January 25, 2001; Updated
September 12, 2014|
|Susa Coffey, MD|
| 9. ||Descamps
Mechanisms of virologic failure in previously untreated HIV-infected patients from a trial of induction-maintenance therapy. Trilège (Agence Nationale de Recherches sur le SIDA 072) Study Team). JAMA. 2000 Jan;283(2):205-11
[PubMed ID: 10634336]
CONTEXT: In the Trilège trial, following induction with a zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir regimen, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) replication was less suppressed by 2-drug maintenance therapy than by triple-drug therapy. OBJECTIVE: To identify mechanisms of virologic failure in the 3 arms of the Trilège trial. DESIGN: Case-control study conducted from February to October 1998. SETTING: Three urban hospitals in Paris, France. PATIENTS: Fifty-eight case patients with virologic failure (HIV RNA rebound to >500 copies/mL in 2 consecutive samples) randomized to 3 therapy groups: triple drug (zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir), 8; zidovudine-lamivudine, 29; and zidovudine-indinavir, 21; the case patients were randomly matched with 58 control patients with sustained viral suppression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At virologic failure (S1 sample) and 6 weeks later (S2 sample), assessment of protease and reverse transcriptase gene mutations, plasma indinavir level, and degree of viral load rebound; pill count during induction and maintenance periods. RESULTS: Only 1 primary resistance mutation, M184V, was detected in S1 plasma samples from 4 of 6 patients in the triple-drug and in all 22 in the zidovudine-lamivudine therapy groups and in S2 plasma samples from 3 of 6 in the triple-drug and 20 of 21 in the zidovudine-lamivudine groups. Of controls, M184V was detected in 11 of 13 S1 plasma samples and in 10 of 11 S2 plasma samples. Indinavir levels were undetectable in all S1 samples but 2 in 7 triple-drug cases tested and in the expected range in 11 of 18 S1 and 5 of 12 S2 zidovudine-indinavir case plasma samples tested. Maintenance adherence rates were lower for cases vs controls for zidovudine (P = .05) and indinavir (P = .05). Low indinavir levels, lower adherence rates for zidovudine (P = .04) and lamivudine (P = .03), and rebound to near-baseline values suggested adherence as cause of early failure for 4 of 8 triple-drug cases. In the zidovudine-lamivudine arm, for which case and control adherence rates did not differ significantly (P = .96), most failures occurred late with low rebound, suggesting suboptimal drug potency. In the zidovudine-indinavir arm, virologic failures may be related to both mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: During the maintenance phase early and late virologic failures appeared to be related more to problems of adherence and antiretroviral treatment potency, respectively, than to selection of resistant mutant viruses.
| 10. ||Havlir
Drug susceptibility in HIV infection after viral rebound in patients receiving indinavir-containing regimens. JAMA. 2000 Jan;283(2):229-34
[PubMed ID: 10634339]
CONTEXT: Loss of viral suppression in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), who are receiving potent antiretroviral therapy, has been attributed to outgrowth of drug-resistant virus; however, resistance patterns are not well characterized in patients whose protease inhibitor combination therapy fails afterachieving viral suppression. OBJECTIVE: To characterize drug susceptibility of virus from HIV-infected patients who are failing to sustain suppression while taking an indinavir-containing antiretroviral regimen. DESIGN AND SETTING: Substudy of the AIDS Clinical Trials Group 343, a multicenter clinical research trial conducted between February 1997 and October 1998. PATIENTS: Twenty-six subjects who experienced rebound (HIV RNA level > or =200 copies/mL) during indinavir monotherapy (n = 9) or triple-drug therapy (indinavir, lamivudine, and zidovudine; n = 17) after initially achieving suppression while receiving all 3 drugs, and 10 control subjects who had viral suppression while receiving triple-drug therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Drug susceptibility, determined by a phenotypic assay and genotypic evidence of resistance assessed by nucleotide sequencing of protease and reverse transcriptase, compared among the 3 patient groups. RESULTS: Indinavir resistance was not detected in the 9 subjects with viral rebound during indinavir monotherapy or in the 17 subjects with rebound during triple-drug therapy, despite plasma HIV RNA levels ranging from 10(2) to 10(5) copies/mL. In contrast, lamivudine resistance was detected by phenotypic assay in rebound isolates from 14 of 17 subjects receiving triple-drug therapy, and genotypic analyses showed changes at codon 184 of reverse transcriptase in these 14 isolates. Mean random plasma indinavir concentrations in the 2 groups with rebound were similar to those of a control group with sustained viral suppression, although levels below 50 ng/mL were more frequent in the triple-drug group than in the control group (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Loss of viral suppression may be due to suboptimal antiviral potency, and selection of a predominantly indinavir-resistant virus population may be delayed for months even in the presence of ongoing indinavir therapy. The results suggest possible value in assessing strategies using drug components of failing regimens evaluated with resistance testing.
