Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 847 records · Page 47Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

Microarray analysis during adipogenesis identifies new genes altered by antiretroviral drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the pathogenesis of HAART-associated lipodystrophy, by investigating the effects of antiretroviral drugs on adipocyte differentiation and gene expression profile. DESIGN AND METHODS: Analysis of gene expression profile by DNA microarrays and quantitative RT-PCR of 3T3-L1 preadipocytes treated with the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) lamivudine, zidovudine, stavudine, and zalcitabine, and with the protease inhibitors (PI) indinavir, saquinavir, and lopinavir during maturation into adipocytes. RESULTS: Under standard adipogenic differentiation protocols, PI significantly inhibited adipocyte differentiation, as demonstrated by cell viability assay and Oil Red O staining and quantification, whereas NRTI had mild effects on adipogenesis. Gene expression profile analysis showed that treatment with NRTI modulated the expression of transcription factors, such as Aebp1, Pou5f1 and Phf6, which could play a key role in the determination of the adipocyte phenotype. PI also modulated gene expression toward inhibition of adipocyte differentiation, with up-regulation of the Wnt signaling gene Wnt10a and down-regulation of the expression of genes encoding master adipogenic transcription factors (e.g., C/EBPalpha and PPARgamma), oestrogen receptor beta, and adipocyte-specific markers (e.g., Adiponectin, Leptin, Mrap, Cd36, S100A8). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies new genes modulated by PI and NRTI in differentiating adipocytes. Abnormal expression of these genes, which include master adipogenic transcription factors and genes involved in lipid metabolism and cell cycle control, could contribute to the understanding of the pathogenesis of HAART-associated lipodystrophy.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1999

Anti-human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) activity of 2'-fluoro-2',3'-dideoxyarabinosyladenine (F-ddA) used in combination with other mechanistically diverse inhibitors of HIV-1 replication.

2'-Fluoro-2'3'-dideoxyarabinosyladenine (F-ddA), a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) replication, is currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Future monotherapy for the treatment of HIV is unlikely owing to the rapid emergence of drug-resistant viruses, so F-ddA was evaluated in combination with a variety of mechanistically diverse inhibitors of HIV replication. Such in vitro studies provide insights into whether certain drug combinations yield synergistic antiviral activity or, more importantly, antagonistic antiviral activity or synergistic cytotoxicity. F-ddA exhibited synergistic antiviral interactions with representatives of each of the major classes of anti-HIV compounds, including other nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors. Greatest levels of synergistic interaction were detected when F-ddA was used in combination with the non-nucleoside compounds nevirapine and costatolide, the nucleoside analogues and costatolide, the nucleoside analogues AZT, ddC and 3TC and the protease inhibitors ritonavir and nelfinavir. No evidence of either combination toxicity or antagonistic antiviral activity was detected with any of the tested compounds.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed1997

The role of genotypic heterogeneity in wild type virus populations on the selection of nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-resistant viruses.

Virus populations were selected in cell culture using two widely used protocols in order to evaluate the role of selection methodology on the genotype and phenotype of nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistant viruses. Selection was performed by serial passage of virus in the presence of gradually increasing concentrations of antiviral compound or passage in the presence of a constant high concentration of compound. Using the CEM-SS cell line, the IIIB strain of HIV-1, and identical nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, resistant viruses were obtained and their phenotypic and genotypic properties were defined. Resistant virus populations containing the Y181C amino acid change in the reverse transcriptase were predominantly selected with each of the tested compounds. Several of the compounds selected secondary amino acid changes using both methods. A comparison of the resistant viruses selected in our laboratory using each of the two protocols with viruses reported by a second laboratory employing one of the two methods suggests that genotypic differences in the selected virus isolates may most likely result from the variation in the genetic composition of the respective wild type virus pools, rather than the specific selection methodology employed. These results imply that HIV may select a wide variety of amino acid changes to avoid the inhibitory effects of the nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and the selection of compounds for clinical use in combination with agents possessing non-overlapping resistance phenotypes will require evaluation of the agents against virus isolates possessing each of the mutations known to confer drug resistance.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Antiretrovirals, Part II: focus on non-protease inhibitor antiretrovirals (NRTIs, NNRTIs, and fusion inhibitors).

The second in a series reviewing the HIV/AIDS antiretroviral drugs. This review summarizes the non-protease inhibitor antiretrovirals: nucleoside and nucleotide analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), the nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs), and cell membrane fusion inhibitors. In an overview format for primary care physicians and psychiatrists, this review presents the mechanism of action, side effects, toxicities, and drug interactions of these agents.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed2000

Pharmacology of nucleoside and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor-induced mitochondrial toxicity.

OBJECTIVE: This paper reviews the function of the mitochondria and the mechanisms by which nucleoside and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) cause mitochondrial toxicity. BACKGROUND: Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) reduces rates of morbidity and mortality due to HIV disease. However, long-term treatment with these drugs may be associated with adverse effects. Nucleoside and nucleotide analogues are potent inhibitors of HIV reverse transcriptase and have become the cornerstone of HAART. Unfortunately, these drugs have also been shown to inhibit cellular polymerases, most notably mitochondrial DNA polymerase gamma. RESULTS: Studies of the NRTIs in enzyme assays and cell cultures demonstrate the following hierarchy of mitochondrial DNA polymerase gamma inhibition: zalcitabine > didanosine > stavudine > lamivudine > zidovudine > abacavir. In vitro investigations have also documented impairment of the mitochondrial enzymes adenylate kinase and the adenosine diphosphate/adenosine triphosphate translocator. Inhibition of DNA polymerase gamma and other mitochondrial enzymes can gradually lead to mitochondrial dysfunction and cellular toxicity. The clinical manifestations of NRTI-induced mitochondrial toxicity resemble those of inherited mitochondrial diseases (ie, hepatic steatosis, lactic acidosis, myopathy, nephrotoxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and pancreatitis). Fat redistribution syndrome, or HIV-associated lipodystrophy, is another side effect attributed in part to NRTI therapy. The morphologic and metabolic complications of this syndrome are similar to those of the mitochondrial disorder known as multiple symmetric lipomatosis: suggesting that this too may be related to mitochondrial toxicity. The pathophysiology of less common adverse effects of nucleoside analogue therapy, such as diabetes, ototoxicity, and retinal lesions, may be related to mitochondrial dysfunction but have not been adequately studied. CONCLUSION: NRTls can block both HIV reverse transcriptase and mitochondrial DNA polymerase gamma. Inhibition of the latter enzyme is the most likely cause of the adverse effects associated with these drugs.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

In silico search of putative adverse drug reaction related proteins as a potential tool for facilitating drug adverse effect prediction.

Adverse drug reaction (ADR) is a significant issue in drug development and post-market applications. Different experimental and computational approaches need to be explored for predicting ADRs due to the complexity of their molecular mechanisms. One approach for predicting ADRs of a drug is to search for its interaction with ADR-related proteins (ADRRPs). In this work, this approach is tested on 11 marketed anti-HIV drugs covering protease inhibitors (PIs), nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). An in silico drug target search method, INVDOCK, is used for searching the ADRRPs of each of these drugs. The corresponding ADRs of the predicted ADRRPs of each of these drugs are compared to clinically observed ADRs reported in the literature. It is found that 86-89% of the INVDOCK predicted ADRs of these drugs are consistent with the literature reported ADRs, and about 67-100% of the literature-reported ADRs of these drugs to various degrees is agreed with INVDOCK predictions. These results suggest that it is feasible to explore in silico ADRRP search methods for facilitating drug toxicity prediction.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗
PubMed2003

The effect of number of mutations and of drug-class sparing on virological response to salvage genotype-guided antiretroviral therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess on longitudinal data the impact of number of drug-associated mutations at genotype resistance testing (GRT) and history of previous exposure to antiretrovirals on the virological response to genotype-guided antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: Subjects that failed HAART who underwent GRT between June 1999 and March 2002 were enrolled. GRT was performed by Viroseq-2 with expert advice offered to physicians. Main outcome was reaching undetectable (< 80 copies/ml) HIV-1 RNA level after GRT and maintaining undetectable viraemia for at least 6 months. The number of mutations conferring resistance to each class of antiretrovirals was categorized and their effect on virological outcome investigated. Mutations considered in the analysis were those reported by the IAS-USA in 2002. Multivariate analysis was performed by Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Four-hundred-and-seventy consecutive subjects were enrolled and followed-up for a median of 14 (IQR 9-19) months after GRT. Sustained undetectable viraemia was reached by 80 of 449 subjects (18%). Using as end-point reaching and maintaining for at least 6 months < 400 copies/ml after GRT, 103 out of 447 subjects (23%) reached the outcome. For each single protease inhibitor (PI)-, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-associated mutation, there was a reduction of, respectively, 11% (P = 0.008), 12% (P = 0.001) and 39% (P = 0.005) in the likelihood of reaching virological outcome. Subjects carrying > or = 6 mutations to NRTIs, > or = 7 mutations to PIs and > or = 2 mutations to NNRTIs were less likely to reach the virological success compared with those carrying 0-1 (NRTI and PI) or 0 (NNRTI) mutations [HR = 0.25 (95% CI: 0.10-0.65); HR = 0.33 (950% CI: 0.16-0.67); HR = 0.33 (95% CI: 0.14-0.77)], respectively. However, at multivariate analysis the probability of reaching a favourable virological outcome in patients with > or = 7 mutations to PIs, if naive for NNRTIs [HR = 1.74 (0.69-4.36)], and in subjects with > or = 2 mutations for NNRTIs if naive for PIs [HR = 1.23 (0.22-6.80)], was comparable to those observed in patients with none or one mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed a non-linear association between resistance-conferring mutations and virological outcome. GRT-guided therapy still provided remarkable chances of durable virological success even in subjects with > or = 7 mutations to PIs and in subjects with > or = 2 mutations to NNRTIs, when the subjects did not have a three-class exposure or if GRT showed no evidence of mutations for a drug class. GRT and as-long-as-possible sparing of a drug class could be a convenient strategy for long-term management of drug-failing patients.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed2003

A controlled Phase II trial assessing three doses of enfuvirtide (T-20) in combination with abacavir, amprenavir, ritonavir and efavirenz in non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-naive HIV-infected adults.

Enfuvirtide is a novel antiretroviral that blocks HIV-1 cell fusion and viral entry. This Phase II, controlled, open-label, randomized, multicentre dose-ranging trial explored the safety, antiviral activity and pharmacokinetics of enfuvirtide, administered by subcutaneous (s.c.) injection, in 71 HIV-1-infected, protease inhibitor-experienced, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-naive adults for 48 weeks. Study participants were randomized to receive enfuvirtide at a deliverable dose of 45, 67.5 or 90 mg twice daily; the 45 mg twice daily dose required 2 injections/day, while the higher doses required 4 injections/day. A background oral antiretroviral (ARV) regimen of abacavir (300 mg twice daily), amprenavir (1200 mg twice daily), ritonavir (200 mg twice daily) and efavirenz (600 mg once daily) was provided with enfuvirtide. A control group received the background ARV regimen alone. All potential participants underwent an HIV genotype at screen to ensure a homogenous population and to exclude patients with evidence of genotypic resistance to NNRTIs. Overall, the tolerability of the combination of abacavir, amprenavir, ritonavir, efavirenz and enfuvirtide was generally comparable to control through 48 weeks. No enfuvirtide dose-dependent adverse events (AEs) were observed across treatment groups. Injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred at least once in 68.5% of the enfuvirtide-treated population, and most ISRs were mild to moderate in severity, with no apparent dose relationship. Excluding ISRs, the most common treatment-emergent AEs were nausea, diarrhoea, dizziness and fatigue; with no clinically significant differences in the incidence of AEs observed between the control and enfuvirtide groups. Each treatment group benefited from ARV therapy, with a trend of increasing antiviral and immunological activity associated with increasing enfuvirtide dose. At 48 weeks, the median HIV-1 RNA change from baseline for the ITT population was -2.24 log10 copies/ml for the combined enfuvirtide groups compared with -1.87 log10 copies/ml for the control group. In addition, 54.9% of patients in the enfuvirtide group achieved HIV-1 RNA < or = 400 copies/ml versus 36.8% of patients in the control group. These results indicate that enfuvirtide has a favourable safety profile and is a promising new antiviral agent for HIV-infected patients who have been on previously failing ARV regimens.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Paradoxical worsening of tuberculosis in HIV-infected persons.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of paradoxical worsening of tuberculosis (TB) in HIV-infected persons. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Public, urban TB clinic. PATIENTS: HIV-infected persons treated for TB between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 1999, and followed through June 30, 2000. INTERVENTION: Patients received standard anti-TB therapy. Antiretroviral therapy was provided by primary medical providers. Patients receiving antiretroviral therapy were given nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors alone or highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART; nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in combination with a protease inhibitor or a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Paradoxical worsening of TB. RESULTS: There were 82 TB cases in 76 patients. Paradoxical worsening was identified in 6 of 82 cases (7%; 95% confidence interval, 3 to 15%). Paradoxical worsening occurred in 3 of 28 cases (11%) in patients receiving HAART and in 3 of 44 cases (7%) in patients not receiving antiretroviral therapy (p = 0.67). Cases complicated by paradoxical worsening were more likely to have both pulmonary and extrapulmonary disease at initial diagnosis than cases without paradoxical worsening (83% vs 24%; p = 0.006). TB relapse occurred in 2 of 6 cases (33%) in patients with paradoxical worsening and in 4 of 76 cases (5%) in patients without paradoxical worsening (p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Paradoxical worsening of TB occurred less frequently than in previous reports and was not associated with HAART. Paradoxical worsening also appeared to be associated with an increased risk of TB relapse. Further studies are warranted to better characterize the risk factors for paradoxical worsening and the appropriate duration of anti-TB therapy in patients in whom it occurs.

AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections↗
PubMed1999

Efavirenz plus zidovudine and lamivudine, efavirenz plus indinavir, and indinavir plus zidovudine and lamivudine in the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adults. Study 006 Team.

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz is a nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). We compared two regimens containing efavirenz, one with a protease inhibitor and the other with two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, with a standard three-drug regimen. METHODS: The study subjects were 450 patients who had not previously been treated with lamivudine or any nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor or protease inhibitor. In this open-label study, patients were randomly assigned to one of three regimens: efavirenz (600 mg daily) plus zidovudine (300 mg twice daily) and lamivudine (150 mg twice daily); the protease inhibitor indinavir (800 mg every eight hours) plus zidovudine and lamivudine; or efavirenz plus indinavir (1000 mg every eight hours). RESULTS: Suppression of plasma HIV-1 RNA to undetectable levels was achieved in more patients in the group given efavirenz plus nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors than in the group given indinavir plus nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (70 percent vs. 48 percent, P<0.001). The efficacy of the regimen of efavirenz plus indinavir was similar (53 percent) to that of the regimen of indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine. CD4 cell counts increased significantly with all combinations (range of increases, 180 to 201 cells per cubic millimeter). More patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events in the group given indinavir and two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors than in the group given efavirenz and two nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (43 percent vs. 27 percent, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: As antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1-infected adults, the combination of efavirenz, zidovudine, and lamivudine has greater antiviral activity and is better tolerated than the combination of indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy is better in patients receiving non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-containing regimens than in those receiving protease inhibitor-containing regimens.

The difference between adherence to non- nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) and protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens was investigated. Better adherence was found in NNRTI-treated patients, especially when efavirenz was included in the regimen, compared with single PI-treated patients and in those with CD4 cell counts less than 200 x 10(6)/l. By contrast, younger age, self-report of active drug use, fatigue or vomiting negatively affected adherence. Self-reported sexual dysfunction was significantly associated with non-adherence only in PI-treated individuals.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A population-based approach to determine the prevalence of transmitted drug-resistant HIV among recent versus established HIV infections: results from the Canadian HIV strain and drug resistance surveillance program.

