It has been reported that treatment-naive individuals infected with HIV-1 subtype C may be more likely to harbour viral variants possessing a K65R reverse transcriptase gene mutation. The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of low-level K65R variants within different HIV-1 subtypes and to assess the effects of antiretroviral exposure on K65R variant levels.
Methods
Treatment-naive individuals infected with different HIV-1 subtypes were genotyped by ultra-deep sequencing. Samples were evaluated for low-level variants to 0.4% or 1% levels depending upon viral load. Estimated mutational load was calculated by multiplying the percentage of the variant by the plasma viral load.
Results
A total of 411 treatment-naive individuals were evaluated by ultra-deep sequencing to 1% levels; 4 subjects (0.97%) had K65R variants at ≥1% or had a very high mutation load. All four subjects had variants with linked drug resistance mutations suggesting transmitted resistant variants. 147 ARV-naive subjects were sequenced to 0.4% levels; 8.8% (13/147) had K65R low-level variants identified: 2.2% (2/92) in subtype B, 35.7% (10/28) in subtype C (P<0.001 for B versus C) and 3.7% (1/27) in non-B/C subtypes. The 13 ARV-naive subjects with K65R variants at <1% received tenofovir plus emtricitabine plus a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (TDF+FTC+PI/r) and 5 subsequently experienced virological failure. There was no enhancement in K65R levels by percentage or mutational load compared to pre-therapy levels.
Conclusions
Low-level K65R variants were more frequently identified in subtype C. K65R variants at >1% levels likely represent transmitted resistant variants. The clinical implication of low-level K65R variants below 1% in treatment-naive subjects who receive TDF+FTC+PI/r remains to be determined as the majority are very low-level and did not increase after antiretroviral exposure.
LanierR., MoffattA., StoneC.Comparison of traditional plasmid-based clonal sequencing to 454 ultra-deep sequencing for HIV clinical isolates with reverse transcriptase (RT) mutations at K65R and L74V. Antivir Ther2007; 12Suppl 1: S150.
3.
UnderwoodM.R., RossL.L., IrlbeckD.M.Sensitivity of phenotypic susceptibility analyses for non thymidine nucleoside analogues conferred by K65R or M184V in mixtures with wild-type HIV-1. J Infect Dis2009; 199: 84–88.
4.
CoutsinosD., InvernizziC.F., XuH.Template usage is responsible for the preferential acquisition of the K65R reverse transcriptase mutation in subtype C variants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol2009; 83: 2029–2033.
5.
Doualla-BellF., AvalosA., BrennerB.High prevalence of the K65R mutation in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 subtype C isolates from infected patients in Botswana treated with didanosine-based regimens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2006; 50: 4182–4185.
6.
BrennerB.G., OliveiraM., Doualla-BellF.HIV-1 subtype C viruses rapidly develop K65R resistance to tenofovir in cell culture. AIDS2006; 20: F9–F13.
7.
HosseinipourM.C., van OosterhoutJ.J., WeigelR.The public health approach to identify antiretroviral therapy failure: high-level nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance among Malawians failing first-line antiretroviral therapy. AIDS2009; 23: 1127–1134.
8.
SungkanuparphS., ManosuthiW., KiertiburanakulS., SaekangN., PairojW., ChantratitaW.Prevalence and risk factors for developing K65R mutations among HIV-1 infected patients who fail an initial regimen of fixed-dose combination of stavudine, lamivudine, and nevirapine. J Clin Virol2008; 41: 310–313.
9.
LiJ-F, LipscombJ., WeiX.Detection of minority K65R variants in NRTI-naive subtype B and C HIV-1-infected individuals. J Infect Dis2011; 203: 798–802.
10.
VargheseV., WangE., BabrzF.Nucleic acid template and the risk of a PCR-induced HIV-1 drug resistance mutation. PLoS ONE2010; 5: e10922.
11.
CoutsinosD., InvernizziC.F., MoisiD.A template-dependent dislocation mechanism potentiates K65R reverse transcriptase mutation development in subtype C variants of HIV-1. PLoS ONE2011; 6: e20208.
LeT., ChiarellaJ., SimenB.B.Low-abundance HIV drug-resistant viral variants in treatment-experienced persons correlate with historical antiretroviral use. PLoS ONE2009; 4: e6079.
14.
LatailladeM., ChiarellaJ., YangR.Prevalence and clinical significance of HIV drug resistance mutations by ultra-deep sequencing in antiretroviral-naive subjects in the CASTLE study. PLoS ONE2010; 5: e10952.
15.
StenmanJ., LintulaS., RissanenO.Quantitative detection of low-copy-number mRNAs differing at single nucleotide positions. Biotechniques2003; 34: 172–177.
16.
ShaferR.W.Low-abundance drug-resistant HIV-1 variants: finding significance in an era of abundant diagnostic and therapeutic options. J Infect Dis2009; 199: 610–612.
17.
LipscombJ.T., OwenS.M., JohnsonJ.A.Dynamic expression of HIV-1 drug resistance mutations during acute infection. Antivir Ther2010; 15Suppl 2: A47.
18.
VargheseV., WangE., BabrzadehF.Nucleic acid template and the risk of a PCR-induced HIV-1 drug resistance mutation. PLoS ONE2010; 5: e10992.
19.
WatersL., NelsonM., MandaliaS.The risks and incidence of K65R and L74V mutations and subsequent virologic responses. Clin Infect Dis2008; 46: 96–100.
20.
von WylV., YerlyS., BöniJ.Factors associated with the emergence of K65R in patients with HIV-1 infection treated with combination antiretroviral therapy containing tenofovir. Clin Infect Dis2008; 46: 1299–1309.
21.
GrantP.M., TaylorJ., NevinsA.B.International cohort analysis of the antiviral activities of zidovudine and tenofovir in the presence of the K65R mutation in reverse transcriptase. Antimicrob Agents Chemother2010; 54: 1520–1525.
