Approach to salvage antiretroviral therapy in heavily antiretroviral-experienced HIV-positive adults

Lancet Infectious Diseases

Volumn 6, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 496-507

  Temesgen, Zelalem ^a   Cainelli, Francesca ^b   Poeschla, Eric M ^a   Vlahakis, Stacey AR ^a   Vento, Sandro ^c,d  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b Specialist in Infectious Diseases   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VERONA   (Italy)

^d Annunziata Hospital   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMPRENAVIR; ANTIRETROVIRUS AGENT; DARUNAVIR; ENFUVIRTIDE; ETRAVIRINE; HYDROXYUREA; INDINAVIR; INTEGRASE INHIBITOR; LAMIVUDINE; LOPINAVIR; MK 0158; NELFINAVIR; PLACEBO; PROTEINASE INHIBITOR; RITONAVIR; RNA DIRECTED DNA POLYMERASE INHIBITOR; SAQUINAVIR; TIPRANAVIR; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VIRUS RNA;

ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME; AMINO ACID SUBSTITUTION; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG ELIMINATION; DRUG INTERMITTENT THERAPY; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG TREATMENT FAILURE; GENETIC POLYMORPHISM; GENOTYPE; GENOTYPE PHENOTYPE CORRELATION; HIGHLY ACTIVE ANTIRETROVIRAL THERAPY; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTED PATIENT; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; IC 50; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; VIRUS LOAD; VIRUS MUTATION; VIRUS REPLICATION;

ANTIRETROVIRAL THERAPY, HIGHLY ACTIVE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG RESISTANCE, MULTIPLE, VIRAL; DRUG RESISTANCE, VIRAL; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; HIV INFECTIONS; HIV PROTEASE INHIBITORS; HUMANS; TREATMENT FAILURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VIRAL LOAD; VIRUS REPLICATION;

EID: 33746266719     PISSN: 14733099     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(06)70550-3     Document Type: Review

References (146)

1. Palella Jr. F., Delaney K., Moorman A., et al. Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med 338 (1998) 853-860
2. Hogg R., O'Shaughnessy M., Gataric N., et al. Decline in deaths from AIDS due to new antiretrovirals. Lancet 349 (1997) 1294
3. Gallant J., Staszewski S., Pozniak A., et al. Efficacy and safety of tenofovir DF vs stavudine in combination therapy in antiretroviralnaïve patients: a 3-year randomized trial. JAMA 292 (2004) 191-201
4. Squires K., Lazzarin A., Gatell J., et al. Comparison of once-daily atazanavir with efavirenz, each in combination with fixed-dose zidovudine and lamivudine, as initial therapy for patients infected with HIV. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 36 (2004) 1011-1019
5. Walmsley S., Bernstein B., King M., et al. Lopinavir-ritonavir versus nelfinavir for the initial treatment of HIV infection. N Engl J Med 346 (2002) 2039-2046
6. Deeks S., Hecht F., Swanson M., et al. HIV RNA and CD4 cell count response to protease inhibitor therapy in an urban AIDS clinic: response to both initial and salvage therapy. AIDS 13 (1999) F35-F43
7. Fatkenheuer G., Theisen A., Rockstroh J., et al. Virological treatment failure of protease inhibitor therapy in an unselected cohort of HIV-infected patients. AIDS 11 (1997) F113-F116
8. Palella F., Chmiel J., Mooreman A., Holmberg S., and the HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. Durability and predictors of success of highly active antiretroviral therapy for ambulatory HIV-infected patients. AIDS 16 (2002) 1617-1626
9. Lucas G., Chaisson R., and Moore R. Highly active antiretroviral therapy in a large urban clinic: risk factors for virologic failure and adverse drug reactions. Ann Intern Med 131 (1999) 81-87
10. Mocroft A., Phillips A., Friis-Moller N., et al. Response to antiretroviral therapy among patients exposed to three classes of antiretrovirals: results from the EuroSIDA study. Antivir Ther 7 (2002) 21-30
11. Richman D., Morton S., Wrin T., et al. The prevalence of antiretroviral drug resistance in the United States. AIDS 18 (2004) 1393-1401
12. Zaccarelli M., Tozzi V., Lorenzini P., et al. Multiple drug class-wide resistance associated with poorer survival after treatment failure in a cohort of HIV-infected patients. AIDS 19 (2005) 1081-1089
13. Grover D., Allen L., Pillay D., et al. Predictors of death, and response to therapy in patients with multi(three)-class drug resistant HIV in the UK. Antivir Ther 10 suppl 1 (2005) S7
14. Hogg RS, Bangsberg D, Alexander C, et al. Drug resistance is associated with an increased risk of death in patients first starting HAART. 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 712.
