|
|
|
|
|
Session 70
Poster Presentations Resistance Testing: Methodology and Clinical Applications Session Day and Time: Tuesday 1:30 - 3:30 pm Room: Hall A |
Background: The HIVNET 012 trial in Uganda demonstrated that
single-dose nevirapine (NVP) can prevent HIV-1 mother-to-child transmission.
NVP resistance (NVPR) can emerge in women and infants following single-dose
NVP. HIV-1 genotyping can be used to detect NVPR mutations. However, simpler
assays would facilitate evaluation of NVPR in women and infants receiving this
regimen. Because NVPR mutations have been characterized predominantly in
subtype B HIV-1, non-sequencing-based assays for NVPR may be particularly
useful for characterizing NVPR in regions where non-B subtypes are prevalent.
Methods: We evaluated a rapid assay (Amp-RT) for NVPR by
testing samples from women enrolled in HIVNET 012. This assay measures reverse
transcriptase (RT) enzymatic activity and NVPR directly in plasma. We tested 29
plasma samples from 17 women, including pre- and post-NVP samples. Samples were
genotyped using the Applied Biosystems ViroSeq HIV-1 Genotyping System.
Seventeen (17) samples had no detectable NVPR mutations (WT) and 12 samples had
minor variants with NVPR mutations. The subtypes of the samples were 7A, 1C,
7D, and 2 A/D recombinant, and the viral loads ranged from 6,131–631,200
copies/ml. Samples were analyzed in a blinded fashion using 100 microliters of
plasma.
Results: Results were obtained for 26 (90%) of the 29
samples, including 16 WT samples and 10 samples with minor NVPR variants (6
with K103N, 3 with K103N+Y181C, and 1 with K103N+G190A). The other 3 samples
had undetectable RT activity. The Amp-RT assay detected NVPR in 6 (60%) of the
10 samples with minor NVPR variants. Thirteen (13; 81%) of the 16 WT samples
were susceptible to NVP in the Amp-RT assay, and 3 had reduced susceptibility.
Two (2) of the samples with reduced susceptibility were pre- and post-NVP
samples from the same woman who was antiretroviral drug naïve prior to NVP
administration. The pre-NVP sample had a lower level of NVPR than the post-NVP
sample.
Conclusions: The lack of phenotypic NVPR in 4 samples with NVPR
mutations most likely reflects the low levels of mutant HIV-1 in those samples.
The finding of reduced NVP susceptibility in 3 WT samples suggests that
mutations other than those defined in subtype B may cause NVPR in other
subtypes. Further studies are needed to characterize the full genetic
correlates of NVPR in non-subtype B HIV-1 and to assess the utility of
biochemical testing of NVPR in resource-poor settings.