Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Minireviews
    • JVI Classic Spotlights
    • Archive
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JVI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Virology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Minireviews
    • JVI Classic Spotlights
    • Archive
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JVI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Virus-Cell Interactions

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Protease Genotypes and In Vitro Protease Inhibitor Susceptibilities of Isolates from Individuals Who Were Switched to Other Protease Inhibitors after Long-Term Saquinavir Treatment

Mark A. Winters, Jonathan M. Schapiro, Jody Lawrence, Thomas C. Merigan
Mark A. Winters
Center for AIDS Research at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jonathan M. Schapiro
Center for AIDS Research at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jody Lawrence
Center for AIDS Research at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas C. Merigan
Center for AIDS Research at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.6.5303-5306.1998
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

An understanding of the mechanisms of virologic cross-resistance between human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitors is important for the establishment of effective treatment strategies for patients who no longer respond to their initial protease inhibitor. Protease gene sequencing results from patients treated with saquinavir showed significant increases in the frequency of the G48V protease mutation in patients receiving higher doses of the drug. In addition, all six patients who developed the G48V mutation during saquinavir therapy developed the V82A mutation either on continued saquinavir or after a switch to nelfinavir or indinavir. In vitro susceptibility assays showed that all 13 isolates with reduced susceptibilities to two or more protease inhibitors had either the G48V or L90M mutation, along with an average of six other protease mutations. Reduced susceptibility to nelfinavir was found in 14 isolates, but only 1 possessed the D30N mutation. These results suggest that mutations selected in vivo by initial saquinavir therapy may provide more cross-resistance to the other protease inhibitors than has been previously reported.

Protease inhibitors have become a very important class of drugs for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus infection (reviewed in references5 and 13). Significant decreases in plasma virus levels and elevations in CD4 T-cell counts are typically found in patients receiving any of the four currently approved protease inhibitors. This effect is relatively short-lived, however, in patients receiving protease inhibitors as monotherapy, and triple-drug therapy with combinations of protease and reverse transcriptase inhibitors is now recommended.

Mutations in the protease gene have been shown to be involved in conferring reduced susceptibilities of virus isolates to protease inhibitors. Most of these associations have been confirmed by in vitro experiments, and many have been associated with clinical failure in patients and the reduced susceptibilities of isolates from these patients (3, 15, 17). In vitro selection experiments have indicated that several mutations that appear in the protease gene seem to be associated only with certain protease inhibitors. Although some unique mutational patterns appear in vivo when protease inhibitors are administered as monotherapy in protease inhibitor-naive patients, several mutations appear to be associated with all protease inhibitors. For example, the protease mutation L90M has been reported to appear most frequently in saquinavir-treated patients (8) but also is found after treatment with other protease inhibitors (4, 15, 17). In contrast, the G48V mutation, which appears less frequently than L90M, appears to be associated almost exclusively with saquinavir therapy.

In vitro cross-resistance among proteases appears to range from minor to complete, depending on the particular mutation or combination of mutations studied. Little data, however, has been published regarding clinical cross-resistance to protease inhibitors, i.e., information regarding the outcome for patients who fail to maintain viral load suppression on their first protease inhibitor and are switched to another. As clinical use of protease inhibitors increases, a greater number of patients who no longer respond to their initial drug regimens will be seen. Options for a subsequent treatment regimen are currently ill defined.

In this study, protease gene mutations in plasma virus and in vitro susceptibility data from viral isolates from patients who failed to maintain viral load suppression on saquinavir therapy and were subsequently switched to nelfinavir or indinavir were examined. Specimens were obtained from patients involved in three clinical studies at Stanford whose clinical results were presented elsewhere, as follows. (i) In a study of antiretroviral-drug-naive patients who received either 3,600 or 7,200 mg of saquinavir monotherapy per day for 6 months (18), patients who showed benefits from the drug (as defined by elevated CD4 cell counts from baseline and/or suppression of viral load to below baseline) were allowed to continue saquinavir treatment and to receive reverse transcriptase inhibitors. (ii) A subset of patients from the first study were entered into a follow-up study in which they were switched to indinavir monotherapy for 4 weeks and then received zidovudine and 2′,3′-dideoxy-3′-thiacytidine for 20 additional weeks (19). (iii) A third study involved 16 saquinavir (1,800 mg/day)- and reverse transcriptase inhibitor-experienced patients whose protease inhibitor was switched to nelfinavir (12).

