METHODS: The performance of the point-of-care Xpert HIV-1 viral load assay was evaluated against the Abbott RealTime PCR m2000rt system. A total of 96 plasma specimens ranging from 2.5 log10 copies ml-1 to 4.99 log10 copies ml-1 and proficiency testing panel specimens were used. Precision and accuracy were checked using the Pearson correlation co-efficient test and Bland-Altman analysis.
RESULTS: Compared to the Abbott RealTime PCR, the Xpert HIV-1 viral load assay showed a good correlation (Pearson r=0.81; P<0.0001) with a mean difference of 0.27 log10 copies ml-1 (95 % CI, -0.41 to 0.96 log10 copies ml-1; sd, 0.35 log10 copies ml-1).
CONCLUSION: Reliable and ease of testing individual specimens could make the Xpert HIV-1 viral load assay an efficient alternative method for ART monitoring in clinical management of HIV disease in resource-limited settings. The rapid test results (less than 2 h) could help in making an immediate clinical decision, which further strengthens patient care.
METHODS: CLHIV aged <18 years, who were on first-line cART for ≥12 months, and had virological suppression (two consecutive plasma viral load [pVL] <50 copies/mL) were included. Those who started treatment with mono/dual antiretroviral therapy, had a history of treatment interruption >14 days, or received treatment and care at sites with a pVL lower limit of detection >50 copies/mL were excluded. LLV was defined as a pVL 50 to 1000 copies/mL, and VF as a single pVL >1000 copies/mL. Baseline was the time of the second pVL
DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted among incarcerated individuals with HIV and AUDs transitioning to the community from 2010 through 2016.
METHODS: Eligible participants (N = 100) were randomized 2:1 to receive 6 monthly injections of XR-NTX (n = 67) or placebo (n = 33) starting at release and continued for 6 months. The primary and secondary outcomes were the proportion that maintained or improved VS at <200 and <50 copies per milliliter from baseline to 6 months, respectively, using an intention-to-treat analysis.
RESULTS: Participants allocated to XR-NTX improved VS from baseline to 6 months for <200 copies per milliliter (48.0%-64.2%, P = 0.024) and for <50 copies per milliliter (31.0%-56.7%, P = 0.001), whereas the placebo group did not (<200 copies/mL: 64%-42.4%, P = 0.070; <50 copies/mL: 42.0%-30.3%, P = 0.292). XR-NTX participants were more likely to achieve VS than the placebo group at 6 months (<200 copies/mL: 64.2% vs. 42.4%; P = 0.041; <50 copies/mL: 56.7% vs. 30.3%; P = 0.015). XR-NTX independently predicted VS [<200 copies/mL: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01 to 7.09, P = 0.047; <50 copies/mL: aOR = 4.54; 95% CI = 1.43 to 14.43, P = 0.009] as did receipt of ≥3 injections (<200 copies/mL: aOR = 3.26; 95% CI = 1.26 to 8.47, P = 0.010; <50 copies/mL: aOR = 6.34; 95% CI = 2.08 to 19.29, P = 0.001). Reductions in alcohol consumption (aOR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.98, P = 0.033) and white race (aOR = 5.37, 95% CI = 1.08 to 27.72, P = 0.040) also predicted VS at <50 copies per milliliter.
CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX improves or maintains VS after release to the community for incarcerated people living with HIV and AUDs.
DESIGN: A 4-site, prospective randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted among prison and jail inmates with HIV and OUD transitioning to the community from September 2010 through March 2016.
METHODS: Eligible participants (N = 93) were randomized 2:1 to receive 6 monthly injections of XR-NTX (n = 66) or placebo (n = 27) starting at release and observed for 6 months. The primary outcome was the proportion that maintained or improved VS (<50 copies/mL) from baseline to 6 months.
RESULTS: Participants allocated to XR-NTX significantly improved to VS (<50 copies/mL) from baseline (37.9%) to 6 months (60.6%) (P = 0.002), whereas the placebo group did not (55.6% at baseline to 40.7% at 6 months P = 0.294). There was, however, no statistical significant difference in VS levels at 6 months between XR-NTX (60.6%) vs. placebo (40.7%) (P = 0.087). After controlling for other factors, only allocation to XR-NTX (adjusted odds ratio = 2.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.04 to 8.14, P = 0.043) was associated with the primary outcome. Trajectories in VS from baseline to 6 months differed significantly (P = 0.017) between treatment groups, and the differences in the discordant values were significantly different as well (P = 0.041): the XR-NTX group was more likely than the placebo group to improve VS (30.3% vs. 18.5%), maintain VS (30.3% vs. 27.3), and less likely to lose VS (7.6% vs. 33.3%) by 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: XR-NTX improves or maintains VS after release to the community for incarcerated people living with HIV with OUD.
