Durable suppression of HIV-1 with resistance mutations to integrase inhibitors by dolutegravir following drug washout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Dolutegravir (DTG) has achieved better long-term suppression of HIV-1 replication than other integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs), such as raltegravir (RAL) and elvitegravir (EVG). In in-vitro drug washout experiments, we previously showed that removal of DTG from pretreated MT-2 cells infected with wild-type HIV-1 showed slower rebound in viral replication as compared to removal of RAL. Now, we performed DTG, EVG and RAL washout experiments to compare the recovery of viral integration and production of 2-long terminal repeat (LTR) circles using wild-type HIV-1 clones, R263K viruses with low-level resistance to DTG and viruses with G140S/Q148H mutations showing cross-resistance against all currently approved INSTIs. DESIGN AND METHODS: MT-2 cells infected with wild-type, R263K or G140S/Q148H HIV-1 clones were treated with DTG, RAL or EVG for 3 days. Viral rebound following drug washout was assessed, monitoring viral integration and 2-LTR circle production by qPCR. RESULTS: Viral integration did not resume for up to 8 days after DTG washout from the wild-type or R263K infections but increased soon after washout of either RAL or EVG. With the G140S/Q148H virus, levels of integration were not significantly affected by the presence of either RAL or EVG. With DTG, integration was much lower at 3 days after infection than for the no-drug control. At 8 days after DTG washout, viral integration resumed but remained relatively low. CONCLUSION: DTG antiretroviral activity in tissue culture is more durable than that of either RAL or EVG after drug washout and this is true for both wild-type and drug-resistant viruses.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".