Evaluation of WHO immunologic criteria for treatment failure: implications for detection of virologic failure, evolution of drug resistance and choice of second-line therapy in India

Snigdha Vallabhaneni, Sara Chandy, Elsa Heylen, Maria L Ekstrand, Snigdha Vallabhaneni, Sara Chandy, Elsa Heylen, Maria L Ekstrand

Abstract

Introduction: Routine HIV viral load (VL) testing is not available in India. We compared test performance characteristics of immunologic failure (IF) against the gold standard of virologic failure (VF), examined evolution of drug resistance among those who stayed on a failing regimen because they did not meet criteria for IF and assessed implications for second-line therapy.

Methods: Participants on first-line highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in Bangalore, India, were monitored for 24 months at six-month intervals, with CD4 count, VL and genotype, if VL>1000 copies/ml. Standard WHO criteria were used to define IF; VF was defined as having two consecutive VL>1000 copies/ml or one VL>10,000 copies/ml. Resistance was assessed using standard International AIDS Society-USA (IAS-USA) recommendations.

Results: Of 522 participants (67.6% male, mean age of 37.5; 85.1% on nevirapine-based and 40.4% on d4T-containing regimens), 57 (10.9%) had VF, 38 (7.3%) had IF and 13 (2.5%) had both VF and IF. The sensitivity of immunologic criteria to detect VF was 22.8%, specificity was 94.6% and positive predictive value was 34.2%. Forty-four participants with VF only continued on their failing first-line regimen; by the end of the study period, 90.9% had M184V, 63.6% had thymidine analogue mutations (TAMs), 34.1% had resistance to tenofovir, and 63.6% had resistance to etravirine.

Conclusions: WHO IF criteria have low sensitivity for detecting VF, and the presence of IF poorly predicts VF. Relying on CD4 counts leads to unnecessary switches to second-line HAART and continuation of failing regimens, jeopardizing future therapeutic options. Universal access to VL monitoring would avoid costly switches to second-line HAART and preserve future treatment options.

Keywords: India; WHO criteria; genotype; immunologic failure; resistance; resource-limited settings; virologic failure.

