Highlights
-
•
Lower DOR-resistance in ART-naïve versus ART-experienced individuals with VF.
-
•
DOR-resistance was higher among individuals failing NNRTI-containing regimens.
-
•
DOR use in NNRTI-experienced population should be based on HIV drug resistance data.
Keywords: HIV-1C, Drug resistance mutations, Antiretroviral (ART) experienced, Antiretroviral (ART) naive, Doravirine, Botswana
Abstract
Objectives
There are limited data on the prevalence of doravirine (DOR)-associated drug resistance mutations in people with HIV (PWH) in Botswana. This cross-sectional, retrospective study aimed to explore the prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations among ART-naïve and -experienced PWH in Botswana enrolled in the population-based Botswana Combination Prevention Project (BCPP).
Methods
A total of 6078 HIV-1C pol sequences were analysed for DOR-associated resistance mutations using the Stanford HIV drug resistance database, and their levels were predicted according to the Stanford DRM penalty scores and resistance interpretation. Virologic failure was defined as HIV-1 RNA load (VL) >400 copies/mL.
Results
Among 6078 PWH, 5999 (99%) had known ART status, and 4529/5999 (79%) were on ART at time of sampling. The suppression rate among ART-experienced was 4517/4729 (96%). The overall prevalence of any DOR-associated resistance mutations was 181/1473 (12.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 10.7–14.1]); by ART status: 42/212 (19.8% [95% CI: 14.7–25.4]) among ART-failing individuals (VL ≥400 copies/mL) and 139/1261 (11.0% [95% CI: 9.3–12.9]) among ART-naïve individuals (P < 0.01). Intermediate DOR-associated resistance mutations were observed in 106/1261 (7.8% [95% CI: 6.9–10.1]) in ART-naïve individuals and 29/212 (13.7% [95% CI: 9.4–8.5]) among ART-experienced participants (P < 0.01). High-level DOR-associated resistance mutations were observed in 33/1261 (2.6% [95% CI: 1.8–3.7]) among ART-naïve and 13/212 (6.1% [95% CI: 3.6–10.8]) among ART-failing PWH (P < 0.01). PWH failing ART with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation had high prevalence 13/67 (19.4%) of high-level DOR-associated resistance mutations.
Conclusion
DOR-associated mutations were rare (11.0%) among ART-naive PWH but present in 62.7% of Botswana individuals who failed NNRTI-based ART with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation. Testing for HIV drug resistance should underpin the use of DOR in PWH who have taken first-generation NNRTIs.
1. Introduction
The use of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has had a significant effect on the HIV-1 epidemic, turning it into a chronic manageable disease [1,2]. The available FDA-approved HIV antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) have increased over time and have improved efficacy and toxicity profiles [3,4]. However, the development of HIV drug resistance mutations (DRMs) threatens the success of combination ART (cART) and further limits future HIV treatment options [5,6]. Recently, a rise in the prevalence of HIV DRMs to first-generation ART non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-containing regimens has been observed [7], [8], [9], [10], which has contributed to the use of a dolutegravir (DTG)-based first-line ART regimen. DTG has proven to have high efficacy and a higher genetic barrier of resistance [11]. In June 2016, the Botswana National ART program adopted DTG-based first-line therapy for all people with HIV (PWH) initiating ART [12]. Prior studies have reported the development of HIV variants harbouring DTG resistance, especially in highly treatment-experienced patients with previous raltegravir exposure, and these patients tend to harbour variants with multidrug resistance mutations [13,14]. In addition, higher DTG-associated virologic failure (VF) was observed among NNRTI-experienced individuals harbouring NNRTI-associated resistance [15]. This highlights the need for new ART post-DTG, which lack cross-resistance with the current ARV regimens.
A newly approved third-generation NNRTI, doravirine (DOR), has been shown to be more potent, with distinct resistance patterns compared to the earlier-generation NNRTIs [16]. DOR has a better safety profile and has a long half-life of about 12–21 h, enabling it to be dosed once a day [17,18]. In vitro studies have shown that DOR is efficacious in the presence of most common reverse transcriptase resistance mutations, K103N and Y181C, found in NNRTI-experienced individuals [16,19]. To extend these in vitro studies, it is important to evaluate whether DOR can maintain its potency in a population with a high prevalence of the K103N and Y181C mutations, such as PWH in Botswana. We investigate the prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations in ART-naïve and ART-experienced PWH in Botswana, where NNRTIs were part of first-line ART regimens from 2002 to 2016. These data could guide policy on DOR use in the Botswana ART program and other countries where HIV-1 subtype C predominates and have similar ART experiences.
