Trends of Transmitted and Acquired Drug Resistance in Europe From 1981 to 2019: A Comparison Between the Populations of Late Presenters and Non-late Presenters
Open Access
- 13 April 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Microbiology
- Vol. 13, 846943
Abstract
Background: The increased use of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has decreased mortality and morbidity of HIV-1 infected people but increasing levels of HIV drug resistance threatens the success of ART regimens. Conversely, late presentation can impact treatment outcomes, health costs, and potential transmission of HIV.Objective: To describe the patterns of transmitted drug resistance (TDR) and acquired drug resistance (ADR) in HIV-1 infected patients followed in Europe, to compare its patterns in late presenters (LP) vs non-late presenters (NLP), and to analyze the most prevalent drug resistance mutations among HIV-1 subtypes.Methods: Our study included clinical, socio-demographic, and genotypic information from 26,973 HIV-1 infected patients from the EuResist Integrated Database (EIDB) between 1981 and 2019.Results: Among the 26,973 HIV-1 infected patients in the analysis, 11,581 (42.9%) were ART-naïve patients and 15,392 (57.1%) were ART-experienced. The median age was 37 (IQR: 27.0–45.0) years old and 72.6% were males. The main transmission route was through heterosexual contact (34.9%) and 81.7% of patients originated from Western Europe. 71.9% of patients were infected by subtype B and 54.8% of patients were classified as LP. The overall prevalence of TDR was 12.8% and presented an overall decreasing trend (p for trend < 0.001), the ADR prevalence was 68.5% also with a decreasing trend (p for trend < 0.001). For LP and NLP, the TDR prevalence was 12.3 and 12.6%, respectively, while for ADR, 69.9 and 68.2%, respectively. The most prevalent TDR drug resistance mutations, in both LP and NLP, were K103N/S, T215rev, T215FY, M184I/V, M41I/L, M46I/L, and L90M.Conclusion: Our study showed that the overall TDR (12.8%) and ADR (68.5%) presented decreasing trends during the study time period. For LP, the overall TDR was slightly lower than for NLP (12.3 vs 12.6%, respectively); while this pattern was opposite for ADR (LP slightly higher than NLP). We suggest that these differences, in the case of TDR, can be related to the dynamics of fixation of drug resistance mutations; and in the case of ADR with the more frequent therapeutic failure in LPs.Keywords
Funding Information
- Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
- Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
- Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessing transmissibility of HIV-1 drug resistance mutations from treated and from drug-naive individualsAIDS, 2015
- Estimating Trends in the Proportion of Transmitted and Acquired HIV Drug Resistance in a Long Term Observational Cohort in GermanyPLOS ONE, 2014
- COMET: adaptive context-based modeling for ultrafast HIV-1 subtype identificationNucleic Acids Research, 2014
- Automated subtyping of HIV-1 genetic sequences for clinical and surveillance purposes: Performance evaluation of the new REGA version 3 and seven other toolsInfection, Genetics and Evolution, 2013
- Evaluation of sequence ambiguities of the HIV-1 pol gene as a method to identify recent HIV-1 infection in transmitted drug resistance surveysInfection, Genetics and Evolution, 2013
- Predicting Response to Antiretroviral Treatment by Machine Learning: The EuResist ProjectIntervirology, 2012
- Resistance-Associated Mutation Prevalence According to Subtypes B and Non-B of HIV Type 1 in Antiretroviral-Experienced Patients in Minas Gerais, BrazilAIDS Research and Human Retroviruses, 2011
- HIV-1 mutational pathways under multidrug therapyAIDS Research and Therapy, 2011
- Late presentation of HIV infection: a consensus definitionHIV Medicine, 2010
- Drug Resistance Mutations for Surveillance of Transmitted HIV-1 Drug-Resistance: 2009 UpdatePLOS ONE, 2009