Can linear regression modeling help clinicians in the interpretation of genotypic resistance data? An application to derive a lopinavir-score

Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri, Mattia C F Prosperi, Jesper Kjær, David Dunn, Roger Paredes, Caroline A Sabin, Jens D Lundgren, Andrew N Phillips, Deenan Pillay, EuroSIDA Study, United Kingdom CHIC/United Kingdom HDRD Study, Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri, Mattia C F Prosperi, Jesper Kjær, David Dunn, Roger Paredes, Caroline A Sabin, Jens D Lundgren, Andrew N Phillips, Deenan Pillay, EuroSIDA Study, United Kingdom CHIC/United Kingdom HDRD Study

Abstract

Background: The question of whether a score for a specific antiretroviral (e.g. lopinavir/r in this analysis) that improves prediction of viral load response given by existing expert-based interpretation systems (IS) could be derived from analyzing the correlation between genotypic data and virological response using statistical methods remains largely unanswered.

Methods and findings: We used the data of the patients from the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC) Study for whom genotypic data were stored in the UK HIV Drug Resistance Database (UK HDRD) to construct a training/validation dataset of treatment change episodes (TCE). We used the average square error (ASE) on a 10-fold cross-validation and on a test dataset (the EuroSIDA TCE database) to compare the performance of a newly derived lopinavir/r score with that of the 3 most widely used expert-based interpretation rules (ANRS, HIVDB and Rega). Our analysis identified mutations V82A, I54V, K20I and I62V, which were associated with reduced viral response and mutations I15V and V91S which determined lopinavir/r hypersensitivity. All models performed equally well (ASE on test ranging between 1.1 and 1.3, p = 0.34).

Conclusions: We fully explored the potential of linear regression to construct a simple predictive model for lopinavir/r-based TCE. Although, the performance of our proposed score was similar to that of already existing IS, previously unrecognized lopinavir/r-associated mutations were identified. The analysis illustrates an approach of validation of expert-based IS that could be used in the future for other antiretrovirals and in other settings outside HIV research.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: No member of the The United Kingdom Collaborative Group on HIV Drug Resistance, United Kingdom CHIC Study Group and EuroSIDA has any financial or personal relationships with people or organizations that could inappropriately influence this work, although most members of the group have, at some stage in the past, received funding from a variety of pharmaceutical companies for research, travel grants, speaking engagements or consultancy fees. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLoS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in the guide for authors.

Figures

Figure 1. Description of a lopinavir-based TCE.
Figure 1. Description of a lopinavir-based TCE.
Figure 2. Plot of the standardized coefficients…
Figure 2. Plot of the standardized coefficients of all the factors selected at each step (from step 1 to final step 7) of the best subset (LSE) method are plotted as a function of the step number.
This enables to assess the relative importance of each factor selected at any step of the selection process as well as provides information as to when effects entered the model. The lower plot in the panel shows how CV PRESS (the criterion used to choose the selected model) changes as factors enter or leave the model. Selection was halted at step 7 when the “one-standard error” rule was achieved.