15. Yeni P., Hammer S., Hirsch S., et al. Treatment for adult HIV infection: 2004 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA Panel. JAMA 292 (2004) 251-265
16. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Panel on Clinical Practices for Treatment of HIV Infection. Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents (May 4, 2006). http://www.aidsinfo.nih.gov/ContentFiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf (accessed June 14, 2006)
17. BHIVA Writing Committee on behalf of the BHIVA Executive Committee. British HIV Association (BHIVA) guidelines for the treatment of HIV-infected adults with antiretroviral therapy (2005). http://www.bhiva.org/guidelines/2005/HIV/index.html (accessed June 14, 2006)
18. Schuurman R., Demeter L., Reichelderfer P., et al. Worldwide evaluation of DNA sequencing approaches for identification of drug resistance mutations in the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse transcriptase. J Clin Microbiol 37 (1999) 2291-2296
19. Bae A., Waters J., Margot N., Borroto-Esoda K., and Miller M. Pre-existing L74V is a risk factor for virological non-response and development of K65R in patients taking tenofovir DF (TDF). Antivir Ther 9 suppl (2004) S174
20. Marcelin AG, Roquebert B, Malet I, Wirden M, Katlama C, Calvez V. Role of HIV-1 minority populations on resistance mutational patterns evolution after nelfinavir failure and susceptibility to protease inhibitors. 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 683.
21. Ceccherini-Silberstein, F, Gori C, Santoro M, et al. Dynamics of protease inhibitor-resistance mutations during treatment interruptions. 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 681.
22. Mellors J, Palmer S, Nissley D, et al. Low-frequency NNRTI-resistant variants contribute to failure of efavirenz-containing regimens. 11th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; San Francisco, CA, USA; Feb 8-11, 2004. Abstract 39.
23. Wind-Rotolo M, Haggerty C, Siliciano J, et al. Archived NNRTI-resistant HIV-1 in the resting CD4+ T cell reservoir of patients with a previous history of K103N or Y181C mutations. 13th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Denver, CO, USA; Feb 5-8, 2005. Abstract 616.
24. Hanna G., and D'Aquila R. Clinical use of genotypic and phenotypic drug resistance testing to monitor antiretroviral chemotherapy. Clin Infect Dis 32 (2001) 774-782
25. Byrnes V., Emini E., Schleif W., et al. Susceptibilities of human immundeficiency virus type 1 enzyme and viral variants expressing multiple resistance-engendering amino acid substitutions to reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 38 (1994) 1404-1407
26. Larder B. 3′-Azido-3′-deoxythymidine resistance suppressed by a mutation conferring human immunodeficiency virus type 1 resistance to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 36 (1992) 2664-2669
27. van Laethem K., Witvrouw M., Pannecouque C., et al. Mutations in the non-nucleoside binding-pocket interfere with the multi-nucleoside resistance phenotype. AIDS 15 (2001) 553-561
28. Tisdale M., Kemp S., Parry N., and Larder B. Rapid in vitro selection of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 resistant to 3′-thiacytidine inhibitors due to a mutation in the YMDD region of reverse transcriptase. Proc Natl Acad USA 90 (1993) 5653-5656
29. St Clair M., Martin J., Tudor-Williams G., et al. Resistance to ddI and sensitivity to AZT induced by a mutation in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase. Science 253 (1991) 1557-1559
30. Whitcomb J., Huang W., Limoli K., et al. Hypersusceptibility to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in HIV-1: clinical, phenotypic and genotypic correlates. AIDS 16 (2002) F417
31. Haubrich R., Kemper C., Hellmann N., et al. The clinical relevance of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor hypersusceptibility: a prospective cohort analysis. AIDS 16 (2002) F3340
32. Colonno R., Rose R., McLaren C., Thiry A., Parkin N., and Friborg J. Identification of I50L as the signature atazanavir (ATV)-resistance mutation in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients receiving ATV-containing regimens. J Infect Dis 189 (2004) 1802-1810