2. Methods and materials
2.1. Study population
PWH aged 16–64 years in 30 communities in northern, central and southern parts of Botswana participated in the Botswana Combination Prevention Project (BCPP) between 2013 and 2018 [20]. The BCPP impact evaluation survey enrolled 16 years or older individuals, regardless of HIV or ART status, who were residing in a random sample of approximately 20% of households among 30 communities at study entry (baseline household survey [BHS]) into a longitudinal cohort (annual household survey [AHS]) that was followed for 30 months as described elsewhere [20]. In addition to 15 intervention communities (15 villages that received preventative measures such as three-drug ARV to all people with viral loads of 10 000 copies/mL and/or CD4 cells ≤500 to track HIV incidence), PWH who were receiving ART in local clinics were recruited to provide a one-time blood sample for HIV sequencing and metadata but were excluded on the longitudinal cohort. For this analysis, samples and data from all PWH in both the AHS cohort and from the clinics were used.
2.2. Selection of study participants
In this analysis, we included PWH who were either ART-naïve or ART-experienced, who had HIV-1 viral load (VL) measurement at the first BCPP study visit and had available HIV-1 sequence. HIV-1 VL of participants was quantified using Abbott m2000sp/rt assay (Wiesbaden, Germany) with a range of 40–10 000 000 copies/mL [21]. Among participants who were on ART, some were classified as having VF (HIV-1 VL >400 copies/mL, as per current Botswana's HIV treatment guidelines definition) [22]. Participants with HIV-1 VL ≤400 copies/mL were regarded as virally suppressed (Fig. 1).
Figure 1.
Study schema for the participants used to determine the prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations.
2.3. Near full-length HIV genotyping
Both HIV-1 proviral DNA sequences and viral RNA sequences were generated by a long-range HIV genotyping protocol described elsewhere [21,23]. The next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed by the BioPolimers Facility at Harvard Medical School (https://genome.med.harvard.edu/) and through collaboration with PANGEA HIV consortium [21] at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (Cambridge, UK; http:// www.sanger.ac.uk/) with high-sequencing coverage using Illumina platforms MiSeq and HiSeq [21].
2.4. HIV-1 subtyping
Generated near full-length HIV-1 sequences were subtyped by online tools REGA version 3 [24] and COMET [25].
2.5. Analysis of HIV-1 drug resistance mutations
DOR-associated resistance mutations were identified according to the lists of surveillance drug resistance mutations and major drug resistance mutations (DRMs) in the Stanford University HIV Drug Resistance Database algorithm 9.1 (https://hivdb.stanford.edu/hivdb/by-sequences/). The level of DOR resistance was predicted according to the Stanford HIV DRM penalty scores and resistance interpretation (individuals with low-level, intermediate-level and high-level resistance were considered to have drug resistance). Only intermediate and high-level specific DOR-associated resistance mutations were reported. The list of mutations assessed are shown in Table 1.
Table 1.
List of DOR-associated mutations assess, their penalty scores and resistance level
| Mutations | DOR penalty score | Resistance level |
|---|---|---|
| V106M | 30 | Intermediate |
| Y188F | 30 | Intermediate |
| G190Q | 30 | Intermediate |
| L234I | 45 | Intermediate |
| V106A | 60 | High-level resistance |
| Y188L | 60 | High-level resistance |
| G190E | 60 | High-level resistance |
| F227C | 60 | High-level resistance |
| F227I | 60 | High-level resistance |
| F227L | 60 | High-level resistance |
| F227V | 60 | High-level resistance |
| M230L | 60 | High-level resistance |
| Y318F | 60 | High-level resistance |
The prevalence of DOR-associated resistance was estimated in the following groupings: (i) overall; (ii) ART-naïve individuals; (iii) virologic failure (VF) on ART; and (iv) viral suppression (HIV-1 RNA ≤400 copies/mL) on ART. The DOR prevalence was compared between groups (ii) and (iii), as well as between groups (iii) and (iv). The prevalence of specific DOR-associated resistance mutations was estimated within each group and compared among groups. We also assessed the presence of DOR-associated resistance mutations in a subset of participants on NNRTI-based regimens with at least one major efavirenz (EFV)/nevirapine (NVP)-associated resistance mutation (L100I, K101E/P, K103N/S, V106A/M, Y181C/I/V, Y188L/C/H, G190A/S/E and M230L).
2.6. Apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC)-induced hypermutations
Guanine-to-adenine transitions (G-to-A) apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC)-induced hypermutations were screened in the viral sequences using the Hypermut program available in Los Alamos National Laboratory HIV Database tools (http://www.hiv.lanl.gov/) [26]. Adjustment for hypermutations was performed [23] using the HIV-1C consensus sequence as a reference. The adjusted hypermutations were accounted for using the cumulative number of mutations across the length of the sequences from the analysed HIV-1 pol gene. The adjustment for hypermutations was performed before the drug resistance analysis, as a part of quality control. HIV DRMs identified as hypermutations were not included in the prevalence of DOR resistance in this study.
2.7. Statistical analysis
Patient demographics between ART-naïve and individuals on ART experiencing VF were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables such as plasma log10 HIV-1 VL and χ2 test for categorical variables such as sex. The prevalence of mutations was estimated with 95% confidence using the binomial exact method for each group. The prevalence of mutations among ART-naïve group and individuals experiencing VF on ART was compared using comparison of proportions test. The potential association between the prevalence of HIV-DRM and sex, age, EFV use, NVP use, log10 HIV-1 VL was assessed by univariate logistic regression (adjusted for clustering by community) in NNRTI-failing individuals with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation for detection of DOR-associated resistance mutations. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All the statistical analysis was done using STATA version 14 software.
