English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  With the phase-out of stavudine (d4T), change to first-line regimens with zidovudine (AZT) or tenofovir (TDF) in resource-limited settings (RLS) might increase risks of cross-resistance to nucleos(t) ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI). This would restrict the scope of switching to the World Health Organisation (WHO)-recommended standard second-line combinations (SLC) without HIV drug resistance (HIVDR)-testing in routine clinical practice.    Methods  An observational study was conducted among 101 Cameroonian patients (55.4% male, median [IQR] age 34 [10–41] years) failing first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in 2016, and stratified into three groups according to NRTIs exposure: exposure to both thymidine analogues AZT “and” D4T (group-A,  n  = 55); exposure to both TDF and AZT “or” D4T (group-B,  n  = 22); exposure solely to D4T (group-C,  n  = 24). Protease-reverse transcriptase HIVDR was interpreted using the  HIVdb  penalty scores (≥60: high-resistance; 20–59: intermediate-resistance; < 20: susceptible). The acceptable threshold for potential-efficacy was set at 80%.    Results  The median [IQR] CD4, viral RNA, and time on ART, were respectively 129 [29–466] cells/μl, 71,630 [19,041-368,000] copies/ml, and 4 [2–5] years. Overall HIVDR-level was 89.11% (90/101), with 83.2% harbouring M184 V (high-level 3TC/FTC-resistance) and only 1.98% (2/101) major HIVDR-mutations to ritonavir-boosted protease-inhibitors (PI/r). Thymidine-analogue mutations (TAMs)-1 [T215FY (46.53%), M41 L (22.77%), L210 W (8.91%)], with cross-resistance to AZT and TDF, were higher compared to TAMs-2 [D67N (21.78%), K70R (19.80%), K219QE (18.81%)]. As expected, K65R was related with TDF-exposure: 0% (0/55) in group-A, 22.72% (5/22) group-B, 4.17% (1/24) group-C ( p  = 0.0013). The potential-efficacy of AZT vs. TDF was respectively 43.64% (24/55) vs. 70.91% (39/55) in group-A ( p  = 0.0038); 63.64% (14/22) vs. 68.28% (15/22) in group-B ( p  = 1.0000); and 37.50% (9/24) vs. 83.33% (20/24) in group-C ( p  = 0.0032). CRF02_AG was the prevailing subtype (63.40%), followed by CRF11.cpx (8.91%), A 1  (7.92%), G (5.94%); without any significant effect of the subtype-distribution on HIVDR (92.2% in CRF02_AG vs. 83.8% in non-AG;  p  = 0.204).    Conclusion  First-line ART-failure exhibits high-level NRTI-resistance, with potential lower-efficacy of AZT compared to TDF. Significantly, using our 80% efficacy-threshold, only patients without NRTI-substitution on first-line could effectively switch to SLC following the WHO-approach. Patients with multiple NRTI-substitutions (exposed to both thymidine-analogues and TDF) on first-line ART would require HIVDR-testing to select active NRTIs for SLC.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-019-3871-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

bmc infectious diseases

HIV-1 drug resistance testing is essential for heavily-treated patients switching from first- to second-line regimens in resource-limited settings: evidence from routine clinical practice in Cameroon