33. Resch W., Ziermann R., Parkin N., Gamarnik A., and Swanstrom R. Nelfinavir-resistant, amprenavir-hypersusceptible strains of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 carrying an N88S mutation in protease have reduced infectivity, reduced replication capacity, and reduced fitness and process the gag polyprotein precursor aberrantly. J Virol 76 (2002) 8659-8666
34. Ziermann R., Limoli K., Das K., Arnold E., Petropoulos C., and Parkin N. A mutation in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease, N88S, that causes in vitro hypersensitivity to amprenavir. J Virol 74 (2000) 4414-4419
35. Tozzi V., Zaccarelli M., Narciso P., et al. Mutations in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase potentially associated with hypersusceptibility to nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors: effect on response to efavirenz-based therapy in an urban observational cohort. J Infect Dis 189 (2004) 1688-1695
36. Shulman N., Zolopa A., Passaro D., et al. Phenotypic hypersusceptibility to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients: impact on virological response to efavirenz-based therapy. AIDS 15 (2001) 1125-1132
37. Katzenstein D., Bosch R., Hellmann N., Wang N., Bacheler L., and Albrecht M. Phenotypic susceptibility and virological outcome in nucleoside-experienced patients receiving three or four antiretroviral drugs. AIDS 17 (2003) 821-830
38. Resch W., Ziermann R., Parkin N., Gamarnik A., and Swanstrom R. Nelfinavir-resistant, amprenavir-hypersusceptible strains of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 carrying an N88S mutation in protease have reduced infectivity, reduced replication capacity, and reduced fitness and process the Gag polyprotein precursor aberrantly. J Virol 76 (2002) 8659-8666
39. Zachary K., Hanna G., and D'Aquila R. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 hypersusceptibility to amprenavir in vitro can be associated with virus load response to treatment in vivo. Clin Infect Dis 33 (2001) 2075-2077
40. Gomes P, Diogo I, Goncalves MF, et al. Different pathways to nelfinavir genotypic resistance in HIV-1 subtypes B and G. 9th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Seattle, WA, USA; Feb 24-28, 2002. Abstract 46.
41. Brenner B., Turner D., Oliveira M., et al. A V106M mutation in HIV-1 clade C viruses exposed to efavirenz confers cross-resistance to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. AIDS 17 (2003) F1-F5
42. Munoz M., Carmona R., Perez-Alvarez L., et al. Analysis of discrepancies in the interpretation of antiretroviral drug resistance results in HIV-1 infected patients of Basque country, Spain. J Clin Virol 33 (2005) 224-229
43. Zolopa A. Genotype-phenotype discordance: the evolution in our understanding HIV-1 drug resistance. AIDS 17 (2003) 1077-1078
44. Parkin N., Chappey C., and Petropoulos C. Improving lopinavir genotype algorithm through phenotype correlations: novel mutation patterns and amprenavir cross-resistance. AIDS 17 (2003) 955-961
45. Garcia-Lerma J., Nidtha S., Blumoff K., Weinstock H., and Heneine W. Increased ability for selection of zidovudine resistance in a distinct class of wild-type HIV-1 from drug-naive persons. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98 (2001) 13907-13912
46. Kijak G., Rubio A., Pampuro S., et al. Discrepant results in the interpretation of HIV-1 drug-resistance genotypic data among widely used algorithms. HIV Med 4 (2003) 72-78
47. Torti C., Quiros-Roldan E., Keulen W., et al. Comparison between rules-based human immunodeficiency virus type 1 genotype interpretations and real or virtual phenotype: concordance analysis and correlation with clinical outcome in heavily treated patients. J Infect Dis 188 (2003) 194-201
48. Larder B., De Vroey V., Dehertogh P., Kemp S., Bloor S., and Hertogs K. Predicting HIV-1 phenotypic resistance from genotype using a large phenotype-genotype relational database. Antivir Ther 4 suppl 1 (1999) 41
49. Durant J., Clevenbergh P., Halfon P., et al. Drug-resistance genotyping in HIV-1 therapy: the VIRADAPT randomised controlled trial. Lancet 353 (1999) 2195-2199
50. Baxter J., Mayers D., Wentworth D., et al. A randomized study of antiretroviral management based on plasma genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing in patients failing therapy. AIDS 14 (2000) F83-F93