References

    1. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) Geneva, Switzerland: UNAIDS; 2011. AIDS at 30: nations at the crossroads. [cited 2012 Aug 1]. Available from: .
    1. National AIDS Control Organization. Patients alive and on ART August 2010. [cited 2012 April 11]. Available from: .
    1. Aldous JL, Haubrich RH. Defining treatment failure in resource-rich settings. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2009;4:459–66.
    1. Deeks SG, Barbour JD, Martin JN, Swanson MS, Grant RM. Sustained CD4+T cell response after virologic failure of protease inhibitor-based regimens in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. J Infect Dis. 2000;181:946–53.
    1. Haubrich RH, Currier JS, Forthall DN, Beall G, Kemper CA, Johnson D, et al. A randomized study of the utility of human immunodeficiency virus RNA measurement for the management of antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33:1060–8.
    1. Petersen ML, van der Laan MJ, Sonia N, Eron JJ, Moore RG, Deeks SG. Long-term consequences of the delay between virologic failure of highly active antiretroviral therapy and regimen modification. AIDS. 2008;22:2097–106.
    1. Hatano H, Hunt P, Weidler P, Coakley E, Hoh R, Liegler T, et al. Rate of viral evolution and risk of losing future drug options in heavily pretreated, HIV-infected patients who continue to receive a stable, partially suppressive regimen. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;43:1329–36.
    1. Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Department of Health and Human Services; Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents. [cited 2012 Aug 8]. Available from: .
    1. World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2010. Antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in adults and adolescents. Recommendations for a public health approach [2010 revision] [cited 2012 Aug 8]. Available from: .
    1. Mee P, Fielding KL, Charalambous S, Churchyard GJ, Grant AD. Evaluation of the WHO criteria for antiretroviral treatment failure among adults in South Africa. AIDS. 2008;22:1971–7.
    1. Kantor R, Diero L, Delong A, Kamle L, Muyonga S, Mambo F, et al. Misclassification of first-line antiretroviral treatment failure based on immunological monitoring of HIV infection in resource-limited settings. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49:454–62.
    1. Rewari BB, Bachani D, Rajasekaran S, Deshpande A, Chan PL, Srikantiah P. Evaluating patients for second-line antiretroviral therapy in India: the role of targeted viral load testing. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;55:610–14.
    1. Rawizza HE, Chaplin B, Meloni ST, Eisen G, Rao T, Sankalé JL, et al. Immunologic criteria are poor predictors of virologic outcome: implications for HIV treatment monitoring in resource-limited settings. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;53:1283–90.
    1. Reynolds SJ, Nakigozi G, Newell K, Ndyanabo A, Galiwongo R, Boaz I, et al. Failure of immunologic criteria to appropriately identify antiretroviral treatment failure in Uganda. AIDS. 2009;23:697–700.
    1. Moore DM, Awor A, Downing R, Kaplan J, Montaner JS, Hancock J, et al. CD41 T-cell count monitoring does not accurately identify HIV-infected adults with virologic failure receiving antiretroviral therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2008;49:477–84.
    1. van Oosterhout JJ, Brown L, Weigel R, Kumwenda JJ, Mzinganjira D, Saukila N, et al. Diagnosis of antiretroviral therapy failure in Malawi: poor performance of clinical and immunological WHO criteria. Trop Med Int Health. 2009;14:856–61.
    1. Moore DM, Mermin J, Awor A, Yip B, Hogg RS, Montaner JS. Performance of immunologic responses in predicting viral load suppression: implications for monitoring patients in resource-limited settings. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:436–9.
    1. Ekstrand ML, Shet A, Chandy S, Singh G, Shamsundar R, Madhavan V, et al. Suboptimal adherence associated with virological failure and resistance mutations to first-line highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in Bangalore, India. Int Health. 2011;3:27–34.
    1. Shet A, DeCosta A, Heylen E, Shastri S, Chandy S, Ekstrand M. High rates of adherence and treatment success in a public and public-private HIV clinic in India: potential benefits of standardized national care delivery systems. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:277–81.
    1. National AIDS Control Organization. Antiretroviral therapy guidelines for HIV infected adults and adolescents including post-exposure 2007. [cited 2012 June 12]. Available from: .
    1. Balakrishnan P, Kumarasamy N, Kantor R, Solomon S, Vidya S, Mayer KH, et al. HIV type 1 genotypic variation in an antiretroviral treatment-naive population in southern India. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2005;21:301–5.
    1. Saravanan S, Vidya M, Balakrishnan P, Kumarasamy N, Solomon SS, Solomon S, et al. Evaluation of two human immunodeficiency virus-1 genotyping systems: ViroSeq 2.0 and an in-house method. J Virol Methods. 2009;159:211–6.
    1. Johnson VA, Calvez V, Günthard HF, Paredes R, Pillay D, Shafer RW, et al. Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1. Top Antivir Med. 2011;19:156–64.
    1. Vingerhoets J, Tambuyzer L, Azijn H, Hoogstoel A, Nijs S, Peeters M, et al. Resistance profile of etravirine: combined analysis of baseline genotypic and phenotypic data from the randomized, controlled phase III clinical studies. AIDS. 2010;24:503–14.
