Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2025
An Affordable HIV-1 Drug Resistance Monitoring Method for Resource Limited Settings
Published on: March 30, 2014
Affordable drug resistance genotyping of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase, protease and integrase genes, for resource
Sontaga Manyana1, Melendhran Pillay1, Lilishia Gounder1
1Department of Virology, School of Laboratory Medicine and Medical Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal and National Health Laboratory Service, 800 Vusi Mzimela Road, Durban, 4058, South Africa.
Background:
As use of dolutegravir (DTG) becomes more common in resource limited settings (RLS), the demand for integrase resistance testing is increasing. Affordable methods for genotyping all relevant HIV-1 pol genes (i.e., protease (PR), reverse transcriptase (RT) and integrase (IN)) are required to guide choice of future antiretroviral therapy (ART). We designed an in-house HIV-1 drug resistance (HIVDR) genotyping method that is affordable and suitable for use in RLS.
Methods:
We obtained remnant plasma samples from CAPRISA 103 study and amplified HIV-1 PR, RT and IN genes, using an innovative PCR assay. We validated the assay using remnant plasma samples from an external quality assessment (EQA) programme. We genotyped samples by Sanger sequencing and assessed HIVDR mutations using the Stanford HIV drug resistance database. We compared drug resistance mutations with previous genotypes and calculated method cost-estimates.
Results:
From 96 samples processed, we obtained sequence data for 78 (81%), of which 75 (96%) had a least one HIVDR mutation, with no major-IN mutations observed. Only one sample had an E157Q INSTI-accessory mutation. When compared to previous genotypes, 18/78 (23%) had at least one discordant mutation, but only 2/78 (3%) resulted in different phenotypic predictions that could affect choice of subsequent regimen. All CAPRISA 103 study sequences were HIV-1C as confirmed by phylogenetic analysis. Of the 7 EQA samples, 4 were HIV-1C, 2 were HIV-1D, and 1 was HIV-1A. Genotypic resistance data generated using the IDR method were 100% concordant with EQA panel results. Overall genotyping cost per sample was estimated at ~ US$43-$US49, with a processing time of ~ 2 working days.
Conclusions:
We successfully designed an in-house HIVDR method that is suitable for genotyping HIV-1 PR, RT and IN genes, at an affordable cost and shorter turnaround time. This HIVDR genotyping method accommodates changes in ART regimens and will help to guide HIV-1 treatment decisions in RLS.