51. Tural C., Ruiz L., Holtzer C., et al. Clinical utility of HIV-1 genotyping and expert advice: the Havana trial. AIDS 16 (2002) 209-218
52. Cingolani A., Antinori A., Rizzo M., et al. Usefulness of monitoring HIV drug resistance and adherence in individuals failing highly active antiretroviral therapy: a randomized study (ARGENTA). AIDS 16 (2002) 369-379
53. Cohen C., Hunt S., Sension M., et al. A randomized trial assessing the impact of phenotypic resistance testing on antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 16 (2002) 579-588
54. Clevenbergh P., Garraffo R., Durant J., and Dellamonica P. PharmAdapt: a randomized prospective study to evaluate the benefit of therapeutic monitoring of protease inhibitors: 12 week results. AIDS 16 (2002) 2311-2315
55. Vray M., Meynard J., Dalban C., et al. Predictors of the virological response to a change in the antiretroviral treatment regimen in HIV-1-infected patients enrolled in a randomized trial comparing genotyping, phenotyping and standard of care (Narval trial, ANRS 088). Antivir Ther 8 (2003) 427-434
56. Mazzotta F., Lo Caputo S., Torti C., et al. Real versus virtual phenotype to guide treatment in heavily pretreated patients: 48-week follow-up of the Genotipo-Fenotipo di Resistenza (GenPheRex) trial. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 32 (2003) 268-280
57. Perez-Elias M., Garcia-Arota I., Munoz V., et al. Phenotype or virtual phenotype for choosing antiretroviral therapy after failure: a prospective, randomized study. Antivir Ther 8 (2003) 577-584
58. Haupts S., Ledergerber B., Boni J., et al. Impact of genotypic resistance testing on selection of salvage regimen in clinical practice. Antivir Ther 8 (2003) 443-454
59. Saracino A., Monno L., Locaputo S., et al. Selection of antiretroviral therapy guided by genotypic or phenotypic resistance testing: an open-label, randomized, multicenter study (PhenGen). J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 37 (2004) 1587-1598
60. Wegner S., Wallace M., Aronson N., et al. Long-term efficacy of routine access to antiretroviral-resistance testing in HIV type 1-infected patients: results of the clinical efficacy of resistance testing trial. Clin Infect Dis 38 (2004) 723-730
61. Bossi P., Peytavin G., Ait-Mohand H., et al. GENOPHAR: a randomized study of plasma drug measurements in association with genotypic resistance testing and expert advice to optimize therapy in patients failing antiretroviral therapy. HIV Med 5 (2004) 352-359
62. Blanco J, Guelar A, Domingo P, et al. Genotypic vs real phenotypic tests to guide salvage antiretroviral therapy in heavily pretreated patients with virological failure: a 48 weeks prospective, randomized study (VIHRES Study). 11th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; San Francisco, CA, USA; Feb 8-11, 2004. Abstract 675.
63. Haubrich R., Kemper C., Hellmann N., et al. A randomized, prospective study of phenotype susceptibility testing versus standard of care to manage antiretroviral therapy: CCTG 575. AIDS 19 (2005) 295-302
64. Evaluation of Resistance Assays (ERA) Trial Investigators. A randomized controlled trial of the clinical utility of genotypic resistance testing in patients with limited prior exposure to antiretroviral drugs. HIV Clin Trials 6 (2005) 183-186
65. Dunn D., Green H., Loveday C., et al. A randomized controlled trial of the value of phenotypic testing in addition to genotypic testing for HIV drug resistance: evaluation of resistance assays (ERA) trial investigators. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 38 (2005) 553-559
66. Panidou E., Trikalinos T., and Ioannidis J. Limited benefit of antiretroviral resistance testing in treatment-experienced patients: a meta-analysis. AIDS 18 (2004) 2153-2161
67. Harrigan P., Wynhoven B., Brumme Z., et al. HIV-1 drug resistance: degree of underestimation by a cross-sectional versus a longitudinal testing approach. J Infect Dis 191 (2005) 1325-1330
68. Palella F, Armon C, Chmiel J, et al. Enhanced survival associated with use of HIV susceptibility testing among HAART-experienced patients in the HIV Outpatient Study (HOPS). 13th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Denver, CO, USA; Feb 5-8, 2006. Abstract 654.