2.8. Ethical considerations
The BCPP study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Botswana IRB (HRDC), and it is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01965470). All recruited participants provided written informed consent for participation.
3. Results
3.1. Participants characteristics
The median age at enrolment of the participants included in this analysis was 34 years (interquartile range [Q1, Q3: 27.1, 42.0]), and study participants were mostly women (66%). Among 6078 participants, 5999 (99%) had known ART status (either ‘on ART’ or ‘ART-naive’). The majority of these participants, 4738 (79%), were on ART, whereas 1261 (21%) were ART-naïve at the time of sampling. Among 4738 participants, a total of 4729 had HIV-1 VL data; 4517 (96%) were virally suppressed (HIV-1 VL ≤400 copies/mL). The median HIV-1 VL among ART-naïve individuals (4.3 [Q1, Q3: 3.5,4.8] log10 copies/mL) was similar to the median HIV-1 VL among individuals experiencing VF on ART (4.0; [Q1, Q3: 3.2, 4.7] log10 copies/mL; P = 0.07; not shown). The study entry demographics of BCPP participants stratified by HIV-1 VL groups are in Table 2: females, older participants (>29 years) and those on ART were most likely to have HIV-1 VL< 400 copies/mL.
Table 2.
General characteristics of study participants included
| Total N = 5990 (%), median (Q1, Q3) | Viral suppression ON ART n = 4517, median (Q1, Q3) | Individuals with virologic failure on ART N = 212, median (Q1, Q3) | ART-naïve n = 1261, median (Q1, Q3) | P values | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | n = 4516 | ||||
| Females | 4243 (71) | 3265 (73) | 137 (65) | 841 (67) | <0.01 |
| 1746 (29) | 1251 (27) | 75 (35) | 420 (33) | ||
| Males | |||||
| Age (y) | n = 4516 | ||||
| <30 | 1018 (17) | 509 (11) | 73 (34) | 436 (35) | <0.01 |
| 30–39 | 1964 (33) | 1459 (32) | 74 (35) | 431 (34) | |
| 40–49 | 1767 (29) | 1484 (33) | 39 (18) | 244 (19) | |
| 50+ | 1240 (21) | 1064 (24) | 26 (12) | 150 (12) | |
| Geographical region | |||||
| North | 1490 (25) | 1223 (27) | 53 (25) | 214 (17) | <0.01 |
| South | 1745 (29) | 1185 (26) | 70 (33) | 490 (39) | |
| Central | 2755 (46) | 2109 (47) | 89 (42) | 557 (44) | |
| Year of sampling | |||||
| 2013–2015 | 3368 (56) | 2471 (55) | 97 (46) | 800 (63) | <0.01 |
| 2016–2018 | 2622 (44) | 2046 (45) | 115 (54) | 461 (37) | |
| Median log10 VL copies/ML | 1.6 (1.6, 2.6) | 1.6 (1.6, 1.6) | 4.0 (3.2, 4.7) | 4.3 (3.5, 4.8) | <0.01a |
| Known ART regimens (N = 4318) | n = 4161 | n = 157 | n/a | <0.01b | |
| Non-NNRTI | 584 (13) | 534 (13) | 50 (32) | ||
| EFV | 2455 (59) | 82 (52) | |||
| NVP | 1197 (28) | 1172 (28) | 25 (16) |
ART, antiretroviral therapy; EFV, efavirenz-based therapy; IQR, 95% confidence intervals; n, population size; non-NNRTI, other ART therapy except non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, non-NNRTI-lopinavir, and dolutegravir-containing regimens; NVP, nevirapine-containing regimen, 1672 with missing ART regimen information.
P values obtained using Wilcoxon rank-sum test, while other P values were from χ2 test.
P values obtained from viral suppression and individuals with virologic failure on ART, numbers in brackets are percentages within columns.
