Journal of Clinical Virology
Volume 47, Issue 1 , Pages 18-22, January 2010

HIV-1 viral load and phenotypic antiretroviral drug resistance assays based on reverse transcriptase activity in comparison to amplification based HIV-1 RNA and genotypic assays

  • Sonia Napravnik

      Affiliations

    • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
  • ,
  • Ada Cachafeiro

      Affiliations

    • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
  • ,
  • Paul Stewart

      Affiliations

    • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Biostatistics, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
  • ,
  • Joseph J. Eron Jr.

      Affiliations

    • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
  • ,
  • Susan A. Fiscus

      Affiliations

    • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Dept of Microbiology & Immunology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB # 7290, 709 Mary Ellen Jones Building, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7290, United States. Tel.: +1 919 966 6872; fax: +1 919 966 9873.

Received 1 July 2009; received in revised form 25 September 2009; accepted 4 October 2009. published online 06 November 2009.

Abstract 

Background

Amplification based HIV-1 viral load and genotypic resistance assays are expensive, technologically complex and may be difficult to implement in resource limited settings. Inexpensive, simpler assays are urgently needed.

Objectives

To determine the suitability of the ExaVir™ Load and ExaVir™ Drug assays for use in patient monitoring.

Study design

Specimens from 108 adults were used to compare ExaVir™ Load HIV-1 RT to Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor® HIV-1 RNA, and ExaVir™ Drug phenotype to HIV GenoSure™ genotype.

Results

HIV-1 RT and HIV-1 RNA levels were comparable (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.83). Most (94%) had detectable results in both assays. The mean difference (HIV-1 RT minus HIV-1 RNA) was −0.21log10cps/mLequiv. Relationship between HIV-1 RT and HIV-1 RNA was not affected by RT mutations, CD4 cell count, or efavirenz (EFV) or nevirapine (NVP) use. Phenotypes were generally consistent with genotype findings for EFV, but not for NVP. Most patients (93.9%) with phenotypic EFV resistance had at least one EFV mutation, while 78.0% of patients with phenotypic NVP resistance had at least one NVP mutation. Eleven of 49 samples tested for EFV susceptibility were found resistant (n=2) or with reduced susceptibility (n=9) despite the absence of genotypic resistance. Eleven of 45 samples tested for NVP susceptibility were found resistant (n=9) or with reduced susceptibility (n=2) with no evidence of genotypic mutations.

Conclusions

The ExaVir™ Load assay performed well and may be an alternative to amplification based techniques for HIV-1 RNA quantification. The ExaVir™ Drug assay for phenotypic resistance testing requires further evaluation, especially for NVP.

Abbreviations: CI, confidence intervals, cp/mLeqs, copies per milliliter equivalents, EFV, efavirenz, IC50, half maximal inhibitory concentration, IQR, interquartile range, NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, NRTI, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, NVP, nevirapine, RT, reverse transcriptase, SD, standard deviation

Keywords: Cavidi, HIV-1, Phenotype assay, Genotype assay, Viral load

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Presented in part at the 13th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, Denver, CO, February 5–8, 2006, and the 15th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, Boston, MA, February 3–6, 2008.

PII: S1386-6532(09)00491-0

doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2009.10.001

Journal of Clinical Virology
Volume 47, Issue 1 , Pages 18-22, January 2010