69. Daar E., Kesler K., Wrin T., et al. HIV-1 pol replication capacity predicts disease progression. AIDS 19 (2005) 871-877
70. Quinones-Mateu M., Ball S., Marozsan A., et al. A dual infection/competition assay shows a correlation between ex vivo human immunodeficiency virus type 1 fitness and disease progression. J Virol 74 (2000) 9222-9233
71. Martinez-Picado J., Savara A., Sutton L., and D'Aquila R. Replicative fitness of protease inhibitor-resistant mutants of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol 73 (1999) 3744-3752
72. Gamarnik A., Wrin T., Ziermann R., et al. Drug resistance is associated with impaired protease and reverse transcriptase function and reduced replication capacity: characterization of recombinant viruses derived from 150 HIV-1 infected patients. Antivir Ther 5 suppl 3 (2000) 92
73. Nijhuis M., Deeks S., and Boucher C. Implications of antiretroviral resistance on viral fitness. Curr Opin Infect Dis 14 (2001) 23-28
74. Prado J., Wrin T., Beauchaine J., et al. Amprenavir-resistant HIV-1 exhibits lopinavir cross-resistance and reduced replication capacity. AIDS 16 (2002) 1009-1017
75. Deval J., White K., Miller M., et al. Mechanistic basis for reduced viral and enzymatic fitness of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase containing both K65R and M184V mutations. J Biol Chem 279 (2004) 509-516
76. Deeks S., Barbour J., Martin J., Swanson M., and Grant R. Sustained CD4+ T cell response after virologic failure of protease inhibitor-based regimens in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. J Infect Dis 181 (2000) 946-953
77. Piketty C., Weiss L., Thomas F., Mohamed A., Belec L., and Kazatchkine M. Long-term clinical outcome of human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients with discordant immunologic and virologic responses to a protease inhibitor-containing regimen. J Infect Dis 183 (2001) 1328-1335
78. Deeks S., Wrin T., Liegler T., et al. Virologic and immunologic consequences of discontinuing combination antiretroviral-drug therapy in HIV-infected patients with detectable viremia. N Engl J Med 344 (2001) 472-480
79. Miller V., Sabin C., Hertogs K., et al. Virological and immunological effects of treatment interruptions in HIV-1 infected patients with treatment failure. AIDS 14 (2000) 2857-2867
80. Castagna A, Danise A, Menzo S, et al. E-184V study: lamivudine monotherapy vs treatment interruption in failing HIV-1 infected subjects, harboring the M184V mutation: 48-week final results. 3rd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; July 24-27, 2005. Abstract WeFo0205.
81. Eron Jr. J., Bartlett J., Santana J., et al. Persistent antiretroviral activity of nucleoside analogues after prolonged zidovudine and lamivudine therapy as demonstrated by rapid loss of activity after discontinuation. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 37 (2004) 1581-1583
82. Grabar S., Le Moing V., Goujard C., et al. Clinical outcome of patients with HIV-1 infection according to immunologic and virologic response after 6 months of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Ann Intern Med 133 (2000) 401-410
83. Sufka S., Ferrari G., Gryszowka V., et al. Prolonged CD4+ cell/virus load discordance during treatment with protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy: immune response and viral control. J Infect Dis 187 (2003) 1027-1037
84. Deeks SG, Lu J, Hoh R, et al. Interruption of enfuvirtide in patients with enfuvirtide resistance. 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 680.
85. Gianotti N., Galli L., Boeri E., et al. In vivo dynamics of the K103N mutation following the withdrawal of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. New Microbiol 28 (2005) 319-326
86. Piketty C., Gerard L., Chazallon C., et al. Virological and immunological impact of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor withdrawal in HIV-infected patients with multiple treatment failures. AIDS 18 (2004) 1469-1471
87. Lalezari J., Henry K., O'Hearn M., et al. Enfuvirtide, an HIV-1 fusion inhibitor, for drug-resistant HIV infection in North and South America. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 2175-2185
88. Lazzarin A., Clotet B., Cooper D., et al. Efficacy of enfuvirtide in patients infected with drug-resistant HIV-1 in Europe and Australia. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 2186-2195
89. Lazzarin A, Mukwaya G, Clumeck N, et al. Tipranavir/ritonavir (TPV/r) demonstrates superior treatment response to lopinavir/r (LPV/r), amprenavir/r (APV/r) or saquinavir/r (SQV/r) in PI-experienced patients from the TPV RESIST-1 and RESIST-2 trials. 3rd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; July 24-27, 2005. Abstract WePe6.3C07.
90. Cooper D, Hicks C, Cahn P, et al. 24-week RESIST study analyses: the efficacy of tipranavir/ritonavir is superior to lopinavir/ritonavir, and the TPV/r treatment response is enhanced by inclusion of genotypically active antiretrovirals in the optimized background regimen. 12th Conference on retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 560.
91. Thommes JA, Demasi R, Haubrich R. Improved virologic response in three-class experienced patients when an active boosted protease inhibitor is combined with enfuvirtide (ENF). 43rd Annual Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America; San Francisco, CA, USA; Oct 6-9, 2005. Abstract 785.