3.2. Overall prevalence of DOR-associated resistance, intermediate and high-level resistance levels with specific mutations among ART-naïve and individuals experiencing VF on ART
A total of 1473 participants with viremia were analysed for DOR-associated resistance mutations. Of these, 1261 were ART-naïve, whereas 212 were individuals experiencing VF on ART with HIV-1 VL >400 copies/mL. The overall prevalence of participants with DOR-associated resistance mutations was 181/1473 (12.3% [95% CI: 10.7–14.1]). Higher overall prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations was reported among individuals experiencing VF on ART, which was 42/212 (19.8% [95% CI: 14.7–25.4]) compared to 139/1261 (11.0% [95% CI: 9.3–12.9]) in the ART-naïve population (P < 0.01). A majority of the participants harboured intermediate DOR-associated resistance mutations with a lower prevalence of 106/1261 (7.8% [95% CI: 6.9–10.1]) in ART-naïve individuals and 29/212 (13.7% [95% CI: 9.4-19.1]) among ART-experienced participants (P < 0.01). The prevalence of high-level DOR-associated resistance mutations was 33/1261 (2.6% [95% CI: 1.8–3.7]) among ART-naïve individuals and 13/212 (6.1% [95% CI: 3.6–10.8]) among individuals experiencing VF on ART (P < 0.01). Of the two intermediate DOR-associated mutations reported in the study (V106M and Y188F), V106M was the most predominant mutation, 12/1473 (0.8%), and was common among individuals experiencing VF on ART 7/212 (3.3%) (P < 0.01). Seven high-level DOR-associated mutations predicted were V106A, Y188L, F227L and M230L, which occurred in 2/1473 (0.14%) participants, F227C and Y318F in 1/1473 (0.07%) each and the G190E 33/1473 (2.2%), which was the most predominant mutation. The prevalence of specific DOR-associated resistance mutations stratified by ART groups are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3.
Overall prevalence of doravirine-associated resistance, intermediate and high-level resistance levels with specific mutations among ART-naïve and individuals with virologic failure on ART
| Resistance levels | Total N = 1473 (%) | ART-naïve N = 1261 (%) | Individuals with VF on ART N = 212 (%) | P values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall resistance | 181 (12.3) | 139 (11.0) | 42 (19.8) | <0.01 |
| Intermediate | 135 (9.2) | 106 (8.4) | 29 (13.7) | <0.01 |
| High-level resistance | 46 (3.1) | 33 (2.6) | 13 (6.1) | <0.01 |
| Specific intermediate mutations | ||||
| V106M | 12 (0.8) | 5 (0.4) | 7 (3.3) | <0.01 |
| Y188F | 2 (0.14) | 0 | 2(0.9) | NA |
| Specific high-level mutations | ||||
| V106A | 2 (0.14) | 0 | 2 (0.9) | NA |
| Y188L | 2 (0.14) | 0 | 2 (0.9) | NA |
| G190E | 33 (2.2) | 30 (2.4) | 3 (1.4) | 0.36 |
| F227C | 1(0.07) | 0 | 1(0.5) | NA |
| F227L | 2 (0.14) | 1 (0.08) | 1(0.5) | 0.131 |
| M230L | 2(0.14) | 0 | 2 (0.9) | NA |
| Y318F | 1(0.07) | 0 | 1 (0.5) | NA |
NOTE: P values from comparison of proportions of mutations among ART-naïve and individuals with VF on ART. All mutations reported among individuals with VF on ART were from individuals failing NNRTI with at least one major EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation. Note that none of the individuals had DOR-associated resistance in the absence of EFV/NVP resistance associated mutations.
ART, antiretroviral therapy; NA, not applicable; VF, virologic failure.
3.3. Overall prevalence of mutations associated with intermediate and high-level DOR resistance among individuals failing NNRTI-based ART with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation
Amongst individuals experiencing VF on ART with detectable HIV-1 VL >400 copies/mL, 67/212 (31.6% [95% CI: 25.4–38.3]) were failing ART with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation. A total of 42/67 (62.7% [95% CI: 50.0–74.2]) had a combination of DOR- and EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutations. The overall prevalence of intermediate DOR-associated resistance mutations was 29/67 (43.3% [95% CI: 31.2–56.0]) in this group, whereas the high-level DOR resistance was reported in 13/67 (19.4% [95% CI: 10.8–30.9]). Mutation V106M (7/67:10.4%) was the most predominant intermediate mutation, followed by Y188F. In the high-level resistance group, G190E was the most prevalent at 3/67 (4.5%), followed by equal proportions of V106A and M230L mutations at 2/67 (3.0%), and, lastly, F227C, F227L and Y318F, all occurring at a prevalence of 1/67 (1.4%) each. Individuals without EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutations had no DOR-associated resistance. Among 67 participants with at least one major EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation, 38 had dual resistance with at least one major NRTI-associated resistance mutation. The prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations was higher in this group: 29/38 (76%) overall prevalence, 21 (55%) intermediate and 8 (21.1%) high-level resistance.
3.4. Association of DOR-associated resistance mutations among individuals failing NNRTI-based ART with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation
In the univariate logistic regression, among NNRTI failing participants with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation, sex, age, EFV use, NVP use and median HIV-1 VL log10 copies/mL were not associated with DOR-associated resistance mutations in a small population of 67 participants (Table 4).
Table 4.