Protease gene sequences from the plasma of patients were determined by reverse transcription and PCR methods previously described (21), except that the reverse transcription and first-round PCR primers were MAW-26 (TTG GAA ATG TGG AAA GGA AGG AC) and RT21 (16). Second-round PCR primers were PRO1 (19) and RT20 (16). Sequencing of the second-round product was performed by using dye-labelled dideoxy-terminator kits (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, Calif.) with primers proseq (AAG AGA GCT TCA GGT TTG G) and PSR2 (ATG CCT TTA TTT TTT CTT CTG TC). To rule out laboratory contamination of sequencing results, the uniqueness of each sequence result was confirmed by analyzing nucleotide sequence divergence among all sequences generated in the laboratory. Genotypic mixtures were reported when the minority population was at least 30% of the total.

Reports describing protease mutations in patients treated with 1,800 mg of saquinavir per day have indicated that the L90M mutation occurs with the highest frequency (2, 8). This mutation is also seen in patients treated with all other protease inhibitors (4, 5, 17, 22). The G48V mutation has also been shown to appear with saquinavir therapy, although at a substantially lower frequency than L90M (8), and appears to be relatively unique to saquinavir. In this study, protease gene sequences were obtained from 16 patients who received either 3,600 or 7,200 mg of saquinavir monotherapy per day for 63 ± 28 weeks (mean ± standard deviation) (range, 24 to 104 weeks) and had an average overall saquinavir exposure (with or without reverse transcriptase inhibitors) of 77 ± 28 weeks (range, 40 to 124 weeks). Results shown in Table1 indicate that there was a significant increase in the frequency of the G48V mutation in patients who had received the higher doses of saquinavir (3,600 or 7,200 mg/day), compared to published data from similar patients who had received the standard (1,800 mg/day) dose of saquinavir for a mean of 46 weeks (8). There was also an increase in the frequency of the V82A mutation, although this was not statistically significant. The frequencies of other protease inhibitor mutations did not differ between saquinavir doses. Because there was a slight difference in treatment duration between the patients in the low- and high-dose saquinavir studies, it is difficult to completely separate the impact of dose and/or total drug exposure from the impact of duration of treatment. Nevertheless, since higher doses of saquinavir provide greater plasma drug levels and greater viral load suppression (18), these higher doses of saquinavir resulted in greater selective pressure on the virus, which elicited the G48V mutation with greater frequency.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Frequencies of protease mutations in saquinavir-treated patients

All patients who developed the G48V mutation on saquinavir therapy eventually developed the V82A mutation either on continued saquinavir therapy (three of six patients) or after a switch from saquinavir to nelfinavir (two of six) or indinavir (one of six). Two recent reports have also identified this dual genotype emerging from saquinavir-treated patients (7, 20). For two patients for whom the V82A mutation was not evident after saquinavir therapy by population-based sequencing, analysis of 10 to 12 molecular clones derived from PCR amplicons (TA Cloning Kit; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, Calif.) of plasma virus RNA showed the presence of small populations (≤20%) of V82A-containing viruses. These results indicate that the G48V-V82A genotypes that developed during saquinavir therapy were expanded and potentiated during subsequent therapy with either nelfinavir or indinavir. The emergence or persistence of the G48V-V82A genotype after a change in protease inhibitor therapy is consistent with in vitro susceptibility data (Table2) that shows these isolates to have reduced sensitivities to nelfinavir, saquinavir, and indinavir.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Relationships between protease mutations and in vitro susceptibilities to protease inhibitors in primary patient isolatesa

A total of 31 primary viral isolates obtained from 23 patients treated with saquinavir or with saquinavir followed by nelfinavir were evaluated for sensitivities to nelfinavir, saquinavir, and indinavir (Table 2). The 90% inhibitory concentration (IC90) for each isolate was determined by the ACTG/DOD consensus method (1). In addition, the sequences of the viral stocks used for susceptibility testing were determined from viral RNA, as described above for plasma virus. Nucleotide sequences from the viral stocks were compared to the nucleotide sequences of the patients’ plasma virus sequences to rule out laboratory contamination of sequencing or susceptibility results. The results showed that seven isolates from five patients had reduced sensitivities to saquinavir, nelfinavir, and indinavir. Four of those isolates were from patients who received only saquinavir therapy, while two were from patients who received nelfinavir after saquinavir. Isolates from six patients had reduced susceptibilities to saquinavir and nelfinavir but maintained sensitivity to indinavir. Four of these isolates were from patients who had received nelfinavir after saquinavir, and two were from patients who had received only saquinavir. Isolates from 17 patients who had failed to maintain viral load suppression on either low- or high-dose saquinavir were sensitive to all three protease inhibitors. There was no significant correlation between duration of saquinavir treatment and reduced sensitivity to any protease inhibitor.