92. Grossman HA, Hicks C, Nadler J, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of Tmc125 in HIV patients with NNRTI and PI resistance at 24 weeks: Tmc125-c223. 45th Interscience Conference of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; Washington, DC, USA: Dec 16-19, 2005. Abstract H-416c.
93. Katlama C, Berger D, Bellos N, et al. Efficacy of TMC114/r in 3-class experienced patients with limited treatment options: 24-week planned interim analysis of 2 96-week multinational dose-finding trials. 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 22-25, 2005. Abstract 164LB.
94. Grinsztejn B, Nguyen BY, Katlama C, et al. Potent antiretroviral effect of MK-0518, a novel HIV-1 integrase inhibitor, in patients with triple-class resistant virus. 13th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Denver, CO, USA; Feb 5-8, 2006. Abstract 159LB.
95. Moyle G., and Back D. Principles and practice of HIV-protease inhibitor pharmacoenhancement. HIV Med 2 (2001) 105-113
96. Flexner C. Dual protease inhibitor therapy in HIV-infected patients: pharmacological rationale and clinical benefit. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 40 (2000) 649-674
97. Casado J., Moreno A., Marti-Belda P., et al. Overcoming resistance: virologic response to a salvage regimen with the combination of ritonavir plus indinavir. HIV Clin Trials 4 (2003) 21-28
98. Benson C., Deeks S., Brun S., et al. Safety and antiviral activity at 48 weeks of lopinavir/ritonavir plus nevirapine and 2 nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected protease inhibitor-experienced patients. J Infect Dis 185 (2002) 599-607
99. Dragsted U., Gerstoft J., Pedersen C., et al. Randomized trial to evaluate indinavir/ritonavir versus saquinavir/ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients: the MaxCmin1 trial. Clin Infect Dis 188 (2003) 635-642
100. Ulrik B., Jan G., Mike Y., et al. A randomized trial to evaluate lopinavir/ritonavir versus saquinavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected patients: the MaxCmin2 trial. Antivir Ther 10 (2005) 735-743
101. Katner H., Paar D., Nadler J., et al. Open-label study of a twice-daily indinavir 800-mg/ritonavir 200-mg regimen in HIV-infected adults failing a protease inhibitor regimen. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 31 (2002) 483-487
102. Arvieux C., Tattevin P., Souala F., et al. Salvage therapy with amprenavir and ritonavir: prospective study in 17 heavily pretreated patients. HIV Clin Trials 3 (2002) 125-132
103. Badaro R, DeJesus E, Lazzarin A, et al. Efficacy and safety of atazanavir (ATV) with ritonavir (RTV) or saquinavir (SQV) versus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) in combination with tenofovir (TFV) and one NRTI in patients who have experienced virologic failure to multiple HAART regimens: 16-week results from BMS AI424-045. 2nd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment; Paris, France; July 13-16, 2003. Abstract 118.
104. DeJesus E, LaMarca A, Sension M, et al. The Context study: efficacy and safety of GW433908/RTV in PI-experienced subjects with virological failure (24 week results). 10th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Boston, MA, USA; Feb 10-14, 2003. Abstract 178.
105. Patterson P, Zala C, Coll P, et al. Virological response and safety at 48 weeks of double boosted protease inhibitors with lopinavir/r plus either saquinavir or amprenavir in heavily pretreated HIV infected patients. 14th International AIDS Conference; Barcelona, Spain; July 7-12, 2002. Abstract TuPeB4492.
106. Staszewski S, Dauer B, von Hentig N, et al. The LOPSAQ study: 24 week analysis of the double protease inhibitor salvage regimen containing lopinavir (LPV/r) plus saquinavir without any additional antiretroviral therapy. 2nd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment; Paris, France; July 13-16, 2003. Abstract 583.
107. Corbett AH, Eron JJ, Diebold M, et al. A triple protease inhibitor (PI) salvage regimen of amprenavir (APV) + saquinavir (SQV) + mini dose ritonavir (r): steady state (SS) pharmacokinetics (PK) and initial RNA and CD4 response. 14th International AIDS Conference; Barcelona, Spain; July 7-12, 2002. Abstract TuPeB4464.
108. Dauer B, Von Hentig N, Müller A, et al. The CRIXILOP cohort study: preliminary results from a salvage study of the boosted double protease inhibitor (PI) regimen containing indinavir (IDV) plus lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) without the addition of reverse transcriptase inhibitors (RTI) in heavily therapy-experienced HIV+ patients. 9th European AIDS Conference; Warsaw, Poland; Oct 25-29, 2004. Abstract 7.4/4.
109. Raguin G, Chene G, Morand-Joubert L, et al. Salvage therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir, amprenavir + an additional boost with ritonavir: 1-year results of Puzzle 1-ANRS 104 study. 2nd International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment; Paris, France; July 13-16, 2003. Abstract 585.
110. Ruiz L, Ribera E, Bonjoch A, et al. Virological and immunological benefit of a salvage therapy that includes kaletra plus fortovase preceded or not by antiretroviral therapy interruption (TI) in advanced HIV-infected patients (6-month-follow-up). 9th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Seattle, WA, USA; Feb 24-28, 2002. Abstract 421-W.
111. Baldini F, RizzoMG, Hoetelmans R, et al. A prospective study of deep salvage therapy with lopinavir/r, amprenavir, and NRTIs: final 24-week data, pharmacokinetics, and association of drug levels/drug susceptibility with virologic response. 9th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Seattle, WA, USA; Feb 24-28, 2002. Abstract 423-W.
112. Izopet J., Massip P., Souyris C., et al. Shift in HIV resistance genotype after treatment interruption and short-term antiviral effect following a new salvage regimen. AIDS 14 (2000) 2247-2255
113. Miller V., Sabin C., Hertogs K., et al. Virological and immunological effects of treatment interruptions in HIV-1 infected patients with treatment failure. AIDS 14 (2000) 2857-2867
114. Halfon P., Durant J., Clevenbergh P., et al. Kinetics of disappearance of resistance mutations and reappearance of wild-type during structured treatment interruptions. AIDS 17 (2003) 1351-1361
115. Ruiz L., Ribera E., Bonjoch A., et al. Role of structued treatment interruption before a 5-drug salvage antiretroviral regimen: the Retrogene Study. J Infect Dis 188 (2003) 977-985
116. Lawrence J., Mayers D., Hullseik K., et al. Structured treatment interruption in patients with multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus. N Engl J Med 349 (2003) 837-846
117. Ghosn J., Wirden M., Ktorza N., et al. No benefit of a structured treatment interruption based on genotypic resistance in heavily pretreated HIV-infected patients. AIDS 19 (2005) 1643-1647
118. Katlama C., Dominguez S., Gourlain K., et al. Benefit of treatment interruption in HIV-infected patients with multiple therapeutic failures: a randomized controlled trial (ANRS 097). AIDS 18 (2004) 217-226
119. Montaner J., Harrigan P., Jahnke N., et al. Multiple therapy rescue therapy for HIV-infected individuals with prior virologic failure to multiple regimens. AIDS 15 (2001) 61-69
120. Youle M., Tyrer M., Fisher M., et al. Brief report: two-year outcome of a multidrug regimen in patients who did not respond to a protease inhibitor regimen. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 29 (2002) 58-61
121. Staszewski S., Gute P., Carlebach A., et al. Virological and immunological response to mega-HAART salvage therapy after failure of multiple antiretroviral regimens. AIDS 12 suppl 4 (1998) S40
122. Youle M., Mocroft A., Johnson M., et al. Surrogate marker responses to multidrug combinations comprising hydroxyurea, efavirenz, double protease inhibitors and nucleoside analogues in protease inhibitor failures. Antiviral Ther 4 suppl 1 (1999) 18-19
123. Khoo S., Gibbons S., and Back D. Therapeutic drug monitoring as a tool in treating HIV infection. AIDS 15 suppl (2001) S171-S181
124. Burger D., Boyd M., Duncombe C., et al. Pharmaocinetics and pharmacodynamics of indinavir with or without low-dose ritonavir in HIV-infected Thai patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 51 (2003) 1231-1238
125. Garraffo R, Lavrut T, Pierre B, et al. Efavirenz and nevirapine concentration-effect retlationships in HIV-infected patients pharmacologically followed by routine therapetuc drug monitoring (TDM). 4th International Workshop on Clinical Pharmacology of HIV Therapy; Cannes, France; March 27-29, 2003. Abstract 26.
126. Haas D., Ribaudo H., Kim R., et al. Pharmacogenetics of efavirenz and central nervous system side effects: an Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group study. AIDS 18 (2004) 2391-2400
127. La Porte C, van der Ende M, Gyssens I, et al. Gender differences in nevirapine and efavirenz pharmacokinetics. 4th International Workshop on Clinical Pharmacology of HIV Therapy; Cannes, France; March 27-29, 2003. Abstract 10.