Doravirine-associated resistance mutations in participants on NNRTI-based regimens with at least one EFV/NVP-associated mutations
| Characteristics | DOR-associated resistance mutations, n (%) |
Univariate analysis |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present n = 24 (%) | Absent n = 43 (%) | Odds ratio; 95% CI | P values | |
| Sex | ||||
| Males | 5 (21) | 18 (42) | 1.0 (ref) | 0.07 |
| Females | 19 (79) | 25 (58) | 0.37; 0.13–1.1 | |
| Age | ||||
| <30 years | 11 (46) | 16 (37) | 1.0 (ref) | 0.47 |
| >30 years | 13 (54) | 27 (63) | 0.70; 0.27–1.8 | |
| EFV in regimen | 8 (33) | 11 (26) | 1.63; 0.38–7.0 | 0.51 |
| NVP in regimen | 4 (17) | 9 (21) | 0.61; 0.14–2.6 | 0.51 |
| HIV-1 VL log10 copies/mL, median (IQR) | 4.2 (3.5–4.6) | 3.5 (3.2–4.7) | 1.38; 0.84–2.3 | 0.21 |
NOTE: ART regimen information was not available for 35 participants.
ART, antiretroviral therapy; EFV, efavirenz; CI, confidence intervals; DOR, doravirine; IQR, interquartile range; NNRTI, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors; NVP, nevirapine; n, population size; VL, viral load.
3.5. Overall prevalence of mutations associated with intermediate and high-level DOR resistance among individuals with viral suppression and virologic failure (VF) on ART
We also compared the prevalence of HIV-DRMs associated with DOR resistance among individuals with viral suppression on ART (HIV-1 VL ≤400 copies/mL) compared to individuals experiencing VF on ART. The overall prevalence of mutations associated with DOR resistance was similar among individuals with viral suppression on ART, 910/4517 (20.1% [95% CI: 19.0–21.3]), compared to 42/212 (19.8% [95% CI: 14.7–25.8]) among those experiencing VF on ART (P = 0.92). The prevalence of intermediate DOR resistance was 735/4517 (16.3% [95% CI: 15.2–17.4]) among individuals with viral suppression on ART vs 29/212 (13.7% [95% CI:9.4–19.1]) among individuals with VF on ART (P = 0.32) and high-level DOR resistance was 175/4517 (3.9% [95% CI: 3.3–4.5]) and 13/212 (6.1% [95% CI: 3.3–10.3]) among individuals with viral suppression and those experiencing VF on ART, respectively (P = 0.11), were not statistically different in the ART-experienced population. Mutations reported in the two groups were G190E (161/4729:3.4%), V106M (21/4729:0.4%), F227L (7/4729: 0.15%), Y188L (6/4729: 0.13%), Y318F (5/4729: 0.11%), V106A and M230L were 4/4729 (0.08%) each and F227C (4/4729: 0.04%). The prevalence of DOR-associated mutations is stratified by individuals with viral suppression and VF on ART in Supplementary Table S1.
Of all the 1091 participants with DOR-associated resistance, 230 (21.1% [95% CI: 18.7–23.6]) are likely to have specific DOR-associated resistance mutations and 861 (78.9% [95% CI: 76.4–81.3]) with nonspecific DOR-associated resistance mutations. Among 861 with nonspecific DOR-associated resistance mutations, 850 (98.7% [95% CI: 97.7–99.4]) and 11 (1.3% [95% CI: 0.6–2.3]) had intermediate and high-level DOR-associated resistance, respectively (P < 0.01).
4. Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to use a large data set with a good representation of the Botswana population to assess the prevalence of mutations associated with DOR resistance among PWH. The reported overall prevalence of DOR-associated resistance was 12.3% higher than 1.62% predicted in the Polish study [27]; however, this prevalence was lower compared to 56.4% [28] and 62% [29] reported in other studies. The difference in the prevalence of DOR-associated resistance across studies may be attributed to the use of different genotyping thresholds to detect DOR-associated resistance mutations, different HIV subtypes, different HIV treatment guidelines in the different studies, and different HIV Stanford algorithm versions used in the analysis.
A significantly lower overall prevalence of DOR-associated resistance was reported among ART-naïve compared to individuals experiencing VF on ART (P < 0.01), confirming the opportunity for the use of DOR-containing regimens among PWH who are ART-naïve in Botswana. However, the prevalence of DOR-associated resistance among ART-naïve individuals (11.0%: 139/1261) in this study was statistically higher than the 2.9% prevalence of other NNRTI (first-generation)-associated resistance mutations previously reported in the BCPP study [21] (31/1069, P < 0.01). Some studies reported higher resistance to other NNRTI-containing regimens when compared to DOR. A study from Greece, Italy and France reported a lower prevalence of DOR-associated resistance (1.4%) compared to first-generation NNRTI-associated resistance (EFV and NVP; 4.3%), with no association between HIV-1 subtype and presence of DOR-associated resistance mutations [30]. In the HIV-1C settings, the lower prevalence of DOR-associated resistance mutations was reported at 4.7% compared to 9.4% NVP/EFV-associated resistance mutations among ART-naïve population [31].
