Noninferiority of atazanavir/ritonavir to lopinavir/ritonavir was confirmed at 96 weeks. Atazanavir/ritonavir had a better lipid profile and fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than lopinavir/ritonavir.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundCASTLE compared the efficacy of atazanavir/ritonavir with lopinavir/ritonavir, each in combination with tenofovir-emtricitabine in ARV-naïve subjects from 5 continents.ObjectivesDetermine the baseline rate and clinical significance of TDR mutations using ultra-deep sequencing (UDS) in ARV-naïve subjects in CASTLE.MethodsA case control study was performed on baseline samples for all 53 subjects with virologic failures (VF) at Week 48 and 95 subjects with virologic successes (VS) randomly selected and matched by CD4 count and viral load. UDS was performed using 454 Life Sciences/Roche technology.ResultsOf 148 samples, 141 had successful UDS (86 subtype B, 55 non-B subtypes). Overall, 30.5% of subjects had a TDR mutation at baseline; 15.6% only had TDR(s) at <20% of the viral population. There was no difference in the rate of TDRs by B (30.2%) or non-B subtypes (30.9%). VF (51) and VS (90) had similar rates of any TDRs (25.5% vs. 33.3%), NNRTI TDRs (11.1% vs.11.8%) and NRTI TDRs (24.4% vs. 25.5%). Of 9 (6.4%) subjects with M184V/I (7 at <20% levels), 6 experienced VF. 16 (11.3%) subjects had multiple TAMs, and 7 experienced VF. 3 (2.1%) subjects had both multiple TAMs+M184V, and all experienced VF. Of 14 (9.9%) subjects with PI TDRs (11 at <20% levels): only 1 experienced virologic failure. The majority of PI TDRs were found in isolation (e.g. 46I) at <20% levels, and had low resistance algorithm scores.ConclusionAmong a representative sample of ARV-naïve subjects in CASTLE, TDR mutations were common (30.5%); B and non-B subtypes had similar rates of TDRs. Subjects with multiple PI TDRs were infrequent. Overall, TDRs did not affect virologic response for subjects on a boosted PI by week 48; however, a small subset of subjects with extensive NRTI backbone TDR patterns experienced virologic failure.

No abstract

These data define key genotypic substitutions in HIV-1 gp120 that could confer phenotypic resistance to BMS-626529.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

BMS-626529 is a novel small-molecule HIV-1 attachment inhibitor active against both CCR5-and CXCR4-tropic viruses. BMS-626529 functions by preventing gp120 from binding to CD4. A prodrug of this compound, BMS-663068, is currently in clinical development. As a theoretical resistance pathway to BMS-663068 could be the development of a CD4-independent phenotype, we examined the activity of BMS-626529 against CD4-independent viruses and investigated whether resistance to BMS-626529 could be associated with a CD4-independent phenotype. Finally, we evaluated whether cross-resistance exists between BMS-626529 and other HIV-1 entry inhibitors. Two laboratory-derived envelopes with a CD4-independent phenotype (one CXCR4 tropic and one CCR5 tropic), five envelopes from clinical isolates with preexisting BMS-626529 resistance, and several site-specific mutant BMS-626529-resistant envelopes were examined for their dependence on CD4 for infectivity or susceptibility to BMS-626529. Viruses resistant to other entry inhibitors (enfuvirtide, maraviroc, and ibalizumab) were also examined for susceptibility to BMS-626529. Both CD4-independent laboratory isolates retained sensitivity to BMS-626529 in CD4؊ cells, while HIV-1 envelopes from viruses resistant to BMS-626529 exhibited no evidence of a CD4-independent phenotype. BMS-626529 also exhibited inhibitory activity against ibalizumab-and enfuvirtide-resistant envelopes. While there appeared to be some association between maraviroc resistance and reduced susceptibility to BMS-626529, an absolute correlation cannot be presumed, since some CCR5-tropic maraviroc-resistant envelopes remained sensitive to BMS-626529. Clinical use of the prodrug BMS-663068 is unlikely to promote resistance via generation of CD4-independent virus. No cross-resistance between BMS-626529 and other HIV entry inhibitors was observed, which could allow for sequential or concurrent use with different classes of entry inhibitors.