|
The Body Covers: The 1st International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment
Resistance
July 10, 2001 This article is part of TheBody.com's archive. Because it contains information that may no longer be accurate, this article should only be considered a historical document. Click here to view the original abstract.
This study collected phenotypic resistance data on 306 HIV-positive adults in Italy who enrolled in expanded access program for abacavir. All of these individuals were experiencing treatment failure as defined as failure to respond or tolerate standard antiretroviral regimens. The resistance tests were the Virco antivirogram assay of phenotypic resistance. The authors reported the results of the resistance assays for abacavir and amprenavir. At this time (March to December 1999) neither abacavir nor amprenavir were approved for use in Italy. Seventy three percent of 281 samples showed full susceptibility (<4 fold reduced susceptibility) to abacavir while only 6% (>10 fold reduced susceptibility) were definitely resistant. Twenty one percent of the samples were in the intermediate (between 4 and 10 fold) range. The data for amprenavir was also favorable. Of those samples that showed resistance to at least one protease inhibitor, 61% were fully susceptible to amprenavir, 6% were definitely resistant, and 33% showed intermediate resistance. Even more interesting was the data on those samples that showed resistance to four protease inhibitors (IDV, SQV, RTV and NFV). Of these isolates 52% were susceptible to amprenavir, 10% resistant and 38% intermediate. 30% of these isolates were susceptible to saquinavir, but less than 10% were susceptible to RTV, NFV or IDV. The authors conclude that this study confirmed the uniqueness of amprenavir in terms of resistance. Susceptibility to amprenavir was maintained in the face of resistance to either one or all of the then available protease inhibitors. This study adds to several prior published studies that have confirmed the relatively low level of cross-resistance to amprenavir after prior exposure (and virologic failure) to other protease inhibitors. We still have limited clinical data indicating virologic response in individuals switched to amprenavir-containing regimens after virologic or treatment failure, but certainly this study (and the others) supports such use of amprenavir.
This article is part of TheBody.com's archive. Because it contains information that may no longer be accurate, this article should only be considered a historical document.
This article was provided by The Body PRO. Copyright © Body Health Resources Corporation. All rights reserved.
|