Maraviroc-containing regimens are known to achieve virological suppression in many treatment-experienced patients. This study aimed to evaluate a more rigorous methodological approach to resistance–response analysis in large clinical studies and to better establish which subpopulations of patients were most likely to benefit from maraviroc by refining and extending previous subgroup analyses from the MOTIVATE studies.
Methods
Individual weighted optimized background therapy (OBT) susceptibility scores were calculated by combining genotypic or phenotypic resistance testing with prior drug use information. Virological response (HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 48) using each of these methods was compared with a commonly used method of counting active drugs. Baseline predictors of virological response, including weighted or unweighted scoring, maraviroc use, baseline CD4+ T-cell count, HIV-1 plasma viral load and tropism, were assessed by logistic regression modelling.
Results
Genotypic or phenotypic weighted methods were similarly predictive of virological response and better than counting active drugs. Weighted scoring and baseline CD4+ T-cell count were the strongest predictors of virological response (P<0.0001): -70% of maraviroc patients with a weighted score ≥2 had a virological response, rising to -80% when the baseline CD4+ T-cell count was ≥50 cells/mm3.
Conclusions
Approximately 80% of patients with a CD4+ T-cell count ≥50 cells/mm3 receiving maraviroc with the equivalent of at least two fully active agents achieved HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at week 48 in the MOTIVATE studies. Genotypic and phenotypic weighted scores were similarly predictive of virological response.
References
1.
DorrP., WestbyM., DobbsS.Maraviroc (UK-427,857): a potent, orally bioavailable and selective small-molecule inhibitor of the chemokine receptor CCR5 with broad-spectrum anti-human immunodeficiency virus type 1 activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2005; 49: 4721–4732.
2.
AsmuthD.M., GoodrichJ., CooperD.A.CD4+ T-cell restoration after 48 weeks in the maraviroc treatment-experienced trials MOTIVATE 1 and 2. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2010; 54: 394–397.
3.
GulickR.M., LalezariJ., GoodrichJ.Maraviroc for previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med2008; 359: 1429–1441.
4.
FätkenheuerG., NelsonM., LazzarinA.for the MOTIVATE 1 and MOTIVATE 2 Study Teams. Subgroup analyses of maraviroc in previously treated R5 HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med2008; 359: 1442–1455.
5.
ClotetB., BellosN., MolinaJ.M.Efficacy and safety of darunavir-ritonavir at week 48 in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection in POWER 1 and 2: a pooled subgroup analysis of data from two randomised trials. Lancet2007; 369: 1169–1178.
6.
CooperD.A., SteigbigelR.T., GatellJ.M.Subgroup and resistance analyses of raltegravir for resistant HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med2008; 359: 355–365.
7.
BaxterJ.D., SchapiroJ.M., BoucherC.A.Genotypic changes in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease associated with reduced susceptibility and virologic response to the protease inhibitor tipranavir. J Virol2006; 80: 10794–10801.
8.
De LucaA., WeidlerJ., Di GiambenedettoS.Association of HIV-1 replication capacity with treatment outcomes in patients with virologic treatment failure. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2007; 45: 411–417.
9.
SwanstromR., BoschR.J., KatzensteinD.Weighted phenotypic susceptibility scores are predictive of the HIV-1 RNA response in protease inhibitor-experienced HIV-1-infected subjects. J Infect Dis2004; 190: 886–893.
10.
Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents.Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1 infected adults and adolescents. Department of Health and Human Services. (Updated 10 January 2011. Accessed 11 March 2011.) Available from http://www.aidsinfo.nih.gov/ContentFiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf.
11.
NaegerL.K., StrubleK.A.Food and Drug Administration analysis of tipranavir clinical resistance in HIV-1-infected treatment-experienced patients. AIDS2007; 21: 179–185.
12.
CoakleyE., ChappeyC., FlandreP.Defining lower (L) and upper (U) phenotypic clinical cutoffs (CCO) for tipranavir (TPV), lopinavir (LPV), saquinavir (SQV) and amprenavir (APV) co-administered with ritonavir (r) within the RESIST dataset using the PhenoSense assay (Monogram [MGRM] Biosciences). Antivir Ther2006; 11Suppl 1: S81.
13.
ANRS-AC11: Resistance Group.Genotype interpretation: nucleoside and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. (Updated July 2008. Accessed 11 March 2011.) Available from www.hivfrenchresistance.org/2008/Algo-2008.pdf.
14.
HIV French Resistance: HIV-1 genotypic drug resistance interpretation's algorithms. (Updated 2002. Accessed 11 March 2011.) Available from www.hivfrenchresistance.org/2002/tab2.html.
HosmerD.W., LemeshowS.Applied logistic regression.New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.1989; pp. 140–145.
17.
JohnsonV.A., Brun-VezinetF., ClotetB.Update of the drug resistance mutations in HIV-1: Spring 2008. Top HIV Med2008; 16: 62–68.
18.
HardyW.D., GulickR., MayerH.Efficacy and safety of maraviroc in treatment-experienced patients infected with R5 HIV-1: 96-week combined analysis of the MOTIVATE 1 and 2 studies.9th International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection. 9–13 November 2008, Glasgow, UK. Abstract O425.
19.
NelsonM., ArastehK., ClotetB.Durable efficacy of enfuvirtide over 48 weeks in heavily treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients in the T-20 versus optimized background regimen only 1 and 2 clinical trials. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2005; 40: 404–412.
20.
HoggR.S., YipB., ChanK.J.Rates of disease progression by baseline CD4 cell count and viral load after initiating triple-drug therapy. JAMA2001; 286: 2568–2577.
21.
MayM.T., SterneJ.A., CostagliolaD.HIV treatment response and prognosis in Europe and North America in the first decade of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a collaborative analysis. Lancet2006; 368: 451–458.
22.
LiuL., MayS., RichmanD.D.Comparison of algorithms that interpret genotypic HIV-1 drug resistance to determine the prevalence of transmitted drug resistance. AIDS2008; 22: 835–839.
23.
SaagM., GoodrichJ., FätkenheuerG.A double-blind, placebo controlled trial of maraviroc in treatment-experienced patients infected with non-R5 HIV-1. J Infect Dis2009; 199: 1638–1647.
24.
AndersonJ.A., JiangH., DingX.Genotypic susceptibility scores and HIV type 1 RNA responses in treatment-experienced subjects with HIV type 1 infection. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses2008; 24: 685–694.
25.
CastorD., VlahovD., HooverD.R.The relationship between genotypic sensitivity score and treatment outcomes in late stage HIV disease after supervised HAART. J Med Virol2009; 81: 1323–1335.
26.
HarriganP.R., WynhovenB., BrummeZ.L.HIV-1 drug resistance: degree of underestimation by a cross-sectional versus a longitudinal testing approach. J Infect Dis2005; 191: 1325–1330.