All of the primary patient isolates (Table 2) that had reduced susceptibilities to more than one protease inhibitor possessed either the G48V or L90M mutation, along with an average of 6.4 additional protease gene mutations. The G48V mutation was significantly associated with resistance to two or more protease inhibitors (4 of 13 isolates with resistance versus 0 of 17 isolates without resistance [P = 0.026, by Fisher’s exact test]). The L90M mutation was not significantly associated with resistance to two or more protease inhibitors, as 6 isolates with the L90M mutation were sensitive to all three protease inhibitors (9 of 13 isolates with resistance versus 6 of 17 isolates without resistance [P = 0.155, by Fisher’s exact test]). In this and other published studies, the L90M mutation alone has had little measurable impact on susceptibilities to saquinavir (15), nelfinavir (17), ritonavir (15), and indinavir (15). The accumulation of additional protease mutations, more than four in this study, appears to be necessary for significant resistance to protease inhibitors. The identification of the type and nature of the mutations necessary for conferring protease inhibitor resistance will require analysis of a larger number of L90M-containing virus isolates and/or in vitro mutagenesis studies.

With one exception, reduced susceptibilities to nelfinavir were found in all isolates having reduced susceptibilities to saquinavir, including isolates from patients who were treated only with saquinavir. One isolate with the D30N mutation, reported as being unique to nelfinavir (17), was resistant to nelfinavir but sensitive to saquinavir and indinavir. This is consistent with previously published reports on D30N-containing isolates. However, 13 other isolates displayed reduced susceptibilities to nelfinavir in the absence of the D30N mutation (Table 2). All of these isolates had either the G48V or L90M mutation, among others. These results suggest that nelfinavir and saquinavir resistance patterns may significantly overlap, similar to what is seen with indinavir and ritonavir resistance patterns (3).

Although one clinical study indicated that nelfinavir did not provide a durable response for a group of highly antiretroviral-drug-experienced patients who had previously taken saquinavir (12), further clinical studies will be needed with different patient populations to ascertain whether nelfinavir, when used with a more potent combination regimen, can be an effective treatment option for patients who fail to maintain viral load suppression on saquinavir. While published data regarding the genotypes of patients who fail to durably respond to saquinavir and switch to indinavir has been lacking, recent reports suggest that patients who possess the L90M mutation and switch to indinavir (6, 19) maintain the L90M mutation and add additional mutations, similar to what has been reported after a switch to nelfinavir (12).

The results presented here suggest that the even greater saquinavir levels achieved by better formulations of saquinavir or combinations of saquinavir and other drugs—for example, ritonavir (10, 14) and nelfinavir (11)—may result in equivalent or greater frequencies of viruses possessing the G48V and G48V-V82A mutations. Because of the reduced susceptibilities of these viruses to currently approved protease inhibitors (Table 2), patients harboring viruses with these genotypes may have few options for subsequent treatment regimens. However, since the high saquinavir levels achieved with protease inhibitor combinations also result in substantially greater reductions of viral load, overall suppression of viral replication by either a combination of protease inhibitors or protease inhibitor plus reverse transcriptase inhibitor combinations may reduce the rate of mutation evolution over the period of effective viral load suppression (9, 18).

The results presented in this report regarding mutation frequencies and in vitro susceptibilities of isolates from patients initiating therapy with saquinavir support a hypothesis by Condra et al. (3). This hypothesis, developed from data on four indinavir-treated patients and a panel of laboratory-developed mutants, suggests that initial therapy with one protease inhibitor may compromise the usefulness of subsequent protease inhibitors. The increased frequency of the G48V mutation in patients treated with higher doses of saquinavir and the eventual emergence of multi-protease-inhibitor-resistant genotypes have implications regarding the effective use of saquinavir. The effective use of both protease and reverse transcriptase inhibitors to suppress viral replication and patient adherence to dosing schedules may be some of the most important factors in slowing the development of mutations that confer drug resistance.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Pat Cain and Jane Norris for collection of clinical data, Muoi Loi for cloning and sequencing efforts, and Kristi Coolley for collection and management of sequencing and susceptibility data.

