Collaborative update of a rule-based expert system for HIV-1 genotypic resistance test interpretation
View/ Open
Author
Paredes, Roger
Tzou, Philip L.
van Zyl, Gert
Barrow, Geoff
Camacho, Ricardo
Carmona, Sergio
Grant, Philip M.
Gupta, Ravindra K.
Hamers, Raph L.
Harrigan, P. Richard
Jordan, Michael R.
Kantor, Rami
Katzenstein, David A.
Maldarelli, Frank
Otelea, Dan
Wallis, Carole L.
Schapiro, Jonathan M.
Shafer, Robert W.
Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.
Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181357Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Paredes, R., P. L. Tzou, G. van Zyl, G. Barrow, R. Camacho, S. Carmona, P. M. Grant, et al. 2017. “Collaborative update of a rule-based expert system for HIV-1 genotypic resistance test interpretation.” PLoS ONE 12 (7): e0181357. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181357.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, fosamprenavir/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.Other Sources
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5533429/pdf/Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAACitable link to this page
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:34375032
Collections
- HMS Scholarly Articles [17922]
Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)