Theme 11. Too early or too late. A never-ending dilemma with new technologies

Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases, Supplement

Volumn , Issue 106, 2003, Pages 99-104

  Biondi, Giuseppe ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIRETROVIRUS AGENT; ZIDOVUDINE; ANTI HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS AGENT;

ARTICLE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG SENSITIVITY; GENE MUTATION; GENOTYPE PHENOTYPE CORRELATION; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PRESCRIPTION; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; VALIDATION PROCESS; VIRUS RECOMBINANT; VIRUS STRAIN; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DRUG EFFECT; FORECASTING; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS 1; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MICROBIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; VIROLOGY;

ANTI-HIV AGENTS; DRUG RESISTANCE, MULTIPLE, VIRAL; DRUG RESISTANCE, VIRAL; FORECASTING; HIV INFECTIONS; HIV-1; HUMANS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 1842863036     PISSN: 03008878     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Larder B, Darby G, Richman DD. HIV with reduced sensitivity to zidovudine (AZT) isolated during prolonged therapy. Science 1989; 243: 1731-4.
2. Hirsch MS. HIV drug resistance: a chink in the armour. NEJM 2002; 347: 438-9.
3. Kellam P, Larder B. Recombinat virus assay: a rapid phenotypic assay for assessment of drug susceptibility of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 23-30.
4. Federal Register. Medical Devices Classification. 1997, Vol 62, 62243-60
5. Richman DD. Principles of HIV resistance testing and overview of assay performance characteristics. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5: 2731.
6. Hertogs K, Zolopa AR, Bloor S, et al. A blinded comparative analysis of two genotype service laboratories: full sequence analysis of HIV-1 protease and reverse transcriptase [abstract 87]. Antiviral Therapy 1999; 4(Suppl.1): 59.
7. Qari SH, Respess R, Weinstock H, Beltrami EM, Hertogs K, Larder BA, et al. Comparative analysis of 2 commercial phenotypic assays for drug susceptibility testing of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40: 31-5.
8. D'Aquila RT. Nucleosides and Foscarnet: Clinical Aspects. In: Richman DD, ed. Antiviral Drug Resistance. Wiley; 1996.
9. Anon. Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1infection. JAMA 1998; 279: 1984-91.
10. Anon. Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adult HIV-1 infection. JAMA 2000; 283: 2417-26.
11. Durant J, Clevembergh P, Halfon P, et al. Drug-resistance genotyping in HIV-1 therapy: the VIRADAPT randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1999; 353: 2195-9.
12. Cohen CJ, Hunt S, Sension M, et al. A randomized trial assessing the impact of phenotypic resistance testing on antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 2002; 16: 579-88.
13. Weinstein MC, Goldie SJ, Losina E, et al. Use of genotypic resistance to guide HIV therapy: clinical impact and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 440-50.
14. Genotypic and phenotypic resistance testing. P1 Perspective 1998; 25: 9-10.
15. Hale P. Phenotyping breakthrough: a remarkable new tool for quantifying HIV drug resistance, Searchlight 1997; 9-16.
16. Anon. Reports from the HIV Drug Resistance Collaborative Group Meeting. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5: 23-83.
17. The Euroguidelines Group for HIV resistance. Clinical and laboratory guidelines for the use of HIV-1 drug resistance testing as part of treatment management: recommendations for the European setting. AIDS 2001; 15: 309-20.
18. Schimidt B, Korn K, Moschik B, et al. Comparison of different algorithms for the interpretation of genotypic data for protease inhibitors [abstract 79]. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5(Suppl. 3): 60.
19. Robert I, Fontaine E, Lambert C, et al. Inter-person variability in interpreting sequencing results of HIV-1 resistance testing [abstract 70]. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5(Suppl. 3): 54.
20. Larder B, Kemp SD, Hetrtogs K. Quantitative prediction of HIV phenotypic drug resistance from genotypes: the virtual phenotype [abstract 63]. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5(Suppl. 3): 50.
21. Beerenwinkel N, Schmidt B, Walter H, et al. Diversity and complexity of HIV-1 drug resistance: a bioinformatic approach to predicting phenotype from genotype. PNAS 2002; 99: 8271-6.
22. De Gruttola V, Dix L, D'Aquila R, et al. The relationship between baseline HIV drug resistance and response to antiretroviral therapy : re-analysis of retrospective and prospective studies using a standardized data analysis plan. Antiviral Therapy 2000; 5: 41-8.