128. Marzolini C., Telenti, Decostered L., Greub G., Biollaz J., and Buclin T. Efavirenz plasma levels can predict treatment failure and central nervous system side effects in HIV-1 infected patients. AIDS 15 (2001) 71-75
129. Reijers M., Weigel H., Hart A., et al. Toxicity and drug exposure in a quadruple drug regimen in HIV-1 infected patients participating in the ADAM study. AIDS 14 (2000) 59-67
130. Buss N., Snell P., Bock J., Hsu A., and Jorga K. Saquinavir and ritonavir pharmacokinetics following combined ritonavir and saquinavir (soft gelatine capsules) administration. Br J Clin Pharmacol 52 (2001) 255-264
131. Burger D., Hugen P., Reiss P., et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring of nelfinavir and indinavir in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected individuals. AIDS 17 (2003) 1157-1165
132. Alexander C., Asselin J., Ting L., et al. Antiretroviral concentrations in untimed plasma samples predict therapy outcome in a population with advanced disease. J Infect Dis 188 (2003) 541-548
133. Morse G., Catanzaro L., and Acosta E. Clinical pharmacodynamics of HIV-1 protease inhibitors: use of inhibitory quotients to optimise pharmacotherapy. Lancet Infect Dis 6 (2006) 215-225
134. Duval X., Lamotte C., Race E., et al. Amprenavir inhibitory quotient and virological response in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients on an amprenavir-containing salvage regimen without or with ritonavir. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46 (2002) 570-574
135. Marcelin A., Lamotte C., Delaugerre C., et al. Genotypic inhibitory quotient as predictor of virological response to ritonavir-amprenavir in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitor-experienced patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47 (2003) 594-600
136. De Luca A., Baldini F., Cingolani A., Di Giambenedetto S., Hoetelmans R., and Cauda R. Deep salvage with amprenavir and lopinavir/ritonavir: correlation of pharmacokinetics and drug resistance with pharmacodynamics. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 35 (2004) 359-366
137. Breilh D., Pellegrin I., Rouzes A., et al. Virological, intracellular and plasma pharmacological parameters predicting response to lopinavir/ritonavir (KALEPHAR study). AIDS 18 (2004) 1305-1310
138. Marcelin A., Cohen-Codar I., King M., et al. Virological and pharmacological parameters predicting the response to lopinavirritonavir in heavily protease inhibitor-experienced patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49 (2005) 1720-1726
139. Gonzalez de Requena D., Gallego O., Valer L., Jimenez-Nacher I., and Soriano V. Prediction of virological response to lopinavir/ritonavir using the genotypic inhibitory quotient. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 20 (2004) 275-278
140. Castagna A., Gianotti N., Galli L., et al. The NIQ of lopinavir is predictive of a 48-week virological response in highly treatment experienced HIV-1-infected subjects treated with a lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen. Antivir Ther 9 (2004) 537-543
141. Hsu A., Isaacson J., Brun S., et al. Pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic analysis of lopinavir-ritonavir in combination with efavirenz and two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in extensively pretreated human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47 (2003) 350-359
142. Gianotti N., Seminari E., Guffanti M., et al. Evaluation of atazanavir trough, atazanavir genotypic inhibitory quotient, and baseline HIV genotype as predictors of a 24-week virological response in highly drug-experienced, HIV-infected patients treated with unboosted atazanavir. New Microbiol 28 (2005) 119-125
143. Barrios A., Rendon A., Gallego O., et al. Predictors of virological response to atazanavir in protease inhibitor-experienced patients. HIV Clin Trials 5 (2004) 201-205
144. Marcelin A., Dalban C., Peytavin G., et al. Clinically relevant interpretation of genotype and relationship to plasma drug concentrations for resistance to saquinavir-ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitor-experienced patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48 (2004) 4687-4692
145. Shulman N., Zolopa A., Havlir D., et al. Virtual inhibitory quotient predicts response to ritonavir boosting of indinavir-based therapy in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients with ongoing viremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46 (2002) 3907-3916
146. Hatano H, Hunt P, Weidler J, et al. Rate of viral evolution and risk of losing future drug options in heavily pre-treated patients remaining on a stable partially suppressive regimen. 13th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Denver, CO, USA; Feb 5-8, 2006. Abstract 615.