Virtual Phenotype Research Articles

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 pharmacogenomics in clinical practice: relevance of HIV-1 drug resistance testing (Part 2).

Throughout most of the past century, physicians could offer patients no treatments for infections caused by viruses. The experience with treatment of infection by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has changed the way healthcare workers deal with viral infections and has triggered a growing rate of discovery and use of antiviral agents, the first fruits of the expanding genomics revolution. HIV treatment also provides an informative paradigm for pharmacogenomics because control of infection and its consequences is limited by the development of viral drug resistance and by host factors. This report summarizes studies published to date on the significance of testing of HIV-1 resistance to antiretroviral drugs. The only Food and Drug Administration-approved kit is commercially available through Visible Genetics, Inc., for HIV drug resistance testing by genotypic sequencing. Genotyping sequencing alone is most likely an adequate test to assist in the therapeutic decision-making process in cases of previous regimen failure, treatment-naïve patients in areas of high prevalence of transmitted resistant virus, and pregnant women. However, in exceptional cases of highly complex mutation patterns and extensive cross-resistance, it may be useful to obtain a phenotype test, because that result may more easily identify drugs to which the virus is least resistant. There are no published clinical trial results on the usefulness of the so-called virtual phenotype over genotypic sequencing alone. The paradigm of viral pharmacogenomics in the form of HIV genotypic sequencing has been not only useful to the treatment of other viral diseases but also important to the real-life implementation of the growing discipline of genomics or molecular medicine. The application of this paradigm to the thousands of potential therapeutic targets that have become available through the various human genome projects will certainly gradually change the landscape of diagnosis and management of many diseases, including cancer.

Virtual Inhibitory Quotient Predicts Response to Ritonavir Boosting of Indinavir-Based Therapy in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients with Ongoing Viremia

Depending on the degree of underlying resistance present, optimization of the pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors may result in improved virologic suppression. Thirty-seven human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected subjects who had chronic detectable viremia and who were receiving 800 mg of indinavir three times a day (TID) were switched to 400 mg of indinavir BID with 400 mg of ritonavir two times a day (BID) for 48 weeks. Full pharmacokinetic evaluations were obtained for 12 subjects before the switch and 3 weeks after the switch. Combination therapy increased the indinavir predose concentrations in plasma by 6.47-fold, increased the minimum concentration in serum by 3.41-fold, and reduced the maximum concentration in serum by 57% without significantly changing the area under the plasma concentration-time curve at 24 h. At week 3, 58% (21 of 36) of the subjects for whom postbaseline measurements were available achieved a viral load in plasma of <50 copies/ml or a reduction from the baseline load of > or =0.5 log(10) copies/ml. Of these subjects, 82% (14 of 17) whose viruses had three or fewer protease inhibitor mutations and 88% (14 of 16) whose viruses had an indinavir virtual phenotypic susceptibility test of more than sixfold less than that for the baseline isolate were considered virologic responders. The indinavir virtual inhibitory quotient, which is a function of baseline indinavir phenotypic resistance (estimated by virtual phenotype) and the indinavir predose concentration in plasma achieved with indinavir-ritonavir combination therapy, was the best predictor of a viral load reduction. Sixteen subjects discontinued the study by week 48 due to adverse events, predominantly related to hyperlipidemia. Pharmacokinetic intensification of indinavir-based therapy with ritonavir reduced the viral loads in subjects but added toxicity. The virtual inhibitory quotient, which incorporates both baseline viral resistance and the level of drug exposure in plasma, was superior to either baseline resistance or drug exposure alone in predicting the virologic response.