Our study reports the prevalence of ‘archived’ DOR-associated resistance mutations of 20.1% among individuals with viral suppression on ART, similarly to those with VF on ART. Although the predominant prevalence (62.7%) of DOR-associated resistance mutations was among participants failing NNRTI-based therapy in our findings, this was lower when compared to 84.8% reported in a South African study [31] but higher compared to 42% reported in European studies [32,33]. The prevalence of mutations associated with high-level DOR resistance was low among NNRTI-experienced patients in non-B vs. B HIV-1 subtypes in Italy, with higher prevalence in HIV-1 subtype C; furthermore, the presence of mutation Y188L was associated with HIV-1C subtype [33]. Our results together with other studies support the notion that some DOR-associated resistance mutations are HIV-1 subtype-specific, e.g., intermediate DOR-associated resistance mutation V106M. There is evidence that individuals on DOR harbour distinct resistance profiles of HIV-DRMs compared to other NNRTI regimens [30,34]. Furthermore, there is still a need to understand the mechanisms of DOR-associated resistance, especially among individuals who harbour DOR-associated resistance without specific DOR-associated resistance mutations. The presence of DOR resistance in individuals without specific DOR-associated resistance mutations was observed in phenotypic studies [19,34]; this shows that there could be other mutations that play a part in DOR resistance that are yet to be described.
The high-level DOR-associated resistance mutations G190E, F227L and Y318F all showed a similar prevalence among the three groups: ART-naive, individuals with VF, and individuals on ART with viral suppression. The similar prevalence of these mutations across the three groups highlights the importance of gaining a better understanding of their mechanisms, particularly in ART-naïve and ART-suppressed individuals. It was difficult to determine if the presence of these mutations in ART-naïve individuals was due to undisclosed ART use in the BCPP cohort [35] or to transmitted DRM circulating in the Botswana population [9]. A study conducted in 23/24 individuals with baseline first-generation NNRTI-associated resistance mutations reveals that switching to DOR/lamivudine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) leads to viral suppression within 48 weeks of follow-up [36]. These findings suggest that some of the first-generation NNRTI resistance mutations do not have an effect on DOR activity.
EFV has been associated with an increased risk of developing high-level DOR-associated resistance mutations [33], but our findings are discordant with these reports. Although we report no association of EFV use with the presence of DOR-associated resistance, the cohort used had a relatively low number of individuals who were failing NNRTI with at least one EFV/NVP-associated resistance mutation experiencing VF; therefore, our study was not powered to reveal the effect of EFV/NVP-associated resistance in the development of DOR-associated resistance mutations. Nonetheless, our results still highlight the importance of genotyping before initiation of a DOR-containing regimen among individuals with previous NNRTI exposure.
Because our study had a small number of participants on DTG-based ART, our findings cannot reveal whether DOR can be used as an alternative drug for DTG-failing participants with multi-resistance mutations. As a result, future studies should investigate DOR-associated resistance mutations in DTG-failing participants with multi-drug resistance.
In conclusion, the prevalence of intermediate and high-level DOR-associated resistance mutations was low among ART-naïve and ART-failing individuals, with the ART-failing group showing a statistically higher prevalence compared to the ART-naïve group. Specifically, a higher prevalence was observed among PWH with EFV/NVP-associated resistance experiencing VF. Our results support the use of DOR among ART-naïve patients in Botswana; however, we highly recommend HIV drug resistance testing among NNRTI-failing individuals before DOR-based regimen initiation.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None declared.
Acknowledgments
Funding
The BCPP Impact Evaluation was funded by the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, cooperative agreements U01 GH000447 and U2G GH001911). The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies. OTB was supported by the Fogarty International Center (grant no. 5D43TW009610). SG and WTC were partially supported by H3ABioNet. H3ABioNet is supported by the National Institutes of Health Common Fund [U41HG006941]. H3ABioNet is an initiative of the Human Health and Heredity in Africa Consortium (H3Africa) programme of the African Academy of Science (AAS). SM, NK and OTB were supported by the Trials of Excellence in Southern Africa (TESA III), which is part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union (grant CSA2020NoE-3104 TESAIII CSA2020NoE). SM, SG, WTC and NOM are partly supported through the Sub-Saharan African Network for TB/HIV Research Excellence (SANTHE 2.0) from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-033558). PANGEA-HIV is funded primarily by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMFG). S.L. is supported by National Institutes of Health Common Fund [K24 AI131928]. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of AAS, NEPAD Agency, Wellcome Trust or the U.K. government. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and decision to publish, or in the preparation of the manuscript.
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Data availability
All relevant data are within the paper and the Supplemental Notes, Figures and Tables. HIV-1 sequences are available on request through the PANGEA consortium (www.pangea-hiv.org). BCPP data is available at: https://data.cdc.gov/Global-Health/Botswana-Combination-Prevention-Project-BCPP-Publi/qcw5-4m9q.
Acknowledgements
We thank all the study participants. We thank the BCPP study team for their contribution to this study. We thank the Ministry of Health and Wellness, Botswana Harvard AIDS Institute Partnership, CDC Botswana and US CDC for their excellent support and contributions to the study. We acknowledge the contributions of the PANGEA-HIV Consortium Steering Committee (Helen Ayles, Lucie Abeler-Dörner, David Bonsall, Rory Bowden, Max Essex, Sarah Fidler, Christophe Fraser, Kate Grabowski, Tanya Golubchik, Ravindra Gupta, Richard Hayes, Joshua Herbeck, Joseph Kagaayi, Pontiano Kaleebu, Jairam Lingappa, Vladimir Novitsky, Sikhulile Moyo, Deenan Pillay, Thomas Quinn, Andrew Rambaut, Oliver Ratmann, Janet Seeley, Deogratius Ssemwanga, Frank Tanser and Maria Wawer) for generation of HIV sequences used for this paper.