OBJECTIVES: Published results on primary or transmitted HIV drug resistance may be biased because they have been largely derived from specific cohort studies or higher risk individuals who present symptomatically. Here, we present results from a representative population-based study of newly diagnosed cases of HIV in Canada and compare the prevalence of transmitted drug resistance between recent and established infections. METHODS: Available archived sera taken for the purpose of diagnostic HIV testing from all treatment-naive HIV-positive individuals who were newly diagnosed between 2000 and 2001 were tested for recency of infection, HIV-1 subtype, and mutations conferring reduced susceptibility to reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors (PIs). Recent infections were identified using the Organon Teknika Vironostika HIV-1-LS assay. After full-length sequencing of the pol gene, drug resistance mutations were identified using the 2004 International AIDS Society-USA mutations panel. Differences in drug resistance profiles between recent and prevalent infections were examined using the chi test and the Fisher exact test. The variables examined included gender, age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, exposure category, ethnicity, and HIV-1 subtype. RESULTS: Among the study population, 8.1% had genotypic evidence of transmitted drug resistance: 4.1% against nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 1.4% against nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, 1.5% against PIs, and 1% against > or =2 classes of drugs. A higher proportion of recent infections had genotypic evidence of transmitted drug resistance when compared with established infections (12.2% vs. 6.1%, respectively; P = 0.005). Transmitted drug resistance was identified mainly among recently infected Caucasian men who have sex with men but it was not limited to this group. Compared with the year 2000, a higher proportion of recently infected individuals with resistance-conferring mutations were diagnosed during the year 2001 (66.7% vs. 46.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In Canada, transmitted drug resistance is occurring within all 3 drug classes and across different population groups. The results suggest that the prevalence rates may be higher among recent versus established infections. Given the public health implications of transmitting drug-resistant HIV, it is important to continue population-based drug resistance surveillance to guide optimum prevention and treatment of HIV infection.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Effect of nucleoside analogs and non-nucleoside inhibitors of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase on cell-free virions.

Reverse transcription takes place in the cytoplasm of infected cells, although it has been demonstrated that retroviruses can also initiate reverse transcription prior to infection of target cells. In addition to partial reverse transcripts, full-length proviral molecules have been detected in the plasma and seminal fluid of HIV-1 seropositive patients. Intravirion endogenous reverse transcription appears to be directly correlated with an increased level of infectivity. Therefore, the ability of an inhibitor to reach and inhibit the replication complex in the core of the free-virion may constitute an important part of its capacity to suppress viral infection. In this work we tested the ability of some reverse transcriptase inhibitors to decrease viral infectivity in pretreated highly purified virions. Our results showed that Curie pyridinone [Dollé et al. (1995), J Med Chem 38: 4,679-4,686], a non nucleoside RT inhibitor, strongly inhibited the infectivity of extracellular HIV-1 particles. Other non nucleoside inhibitors (TIBO R82913, HEPT, nevirapine) tested in these conditions were unable to do so. Our data indicate that the effect of Curie pyridinone on intact virions may be related to its capacity to tightly bind the target RT. This approach may lead to the design and synthesis of new drugs able to interact with the retroviral enzyme inside the viral core.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed2003

New antiretroviral drugs.

