Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Aug 31;15(8):e0238052. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238052

Dolutegravir: Virologic response and tolerability of initial antiretroviral regimens for adults living with HIV

Analú Correa 1,#, Polyana Monteiro 1,, Fernanda Calixto 2,, Joanna d’Arc Lyra Batista 3,, Ricardo Arraes de Alencar Ximenes 1,4,#, Ulisses Ramos Montarroyos 5,*,#
Editor: Luis Menéndez-Arias6
PMCID: PMC7458288  PMID: 32866163

Abstract

The integrase inhibitor dolutegravir was included in initial antiretroviral therapy in Brazil in January 2017. Studies have demonstrated that the efficacy and safety of antiretrovirals have improved with the introduction of new classes of antiretrovirals, such as integrase inhibitors. This study aimed to estimate the frequency of individuals with a virologic response by week 24 of antiretroviral treatment and to describe the adverse events of the regimen containing dolutegravir. This was a cohort of people living with HIV followed up at a referral hospital. Patients were included who had initiated their first treatment between January and August 2017. Data were obtained from medical records, the Drug Logistics Management System and from the Laboratory Tests Control System. Two hundred and twenty-two patients were included for the tolerability analysis and one hundred and thirty-seven for the virologic response analysis. The mean age was 34 years, the median time between diagnosis and initiating treatment was 1.9 months and the median time on antiretroviral therapy was 13.2 months. The frequency of adverse events was 10% (95% CI: 7% to 15.2%), of these, amongst the most frequent events, 91% presented gastrointestinal effects, and 47.8% neuropsychiatric. By week 24 the estimated incidence of virologic response was 89.1% (95% CI: 83% to 93.5%), with an increase during the first 6 months in the number of T-CD4 lymphocytes of 50.7 cells/mm 3 (95% CI: 42 to 59.3). Initial antiretroviral regimens containing dolutegravir were well tolerated and effective in viral suppression during the first 24 weeks after initiating treatment. The occurrence of adverse events was low, either mild or moderate.

Introduction

Antiretroviral therapy transformed the natural history of HIV infection [1,2]. Advances in treatment have severely impacted the course of the disease, reducing morbidity and mortality and improving the quality of life of people living with HIV (PLHIV). However, there are adverse events associated with antiretroviral use as well as other factors that contribute to poor adherence and to the discontinuation of treatment and may lead to therapeutic failure and an accumulation of mutations [3].

Dolutegravir (DTG) is an integrase inhibitor that was incorporated into the Brazilian pharmacological arsenal as of January 2017. It has become the third preferred agent to compose the initial antiretroviral regimen of HIV-1 positive individuals, according to Brazil’s treatment guidelines [4]. It is administered once a day in a single 50mg tablet, without the need for pharmacological reinforcement and with the advantage of presenting few drug-drug interactions [5,6].

Controlled, randomized trials have compared the efficacy of DTG in treatment-naïve individuals with drugs commonly used as a choice in major treatment guidelines. In the Single study [7], the comparison was made with efavirenz (EFZ), in the Spring-2 study [8] with raltegravir (RAL) and in the Flamingo study [9] with darunavir These studies verified that dolutegravir provided non-inferior efficacy compared to raltegravir, and was superior in comparison to darunavir, and also provided superior virologic efficacy compared to the regimen using efavirenz [79].

In relation to tolerability, the Spring-2 study reported similar adverse event results when compared to the use of integrase inhibitors as a third drug. In the Flamingo study [9], there was a report 1 life threatening event related to DTG (a suicide attempt), however the patient had a history of depression. The Single study [7] reported fewer adverse events using DTG (10% versus 16%) despite more frequent reports of insomnia, which were more intense than in previous studies.

Rates of treatment discontinuation were lower in the group using DTG in the three abovementioned studies.

In a non-controlled study in Northern Ireland in 2017, Todd et al., in a cohort of with 51 treatment-naive individuals and 106 treatment-experienced individuals, reported a rapid reduction in the viral load in the treatment-naive group, with 94% presenting an undetectable viral load and a 30% improvement in the mean CD4 cell count at week 12 of treatment. In terms of tolerability, three patients discontinued DTG due to events such as insomnia, depressed mood, and anxiety [10].

In 2019, a Brazilian cohort study observed that more than 90% of the patients treated with DTG achieved viral suppression. The adverse event wasn’t studied. The study concludes that there is evidence of the superiority of dolutegravir over efavirenz, lopinavir and atazanavir in suppressing viral replication in adults by the first year on ART, based in a national approach [11]. Brazil have different social and economic aspect between the regions of country and within of each region, because this is important that local studies to be carried and the evidence compared with the national reality.

The present study aims to estimate the frequency of individuals with a virologic response up until the 24th week after initiating antiretroviral treatment, and to describe the occurrence of adverse events of the initial DTG regimen in people living with HIV/AIDS treated in a hospital of northeast of Brazil.

