Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
    Int J STD AIDS. 2012 May;23(5):316-8. doi: 10.1258/ijsa.2011.011337.

    HIV-1 drug resistance at virological failure versus immunological failure among patients failing first-line antiretroviral therapy in a resource-limited setting.

    Source

    Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand. somnuek.sun@mahidol.ac.th

    Abstract

    Antiretroviral treatment failure has been defined by immunological failure (IF) in some resource-limited settings whereas defining by virological failure (VF) has been widely used in developed countries. There is limited comparison of the levels of HIV-1 drug resistance between using VF and IF for the diagnosis of treatment failure. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among HIV-1-infected patients failing first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART). Of 95 patients, median CD4 and HIV-1 RNA were 158 cells/mm(3) and 10,200 copies/mL, respectively. Patients in the IF group had higher HIV-1 RNA than those in VF group (23,820 versus 9510 copies/mL, P = 0.008). Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-, non-NRTI- and protease inhibitor-resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were observed in 57.9%, 94.7% and 5.3%, respectively. Q151M, a multidrug RAM, was more commonly observed in the IF group (14.8% versus 2.9%, P = 0.032). Using IF to diagnose treatment failure is associated with higher HIV-1 RNA levels and a higher rate of Q151M, which can limit the options for second-line ART.

    PMID:
    22648883
    [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

      Supplemental Content

      Icon for HighWire

      Save items

      Recent activity

      Your browsing activity is empty.

      Activity recording is turned off.

      Turn recording back on

      See more...
      Write to the Help Desk