Response to Antiretroviral Therapy in a Patient with an Uncommon Codon 69
Insertion in the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Reverse Transcriptase
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 2000, p. 1767-1768, Vol. 44, No. 6
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
LETTER
Therapy failure of antiretroviral drugs may occur due to many factors, and one of the most important is drug resistance development (3). In the last few
years, several authors have written about the phenomenon of multiple nucleoside resistance (MDR), which confers simultaneous resistance to many
nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) (2, 4). Different mechanisms are involved in this event; one of these is the codon 69
insertion, whose role continues to be controversial. Larder et al. (5) hypothesized that this insertion could effect nucleoside resistance
particularly when combined with other mutated codons within the reverse
transcriptase, and Winters et al. (10) reported that this insertion accounted for increases of up to 10-fold in the 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC50) of
most nucleosides except stavudine.
Here we report the case of a patient treated with various antiretroviral drugs in whom we found a viral mutant with an unusual codon 69 reverse
transcriptase insertion. A 37-year-old heterosexual woman began therapy with zidovudine (ZDV) in December 1994. After 8 months we changed ZDV to
didanosine (ddI) due to a CD4+ cell decline. In July 1996 we measured the viral load for the first time, which was very high (653,000 copies/ml;
branched DNA), so we began triple therapy with ZDV-zalcitabine (ddC)-saquinavir
(SQV). Three months later we again changed treatment due to a virological failure (Fig. 1), and the patient then began
taking stavudine (d4T)-ddI-SQV. In November 1997, after a transient virological response there was a viral-load rebound; therefore, we started a
double-protease-inhibitor regimen with ddI-ritonavir (RTV)-SQV, because it was the only alternative regimen available. Finally, after another
virological failure and on the basis of a resistance test performed, in September 1998 we introduced a new treatment regimen: d4T-efavirenz
(EFV)-nelfinavir (NFV). One month later, the viral load decreased to an undetectable level, and the situation has remained unchanged. Figure 1 shows
CD4+ cell counts and HIV-1 RNA modifications in relation to drug changes.
The patient was evaluated for drug resistance in March 1997 with both genotypic and phenotypic analyses, conducted as previously reported (6, 9).
The results showed a genotypic profile for the protease gene typical of multiple mutations linked to protease inhibitor cross-resistance. Of note, the
reverse transcriptase exhibited a resistance pattern that to our knowledge has been reported only once before (5). The reverse transcriptase of our
patient (plasma RNA) showed mutations V106I and F214L and the T69S insertion VG
(GenBank accession number, AF186771); the amino acid sequence from the culture supernatant showed a codon 210W mutation as well. The phenotypic
analysis, repeated in several experiments, revealed a marked resistance to the protease inhibitors indinavir and RTV (IC50 > 0.1 然), to the NRTI ZDV
(IC50 > 10 然), ddI (IC50 > 1 然), and lamivudine (IC50 = 1.169 然). On the other hand, a phenotypic susceptibility was evident for d4T (IC50 = 0.052 然)
and the new protease inhibitor tipranavir (IC50 = 0.191 然).
This case offers additional evidence of newly described MDR insertions in heavily pretreated HIV-1-infected subjects in the absence of optimal viral
suppression. Moreover, the finding of novel mutated codons can account for the emergence
of resistance in the presence of potentially effective antiviral regimens, as described by Bloor et al. (1), who pointed out the role of the E44D and V118I
mutations within the HIV-1 reverse transcriptase. As previously reported (10), our patient experienced the beneficial effect of d4T therapy, combined
with EFV and NFV. Nevertheless, the potential development of d4T phenotypic resistance should be taken into account for NRTI-treated patients (7). Our
report, as have others (5, 8), emphasizes the importance of continued monitoring for genotypic drug resistance in order to detect new mutations
that can impair the efficacy of combination therapies against HIV-1.