Despite the availability of 16 antiretroviral drugs approved for the treatment of HIV infection, current combination regimens present challenges. Newer antiretroviral drugs are needed to improve convenience, reduce toxicity and, of particular importance, to provide antiretroviral activity against viral strains resistant to the currently available antiretroviral agents. Candidate drugs with novel properties are in development in the two currently available drug classes: HIV reverse transcriptase inhibitors (nucleoside analogs, non-nucleoside analogs and nucleotide analogs) and HIV protease inhibitors (PI). Investigational nucleoside analog reverse transcriptase inhibitors (nRTI) include emtricitabine (FTC) and amdoxovir (DAPD), and investigational non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) include DPC 083 and TMC 125. New protease inhibitors under investigation include atazanavir (BMS-232 632), tipranavir, and TMC 114. In addition, newer agents with novel mechanisms of action such as HIV entry inhibitors (that inhibit the three steps of HIV entry: CD4 attachment, chemokine receptor binding and membrane fusion) and HIV integrase inhibitors are under investigation. Investigational entry inhibitors include PRO 542 (a CD4 attachment inhibitor), Schering C (a chemokine receptor inhibitor), enfuvirtide (T-20) and T-1249, inhibitors of membrane fusion. Investigational HIV integrase inhibitors include S-1360. Continued progress in the treatment of HIV disease will result from the development of new antiretroviral drugs.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The reverse transcriptase codon 69 insertion is observed in nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-experienced HIV-1-infected individuals, including those without prior or concurrent zidovudine therapy.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to examine 6-bp insertions following codon 69 in the reverse transcriptase (RT) coding region of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) mutations in terms of incidence, presence of additional RT mutations, phenotypic drug resistance, HIV-1 RNA levels, and antiretroviral treatment history. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: A retrospective study of 121 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-experienced subjects infected with HIV-1 was performed. Methods included quantitation of HIV-1 RNA levels, genotypic analyses of the RT and protease coding regions, and determination of phenotypic drug resistance. RESULTS: A 6-bp insertion following RT codon 69 was observed in viral isolates from 4 subjects. Two subjects had a history of zidovudine (ZDV)-based therapy, and two subjects had a history of stavudine (D4T)-based therapy without prior exposure to ZDV. The T69S mutation and the 6-bp insertion following RT codon 69 were the only RT mutations observed in the 2 subjects with a history of D4T-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Six-basepair insertions occurred in virus from 4 of 121 (3%) NRTI-experienced subjects, including those without prior ZDV treatment, and was observed in the absence of the T215Y mutation. There was no apparent correlation between insertion incidence and HIV-1 viremia.

Anti-HIV Agents↗
PubMed2004

A comparison of the CD4 response to antiretroviral regimens in patients commencing therapy with low CD4 counts.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the immunological response to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in treatment-naive patients with a baseline CD4 count of <200 cells/mm(3). DESIGN AND METHODS: We identified treatment-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1)-infected individuals who had commenced HAART since 1996 and who had a starting CD4 count of <200 cells/mm(3). Immunological success was defined as achieving a CD4 count of >200 cells/mm(3) and treatments were compared using univariate and multivariate Cox's proportional hazards models in order to establish whether protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens were significantly different to regimens based on non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). Both regimens utilize a nucleoside analogue (NA) backbone. RESULTS: A total of 599 patients were identified. When the variables were entered into a multivariate analysis, no significant differences between HAART regimens were found. We showed that compared with efavirenz regimens a two NA plus one PI regimen was not significantly less likely to achieve immunological success (adjusted HR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.41-1.03, P=0.07). Two NA and boosted PI (adjusted HR: 1.33, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.16) or two NA and nevirapine (adjusted HR: 0.93, 95% CI 0.67-1.29) regimens were also not significantly different from efavirenz-based regimens, based on the endpoint of immunological success. CONCLUSION: PI-, boosted PI- and NNRTI-based HAART regimens are not significantly different in achieving increased CD4 counts in individuals who commence therapy with a low CD4 count.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Determination of 19 antiretroviral agents in pharmaceuticals or suspected products with two methods using high-performance liquid chromatography.

Three classes of antiretroviral agents are usually available for the treatment of HIV infection: nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (IN), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (INN) and protease inhibitors (IP). Two methods by reversed-phase liquid chromatography were developed for the analysis of 19 antiretroviral molecules belonging to these three therapeutic classes and used in medicinal products. Both of these HPLC techniques use a C18 column and UV detection. The first method is for IN family analysis and allows eight molecules to be separated: zalcitabine, lamivudine, amdoxovir, emtricitabine, didanosine, stavudine, zidovudine and abacavir. The second method is for INN and IP family analysis and allows 11 molecules to be separated: fosamprenavir, nevirapine, indinavir, amprenavir, saquinavir, atazanavir, ritonavir, lopinavir, efavirenz, nelfinavir and tipranavir. The combination of these two methods makes possible the quality control of mono-, bi- or tri-therapy pharmaceutical products and the detection of illegal products sold particularly in developing countries.

Anti-HIV Agents↗