HIV-1 subtype C viruses rapidly develop K65R resistance to tenofovir in cell culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genotypic diversity among HIV-1 subtypes and circulating recombinant forms (CRF) may lead to distinct pathways to drug resistance. This study evaluated subtype-related differences in the development of resistance in culture to tenofovir. METHODS: Genotyping determined nucleotide diversity among subtypes. Representative subtype B, C, CRF1_AE, CRF2_AG, G, and HIV-2 isolates were selected for resistance to tenofovir, lamivudine and didanosine in cell culture. Phenotypic assays determined the effects of the K65R substitution in reverse transcriptase (RT) on drug susceptibility. RESULTS: Subtype C isolates show unique polymorphisms in RT codons 64 (AAG-->AAA), 65 (AAA-->AAG), and 66 (AAA-->AAG), absent in other subtypes. The K65R mutation (AAG-->AGG) arose with tenofovir by week 12 in four subtype C selections. In contrast, no tenofovir resistance arose in four subtype B (> 34-74 weeks), one each of CRF2_AG and G (> 30-33 weeks), and three HIV-2 (> 27-28 weeks) selections. K65R appeared after 55 and 73 weeks in two CRF1_AE selections with tenofovir. In contrast, times to the appearance of M184V with lamivudine pressure (weeks 8-14) did not vary among subtypes. Selective didanosine pressure resulted in the appearance of M184V and L74V after 38 weeks in two of four subtype C selections. The K65R transitions in subtype C and other subtypes (AGG and AGA) conferred similar 6.5-10-fold resistance to tenofovir and five to 25-fold cross-resistance to each of abacavir, lamivudine, and didanosine, while not affecting zidovudine susceptibility. CONCLUSION: Tenofovir -based regimens will need to be carefully monitored in subtype C infections for the possible selection of K65R.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".