Editor by Prof Guido Antonelli
Footnotes
Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.jgar.2022.08.008.
Appendix. Supplementary materials
References
- 1.Viswanathan S, Detels R, Mehta SH, Macatangay BJ, Kirk GD, Jacobson LP. Level of adherence and HIV RNA suppression in the current era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) AIDS Behav. 2015;19:601–611. doi: 10.1007/s10461-014-0927-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Chouraya C, Ashburn K, Khumalo P, Mpango L, Mthethwa N, Machekano R, et al. Association of antiretroviral drug regimen with viral suppression in HIV-positive children on antiretroviral therapy in Eswatini. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2019;38:835–839. doi: 10.1097/inf.0000000000002347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Gulick RM. New HIV drugs: 2018 and beyond. 10.1097/coh.0000000000000478. [DOI]
- 4.Clayden P. Dolutegravir preconception signal: time is up for shoddy surveillance. https://i-base.info/htb/34459. [Accessed 08 June 2021].
- 5.Bertagnolio S, Perno CF, Vella S, Pillay D. The impact of HIV drug resistance on the selection of first- and second-line ART in resource-limited settings. J Infect Dis. 2013;207(Suppl. 2):S45–S48. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jit121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.World Health Organization. HIV drug resistance report 2012. https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/drugresistance/report2012/en/; 2012. [Accessed 17 June 2021].
- 7.Hong SY, Jonas A, DeKlerk M, Shiningavamwe A, Desta T, Badi A, et al. Population-based surveillance of HIV drug resistance emerging on treatment and associated factors at sentinel antiretroviral therapy sites in Namibia. Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;68:463–471. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Rutstein SE, Chen JS, Nelson JAE, Phiri S, Miller WC, Hosseinipour MC. High rates of transmitted NNRTI resistance among persons with acute HIV infection in Malawi: implications for first-line dolutegravir scale-up. AIDS Res Ther. 2019;16:5. doi: 10.1186/s12981-019-0220-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Rowley CF, MacLeod IJ, Maruapula D, Lekoko B, Gaseitsiwe S, Mine M, et al. Sharp increase in rates of HIV transmitted drug resistance at antenatal clinics in Botswana demonstrates the need for routine surveillance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:1361–1366. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv500. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.World Health Organization. Guidelines for managing advanced HIV disease and rapid initiation of antiretroviral therapy. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550062; 2017 [accessed 10 March 2020]. [PubMed]
- 11.Mondi A, Cozzi-Lepri A, Tavelli A, Rusconi S, Vichi F, Ceccherini-Silberstein F, et al. Effectiveness of dolutegravir-based regimens as either first-line or switch antiretroviral therapy: data from the Icona cohort. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22:e25227. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.World Health Organization. Updated recommendations on first-line and second-line antiretroviral regimens and post-exposure prophylaxis and recommendations on early infant diagnosis of HIV: interim guidance. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/273632/WHO-CDS-HIV-18.18-eng.pdf; 2018. [Accessed 18 July 2021.]
- 13.Seatla KK, Avalos A, Moyo S, Mine M, Diphoko T, Mosepele M, et al. Four-class drug-resistant HIV-1 subtype C in a treatment experienced individual on dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy in Botswana. AIDS. 2018;32:1899–1902. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Seatla KK, Maruapula D, Choga WT, Ntsipe T, Mathiba N, Mogwele M, et al. HIV-1 subtype C drug resistance mutations in heavily treated patients failing integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based regimens in Botswana. Viruses. 2021:13. doi: 10.3390/v13040594. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Rugemalila J, Kalluvya S. A heavily treated HIV-1 infected patient with multiclass drug resistance: a case report and review of management challenges in settings with a limited formulary. Med Case Rep. 2021;7 https://medical-case-reports.imedpub.com/a-heavily-treated-hiv1-infected-patient-with-multiclass-drug-resistance-a-case-report-and-review-of-management-challenges-in-setti.pdf [Google Scholar]
- 16.Feng M, Sachs NA, Xu M, Grobler J, Blair W, Hazuda DJ, et al. Doravirine suppresses common nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-associated mutants at clinically relevant concentrations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:2241–2247. doi: 10.1128/aac.02650-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Molina JM, Squires K, Sax PE, Cahn P, Lombaard J, DeJesus E, et al. Doravirine versus ritonavir-boosted darunavir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 (DRIVE-FORWARD): 48-week results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet HIV. 2018;5:e211–e220. doi: 10.1016/s2352-3018(18)30021-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Orkin C, Squires KE, Molina JM, Sax PE, Wong WW, Sussmann O, et al. Doravirine/lamivudine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is non-inferior to efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naive adults with human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection: week 48 results of the DRIVE-AHEAD Trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68:535–544. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Asante-Appiah E, Lai J, Wan H, Yang D, Martin EA, Sklar P, et al. Impact of HIV-1 resistance-associated mutations on susceptibility to doravirine: analysis of real-world clinical isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2021;65 doi: 10.1128/aac.01216-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Makhema J, Wirth KE, Pretorius Holme M, Gaolathe T, Mmalane M, Kadima E, et al. Universal testing, expanded treatment, and incidence of HIV infection in Botswana. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:230–242. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1812281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Moyo S, Gaseitsiwe S, Zahralban-Steele M, Maruapula D, Nkhisang T, Mokaleng B, et al. Low rates of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor drug resistance in Botswana. AIDS. 2019;33:1073–1082. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002166. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Ministry of Health. Botswana integrated HIV clinical care guidelines 2016. https://www.childrenandaids.org/Botswana_Integrated-HIV-Clinical-Care-Guidelines_2016. [Accessed 23 July 2021].