References

    1. Mocroft A, Vella S, Benfield TL, Chiesi A, Miller V, et al. Changing patterns of mortality across Europe in patients infected with HIV-1. Lancet. 1998;352:1725–1730.
    1. Palella FJJ, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, Loveless MO, Fuhrer J, et al. Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:853–860.
    1. Vella S. HIV pathogenesis and treatment strategies. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes and Human Retrovirology. 1995;10:S20–S23.
    1. Grant RM, Feinberg MB. HIV replication and pathogenesis. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 1996;9(1):7–13.
    1. Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents. 2009. 1–139 Department of Health and Human Services.
    1. BHIVA Guidelines for the Treatment of HIV-1 infected adults with antiretroviral therapy. 2008. Available: Accessed 2011 August.
    1. World Health Organization (WHO) Antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in adults and adolescents: recommendations for a public heath approach. 2006. Geneva, Switzerland. Available: . Accessed 2009 April 2.
    1. Kempf DJ, Isaacson JD, King MS, Brun SC, Xu Y, et al. Identification of genotypic changes in human immunodeficiency virus protease that correlate with reduced susceptibility to the protease inhibitor lopinavir among viral isolates from protease inhibitor-experienced patients. J Virol. 2001;75:7462–7469.
    1. Parkin N, Chappey C, Petropoulos C. Improving lopinavir genotype algorithm through phenotype correlations: novel mutation patterns and amprenavir cross-resistance. AIDS. 2003;17:955–961.
    1. Loutfy MR, Raboud JM, Walmsley SL, Saskin R, Montaner JS, et al. Predictive value of HIV-1 protease genotype and virtual phenotype on the virological response to lopinavir/ritonavir-containing salvage regimens. Antivir Ther. 2004;9(4):595–602.
    1. King MS, Rode R, Cohen-Codar I, Calvez V, Marcelin AG, et al. Predictive genotypic algorithm for virologic response to lopinavir-ritonavir in protease inhibitor-experienced patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(9):3067–74.
    1. Abbott Pharmaceuticals. Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) US Prescribing Information. 2004. Abbott Laboratories. Available: Accessed 2008 May 19.
    1. Naeger L, Struble K. Effect of baseline protease genotype and phenotype on HIV response to atazanavir/ritonavir in treatment-experienced patients. AIDS. 2006;20:847–853.
    1. Grant P, Wong EC, Rode R, Shafer R, De Luca A, et al. Virologic response to lopinavir-ritonavir-based antiretroviral regimens in a multicenter international clinical cohort: comparison of genotypic interpretation scores. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(11):4050–6.
    1. Hill A, Marcelin AG, Calvez V. Identification of new genotypic cut-off levels to predict the efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir and darunavir/ritonavir in the TITAN trial. HIV Med. 2009;10(10):620–6.
    1. Zazzi M, Kaiser R, Sönnerborg A, Struck D, Altmann A, et al. Prediction of response to antiretroviral therapy by human experts and by the EuResist data-driven expert system (the EVE study). HIV Med. 2010;12(4):211–8.
    1. Prosperi MC, Altmann A, Rosen-Zvi M, Aharoni E, Borgulya G, et al. EuResist and Virolab study groups. Investigation of expert rule bases, logistic regression, and non-linear machine learning techniques for predicting response to antiretroviral treatment. Antivir Ther. 2009;14(3):433–42.
    1. Assoumou L, Brun-Vézinet F, Cozzi-Lepri A, Kuritzkes D, Phillips A, et al. Standardization and Clinical Relevance of HIV Drug Resistance Testing Project of the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research. Initiatives for developing and comparing genotype interpretation systems: external validation of existing systems for didanosine against virological response. J Infect Dis. 2008;15;198(4):470–80.
    1. Assoumou L, Houssaïni A, Costagliola D, Flandre P. Standardization and Clinical Relevance of HIV Drug Resistance Testing Project from the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research. Relative contributions of baseline patient characteristics and the choice of statistical methods to the variability of genotypic resistance scores: the example of didanosine. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(4):752–60.
    1. Larder B, Wang D, Revell A. Application of artificial neural networks for decision support in medicine. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;458:123–36.
    1. Kirk O. EuroSIDA a multicentre study, 1994–2009. Available: . Accessed 2011 August.
    1. UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC) Steering Committee. The creation of a large UK-based multicantre cohort of HIV-infected individuals: The UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC) Study. HIV Medicine. 2004;5:115–124.
    1. ANRS website. Available: Accessed 2011 August.
    1. Rega Institute website. Available: . Accessed 2011 August.
    1. Stanford University website. Available: Accessed 2011 August.
    1. IAS-USA HIV resistance list website. Available: Accessed 2011 August.
    1. Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J Royal Statist Soc B. 1996;58(1):267–288.
    1. Efron B, Hastie T, Johnstone I, Tibshirani R. Least angle regression. Ann Statist. 2004;32(2):407–499.
    1. Altmann A, Beerenwinkel N, Sing T, Savenkov I, Doumer M, et al. Improved prediction of response to antiretroviral combination therapy using the genetic barrier to drug resistance. Antivir Ther. 2007;12(2):169–78.
    1. González de Requena D, Gallego O, Valer L, Jiménez-Nácher I, Soriano V. Prediction of virological response to lopinavir/ritonavir using the genotypic inhibitory quotient. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2004;20(3):275–8.
    1. Maillard A, Chapplain JM, Tribut O, Bentué-Ferrer D, Tattevin P, et al. The use of drug resistance algorithms and genotypic inhibitory quotient in prediction of lopinavir-ritonavir treatment response in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitor-experienced patients. J Clin Virol. 2007;38(2):131–8. Epub 2007 Jan 4.
    1. Gianotti N, Galli L, Danise A, Hasson H, Boeri E, et al. Ability of different lopinavir genotypic inhibitory quotients to predict 48-week virological response in highly treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir. J Med Virol. 2006;78(12):1537–41.
    1. Assoumou L, Cozzi-Lepri A, Brun-Vézinet F, Degruttola V, Kuritzkes DR, et al. Standardization, Clinical Relevance of HIV Drug Resistance Testing Project from the Forum for Collaborative HIV Research. Development of a didanosine genotypic resistance interpretation system based on large derivation and validation datasets. AIDS. 2010;24(3):365–71.
    1. Prosperi MC, Rosen-Zvi M, Altmann A, Zazzi M, Di Giambenedetto S, et al. EuResist study group; Virolab study group. Antiretroviral therapy optimisation without genotype resistance testing: a perspective on treatment history based models. PLoS One. 2010;5(10):e13753.
    1. Rosen-Zvi M, Altmann A, Prosperi M, Aharoni E, Neuvirth H, et al. Selecting anti-HIV therapies based on a variety of genomic and clinical factorss. Bioinformatics. 2008;1;24(13):i399–406.
    1. Buendia P, Cadwallader B, DeGruttola V. A phylogenetic and Markov model approach for the reconstruction of mutational pathways of drug resistance. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(19):2522–9.
    1. Beerenwinkel N, Drton M. A mutagenetic tree hidden Markov model for longitudinal clonal HIV sequence data. Biostatistics. 2007;8(1):53–71.
    1. Bogojeska J, Bickel S, Altmann A, Lengauer T. Dealing with sparse data in predicting outcomes of HIV combination therapies. Bioinformatics. 2010;1;26(17):2085–92.
    1. Deforche K, Cozzi-Lepri A, Theys K, Clotet B, Camacho RJ, et al. EuroSIDA Study Group. Modelled in vivo HIV fitness under drug selective pressure and estimated genetic barrier towards resistance are predictive for virological response. Antivir Ther. 2008;13(3):399–407.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