Comparison of Nine Resistance Interpretation Systems for HIV-1 Genotyping

HIV-1 genotyping has become a widely accepted tool for monitoring antiretroviral therapy. However, the benefit of genotyping is limited by the need to interpret the mutation pattern in order to obtain a prediction regarding susceptibility to each antiretroviral drug. Several different interpretation systems are currently available, commercially or free of charge; some are in combination with the genotyping test system used. In this study, we compared the results obtained on patient samples, using nine different resistance interpretation systems for HIV-1 genotype, and identified mutation patterns responsible for discordances between these systems. HIV-1 genotypes from 26 patients were obtained using the ViroSeq HIV-1 Genotyping System (Applied Biosystems). Nine resistance interpretation systems were used: the 'virtual phenotype' systems VirtualPhenotype (Virco) and Geno2Pheno (http://cartan.gmd.de/geno2pheno.html), the rule-based resistance algorithms Antiretroviral Drug Resistance Report (Applied Biosystems), Stanford HIV-SEQ program (http://hivdb.stanford.edu/) and the ViroScorer system (ABL; including ANRS AC11, Detroit Medical Center, Grupo de Aconselhamento Virológico, CHL, and Rega). Discordance was defined as the same sequence being interpreted as resistant and sensitive to a substance by different systems, with intermediate scores being regarded as neutral. Results for lopinavir were not available from some interpretation systems. None of the 26 patient samples had concordant results for all drugs. The highest degree of concordance was found for the resistance scoring of lamivudine (25/26), followed by nelfinavir (23/26), indinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir (all 22/26), zidovudine, nevirapine (all 21/26), lopinavir, efavirenz (all 18/26), amprenavir, delavirdine (all 17/26), stavudine, abacavir (all 13/26), zalcitabine (7/26) and didanosine (5/26). In most cases, it was only one interpretation system that gave an interpretation different from the others. If this interpretation system was omitted, the overall discordance rate decreased by a statistically significant degree. There exists, therefore, an urgent need for standardization of interpretation algorithms for HIV-1 genotyping.

Baseline Antiretroviral Drug Susceptibility Influences Treatment Response in Patients Receiving Saquinavir-Enhancing Therapy

Purpose: To relate baseline plasma HIV genotypic and virtual phenotypic antiretroviral drug susceptibility to subsequent virological response in patients receiving saquinavir (SQV)-enhancing therapy. Individuals were randomized to receive stavudine (d4T), SQV, and one of ritonavir, nelfinavir, or delavirdine to enhance SQV blood levels. Method: The protease and reverse transcriptase baseline sequences of 31 treatment-experienced patients were analyzed by genotype and virtual phenotype and were related to viral load at weeks 12 and 24. Genotypic resistance to SQV was defined by the presence of G48V and/or L90M mutations in the protease gene. Potential cross-resistance to d4T in zidovudine (ZDV)-experienced individuals was defined by the presence of thymidine-associated mutations in the reverse transcriptase gene. Results: ZDV-associated mutations did not affect the virological response at 24 weeks. Individuals who were sensitive to SQV at baseline as determined by either genotyping or virtual phenotyping showed a greater decrease in viral load at week 24 than those resistant to SQV, irrespective of treatment arm. By genotyping, SQV-sensitive individuals had a median log decrease of 1.12 compared to 0.32 for those individuals who were SQV resistant. By virtual phenotyping, SQV-sensitive individuals had a median log decrease of 1.0 compared to a rise of 0.08 in resistant individuals. Conclusion: Thymidine analogue-associated mutations at baseline did not influence the response to subsequent therapy involving d4T. Individuals who were sensitive or resistant to SQV by genotyping or virtual phenotyping responded to SQV-enhancing regimens, but the virological response was greater in those who were sensitive.

Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor failure impairs HIV-RNA responses to efavirenz-containing salvage antiretroviral therapy.

In a retrospective cohort study of salvage antiretroviral combination therapy including efavirenz, 60% of 51 patients were able to suppress HIV RNA by at least 1 log10 or to less than 50 copies/ml. A lack of the previous use of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors was the only factor predictive of response on multivariate analysis. No patient with a viral isolate with an increased IC50 to efavirenz by virtual phenotype had a virological response

Evolution of Antiretroviral Phenotypic and Genotypic Drug Resistance in Antiretroviral-Naive HIV-1-Infected Children Treated with Abacavir/Lamivudine, Zidovudine/Lamivudine or Abacavir/Zidovudine, with or without Nelfinavir (The Penta 5 Trial)