Materials and methods

Study design and setting

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a referral hospital for HIV/AIDS, Hospital Correia Picanço, located in the city Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. Data collection took place from April to October 2018, the inclusion criteria of study population consisted of individuals with HIV infection aged 18 years or older, who had initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir between January and August 2017, according to Brazilian Ministry of Health guidelines [4].

Data collection

The initiation date of the antiretroviral regimen was considered as the starting moment of the cohort. Measurements of the CD4 and viral load and the occurrence of adverse events were observed within a minimum of 24 weeks after initiating the regimen. For those with no results of viral load and CD4 cell count up until 24 weeks, we considered the measurements up until 36 weeks. Were excluded the patients who had undetected viral load (<50 copies/ml) at baseline and who don’t have at least two available HIV viral load measurements collected at different timepoint. For standardization purposes, all viral load and CD4 records of the study participants were collected following the hospital routine. Due to this, is expected not all patients had viral load and CD4 cell count measurements consistently.

Eligible patients were identified using the Drug Logistics Management System (known as SICLOM). T-CD4 lymphocyte and viral load measurements were collected from the Laboratory Tests Control System (SISCEL). SICLOM and SISCEL are integrated computerized information systems for monitoring PVHIV, under the administration of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, which stores data on laboratory testing, drug dispensing and stocks. Information related to biological and behavioural characteristics, comorbidities, initial regimen, concomitant use of other medications, regimen change, and adverse events were collected from patient records.

The collected information was recorded on a specific research form, corrected for possible inconsistencies, and after a review, the forms were submitted for typing.

Our primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with viral load of less than 50 copies per mL at 24th week of retroviral treatment [4] and proportion of presence of adverse events in the same period. The adverse events were classified in gastrointestinal symptoms, neuropsychiatric and other symptoms [12]. The secondary endpoint was to describe the variations of CD4 counts over time in patients living with HIV.

Statistical methods

The frequency of therapeutic response was represented by the cumulative incidence measure and estimated with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The characteristics of the study population were presented by frequency distribution when the variables were categorical and by means and standard deviation for quantitative variables. The hypothesis of normal distribution was observed with the Shapiro-Wilk test, presenting the median and interquartile range when the hypothesis of normality was rejected. In the analysis of the association of the explanatory factors of the virological response, Pearson's chi-square test and Student’s t test or Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare means or medians, respectively. To estimate the mean growth rate in the number of T-CD4 cells over time, a Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) model was used for repeated measurements. The significance adopted in the study was 5% (p <0.05). The software used for the analysis was Stata 14.

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the Teaching Hospital Oswaldo Cruz of University of Pernambuco (HUOC) Research Ethics Committee in accordance with resolution 466/12, under Report No. 2,600,137, on 16/04/2018.

Results

Of the 562 individuals taking dolutegravir registered on SICLOM, we identified 230 who initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Study flowchart.

Fig 1

A total of 222 individuals were included in the tolerability analysis, of whom eight were excluded as losses during the collection period: one had no detailed information regarding the regimen used, four had no records of the initiation date of antiretroviral therapy (ART) and three had no information regarding regimen change and the occurrence of adverse events. For the virological response analysis, 93 individuals provided did not have laboratory data, thereby leaving 137 individuals to compose the sample.

The study population consisted of 72.5% male individuals with a mean age of 34.5 years. With regard to habits, 17.3% of the respondents used illicit drugs, 64.8% consumed alcohol and 27.6% were smokers.

Of the total patients, 25.8% regularly used another medication, 0.5% presented with diabetes mellitus, 5.4% had been diagnosed with systemic arterial hypertension and 10.3% other diseases.

A total of 220 participants (99.1%) had initiated a combination of dolutegravir, tenofovir and lamivudine (DTG + TDF + 3TC). The median time between diagnosing the disease and initiating treatment was 1.9 months and the median time of using ART was 13.2 months. The median maximum viral load was 33,400 copies/mm³ and the CD4 nadir median was 360 cells/mm³. These characteristics are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Biological, clinical and behavioural characteristics of 222 people living with HIV who initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir.

Characteristics Number/Total (%)
Biological
Agea 34.5 ± 9.7 (17.4–66.5)
Sex: Male 161/222 (72.5)
Habits
Use of illicit drugs 161/222 (17.3)
Alcohol consumption 94/145 (64.8)
Smoker 39/141 (27.6)
Clinical characteristics related to HIV
Regular use of other medication 48/186 (25.8)
Comorbidities
  No comorbidities 186/222 (83.8%)
  Diabetes 1/222 (0.5%)
  Arterial hypertension 12/222 (5.4%)
  Others 23/222 (10.3%)
Time between HIV diagnosis and initiating ART (months)b 1.9 (24 days–3.4 months)
Time on ART (months)b 13.2 (12.7–14 months)
ART regimen
  DTG+TDF+3TC 220/222 (99.1%)
  DTG+ABC+3TC 2/222 (0.9%)
Max. Viral load (copies/mm3)b 33.400 (6.934–186.352)
CD4 nadir (cell/mm3) b 360 (167–549)

a Mean ± sd (Minimum—Maximum).

b Median (P25—P75). HIV—human immunodeficiency virus. ART—antiretroviral therapy. DTG–dolutegravir. TDF—tenofovir. 3TC—lamivudine. ABC–abacavir

The frequency of adverse events following the introduction of ART was 10.4% (95% CI: 7% to 15.2%). Of the 23 individuals that presented adverse events, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most frequent, representing 91% (21/23) of patient complaints. Diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, heartburn and stomach pains as the main adverse events reported. Neuropsychiatric symptoms were reported by 47.8% (11/23) of individuals, with insomnia and dizziness being the main complaints. Amongst other adverse events (34.8%), one patient reported fever and other patients reported skin blemishes, cough and itching.

