The R263K substitution in HIV-1 subtype C is more deleterious for integrase enzymatic function and viral replication than in subtype B
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Dolutegravir is an integrase strand-transfer inhibitor that has shown unprecedented robustness against the emergence of HIV drug-resistant strains in treatment-naive individuals. The R263K substitution in integrase was identified through culture selection as a resistance-associated substitution for dolutegravir and was recently detected in two treatment-experienced participants in the SAILING clinical trial, who experienced dolutegravir-based treatment failure, one of whom was infected by a subtype C virus. The objective of this study was to characterize the R263K substitution in HIV-1 subtype C integrase. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used cell-free strand transfer assays and tissue culture experiments to characterize the R263K substitution in HIV-1 subtype C integrase in comparison with subtype B. RESULTS: Cell-free biochemical assays showed that the R263K substitution diminished subtype C integrase strand-transfer activity by decreasing the affinity of integrase for target DNA. Similarly, both viral infectiousness and replication capacity were reduced by the R263K substitution in tissue culture. Decrease in enzyme activity and viral infectiousness exceeded 35 and 50%, respectively - significantly more than in HIV-1 subtype B. R263K in HIV-1 subtype C also conferred low levels of resistance against dolutegravir and high levels of cross-resistance against elvitegravir, but not raltegravir. CONCLUSIONS: The R263K substitution is more deleterious to integrase strand-transfer activity and viral infectiousness in HIV-1 subtype C than in subtype B. Our results suggest that cross-resistance may prevent treatment-experienced individuals who are experiencing treatment failure with dolutegravir from being subsequently treated with elvitegravir.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".