To describe the evolution of resistance to zidovudine (ZDV), lamivudine (3TC), abacavir (ABC) and nelfinavir (NFV), 113 previously untreated children in the PENTA 5 trial had resistance assayed at baseline, rebound and/or 24, 48, 72 weeks (VIRCO: phenotyping and genotyping with 'Virtual Phenotype' interpretation). At baseline, few reverse transcriptase mutations and no primary protease inhibitor mutations were observed. Time to detectable HIV-1 RNA with reduced phenotypic susceptibility to any drug was shortest in the ZDV+3TC arm (overall logrank P=0.02). Through a median follow-up of 55 weeks, at their last assessment 11 (28%), 16 (40%) and 13 (32%) children with detectable HIV-1 RNA and a resistance test available had mutations conferring resistance to none, one, or two or more trial drugs, respectively, according to the virtual phenotype. Reduced phenotypic susceptibility to ABC only occurred in the 3TC+ABC arm and required K65R and/or L74V in addition to M184V. NFV-resistant virus was selected slowly through D30N or L90M pathways, and selection of ZDV-resistant virus was rare. Selection of 3TC-resistant virus was most frequent, followed by NFV and/or ABC; selection of ZDV-resistant virus was rare. Importantly, although in vitro, ABC selects for M184V as the first mutation, ABC did not select for M184V when combined with ZDV without 3TC. The most sustained HIV-1 RNA response was in the 3TC+ABC arm, but mutations conferring reduced susceptibility to 3TC and/or ABC evolved more frequently if virological failure occurred with 3TC+ABC than with ZDV+ABC.

Mutational Patterns in the HIV Genome and Cross-Resistance following Nucleoside and Nucleotide Analogue Drug Exposure

A variety of key mutations in HIV reverse transcriptase (RT) have been associated with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) exposure, which give rise to a diverse range of effects in terms of altered drug susceptibilities, viral replicative capacity and RT biochemistry. There are three basic mechanisms of resistance conferred by specific mutations in the coding region of RT. The first is drug discrimination, whereby a particular drug or drugs are either selectively excluded from uptake or from the RT–primer–template catalytic complex. Drug discrimination is, for the most part, relatively specific for individual drugs. Repositioning of the template–primer to prevent a catalytically competent complex in the presence of a bound drug molecule has also been observed in some instances, and forms a second mechanism. The third, and potentially most significant for long-term efficacy of the NRTIs, is pyrophosphorolysis, the primary mode of resistance to zidovudine. Mutations selected by this drug or stavudine serve to elevate the natural rate of the reverse reaction for RT. Pyrophosphorolysis uncouples the last nucleoside monophosphate added to the proviral transcript, and attaches it to either a free pyrophosphate (regenerating a deoxynucleoside triphosphate) or to a nucleoside di- or triphosphate (usually ATP). Uncoupling a chain-terminating NRTI residue therefore rescues reverse transcription and reduces drug susceptibility across the class, since the process is not specific for the selecting drug. Of all the nucleoside-associated mutations, the best known and most studied are the six associated with thymidine analogue exposure. These six mutations (M41L, D67N, K70R, L210W, T215Y/F, K219Q) enhance RT pyrophosphorolysis to confer high-level viral resistance to zidovudine, and clinically significant loss of response to stavudine and didanosine. They have also been found to confer reduced susceptibility to lamivudine and abacavir, particularly when present alongside other NRTI-induced changes. Other key mutations generally confer more limited resistance to specific agents, although the primary lamivudine- and abacavir-associated M184V substitution generates a broad spectrum of drug-dependent phenotypes, and uncommon mutational complexes conferring resistance across the entire class are well known. In addition to ‘classical’ multi-nucleoside-resistant genotypes, database-driven ‘virtual phenotyping’ for accumulations of NRTI-associated mutations around a core of thymidine analogue-induced changes predicts drug susceptibilities below wild-type across the entire NRTI class, even in the absence of key mutations associated with individual agents. When the natural range of drug susceptibilities for treatment-naive isolates is used as the basis for defining resistance, retrospective analysis of clinical isolates in the Virco database shows a significantly increased incidence of reduced susceptibility for the dideoxy NRTIs (didanosine, stavudine and zalcitabine) that was undetected in previous assays. These data imply a cumulative degradation of response to NRTI drugs incident on the failure of thymidine analogue-based combinations, consistent with observations of treatment-experienced versus treatment-naive individuals. Among the investigational agents, response to tenofovir disproxil fumarate (TDF) appears to be essentially independent of baseline genotype in NRTI-experienced individuals, and its sole selected resistance mutation, K65R, has been observed to emerge only rarely (2%) and without loss of clinical response. In vitro results also show very little effect on TDF susceptibility for the most common of the multi-nucleoside resistance patterns. This drug has also been shown to display a substantially reduced sensitivity to pyrophosphorolytic uncoupling in vitro, which may, in part, explain the surprisingly sustained response observed over 48 weeks for TDF intensification of an existing regimen.