Most of those who used this regimen and reported adverse events only reported one single complaint (43.5%), while 34.8% reported at least two complaints and 21.7% three or more complaints.

Amongst those who needed to change their ART (4.0%), the most frequent reason was tuberculosis—HIV coinfection. Three other cases of change occurred, one due to pregnancy, an individual with a psychiatric disease prior to initiating ART, and one for reasons unregistered in the medical records (Table 2).

Table 2. Adverse events after introducing the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir.

Adverse events Number (%)
Adverse event
 Yes 23 (10.4%)
 No 199 (89.6%)
Adverse events presenteda
Gastrointestinal symptoms 21 (91%)
  Diarrhea 10 (43.4%)
  Nausea 4 (17.3%)
  Vomits 3 (13.0%)
  Heartburn/stomach pains 4 (17.3%)
Neuropsychiatric symptoms 11 (47.8%)
  Insomnia 3 (13.0%)
  Dizziness 2 (8.7%)
  Headaches 1 (4.3%)
  Bilateral visual changes 1 (4.3%)
  Anxiety/Distress 1 (4.3%)
  Dormancy 1 (4.3%)
  Forgetfulness 1 (4.3%)
  Irritability 1 (4.3%)
Others 8 (34.8%)
Number of adverse events presented
 One 10 (43.5%)
 Two 8 (34.8%)
 Three or more 5 (21.7%)
Change of regimen
 No 213 (95.9%)
 Yes 09 (4.1%)
Reason for change
 TB treatment 6 (66.7%)
 Pregnancy 1 (11.1%)
 Psychiatric outbreak 1 (11.1%)
 Reason not specified 1 (11.1%)

a Non-concomitant categories

The estimated incidence of virologic response by week 24 of treatment was 89.1% (95% CI: 83% to 93.5%). The median viral load of patients at the beginning of ART was 334,000 copies, after 24 weeks decrease to 193 copies. Analysing the association of virologic response and the factors studied, in the block of variables of biological and behavioural characteristics, none demonstrated an association with virologic response. Amongst the clinical variables, a statistically significant association between the maximal viral load and virologic response was observed, with a higher viral load amongst those who presented no virologic response up until week 24, as well as a significant association between CD4 nadir, with lower counts in the group with no virologic response, as well as a significant association between the CD4 nadir with the lowest count in the group with no virologic response up until week 24 (Table 3).

Table 3. Analysis of the association of covariates with the virologic response at week 24 in individuals who initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir.

Variables Virologic response (n = 122) No virologic response (n = 15) p-value
Biological aspects
Agea 34.6 ± 9.8 36.8 ± 10.6 0.419
Sex 0.623
  Female 41 (33.6%) 6 (40.0%)
  Male 81 (66.4%) 9 (60.0%)
Habits
Use of illicit drugs
  Yes 18 (18.6%) 0 (0%) 0.207d
  No 79 (81.4%) 10 (100%)
  Not informed 25 5
Alcohol consumption
  Yes 61 (64.9%) 6 (60.0%) 0.741d
  No 33 (35.1%) 4 (40.0%)
  Not informed 28 5
Smoker
  Yes 28 (31.8%) 2 (22.2%) 0.716d
  No 60 (68.2%) 7 (77.8%)
  Not informed 34 6
Clinical characteristics related to HIV
Regular use of other medication
  Ye 27 (25.0%) 4 (26.7%) 0.889d
  No 81 (75.0%) 11 (73.3%)
  Not informed 14 0
Comorbidity
  Yes 96 (78.7%) 12 (80.0%) 0.907d
  No 26 (21.3%) 3 (20.0%)
Time between HIV diagnosis and initiating ART (months)b 1.93 (1.1–3.9) 1.87 (0.4–2.4) 0.415
Time on ART (years)b 1.07 (1.03–1.11) 1.08 (1.03–1.14) 0.416
ART Regimen
  DTG+TDF+3TC 121 (99.2%) 15 (100%) 1.000
  DTG+ABC+3TC 1 (0.8%) 0 (0%)
Maximum viral load S(x10⁻³ copies/mm³)b 33.0 (7.1–86.7) 446.7 (142.2–943) 0.002c
CD4 nadir (cell/mm3)b 392 (191–584) 166 (77–323) 0.027c

a Mean ± sd–t student test

b Median (P25—P75)—Mann-Whitney test

c Statistically significant difference

d Fischer exact test HIV—human immunodeficiency virus. ART—antiretroviral therapy. DTG–dolutegravir. TDF—tenofovir. 3TC–lamivudine. ABC–abacavir.

