Assessing phenotypic effect of integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based resistance substitutions associated with failures on cabotegravir.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Michelle L D'Antoni, Brie Falkard, Kristen Andreatta, Stephanie Cox, Cal Cohen, Christian Callebaut
{"title":"Assessing phenotypic effect of integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based resistance substitutions associated with failures on cabotegravir.","authors":"Michelle L D'Antoni, Brie Falkard, Kristen Andreatta, Stephanie Cox, Cal Cohen, Christian Callebaut","doi":"10.1093/jac/dkaf019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>International guidelines recommend integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimens as initial and switch therapy in people with HIV. As novel INSTIs become available, understanding how emergence of resistance at virological failures and seroconversions affects subsequent treatment options is needed. For the latest approved INSTI, cabotegravir, resistance patterns comprising Q148K/R, N155H, R263K, G118R, E138A/K and G140A/S (alone or in combination) have been documented in virological failures and seroconversions. Here, the effect of these substitutions on antiviral activity of commercially approved INSTIs, bictegravir and elvitegravir, was assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Antiviral testing was performed using person-derived clinical isolates (n = 52) with viral profiles similar to cabotegravir INSTI resistance patterns; susceptibility to cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir was measured using a phenotypic assay. Substitution patterns from isolates included triple [Q148K/H/R + E138A/K + G140A/C/S (n = 16)], double [Q148R + E138K (n = 3); Q148H/R + G140A/S (n = 24)] and single [N155H (n = 6); Q148R (n = 3)] resistance-associated mutations (RAMs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>IC50 fold changes (FCs) for triple RAMs were the highest, at 47.0, 7.59 and >144 for cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir, respectively. For cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir, respectively, mean IC50 FCs were 9.5, 2.5 and >144 for double RAMs; and 3.3, 1.4 and >65 for single RAMs. When considering clinical/biological assay cut-offs, 54% (28/52) of isolates were susceptible to bictegravir, 40% (21/52) were partially susceptible and 6% (3/52) were resistant; for elvitegravir, 100% of isolates were resistant. Cabotegravir cut-offs were not available at the time of reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, clinical isolates with RAM patterns similar to clinically observed cabotegravir INSTI resistance showed meaningful increases in IC50 FCs, suggesting that cabotegravir-associated resistance may negatively affect efficacy of bictegravir- and elvitegravir-based regimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":14969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy","volume":" ","pages":"962-966"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962372/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaf019","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: International guidelines recommend integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimens as initial and switch therapy in people with HIV. As novel INSTIs become available, understanding how emergence of resistance at virological failures and seroconversions affects subsequent treatment options is needed. For the latest approved INSTI, cabotegravir, resistance patterns comprising Q148K/R, N155H, R263K, G118R, E138A/K and G140A/S (alone or in combination) have been documented in virological failures and seroconversions. Here, the effect of these substitutions on antiviral activity of commercially approved INSTIs, bictegravir and elvitegravir, was assessed.

Methods: Antiviral testing was performed using person-derived clinical isolates (n = 52) with viral profiles similar to cabotegravir INSTI resistance patterns; susceptibility to cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir was measured using a phenotypic assay. Substitution patterns from isolates included triple [Q148K/H/R + E138A/K + G140A/C/S (n = 16)], double [Q148R + E138K (n = 3); Q148H/R + G140A/S (n = 24)] and single [N155H (n = 6); Q148R (n = 3)] resistance-associated mutations (RAMs).

Results: IC50 fold changes (FCs) for triple RAMs were the highest, at 47.0, 7.59 and >144 for cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir, respectively. For cabotegravir, bictegravir and elvitegravir, respectively, mean IC50 FCs were 9.5, 2.5 and >144 for double RAMs; and 3.3, 1.4 and >65 for single RAMs. When considering clinical/biological assay cut-offs, 54% (28/52) of isolates were susceptible to bictegravir, 40% (21/52) were partially susceptible and 6% (3/52) were resistant; for elvitegravir, 100% of isolates were resistant. Cabotegravir cut-offs were not available at the time of reporting.

Conclusions: Overall, clinical isolates with RAM patterns similar to clinically observed cabotegravir INSTI resistance showed meaningful increases in IC50 FCs, suggesting that cabotegravir-associated resistance may negatively affect efficacy of bictegravir- and elvitegravir-based regimens.

基于整合酶链转移抑制剂(INSTI)的耐药替代与卡波特韦失败相关的表型效应评估。
目的:国际指南推荐整合酶链转移抑制剂(INSTI)为基础的方案作为HIV感染者的初始和转换治疗。随着新型干扰素的出现,需要了解在病毒学失败和血清转化时耐药性的出现如何影响后续治疗方案。对于最新批准的INSTI, cabotegravir,抗性模式包括Q148K/R, N155H, R263K, G118R, E138A/K和G140A/S(单独或联合)已在病毒学失败和血清转化中记录。在这里,我们评估了这些替代对商业批准的iniss(比替格拉韦和依维替格拉韦)抗病毒活性的影响。方法:使用病毒谱与卡波特韦INSTI耐药模式相似的人源性临床分离株(n = 52)进行抗病毒测试;用表型测定法测定对卡替格拉韦、比替格拉韦和艾替格拉韦的敏感性。分离株的替代模式包括三重[Q148K/H/R + E138A/K + G140A/C/S] (n = 16),双重[Q148R + E138K] (n = 3);Q148H / R + G140A / S (n = 24)]和单[N155H (n = 6);Q148R (n = 3)]抗性相关突变(RAMs)。结果:三联用药组的IC50折叠变化(FCs)最高,cabotegravir、bictegravir和elvittegravir分别为47.0、7.59和bb0 144。对于cabotegravir, bictegravir和elvittegravir,双RAMs的平均IC50 FCs分别为9.5,2.5和bbb144;3.3、1.4和bbb65为单个ram。当考虑临床/生物检测截止时,54%(28/52)的分离株对比替格拉韦敏感,40%(21/52)部分敏感,6%(3/52)耐药;对依维替韦,100%的分离株耐药。在撰写本报告时,还没有卡波特韦的临界值。结论:总体而言,RAM模式与临床观察到的cabotegravity INSTI耐药相似的临床分离株的IC50 fc显著增加,表明cabotegravity相关耐药可能对比替重力韦和依维替重力韦为基础的方案的疗效产生负面影响。
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
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.80%
发文量
423
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal publishes articles that further knowledge and advance the science and application of antimicrobial chemotherapy with antibiotics and antifungal, antiviral and antiprotozoal agents. The Journal publishes primarily in human medicine, and articles in veterinary medicine likely to have an impact on global health.
×
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