- 23.Novitsky V, Zahralban-Steele M, McLane MF, Moyo S, van Widenfelt E, Gaseitsiwe S, et al. Long-range HIV genotyping using viral RNA and proviral DNA for analysis of HIV drug resistance and HIV clustering. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53:2581–2592. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00756-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Pineda-Peña A-C, Faria NR, Imbrechts S, Libin P, Barroso Abecasis A, Deforche K, et al. Automated subtyping of HIV-1 genetic sequences for clinical and surveillance purposes: performance evaluation of the new REGA version 3 and seven other tools. Infect Genet Evol. 2013;19:337–348. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2013.04.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Struck D, Lawyer G, Ternes A-M, Schmit J-C, Bercoff DP. COMET: adaptive context-based modeling for ultrafast HIV-1 subtype identification. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:e144. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Rose PP, Korber BT. Detecting hypermutations in viral sequences with an emphasis on G –>A hypermutation. Bioinformatics. 2000;16:400–401. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/16.4.400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Scheibe K, Urbańska A, Jakubowski P, Hlebowicz M, Bociaga-Jasik M, Raczynska A, et al. Low prevalence of doravirine-associated resistance mutations among polish human immunodeficiency-1 (HIV-1)-infected patients. Antivir Ther. 2021;26:69–78. doi: 10.1177/13596535211043044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Sun Z, Lan Y, Liang S, Wang J, Ni M, Zhang X, et al. Prevalence of doravirine cross-resistance in HIV-infected adults who failed first-line ART in China, 2014–18. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77:1119–1124. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkac016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.El Bouzidi K, Datir RP, Kwaghe V, Roy S, Frampton D, Breuer J, et al. Deep sequencing of HIV-1 reveals extensive subtype variation and drug resistance after failure of first-line antiretroviral regimens in Nigeria. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77:474–482. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkab385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Soulié C, Santoro M, Charpentier C, Storto A, Paraskevis D, Di Carlo D, et al. Rare occurrence of doravirine resistance-associated mutations in HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;74 doi: 10.1093/jac/dky464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Steegen K, Moorhouse M, Wensing AMJ, Venter WDF, Hans L. Is there a role for doravirine in African HIV treatment programmes? A large observational resistance study in South Africa. J Int AIDS Soc. 2021;24:e25706. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25706. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Soulie C, Santoro MM, Storto A, Abdi B, Charpentier C, Armenia D, et al. Prevalence of doravirine-associated resistance mutations in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-experienced patients from two large databases in France and Italy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020;75:1026–1030. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkz553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Sterrantino G, Borghi V, Callegaro AP, Bruzzone B, Saladini F, Maggiolo F, et al. Prevalence of predicted resistance to doravirine in HIV-1-positive patients after exposure to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;53:515–519. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Saladini F, Giammarino F, Hosseini BA, Giannini A, Boccuto A, Dragoni F, et al. In vitro cross-resistance to doravirine in a panel of HIV-1 clones harbouring multiple NNRTI resistance mutations. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2021;76:130–134. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkaa401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Moyo S, Gaseitsiwe S, Powis KM, Holme MP, Mohammed T, Zahralban-Steele M, et al. Undisclosed antiretroviral drug use in Botswana: implication for national estimates. AIDS. 2018;32:1543–1546. doi: 10.1097/qad.0000000000001862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Johnson M, Kumar P, Molina J-M, Rizzardini G, Cahn P, Bickel M, et al. Switching to doravirine/lamivudine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) maintains HIV-1 virologic suppression through 48 weeks: results of the DRIVE-SHIFT Trial. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019;81 doi: 10.1097/qai.0000000000002056. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
All relevant data are within the paper and the Supplemental Notes, Figures and Tables. HIV-1 sequences are available on request through the PANGEA consortium (www.pangea-hiv.org). BCPP data is available at: https://data.cdc.gov/Global-Health/Botswana-Combination-Prevention-Project-BCPP-Publi/qcw5-4m9q.