4.4 Article

Characterization of determinants of genotypic and phenotypic resistance to enfuvirtide in baseline and on-treatment HIV-1 isolates

期刊

AIDS
卷 18, 期 13, 页码 1787-1794

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00002030-200409030-00007

关键词

enfuvirtide; T-20; fusion inhibition; gp41; resistance testing; heptad repeat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Enfuvirtide (ENF) is the first of a novel class of drugs that block HIV gp41-mediated viral fusion to host cells. Viruses with mutations at positions 36-38 in HIV-1 gp41 and/or reduced susceptibility to ENF have been selected both in vitro and in vivo. Methods: An analysis of baseline and on-treatment ENF susceptibility in virus samples from Phase II clinical trial patients treated with ENF as functional monotherapy for 28 days (TRI-003) or in combination with oral antiretrovirals for greater than or equal to 48 weeks (T20-205, T20-206 and T20-208). Population sequencing identified amino acid (aa) substitutions at positions 36-45 of gp41 in plasma HIV-1. ENF susceptibility of virus isolates was tested in the cMAGI assay and viral DNA was sequenced for selected isolates. Results: HIV-1 gp41 aa 36-45 were highly conserved in virus from ENF-naive patients, except for a 15% incidence of N42S which did not reduce sensitivity to ENF Virus from patients experiencing viral load rebound exhibited reduced susceptibility to ENF and substitutions in gp41 aa 36-45. The most common substitutions observed on treatment were at positions 36, 38, 40, 42 and 43. On-treatment changes in the phenotypic susceptibility of virus isolates to ENF were generally associated with genotypic changes in aa 36-45. There was a relatively lower incidence of ENF resistance in patients with baseline sensitivity to more oral antiretrovirals in comparison to patients sensitive to fewer antiretrovirals. Conclusions: These data identify the importance of HIV-1 gp41 aa 36-45 in the emergence of resistance to ENF. (C) 2004 Lippincott Williams Wilkins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据