Dolutegravir maintains a durable effect against HIV replication in tissue culture even after drug washout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Of the currently approved HIV integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs), dolutegravir has shown greater efficacy than raltegravir at suppressing HIV-1 replication in treatment-experienced individuals. Biochemical experiments have also shown that dolutegravir has a longer dissociative half-life when bound to HIV integrase than does raltegravir. In order to study the intracellular efficacy of various INSTIs, we asked whether drug removal from INSTI-treated HIV-1-infected cells would result in different times to viral rebound. In addition, we assessed the role of the R263K substitution within the integrase ORF that is associated with low-level resistance to dolutegravir. METHODS: HIV-infected MT-2 cells were treated with dolutegravir, raltegravir or a third experimental INSTI (MK-2048) and the drugs were washed out after varying times. Viral replication was monitored by measuring reverse transcriptase (RT) activity in the culture fluids. RESULTS: We observed a significantly slower increase in RT activity after the removal of dolutegravir compared with raltegravir or MK-2048. The incubation time before the drug was removed also had an impact on the level of RT activity independently of the drug and virus used. The R263K substitution did not significantly impact on levels of RT activity after drug washout, suggesting that dolutegravir remained tightly bound to the integrase enzyme despite the presence of this mutation. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the residency time of INSTIs on integrase is a key factor in the activity of these drugs and that the anti-HIV activity of dolutegravir persists more effectively than that of other INSTIs after drug washout.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".