Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Collaborative update of a rule-based expert system for HIV-1 genotypic resistance test interpretation

  • Roger Paredes
  • , Philip L. Tzou
  • , Gert van Zyl
  • , Geoff Barrow
  • , Ricardo Camacho
  • , Sergio Carmona
  • , Philip M. Grant
  • , Ravindra K. Gupta
  • , Raph L. Hamers
  • , P. Richard Harrigan
  • , Michael R. Jordan
  • , Rami Kantor
  • , David A. Katzenstein
  • , Daniel R. Kuritzkes
  • , Frank Maldarelli
  • , Dan Otelea
  • , Carole L. Wallis
  • , Jonathan M. Schapiro
  • , Robert W. Shafer*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • IRSICaixa AIDS Research Institute, Badalona, Spain
  • Stanford University
  • Stellenbosch University
  • The University of the West Indies
  • KU Leuven
  • University of the Witwatersrand
  • University College London
  • British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV-AIDS
  • Tufts University
  • Brown University
  • Brigham and Women’s Hospital
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute for Infectious Diseases
  • Lancet Laboratories
  • National Hemophilia Center

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

19 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Introduction: HIV-1 genotypic resistance test (GRT) interpretation systems (IS) require updates as new studies on HIV-1 drug resistance are published and as treatment guidelines evolve. Methods: An expert panel was created to provide recommendations for the update of the Stanford HIV Drug Resistance Database (HIVDB) GRT-IS. The panel was polled on the ARVs to be included in a GRT report, and the drug-resistance interpretations associated with 160 drug-resistance mutation (DRM) pattern-ARV combinations. The DRM pattern-ARV combinations included 52 nucleoside RT inhibitor (NRTI) DRM pattern-ARV combinations (13 patterns x 4 NRTIs), 27 nonnucleoside RT inhibitor (NNRTI) DRM pattern-ARV combinations (9 patterns x 3 NNRTIs), 39 protease inhibitor (PI) DRM pattern-ARV combinations (13 patterns x 3 PIs) and 42 integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) DRM pattern-ARV combinations (14 patterns x 3 INSTIs). Results: There was universal agreement that a GRT report should include the NRTIs lamivudine, abacavir, zidovudine, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; the NNRTIs efavirenz, etravirine, nevirapine, and rilpivirine; the PIs atazanavir/r, darunavir/r, and lopinavir/r (with “/r” indicating pharmacological boosting with ritonavir or cobicistat); and the INSTIs dolutegravir, elvitegravir, and raltegravir. There was a range of opinion as to whether the NRTIs stavudine and didanosine and the PIs nelfinavir, indinavir/r, saquinavir/r, fosampre-navir/r, and tipranavir/r should be included. The expert panel members provided highly concordant DRM pattern-ARV interpretations with only 6% of NRTI, 6% of NNRTI, 5% of PI, and 3% of INSTI individual expert interpretations differing from the expert panel median by more than one resistance level. The expert panel median differed from the HIVDB 7.0 GRT-IS for 20 (12.5%) of the 160 DRM pattern-ARV combinations including 12 NRTI, two NNRTI, and six INSTI pattern-ARV combinations. Eighteen of these differences were updated in HIVDB 8.1 GRT-IS to reflect the expert panel median. Additionally, HIVDB users are now provided with the option to exclude those ARVs not considered to be universally required. Conclusions: The HIVDB GRT-IS was updated through a collaborative process to reflect changes in HIV drug resistance knowledge, treatment guidelines, and expert opinion. Such a process broadens consensus among experts and identifies areas requiring further study.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0181357
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume12
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 28 Jul 2017

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Collaborative update of a rule-based expert system for HIV-1 genotypic resistance test interpretation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this