART 持续时间(p = 0.018,aOR,1.02,95% CI,1.003-1.037):结论:INSTI耐药在台湾作为一线单片治疗方案时并不常见。结果证实,在常规临床治疗中,ABC/DTG/3TC 和 BIC/FTC/TAF 对病毒学失败病例中的整合酶耐药具有稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信