With regard to the immune response, the median CD4 cell count at baseline was 346 cells/mm³, presenting a monthly growth rate of 25.0 cells/mm³ (95% CI: 19.6 to 30.3). During the first 6 months, the increase mean was 50.7 cells/mm³ (95% CI: 42 to 59.3) per month. The reference during first 12 months was the average increase mean was 37.7 cells/mm³ (95% CI: 31.7 to 43.8) per month (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Mean CD4 count from the time antiretroviral therapy was initiated in individuals after the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir.

Fig 2

Discussion

In the present study we observed that dolutegravir is an efficient, well tolerated drug, not only in clinical trials, but also in clinical practice where other factors could influence the therapeutic response. The study has demonstrated a high percentage of individuals with an undetectable viral load after 24 weeks of antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation with a rapid virologic response. These results are similar to other previous studies [7,9,10].

The results presented demonstrated that the estimated incidence of response up until the 24th week of treatment with antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir was 89.1%. In addition to virologic suppression, during the first six months, the individuals presented an increase in the number of T-CD4 lymphocytes of 50.7 cells/mm³ (95% CI: 42 to 59.3). A recent Brazilian cohort published in 2019 estimated a viral suppression of 81.8% in 18000 participants residents in the Northeast of Brazil, results similar to our findings [11]. Todd et al., in Northern Ireland, analysed treatment-naïve individuals on DTG with a 94% response with an undetectable viral load as early as 12 weeks, indicating a high early virologic efficacy [10]. Overall, the results reported in the present study are consistent with the results of the Single (2013), Flamingo (2014) and Todd et al. (2017) studies, which demonstrated high virologic suppression during the first weeks of treatment [7,9,10].

Dolutegravir has a high genetic barrier to mutations and, ever since the pre-clinical studies, has demonstrated a high potency against HIV. Its pharmacological profile is interesting, since it allows a low daily dose of 50 mg, with few reports of adverse events, which favours better adherence and consequently, high response rates [13,14].

In the analysis of factors associated with virologic response, we observed that individuals who maintained a detectable viral load up until week 24, had presented with a higher viral load at the beginning of treatment. However, these individuals presented a significant reduction in the number of viral RNA copies during the follow-up period, a median viral load at the beginning of ART of 334,000 copies was reduced to a median of 193 copies at week 24, thereby indicating that it would likely evolve to undetectability over a longer observation period. This finding corroborates the study by Todd et al., which reported that individuals with a higher baseline viral load needed more time to achieve undetectability [10]. Similarly, the Flamingo study, with a follow-up period of up to 96 weeks, reported a progressive reduction in the viral load even in individuals with basal levels of above 100,000 copies/mm³ [7].

In the tolerability assessment, in our study, 10.4% of individuals initiating an antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir reported adverse events, classified as mild and moderate, data that coincides with other studies already published [7,9,10], thus reducing the possibility of discontinuing the regimen for this reason. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the most frequent (91%), and diarrhea was the most present in 43.4% of individuals.

Neuropsychiatric events were reported by 47.8% of individuals, higher than findings of a recent cohort, which was 25% [10]. Insomnia was present in 13% of this group, similar to that previously published in a controlled trial, the Single study, with a frequency of 15% with mild insomnia. The insomnia rate was higher than in previous studies of dolutegravir [8,9]. In a recent cohort in Northern Ireland, 4% of the individuals presented a higher rate of insomnia [10]. Neuropsychiatric events have proven to be significant elements with regard to regimen change.

In this cohort, there were no serious adverse events and the reported events were insufficient for a change in the therapeutic regimen, as reported in the Single study [7], where the discontinuity rates when comparing DTG to Efavirenz were 2% versus 10%. The Flamingo study [9], which compared DTG with darunavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive subjects obtained a 2% discontinuity rate when using DTG and 4% for the other treatment.

The present study presents methodological limitations, the main is the period of follow-up of 24 weeks, that may have underestimated the effect of DTG regime, but with our results was possible to show that the proportion of virologic response corroborated with the literature findings, even with longer follow-up times. Others limitations are the use of secondary data, a nonuniformity in the period collecting the viral load and CD4 count test results. As well as patient losses in the sample, through lack of data. This was because the cohort did not interfere in the routine of the service, and followed the conduct of the medical assistant. In order to minimize this limitation, a number of searches were performed in the Laboratory Test Control System and medical records before we finally considered loss of patient follow-up due to lack of viral load information [10].

Conclusions

The present study has provided clinically relevant data on the use of dolutegravir in first-line regimens in clinical practice outside the controlled environment of randomized trials. Dolutegravir has proved to be a drug with a high virologic response and good tolerability, with a low frequency of adverse events, which were mild and moderate. Thus, an early, sustained virologic response is critical for immune recovery by improving clinical outcomes, reducing morbidity and mortality, as well as contributing to a reduction in infectivity and in controlling the epidemic.