This work was supported in part by Hoffman-Laroche and Agouron Pharmaceuticals.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 27 October 1997.
    • Accepted 3 March 1998.
  • Copyright © 1998 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    AIDS Clinical Trials Group Virology manual for HIV laboratories. 1997 Division of AIDS, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Bethesda, Md
  2. 2.↵
    1. Boucher C.
    Rational approaches to resistance: using saquinavir.AIDS 10 1996 S15 S19
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Condra J. H.,
    2. Schleif W. A.,
    3. Blahy O. M.,
    4. Gabryelski L. J.,
    5. Graham D. J.,
    6. Quintero J. C.,
    7. Rhodes A.,
    8. Robbins H. L.,
    9. Roth E.,
    10. Shivaprakash M.,
    11. Titus D.,
    12. Yang T.,
    13. Teppier H.,
    14. Squires K. E.,
    15. Deutch P. J.,
    16. Emini E. A.
    In vivo emergence of HIV-1 variants resistant to multiple protease inhibitors.Nature 274 1995 569 571
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Condra J. H.,
    2. Holder D. J.,
    3. Schleif W. A.,
    4. Blahy O. M.,
    5. Danovich R. M.,
    6. Gabryelski L. J.,
    7. Graham D. J.,
    8. Laird D.,
    9. Quintero J. C.,
    10. Rhodes A.,
    11. Robbins H. L.,
    12. Roth E.,
    13. Shivaprakash M.,
    14. Yang T.,
    15. Chodakewitz J. A.,
    16. Deutsch P. J.,
    17. Leavitt R. Y.,
    18. Massari F. E.,
    19. Mellors J. W.,
    20. Squires K. E.,
    21. Steigbigel R. T.,
    22. Teppler H.,
    23. Emini E. A.
    Genetic correlates of in vivo viral resistance to indinavir, a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitor.J. Virol. 70 1996 8270 8276
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Deeks S. G.,
    2. Smith M.,
    3. Holodniy M.,
    4. Kahn J. O.
    HIV-1 protease inhibitors: a review for clinicians.JAMA 277 1997 145 153
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Dulioust A.,
    2. Paulous S.,
    3. Guillemot L.,
    4. Boue F.,
    5. Galanaud P.,
    6. Clavel F.
    Selection of saquinavir-resistant mutants by indinavir following a switch from saquinavir, abstr. 16.Programme and abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  7. 7.↵
    1. Eastman P. S.,
    2. Duncan I. B.,
    3. Gee C.,
    4. Race E.
    Acquisition of genotypic mutations associated with reduced susceptibility to protease inhibitors during saquinavir monotherapy, abstr. 30.Programme and abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  8. 8.↵
    1. Jacobsen H.,
    2. Hanggi M.,
    3. Ott M.,
    4. Duncan I. B.,
    5. Owen S.,
    6. Andreoni M.,
    7. Vella S.,
    8. Mous J.
    In vivo resistance to a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 proteinase inhibitor: mutations, kinetics, and frequencies.J. Infect. Dis. 173 1996 1379 1387
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Kempf D.,
    2. Rode R.,
    3. Xu Y.,
    4. Sun E.,
    5. Japour A.,
    6. Danner S.,
    7. Boucher C.,
    8. Leonard J.,
    9. Molla A.
    The durability of response to protease inhibitor therapy is predicted by viral load, abstr. 62.Programme and abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  10. 10.↵
    1. Kempf D. J.,
    2. Marsh K. C.,
    3. Kumar G.,
    4. Rodrigues A. D.,
    5. Denissen J. F.,
    6. McDonald E.,
    7. Kukulka M. J.,
    8. Hsu A.,
    9. Granneman G. R.,
    10. Bardoldi P. A.,
    11. Sun E.,
    12. Pizzuti D.,
    13. Plattner J. J.,
    14. Norbeck D. W.,
    15. Leonard J. M.
    Pharmacokinetic enhancement of inhibitors of the human immunodeficiency virus protease by coadministration with ritonavir.Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41 1997 654 660
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Kravcik S.,
    2. Sahai J.,
    3. Kerr B.,
    4. Anderson R.,
    5. Buss N.,
    6. Seguin I.,
    7. Bristow N.,
    8. Farnworth A.,
    9. Salgo M.,
    10. Mastrodonato-Delora P.,
    11. Cameron W.
    Nelfinavir mesylate (NFV) increases saquinavir soft-gel capsule (SQV-SGC) exposure in HIV+ patients. 4th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, Washington, D.C 1997
  12. 12.↵
    1. Lawrence J.,
    2. Schapiro J. M.,
    3. Winters M. A.,
    4. Merigan T. C.
    Clinical response and genotypic resistance patterns of sequential therapy with nelfinavir followed by indinavir plus nevirapine in saquinavir/reverse transcriptase inhibitor experienced patients, abstr. 64.Programme and Abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  13. 13.↵
    1. McDonald C. K.,
    2. Kuritzkes D. R.
    Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitors.Arch. Intern. Med. 157 1997 951 959
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    1. Merry C.,
    2. Barry M. G.,
    3. Mulcahy F.,
    4. Ryan M.,
    5. Heavey J.,
    6. Tjia J. F.,
    7. Gibbons S. E.,
    8. Breckenridge A. M.,
    9. Back D. J.
    Saquinavir pharmacokinetics alone and in combination with ritonavir in HIV-infected patients.AIDS 11 1997 F29 F33
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    1. Molla A.,
    2. Korneyeva M.,
    3. Gao Q.,
    4. Vasavanonda S.,
    5. Schipper P. J.,
    6. Mo H.-M.,
    7. Markowitz M.,
    8. Chernyavskiy T.,
    9. Niu P.,
    10. Lyons N.,
    11. Hsu A.,
    12. Granneman G. R.,
    13. Ho D. D.,
    14. Boucher C. A. B.,
    15. Leonard J. M.,
    16. Norbeck D. W.,
    17. Kempf D. J.
    Ordered accumulation of mutations in HIV protease confers resistance to ritonavir.Nat. Med. 2 1996 760 766
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.↵
    1. Nijhuis M.,
    2. Boucher C. A. B.,
    3. Schuurman R.
    Sensitive procedure for amplification of HIV-1 RNA using a combined reverse transcription and amplification reaction.BioTechniques 19 1995 178 182
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Patick A. K.,
    2. Mo H.,
    3. Markowitz M.,
    4. Appelt K.,
    5. Wu B.,
    6. Musick L.,
    7. Kalish V.,
    8. Kaldor S.,
    9. Reich S.,
    10. Ho D.,
    11. Webber S.
    Antiviral and resistance studies of AG1343, an orally bioavailable inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus protease.Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 40 1996 292 297
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Schapiro J. M.,
    2. Winters M. A.,
    3. Stewart F.,
    4. Efron B.,
    5. Norris J.,
    6. Kozal M. J.,
    7. Merigan T. C.
    The effect of high-dose saquinavir on viral load and CD4 T-cell counts in HIV-infected patients.Ann. Intern. Med. 124 1996 1039 1050
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    1. Schapiro J. M.,
    2. Winters M. A.,
    3. Lawrence J.,
    4. Merigan T. C.
    Clinical and genotypic cross resistance between the protease inhibitors saquinavir and indinavir, abstr. 87.Programme and abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  20. 20.↵
    1. Shafer R. W.,
    2. Winters M. A.,
    3. Merigan T. C.
    Multiple concurrent RT and protease mutations and multidrug resistance in heavily treated HIV-1 infected patients, abstr. 39.Programme and abstracts from the International Workshop on HIV Drug Resistance, Treatment Strategies, and Eradication, St. Petersburg, Fla 1997
  21. 21.↵
    1. Winters M. A.,
    2. Shafer R. W.,
    3. Jellinger R. A.,
    4. Mamtora G.,
    5. Gingeras T.,
    6. Merigan T. C.
    Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse transcriptase genotype and drug susceptibility changes in infected individuals receiving dideoxyinosine monotherapy for 1 to 2 years.Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41 1997 757 762
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Zhang Y.-M.,
    2. Imamichi H.,
    3. Imamichi T.,
    4. Lane H. C.,
    5. Falloon J.,
    6. Vasudevachari M. B.,
    7. Salzman N. P.
    Drug resistance during Indinavir therapy is caused by mutations in the protease gene and in its Gag substrate cleavage sites.J. Virol. 71 1997 6662 6670
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Protease Genotypes and In Vitro Protease Inhibitor Susceptibilities of Isolates from Individuals Who Were Switched to Other Protease Inhibitors after Long-Term Saquinavir Treatment
Mark A. Winters, Jonathan M. Schapiro, Jody Lawrence, Thomas C. Merigan
Journal of Virology Jun 1998, 72 (6) 5303-5306; DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.6.5303-5306.1998

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Virology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Protease Genotypes and In Vitro Protease Inhibitor Susceptibilities of Isolates from Individuals Who Were Switched to Other Protease Inhibitors after Long-Term Saquinavir Treatment
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Virology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Virology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Protease Genotypes and In Vitro Protease Inhibitor Susceptibilities of Isolates from Individuals Who Were Switched to Other Protease Inhibitors after Long-Term Saquinavir Treatment
Mark A. Winters, Jonathan M. Schapiro, Jody Lawrence, Thomas C. Merigan
Journal of Virology Jun 1998, 72 (6) 5303-5306; DOI: 10.1128/JVI.72.6.5303-5306.1998
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Genome, Viral
HIV Infections
HIV Protease
HIV-1

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JVI
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #Jvirology

@ASMicrobiology

       

 

JVI in collaboration with

American Society for Virology

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0022-538X; Online ISSN: 1098-5514