| 11. ||Lau
Long-term therapy of chronic hepatitis B with lamivudine. Hepatology. 2000 Oct;32(4 Pt 1):828-34
[PubMed ID: 11003630]
Lamivudine therapy induces improvements in chronic hepatitis B in a high proportion of patients, but prolonged therapy is limited by the development of viral resistance. We analyzed clinical responses and virologic resistance in 27 patients treated continuously with lamivudine for 2 to 4 years. Serum transaminases, hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA by both branched DNA (bDNA) signal amplification and quantitative polymerase chain reaction were monitored at 4- to 8-week intervals. Virologic resistance to lamivudine was confirmed by the presence of mutations in the YMDD motif of the polymerase gene by restriction fragment-length polymorphism analysis. Serum HBV-DNA levels decreased rapidly in all treated patients, falling by 4 to 5 logs within 1 year. Transaminase levels also decreased and were normal in 70% of patients at 1 year, at which point liver histology had improved in 81% of patients. Viral resistance began to emerge after 8 months of therapy, eventually developing in 14 patients, including 76% of hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients but only 10% of HBeAg-negative patients. Lamivudine withdrawal led to reappearance of wild-type HBV species, but retreatment led to more rapid reappearance of the mutant virus. Clinical, serum biochemical, and histologic improvements were maintained in the 13 patients who did not develop resistance. Thus, long-term therapy with lamivudine resulted in maintained improvements in virologic, biochemical, and histologic features of disease in most patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B and in the subgroup of HBeAg-positive patients with high serum transaminase levels. A high rate of resistance limited efficacy, particularly in patients who remained HBeAg positive on therapy.
| 12. ||Benhamou
V, Di Martino
Long-term incidence of hepatitis B virus resistance to lamivudine in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. Hepatology. 1999 Nov;30(5):1302-6
[PubMed ID: 10534354]
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance to lamivudine has not been extensively documented in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. We studied the long-term incidence of HBV resistance to lamivudine in HIV-positive patients. Sixty-six HIV-HBV-coinfected patients were studied while receiving lamivudine (150 mg twice daily) as a part of antiretroviral therapy. All these patients had a detectable serum HBV DNA at the beginning of lamivudine therapy. Serum HBV DNA was quantified by molecular hybridization. Sequence analysis of the HBV polymerase was performed in patients who became resistant to lamivudine. After 2 months of lamivudine, HBV DNA became undetectable in 57 patients (86.4%, 95% CI: 75.7%-93.6%). After 2 years of lamivudine, 47% +/- 18.6% of the patients, had sustained HBV-DNA suppression. All the 22 tested patients with HBV resistance developed mutation at position 550 in the YMDD motif of the DNA polymerase. None of the following variables were associated with an increased risk of lamivudine resistance: age, associated protease inhibitor therapy, Center for Disease Control (CDC) stage C, known HIV-infection duration, serum HBV-DNA level at baseline, CD4 cell count and serum alanine transaminase levels at baseline and at HBV-replication suppression (2 months of lamivudine). Lamivudine (300 mg/d) is effective for the inhibition of HBV replication in HIV-infected patients. However, emergence of lamivudine-resistant HBV may occur in 20% of patients per year.