REFERENCES
1. Bloor, S., K. Hertogs, V. De Vroey, V. Miller, M. Sturmer, and B. Larder.
1999. Lamivudine-resistant HIV-1 clinical isolates lacking the Met184Val
mutation have novel polymorphisms in RT. Antivir. Ther. 4(Suppl. 1):19.
2. de Jong, J. J., S. Jurrians, J. Goudsmit, E. Baan, R. Huismans, S.
Danner, M. Hillebrand, J. H. Ten Veen, and F. de Wolf. 1998. Insertion of two
amino acids in reverse transcriptase (RT) during antiretroviral combination
therapy: implications for resistance against RT inhibitors. Antivir. Ther.
3(Suppl. 2):15.
3. Hirsch, M. S., B. Conway, R. T. D'Aquila, V. A. Johnson, F. Brun-Vezinet,
B. Clotet, L. M. Demeter, S. M. Hammer, D. M. Jacobsen, D. R. Kuritzkes, C.
Loveday, J. W. Mellors, S. Vella, and D. D. Richman for the AIDS Society-USA
Panel.. 1998. Antiretroviral drug resistance testing in adults with HIV
infection: implications for clinical management. JAMA 279:1984-1991[Medline].
4. Iversen, A. K. N., R. W. Shafer, K. Wehrly, M. A. Winters, J. I. Mullins,
B. Chesebro, and T. C. Merigan. 1996. Multidrug-resistant human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 strains resulting from combination
antiretroviral therapy. J. Virol. 70:1086-1090[Abstract].
5. Larder, B. A., S. Bloor, S. D. Kemp, K. Hertogs, R. L. Desmet, V.
Miller, M. Sturmer, S. Staszewsky, J. Ren, K. Stammers, D. I. Stuart, and R.
Pauwels. 1999. A family of insertion mutations between codons 67 and 70 of
human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse transcriptase confer
multinucleoside analog resistance. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
8:1961-1967[Abstract/Full Text].
6. Merrill, D. P., M. Moonis, T.-C. Chou, and M. S. Hirsch. 1996.
Lamivudine (3TC) or stavudine (d4T) in two- or three-drug combinations
against HIV-1 replication in vitro. J. Infect. Dis. 137:355-364[Medline].
7. Milazzo, L., S. Rusconi, L. Testa, S. La Seta-Catamancio, M. Galazzi, S.
Kurtagic, P. Citterio, M. Gianotto, A. Grassini, F. Adorni, A.
d'Arminio-Monforte, M. Galli, and M. Moroni. 1999. Evidence of
stavudine-related phenotypic resistance among zidovudine-pretreated
HIV-1-infected subjects receiving a therapeutic regimen of stavudine plus
lamivudine. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. Hum. Retrovirol. 22:101-103.
8. Ross, L., M. Johnson, N. Graham, M. Sheafer, and M. St. Clair. 1999. 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. J. Hum. Virol.
2:290-295.
9. Rusconi, S., M. P. De Pasquale, L. Milazzo, G. Moscatelli, E.
Bulgheroni, P. Citterio, A. d'Arminio-Monforte, M. Moroni, and M. Galli.
1997. Loss of antiviral effect owing to zidovudine and lamivudine double
resistance in HIV-1-infected patients in an ongoing open-label trial.
Antivir. Ther.2:39-46.
10. Winters, M. A., K. I. Cooley, Y. A. Girard, D. J. Leeve, H. Hamdan, D.
A. Katzenstein, and T. C. Merigan. 1998. A 6-base pair insert in the reverse
transcriptase gene of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 confers resistance
to multiple nucleoside analogues. J. Clin. Investig.
102:1769-1775[Abstract/Full Text].
Paolo Bonfanti
Ivano Faggion
1st Division of Infectious Diseases University of Milan Ospedale Luigi Sacco
20157 Milan, Italy
Simona La Seta Catamancio
Michela Violin
Claudia Balotta
Stefano Rusconi*
Institute of Infectious and Tropical Diseases University of Milan Ospedale
Luigi Sacco via G. B. Grassi 74 20157 Milan, Italy