MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922584461 · doi:10.1128/jvi.01881-15

The Combination of the R263K and T66I Resistance Substitutions in HIV-1 Integrase Is Incompatible with High-Level Viral Replication and the Development of High-Level Drug Resistance

2015· article· en· W1922584461 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiaming Liang, Thibault Mésplède, Maureen Oliveira, Kaitlin Anstett, Mark A. Wainberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsElvitegravirRaltegravirIntegraseDolutegravirBiologyIntegrase inhibitorVirologyGeneticsInfectivityContext (archaeology)Viral replicationVirusViral loadHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antiretroviral therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The R263K substitution in integrase has been selected in tissue culture with dolutegravir (DTG) and has been reported for several treatment-experienced individuals receiving DTG as part of salvage therapy. The R263K substitution seems to be incompatible with the presence of common resistance mutations associated with raltegravir (RAL), a different integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI). T66I is a substitution that is common in individuals who have developed resistance against a different INSTI termed elvitegravir (EVG), but it is not known whether these two mutations might be compatible in the context of resistance against DTG or what impact the combination of these substitutions might have on resistance against INSTIs. E138K is a common secondary substitution observed with various primary resistance substitutions in RAL- and EVG-treated individuals. Viral infectivity, replicative capacity, and resistance against INSTIs were measured in cell-based assays. Strand transfer and 3' processing activities were measured biochemically. The combination of the R263K and T66I substitutions decreased HIV-1 infectivity, replicative capacity, and strand transfer activity. The addition of the E138K substitution partially compensated for these deficits and resulted in high levels of resistance against EVG but not against DTG or RAL. These findings suggest that the presence of the T66I substitution will not compromise the activity of DTG and may also help to prevent the additional generation of the R263K mutation. Our observations support the use of DTG in second-line therapy for individuals who experience treatment failure with EVG due to the T66I substitution. IMPORTANCE: The integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) elvitegravir and dolutegravir are newly developed inhibitors against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). HIV drug-resistant mutations in integrase that can arise in individuals treated with elvitegravir commonly include the T66I substitution, whereas R263K is a signature resistance substitution against dolutegravir. In order to determine how different combinations of integrase resistance mutations can influence the outcome of therapy, we report here the effects of the T66I, E138K, and R263K substitutions, alone and in combination, on viral replicative capacity and resistance to integrase inhibitors. Our results show that the addition of R263K to the T66I substitution diminishes viral replicative capacity and strand transfer activity while not compromising susceptibility to dolutegravir. This supports the use of dolutegravir in second-line therapy for patients failing elvitegravir therapy who harbor the T66I resistance substitution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VirologySame topicHIV/AIDS drug development and treatmentFrench-language works237,207