Supporting information

S1 Data

(RAR)

Data Availability

The data underlying the results presented in the study are available as Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This study was financed by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance code 001 and Fundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de Pernambuco - FACEPE (State of Pernambuco Science and Technology Support Foundation – process IBPG-1420-4.01/16) to URM. RAAX was supported by CNPq (Scholarship 308311/2009-4). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Guia de Vigilância em Saúde: volume único. Brasília, Brasil: Ministério da Saúde, 2019. https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/guia_vigilancia_saude_3ed.pdf. Cited 10 november 2019.
  • 2.Palella FJ, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, Loveless MO, Fuhrer J, Satten GA, et al. Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998; 338(13): 853–860. 10.1056/NEJM199803263381301 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Lima DGL, Arruda EAG, Lima AJA, Oliveira BE, Fonteles MMF. Fatores determinantes para modificações da terapia antirretroviral inicial. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2012; 58(2):222–228. 10.1590/S0104-42302012000200019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Protocolo clínico e diretrizes terapêuticas para manejo da infecção pelo HIV em adultos. Brasília, Brasil: Ministério da Saúde, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.European Aids Clinical Society Guidelines. http://www.eacsociety.org/guidelines/eacs-guidelines/eacs-guidelines.html. Cited 12 february 2019.
  • 6.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Atualização dos esquemas antirretrovirais para pessoas vivendo com HIV/Aids (PVHA) e indicações de uso ampliado de dolutegravir (DTG) e darunavir (DRV) para composição de esquemas. Nota informativa n° 096. de 2016/DDAHV/SVS/MS. http://azt.aids.gov.br/documentos/siclom_operacional/Nota%20Informativa%20007%20-%20protocolo%20de%20uso%20ARV%20-%202017.pdf Cited 12 june 2019.
  • 7.Walmsley SL, Antela A, Clumeck N, Duiculescu D, Eberhard A, Gutierrez F, et al. Dolutegravir plus abacavir-lamivudine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369:1807–1818. 10.1056/NEJMoa1215541 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Raffi F, Rachlis A, Stellbrink HJ, Hardy WD, Torti C, Orkin C, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir versus raltegravir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 infection: 48 week results from the randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority SPRING-2 study. Lancet. 2013; 381(9868):735–743. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61853-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Clotet B, Feinberg J, van Lunzen J, Khuong-Josses MA, Antinori A, Dumitru I, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir versus darunavir plus ritonavir in antiretroviral-naïve adults with HIV-1 infection (FLAMINGO): 48 week results from the randomised open-label phase 3b study. Lancet. 2014; 383(9936):2222–2231. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60084-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Todd S, Rafferty P, Walker E, Hunter M, Dinsmore WW, Donnelly CM, et al. Early clinical experience of dolutegravir in an HIV cohort in a larger teaching hospital. Int J STD AIDS. 2017;28(11):1074–1081. 10.1177/0956462416688127 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Meireles MV, Pascom ARP, Duarte EC, McFarland W. Comparative effectiveness of first-line antiretroviral therapy: results from a large real-world cohort after the implementation of dolutegravir. AIDS. 2019; 33:1663–1668. 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002254 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.National Institutes of Health Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events, December 2004, Clarification Aug 2009. Available at: http://rsc.techres.com/document/safetyandpharmacovigilance/table_for_grading_severity_of_adult_pediatric_adverse_events.pdf. Cited 31 October 2019.
  • 13.Van Lunzen J, Maggiolo F, Arribas JR, Rakhmanova A, Yeni P, Young B, et al. Once-daily dolutegravir (S/GSK1349572) in combination therapy in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV: planned interim 48 week results from SPRING-1, a dose-ranging, randomised, phase 2b trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012; 12(2):111–118. 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70290-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Eduardo S. Uso de inibidores da integrase como agentes de primeira linha no tratamento da infecção pelo HIV. BJID—Educação Médica Continuada. 2016; 2(4):99–106. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Luis Menéndez-Arias

13 Jan 2020

PONE-D-19-33515

Dolutegravir: virologic response and tolerability of initial antiretroviral regimens for adults living with HIV

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr Montarroyos,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLoS ONE. We have received comments from three experts in the field. Unfortunately, two of them (reviewers no. 1 and 3) consider that your paper should be rejected or needs major revision.

Although detailed critiques are given below, according to reviewers, major limitations of your study are:

1) Conclusions of your paper are not clear. Your manuscript should specify in a clear manner its major contributions to our current knowledge on dolutegravir therapy.

2) Relevant references are lacking and proper discussion of your findings in relation to other studies is missing, It is particularly important to cite published papers on dolutegravir therapy (particularly those coming from Brazil) and clarify how conclusions of those reports differ from yours.

3) The methods section should be expanded to clarify the number and type of samples (patients) analyzed and details on how the analysis was performed,

4) The manuscript needs extensive editing. English usage and grammar should be largely improved.