    1. Deshpande A, Jeannot AC, Schrive MH, Wittkop L, Pinson P, et al. Analysis of RT sequences of subtype C HIV-type 1 isolates from Indian patients at failure of a first-line treatment according to clinical and/or immunological WHO guidelines. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2010;3:343–50.
    1. Sinha S, Shekhar RC, Ahmad H, Kumar N, Samantaray JC, Sreenivas V, et al. Prevalence of HIV drug resistance mutation in the northern Indian population after failure of the first line antiretroviral therapy. Curr HIV Res. 2012;10:532–8.
    1. Arnedo M, Alonso E, Eisenberg N, Ibàñez L, Ferreyra L, Jaén A, et al. Monitoring HIV viral load in resource limited settings: still a matter of debate? PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e47391.
    1. Wallis CL, Mellors JW, Venter WD, Sanne I, Stevens W. Varied patterns of HIV-1 drug resistance on failing first-line antiretroviral therapy in South Africa. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;53:480–4.
    1. Hosseinipour MC, van Oosterhout JJ, Weigel R, Phiri S, Kamwendo D, Parkin N, et al. The public health approach to identify antiretroviral therapy failure: high-level nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance among Malawians failing first-line antiretroviral therapy. AIDS. 2009;23:1127–34.
    1. Shepherd JCEM, Griffifth D, Charurat MEO. High levels of classwide NRTI resistance among HIV-positive patients failing first-line antiretroviral regimens in Nigeria. Paper presented at: HIV Implementers’ Meeting; 2008; Kampala, Uganda. Abstract 796.
    1. Yazdanpanah Y, Fagard C, Descamps D, Taburet A, Collins C, Roquebert B, et al. High rate of virologic suppression with raltegravir plus etravirine and darunavir/ritonavir among treatment-experienced patients infected with multidrug-resistant HIV: results of the ANRS 139 TRIO trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49:1441–9.
    1. Lazzarin A, Campbell T, Clotet B, Johnson M, Katlama C, Moll A, et al. Efficacy and safety of TMC125 (etravirine) in treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in DUET-2: 24-week results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;370:39–48.
    1. Bartlett JA, Ribaudo HJ, Wallis CL, Aga E, Katzenstein D, Stevens WS, et al. Lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy after virologic failure of first-line antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings. AIDS. 2012;26:1345–54.
    1. Saravanan S, Vidya M, Balakrishnan P, Kantor R, Solomon SS, Katzenstein D, et al. Viremia and HIV-1 drug resistance mutations among patients receiving second-line highly active antiretroviral therapy in Chennai, southern India. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:995–1000.
    1. Ruxrungtham K, Pedro R, Latiff G, Conradie F, Domingo P, Lupo S, et al. Impact of reverse transcriptase resistance on the efficacy of TMC125 (etravirine) with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in protease inhibitor-naïve, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-experienced patients: study TMC125-C227. HIV Med. 2008;9:883–96.
    1. Neogi U, Shet A, Shamsunder R, Ekstrand M. Selection of nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-associated mutations in HIV-1 subtype C: evidence of etravirine cross-resistance. AIDS. 2011;25:1123–6.
    1. Thorat SR, Chaturbhuj DN, Hingankar NK, Chandrasekhar V, Koppada R, Datkar SR, et al. Surveillance of transmitted HIV type 1 drug resistance among HIV type 1-positive women attending an antenatal clinic in Kakinada, India. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2011;27:1291–7.
    1. Sinha S, Ahmed H, Shekahr RC, Kumar N, Samatarey JC, Sharma SK, et al. Prevalence of HIV drug resistance mutations in HIV type 1 isolates in antiretroviral therapy naïve population from northern India. AIDS Res Treat. 2012;2012:905823.
    1. Hingankar NK, Thorat SR, Deshpande A, Rajasekaran S, Chandrasekar C, Kumar S, et al. Initial virologic response and HIV drug resistance among HIV-infected individuals initiating first-line antiretroviral therapy at 2 clinics in Chennai and Mumbai, India. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(Suppl 4):S348–54.
    1. Kahn JG, Marseille E, Moore D, Bunnell R, Were W, Degerman R, et al. CD4 cell count and viral load monitoring in patients undergoing antiretroviral therapy in Uganda: cost effectiveness study. BMJ. 2011;343:d6884.
    1. Hamers RL, Sawyer AW, Tuohy M, Stevens WS, Rinke de Wit TF, Hill AM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of laboratory monitoring for management of HIV treatment in sub-Saharan Africa: a model-based analysis. AIDS. 2012;26:1663–72.
    1. Phillips AN, Pillay D, Garnett G, Bennett D, Vitoria M, Cambiano V, et al. Effect on transmission of HIV-1 resistance of timing of implementation of viral load monitoring to determine switches from first to second-line antiretroviral regimens in resource-limited settings. AIDS. 2011;25:843–50.
    1. Gupta R, Jordan M, Sultan BJ, Hill A, Davis D, Gregson J, et al. Global trends in antiretroviral resistance in treatment-naive individuals with HIV after rollout of antiretroviral treatment in resource-limited settings: a global collaborative study and meta-regression analysis. Lancet. 2013;S0140–6736:60604.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren