Selective resistance profiles emerging in patient-derived clinical isolates with cabotegravir, bictegravir, dolutegravir, and elvitegravir
0301 basic medicine
Antiretroviral drug resistance
Anti-HIV Agents
Pyridones
HIV Infections
HIV Integrase
Quinolones
Virus Replication
Heterocyclic Compounds, 4 or More Rings
Piperazines
Primary HIV infection isolates
03 medical and health sciences
Drug Resistance, Viral
Oxazines
Integrase inhibitors
Humans
HIV Integrase Inhibitors
Research
RC581-607
Amides
3. Good health
Cell culture selections
Mutation
HIV-1
Immunologic diseases. Allergy
HIV subtypes
Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring
DOI:
10.1186/s12977-018-0440-3
Publication Date:
2018-08-17T11:56:29Z
AUTHORS (8)
ABSTRACT
Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are recommended for first-line HIV therapy based on their relatively high genetic barrier to resistance. Although raltegravir (RAL) and elvitegravir (EVG) resistance profiles are well-characterized, resistance patterns for dolutegravir (DTG), bictegravir (BIC), and cabotegravir (CAB) remain largely unknown. Here, in vitro drug selections compared the development of resistance to DTG, BIC, CAB, EVG and RAL using clinical isolates from treatment-naïve primary HIV infection (PHI) cohort participants (n = 12), and pNL4.3 recombinant strains encoding patient-derived Integrase with (n = 5) and without (n = 5) the E157Q substitution.Patient-derived viral isolates were serially passaged in PHA-stimulated cord blood mononuclear cells in the presence of escalating concentrations of INSTIs over the course of 36-46 weeks. Drug resistance arose more rapidly in primary clinical isolates with EVG (12/12), followed by CAB (8/12), DTG (8/12) and BIC (6/12). For pNL4.3 recombinant strains encoding patient-derived integrase, the comparative genetic barrier to resistance was RAL > EVG > CAB > DTG and BIC. The E157Q substitution in integrase delayed the advent of resistance to INSTIs. With EVG, T66I/A, E92G/V/Q, T97A or R263K (n = 16, 3, 2 and 1, respectively) arose by weeks 8-16, followed by 1-4 accessory mutations, conferring high-level resistance (> 100-fold) by week 36. With DTG and BIC, solitary R263K (n = 27), S153F/Y (n = 7) H51Y (n = 2), Q146 R (n = 3) or S147G (n = 1) mutations conferred low-level (< 3-fold) resistance at weeks 36-46. Similarly, most CAB selections (n = 18) resulted in R263K, S153Y, S147G, H51Y, or Q146L solitary mutations. However, three CAB selections resulted in Q148R/K followed by secondary mutations conferring high-level cross-resistance to all INSTIs. EVG-resistant viruses (T66I/R263K, T66I/E157Q/R263K, and S153A/R263K) retained residual susceptibility when switched to DTG, BIC or CAB, losing T66I by week 27. Two EVG-resistant variants developed resistance to DTG, BIC and CAB through the additional acquisition of E138A/Q148R and S230N, respectively. One EVG-resistant variant (T66I) acquired L74M/G140S/S147G, L74M/E138K/S147G and H51Y with DTG CAB and BIC, respectively.Second generation INSTIs show a higher genetic barrier to resistance than EVG and RAL. The potency of CAB was lower than BIC and DTG. The development of Q148R/K with CAB can result in high-level cross-resistance to all INSTIs.
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Coming soon ....
REFERENCES (63)
CITATIONS (96)
EXTERNAL LINKS
PlumX Metrics
RECOMMENDATIONS
FAIR ASSESSMENT
Coming soon ....
JUPYTER LAB
Coming soon ....