In summary, we think that your manuscript needs MAJOR REVISION and you need to convince the two more critical reviewers in order to get your manuscript accepted for publication. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Feb 27 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Luis Menéndez-Arias, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please describe all virological measurements in the methods section.

3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified 'The data underlying the results presented in the study are available fromulisses.montarroyos@upe.br', but this can not be found.

PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Correa et al describe their experiences with DTG containing regimens in a patient cohort from Brazil. As highlighted by the authors, the data on efficacy and safety of DTG, also in real life settings, has been extensively studied. This limits the novelty of this manuscript apart from that it is from Brazil, a country where like in the main studies on DTG subtype B is dominant and where DTG has been introduced in Jan 2017. My main comment therefore is that the authors fail to make clear to me what their study and research adds to the already existing clinical information on DTG, both regarding wk24 data and tolerability. Without that, it would add little to the scientific community as low-level evidence retrospective analysis of a single center experience unfortunately.

Other major comments:

The authors state that no real life data has been published. However, publications on this do exist. For example, there is a recent publication from Brasil which highlights the high potency of DTG in an analysis of 112243 patients who were prescribed DTG or one of to other regimens (Pascom AR JIAS 2019). Also, another study from Brazil on 107647 patients (including 10.5% on DTG) showed a very favorable suppression rate on DTG which was also comparable to the suppression rate in this study (89.1% vs 90.5%). It is unclear to me how the authors can substantiate their statement or how their study differs from these studies.

Although it seems to be a retrospective analysis, the authors should state whether it was prospective or retrospective in their methods section.

The in- and exclusion criteria, data collection and the primary outcomes are not (well) defined.

The main reason to do the study was to 'aimed to estimate the frequency of individuals

with a virologic response by week 24 of antiretroviral treatment and to describe the

adverse events of the regimen containing dolutegravir'. In that perspective it is a main limitation that only from a approx 2/3 of total patients had lab data available. From the text it is unclear why the 93 patients were excluded (it reads '93 individuals provided had laboratory data'?)

Open door, but 24 weeks of follow up is too short to make any meaningful conclusions in my perspective for a real life data study and this should be acknowledged in a better way than it is currently presented. Longer follow up is required. To present the limitations of the present study as 'some methodological limitations' is an understatement in my perspective and the authors should evaluate that more thoroughly.

Minor comments:

What do the authors mean by 'bidirectional cohort study'?

Reviewer #2: The manuscript by Correa A et al. is well written and structured. The work describes a real-life experience in the use of dolutegravir in a cohort of HIV infected patients.

There are several data in literature describing the use of dolutegravir in clinical practice: I think that the Authors should improve thir discussion comparing the data presented with these other studies.

Moreover, it should be clarified if the adverse events during the treatment with dolutegravir led to the discontinuation of the regimen.

Reviewer #3: The present manuscript evaluated the efficacy and safety of a first line antiretroviral therapy based on dolutegravir. The authors concluded that dolutegravir based combination in first line therapy is a well tolerated and effective drug in the first 24 week follow-up. However, several aspects should be examined before consider it for publication.

In more detail:

Major comments:

1. Patient population:

A number of different patients have been used to assess toxicity and efficacy. This difference makes it difficult to interpret the results.

- In the results section the authors stated that “Of the 562 individuals taking dolutegravir registered on SICLOM, we identified 230 who initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir” However, only 222 were included in the tolerability analysis and 137 for the virological response.

I suggest unifying the population for a better understanding of the results.

- Are there any baseline difference between the population included for tolerability and virological response?

- How many patients included in the virological study had toxicity events?

- What are the efficacy and safety data for the same population studied (f.e: 137)?

2. Immunologic recover:

- Although the baseline value of CD4 of the study population is high, 392, it is noteworthy that the average recovery of CD4 at 24-36 weeks of follow-up is only 50 cells. Given that the virological efficacy is high, what is the explanation for this relatively low immune response?

- The information recorded in figure 2 does not reflect the poor CD4 recovery mentioned along the test.

- Figure 2 represents mean CD4 counts:

o In what population?

o There is a significant increase of CD4 counts from 390 up to 715 at 12 months. However, after that there is a decrease from 715 to 550. What is the explanation for that?

Please clarify the information recorded in figure 2.

3. Virologic failure:

- For the virological analysis only 137 patients has been considered. Among this group the efficacy seems to be similar to that presented in other studies. However, have you been observed any difference when stratified patients according their baseline viral load (<100,000 vs >100,000 copies/mL)?

- There is no resistance analysis for the 15 patient with virological failure. Could you provide any data of resistance?

Minor comments:

- Page 5 line 90: “93 individuals provided had laboratory data….” You men 93 individual provided had not….?

- Page 6 line 100: “the median time using ART was 13.2 months.” If the median time on dolutegravir was 13 months why was the virologic analysis only performed at week 24?

- Table 1. Please specify if data recorded in this table correspond to 230, 222 or 137 patients.

- Table 2. Percentages of adverse events are referred to the 23 individuals who presented any event. This is confusing since it gives the impression that the adverse events rates were very high.

- Page 10 line 173. “….. of ART of 334,000 copies was reduced to a median of 193….” This information s not recorded in the result section.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Aug 31;15(8):e0238052. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238052.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


19 Jun 2020

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Reviewer #1: Correa et al describe their experiences with DTG containing regimens in a patient cohort from Brazil. As highlighted by the authors, the data on efficacy and safety of DTG, also in real life settings, has been extensively studied. This limits the novelty of this manuscript apart from that it is from Brazil, a country where like in the main studies on DTG subtype B is dominant and where DTG has been introduced in Jan 2017. My main comment therefore is that the authors fail to make clear to me what their study and research adds to the already existing clinical information on DTG, both regarding wk24 data and tolerability. Without that, it would add little to the scientific community as lowlevel evidence retrospective analysis of a single center experience unfortunately.

Other major comments: The authors state that no real life data has been published. However, publications on this do exist. For example, there is a recent publication from Brasil which highlights the high potency of DTG in an analysis of 112243 patients who were prescribed DTG or one of to other regimens (Pascom AR JIAS 2019). Also, another study from Brazil on 107647 patients (including 10.5% on DTG) showed a very favorable suppression rate on DTG which was also comparable to the suppression rate in this study (89.1% vs 90.5%). It is unclear to me how the authors can substantiate their statement or how their study differs from these studies.

Reply from authors: Brazil have differents social and economic aspects between the regions of country and within of each region. These aspects affected the treatment response, treatment adherence, health support of patient by local heath system, because this is important that local studies to be carried and the evidence compared with the national reality.

Although it seems to be a retrospective analysis, the authors should state whether it was prospective or retrospective in their methods section.

Reply from authors: The study was a retrospective cohort. Corrected in method.

The in- and exclusion criteria, data collection and the primary outcomes are not (well) defined.

Reply from authors: Included the exclusion criteria and the primary outcome in the article text and reformulated the description of data collection.

The main reason to do the study was to 'aimed to estimate the frequency of individuals with a virologic response by week 24 of antiretroviral treatment and to describe the adverse events of the regimen containing dolutegravir'. In that perspective it is a main limitation that only from a approx 2/3 of total patients had lab data available. From the text it is unclear why the 93 patients were excluded (it reads '93 individuals provided had laboratory data'?)

Reply from authors: For standardization purposes, all viral load and CD4 records of the study participants were collected following the hospital routine. Due to this, is expected not all patients had viral load and CD4 cell count measurements consistently. Of 230 patients, 93 were exclude for don’t had at least two available HIV viral load measurements collected. The data of adverse events was collected from patient records, data that just 8 patients don’t had informed in the medical records.

Open door, but 24 weeks of follow up is too short to make any meaningful conclusions in my perspective for a real life data study and this should be acknowledged in a better way than it is currently presented. Longer follow up is required. To present the limitations of the present study as 'some methodological limitations' is an understatement in my perspective and the authors should evaluate that more thoroughly.

Reply from authors: We consider the main methodological limitations the period of follow-up of 24 weeks, that may have underestimated the effect of DTG regime, but was possible to show that the proportion of virologic response corroborated with the literature findings, although the observation period was short.

Minor comments: What do the authors mean by 'bidirectional cohort study'?

Reply from authors: The study was a retrospective cohort. Corrected in method.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript by Correa A et al. is well written and structured. The work describes a real-life experience in the use of dolutegravir in a cohort of HIV infected patients. There are several data in literature describing the use of dolutegravir in clinical practice: I think that the Authors should improve their discussion comparing the data presented with these other studies. Moreover, it should be clarified if the adverse events during the treatment with dolutegravir led to the discontinuation of the regimen.

Reply from authors: In our findings the discontinuation of the regimen occurred in just 9 of 222 participants (4.1%). The reason on 6 patients was the tuberculosis treatment, disease with high prevalence in the studied region, and the other 3 cases was due to pregnancy, an individual with a psychiatric disease prior to initiating ART, and one for reasons unregistered in the medical records.

Reviewer #3: The present manuscript evaluated the efficacy and safety of a first line antiretroviral therapy based on dolutegravir. The authors concluded that dolutegravir based combination in first line therapy is a well tolerated and effective drug in the first 24 week follow-up. However, several aspects should be examined before consider it for publication. In more detail:

Major comments: 1. Patient population: A number of different patients have been used to assess toxicity and efficacy. This difference makes it difficult to interpret the results. - In the results section the authors stated that “Of the 562 individuals taking dolutegravir registered on SICLOM, we identified 230 who initiated the first antiretroviral regimen containing dolutegravir” However, only 222 were included in the tolerability analysis and 137 for the virological response. I suggest unifying the population for a better understanding of the results.

Reply from authors: For standardization purposes, all viral load and CD4 records of the study participants were collected following the hospital routine. Due to this, is expected not all patients had viral load and CD4 cell count measurements consistently. Of 230 patients, 93 were exclude for don’t had at least two available HIV viral load measurements collected. The data of adverse events was collected from patient records, data that just 8 patients don’t had informed in the medical records. We think to analysis the adverse event with the 137 patients but we considerate that the discrepancy not produce selection bias.

