Resistance to antiretroviral drugs remains an important limitation to successful human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) therapy. Resistance testing can improve treatment outcomes for infected individuals. The availability of new drugs from various classes, standardization of resistance assays, and the development of viral tropism tests necessitate new guidelines for resistance testing. The International AIDS Society-USA convened a panel of physicians and scientists with expertise in drug-resistant HIV-1, drug management, and patient care to review recently published data and presentations at scientific conferences and to provide updated recommendations. Whenever possible, resistance testing is recommended at the time of HIV infection diagnosis as part of the initial comprehensive patient assessment, as well as in all cases of virologic failure. Tropism testing is recommended whenever the use of chemokine receptor 5 antagonists is contemplated. As the roll out of antiretroviral therapy continues in developing countries, drug resistance monitoring for both subtype B and non-subtype B strains of HIV will become increasingly important.

The etiological agent of AIDS, LAV/HTLV-III, is common in Central Africa but is not endemic in other areas of that continent. A novel human retrovirus, distinct from LAV/HTLV-III, has now been isolated from two AIDS patients from West Africa. Partial characterization of this virus revealed that it has biological and morphological properties very similar to LAV but that it differs in some of its antigenic components. Although the core antigens may share some common epitopes, the West African AIDS retrovirus and LAV differ substantially in their envelope glycoproteins. The envelope antigen of the West African virus can be recognized by serum from a macaque with simian AIDS infected by the simian retrovirus termed STLV-IIImac, suggesting that the West African AIDS virus may be more closely related to this simian virus than to LAV. Hybridization experiments with LAV subgenomic probes further established that this new retrovirus, here referred to as LAV-II, is distantly related to LAV and distinct from STLV-IIImac.

New information about the benefits and limitations of testing for resistance to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 (HIV-1) drugs has emerged. The International AIDS Society-USA convened a panel of physicians and scientists with expertise in antiretroviral drug management, HIV-1 drug resistance, and patient care to provide updated recommendations for HIV-1 resistance testing. Published data and presentations at scientific conferences, as well as strength of the evidence, were considered. Properly used resistance testing can improve virological outcome among HIV-infected individuals. Resistance testing is recommended in cases of acute or recent HIV infection, for certain patients who have been infected as long as 2 years or more prior to initiating therapy, in cases of antiretroviral failure, and during pregnancy. Limitations of resistance testing remain, and more study is needed to refine optimal use and interpretation.

A highly divergent HIV-1 isolate, designated YBF 30, was obtained in 1995 from a 40-year-old Cameroonian woman with AIDS. Depending on the genes studied, phylogenetic analysis showed that YBF30 branched either with SIVcpz-gab or between SIVcpz-gab and HIV-1 group M. The structural genes and tat, vpr, and nef of YBF30 are approximately equidistant from those of HIV-1 group M and SIVcpz-gab. In contrast, vif and rev are closer to HIV-1 group M, and vpu is highly divergent. Using a YBF30 V3 loop peptide enzyme immunoassay, we screened 700 HIV-1-positive sera collected in Cameroon; three reacted strongly with the YBF30 peptides and one was confirmed as being related to YBF30 by genetic analysis of a pol fragment. YBF30 is as distinct from SIVcpz-gab as it is from HIV-1 group M and can thus be considered as the prototype strain of a new human immunodeficiency virus group.

BackgroundHIV protease inhibitor (PI) therapy results in the rapid selection of drug resistant viral variants harbouring one or two substitutions in the viral protease. To combat PI resistance development, two approaches have been developed. The first is to increase the level of PI in the plasma of the patient, and the second is to develop novel PI with high potency against the known PI-resistant HIV protease variants. Both approaches share the requirement for a considerable increase in the number of protease mutations to lead to clinical resistance, thereby increasing the genetic barrier. We investigated whether HIV could yet again find a way to become less susceptible to these novel inhibitors.Methods and FindingsWe have performed in vitro selection experiments using a novel PI with an increased genetic barrier (RO033-4649) and demonstrated selection of three viruses 4- to 8-fold resistant to all PI compared to wild type. These PI-resistant viruses did not have a single substitution in the viral protease. Full genomic sequencing revealed the presence of NC/p1 cleavage site substitutions in the viral Gag polyprotein (K436E and/or I437T/V) in all three resistant viruses. These changes, when introduced in a reference strain, conferred PI resistance. The mechanism leading to PI resistance is enhancement of the processing efficiency of the altered substrate by wild-type protease. Analysis of genotypic and phenotypic resistance profiles of 28,000 clinical isolates demonstrated the presence of these NC/p1 cleavage site mutations in some clinical samples (codon 431 substitutions in 13%, codon 436 substitutions in 8%, and codon 437 substitutions in 10%). Moreover, these cleavage site substitutions were highly significantly associated with reduced susceptibility to PI in clinical isolates lacking primary protease mutations. Furthermore, we used data from a clinical trial (NARVAL, ANRS 088) to demonstrate that these NC/p1 cleavage site changes are associated with virological failure during PI therapy.ConclusionsHIV can use an alternative mechanism to become resistant to PI by changing the substrate instead of the protease. Further studies are required to determine to what extent cleavage site mutations may explain virological failure during PI therapy.

Overall, resistance assays did not demonstrate benefit over standard of care. In patients with the most limited protease inhibitor experience, a significant benefit was observed in the genotyping arm.

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) group N from Cameroon is phylogenetically close, in env, to the simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) cpz-gab from Gabon and SIVcpz-US of unknown geographic origin. We screened 29 wild-born Cameroonian chimpanzees and found that three (Cam3, Cam4, and Cam5) were positive for HIV-1 by Western blotting. Mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis demonstrated that Cam3 and Cam5 belonged to Pan troglodytes troglodytes and that Cam4 belonged to P. t. vellerosus. Genetic analyses of the viruses together with serological data demonstrated that at least one of the two P. t. troglodytes chimpanzees (Cam5) was infected in the wild, and revealed a horizontal transmission between Cam3 and Cam4. These data confirm that P. t. troglodytes is a natural host for HIV-1-related viruses. Furthermore, they show that SIVcpz can be transmitted in captivity, from one chimpanzee subspecies to another. All three SIVcpz-cam viruses clustered with HIV-1 N in env. The full Cam3 SIVcpz genome sequence showed a very close phylogenetic relationship with SIVcpz-US, a virus identified in a P. t. troglodytes chimpanzee captured nearly 40 years earlier. Like SIVcpz-US, SIVcpz-cam3 was closely related to HIV-1 N in env, but not in pol, supporting the hypothesis that HIV-1 N results from a recombination event. SIVcpz from chimpanzees born in the wild in Cameroon are thus strongly related in env to HIV-1 N from Cameroon, demonstrating the geographic coincidence of these human and simian viruses and providing a further strong argument in favor of the origin of HIV-1 being in chimpanzees.

Emerging data indicate that despite limitations, resistance testing should be incorporated into patient management in some settings. Resistance testing is recommended to help guide the choice of new regimens after treatment failure and for guiding therapy for pregnant women. It should be considered in treatment-naive patients with established infection, but cannot be firmly recommended in this setting. Testing also should be considered prior to initiating therapy in patients with acute HIV infection, although therapy should not be delayed pending the results. Expert interpretation is recommended given the complexity of results and assay limitations.