OBJECTIVE: To augment the affinity of AnkGAG1D4 scaffold towards its CA target, through computational predictions and experimental designs.
METHOD: Three dimensional structure of the binary complex formed by AnkGAG1D4 docked to the CA was used as a model for van der Waals (vdW) binding energy calculation. The results generated a simple guideline to select the amino acids for modifications. Following the predictions, modified AnkGAG1D4 proteins were produced and further evaluated for their CA-binding activity, using ELISA-modified method and bio-layer interferometry (BLI).
RESULTS: Tyrosine at position 56 (Y56) in AnkGAG1D4 was experimentally identified as the most critical residue for CA binding. Rational substitutions of this residue diminished the binding affinity. However, vdW calculation preconized to substitute serine for tyrosine at position 45. Remarkably, the affinity for the viral CA was significantly enhanced in AnkGAG1D4-S45Y mutant, with no alteration of the target specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: The S-to-Y mutation at position 45, based on the prediction of interacting amino acids and on vdW binding energy calculation, resulted in a significant enhancement of the affinity of AnkGAG1D4 ankyrin for its CA target. AnkGAG1D4-S45Y mutant represented the starting point for further construction of variants with even higher affinity towards the viral CA, and higher therapeutic potential in the future.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We reviewed all GenBank submissions of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase sequences with or without protease and identified 287 studies published between March 1, 2000, and December 31, 2013, with more than 25 recently or chronically infected ARV-naïve individuals. These studies comprised 50,870 individuals from 111 countries. Each set of study sequences was analyzed for phylogenetic clustering and the presence of 93 surveillance drug-resistance mutations (SDRMs). The median overall TDR prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), south/southeast Asia (SSEA), upper-income Asian countries, Latin America/Caribbean, Europe, and North America was 2.8%, 2.9%, 5.6%, 7.6%, 9.4%, and 11.5%, respectively. In SSA, there was a yearly 1.09-fold (95% CI: 1.05-1.14) increase in odds of TDR since national ARV scale-up attributable to an increase in non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) resistance. The odds of NNRTI-associated TDR also increased in Latin America/Caribbean (odds ratio [OR] = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.06-1.25), North America (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.12-1.26), Europe (OR = 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.13), and upper-income Asian countries (OR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.12-1.55). In SSEA, there was no significant change in the odds of TDR since national ARV scale-up (OR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.92-1.02). An analysis limited to sequences with mixtures at less than 0.5% of their nucleotide positions—a proxy for recent infection—yielded trends comparable to those obtained using the complete dataset. Four NNRTI SDRMs—K101E, K103N, Y181C, and G190A—accounted for >80% of NNRTI-associated TDR in all regions and subtypes. Sixteen nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) SDRMs accounted for >69% of NRTI-associated TDR in all regions and subtypes. In SSA and SSEA, 89% of NNRTI SDRMs were associated with high-level resistance to nevirapine or efavirenz, whereas only 27% of NRTI SDRMs were associated with high-level resistance to zidovudine, lamivudine, tenofovir, or abacavir. Of 763 viruses with TDR in SSA and SSEA, 725 (95%) were genetically dissimilar; 38 (5%) formed 19 sequence pairs. Inherent limitations of this study are that some cohorts may not represent the broader regional population and that studies were heterogeneous with respect to duration of infection prior to sampling.
CONCLUSIONS: Most TDR strains in SSA and SSEA arose independently, suggesting that ARV regimens with a high genetic barrier to resistance combined with improved patient adherence may mitigate TDR increases by reducing the generation of new ARV-resistant strains. A small number of NNRTI-resistance mutations were responsible for most cases of high-level resistance, suggesting that inexpensive point-mutation assays to detect these mutations may be useful for pre-therapy screening in regions with high levels of TDR. In the context of a public health approach to ARV therapy, a reliable point-of-care genotypic resistance test could identify which patients should receive standard first-line therapy and which should receive a protease-inhibitor-containing regimen.