- Are there any baseline difference between the population included for tolerability and virological response?

Reply from authors: Comparing the characteristic of patients, the frequency of males there was statistic difference. We believe that this difference not modify the estimate of virological response, the association with virological response not was significant in our study (p = 0.623 – table 3).

- How many patients included in the virological study had toxicity events? What are the efficacy and safety data for the same population studied (f.e: 137)?

Reply from authors: Of the 137 individuals included in the virological study, 21 had adverse event.

2. Immunologic recover:

- Although the baseline value of CD4 of the study population is high, 392, it is noteworthy that the average recovery of CD4 at 24-36 weeks of follow-up is only 50 cells. Given that the virological efficacy is high, what is the explanation for this relatively low immune response?

Reply from authors: Our results show an increase mean of 50 cells each month. We did correction in the text making clear that is a monthly growth mean rate. Considering 24 weeks the mean of CD4 count of population was 625 cell and in the 36 weeks was 700 cells, approximately. We conclude that the immune response was satisfactory.

- The information recorded in figure 2 does not reflect the poor CD4 recovery mentioned along the test. - Figure 2 represents mean CD4 counts:

o In what population?

Reply from authors: individuals after the first antiretroviral regimen containing Dolutegravir.

o There is a significant increase of CD4 counts from 390 up to 715 at 12 months. However, after that there is a decrease from 715 to 550. What is the explanation for that? Please clarify the information recorded in figure 2.

Reply from authors: Although CD4+ cell count is an important test for monitoring antiretroviral therapy effectiveness and guiding opportunistic infection prophylaxis, values may vary from one measurement to another, fluctuating with diurnal variation and ongoing infections, especially with higher CD4+ counts. Once CD4+ cell count is good, it requires less frequent monitoring and practioners should look at overall measurements. In this regard, the viral load is the most important parameter in treatment monitoring.

3. Virologic failure: - For the virological analysis only 137 patients has been considered. Among this group the efficacy seems to be similar to that presented in other studies. However, have you been observed any difference when stratified patients according their baseline viral load (<100,000 vs >100,000 copies/mL)? - There is no resistance analysis for the 15 patient with virological failure. Could you provide any data of resistance?

Reply from authors: Among the 15 patients with virological failure, six achieved virological control beyond 24 weeeks, it shoul be noted that all of them had baseline viral load >100,000 copies/mL. Despite the fact that antiretroviral regimens with dolutegravir facilitate adherence they do not guarantee it totally, adherence is multifactorial and varies within individuals over time. Even though convenience and tolerability of ART have improved, suboptimal adherence remains common (Bangsberg DR, Kroetz DL, Deeks SG. Adherence-resistance relationships to combination HIV antiretroviral therapy. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2007 May;4(2):65-72; Dorward J, Lessells R, Drain PK et al. Dolutegravir for first-line antiretroviral therapy in low-income and middle-income countries: uncertainties and opportunities for implementation and research. Lancet HIV. 2018 Jul; 5(7): e400–e404). We found that nine patients who did not achieve virological control had suboptimal adherence with irregular follow-up visits . Two of them had genotypic assays with no evidence of resistance mutations and one patient had no genotypic data since viral load was low (<1000 copies/mL).

Minor comments:

- Page 5 line 90: “93 individuals provided had laboratory data….” You men 93 individual provided had not….?

Reply from authors: Done

- Page 6 line 100: “the median time using ART was 13.2 months.” If the median time on dolutegravir was 13 months why was the virologic analysis only performed at week 24?

Reply from authors: Some individuals we considerate the CD4 count and viral load after the investigation period with objective to describe the CD4 cells and load viral behavior in the maximum time.

- Table 1. Please specify if data recorded in this table correspond to 230, 222 or 137 patients.

Reply from authors: Done

Table 2. Percentages of adverse events are referred to the 23 individuals who presented any event. This is confusing since it gives the impression that the adverse events rates were very high.

Reply from authors: Modified in the text of article

Page 10 line 173. “….. of ART of 334,000 copies was reduced to a median of 193….” This information s not recorded in the result section.

Reply from authors: Included in the text of article – “The median viral load of patients at the beginning of ART was 334,000 copies, after 24 weeks decrease to 193 copies”.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Replay from authors to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Luis Menéndez-Arias

10 Aug 2020

Dolutegravir: virologic response and tolerability of initial antiretroviral regimens for adults living with HIV

PONE-D-19-33515R1

Dear Dr. Montarroyos,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Luis Menéndez-Arias, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I have no further comments for the authors on this submitted manuscript. My questions have been addressed.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Dr. Casper Rokx

Acceptance letter

Luis Menéndez-Arias

20 Aug 2020

PONE-D-19-33515R1

Dolutegravir: virologic response and tolerability of initial antiretroviral regimens for adults living with HIV

Dear Dr. Montarroyos:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Luis Menéndez-Arias

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Data

    (RAR)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Replay from authors to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The data underlying the results presented in the study are available as Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES